Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 1st Jun 2009 17:50 UTC, submitted by poundsmack
Sun Solaris, OpenSolaris The team at Sun behind OpenSolaris has unleashed OpenSolaris 2009.06 upon the world. This new release comes packed with new features, changes, improvements, and fixes, and is the first release of OpenSolaris for SPARC, adding support for UltraSPARC T1, T2 (Sun4v), and UltraSPARC II, III and IV (Sun4u). Read on for some of the improvements that stand out.
Thread beginning with comment 366914
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[5]: Open Solaris is not bad
by cade on Thu 4th Jun 2009 04:38 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Open Solaris is not bad"
cade
Member since:
2009-02-28

-------------------------------------
It was mentioned ...
"Ummmmm, almost all versions of Linux include Open Office, I should not have to spend 30 minutes or more downloading it when I can spend 5 min on any Linux version and get the latest patches."

So what if Linux includes OpenOffice by default.
Some people might use Abiword, other's may use KDE office, others may use OpenOffice. So, should OpenSolaris contain all these by default. The choice is there to download it or not. Personal responsibility, it's a good thing !

If you cannot be productive while updating/patching your system then that's your problem or your computer's problem. I patch OpenSolaris while I code and build my C++ libraries and am still productive. With a cable modem (my broadband plan being slower than ADSL2+) I patch my system leading to a new boot environment in ~15 minutes.
-------------------------------------
It was mentioned:
"On the hardware I tried it on Linux worked 100% out the box. Open Solaris did not. "

You can either accept "hardware is hardware" and what that entails in the proprietary world of hardware tech or contribute to the free operating system world with hardware-related research or wait until hardware support broadens.
-------------------------------------
It was mentioned ....
"Ummmmm, Windows 7 and Linux (Fedora and Ubuntu) both fly on my Dell 755 and my iMac. Open Solaris takes 3 times as long to boot up as both versions of Linux I use."

Like I mentioned in a previous post, OpenSolaris has many technologies that other operating systems do not have and it would not be surprising if boot time increases.

However, on my HP xw9300 box OpenSolaris 2009.06 boots in 40 seconds (GRUB --> Gnome login screen) and shuts down in 10 seconds (shutdown dialog --> power OFF). This is fine especially with all the goodies the OpenSolaris kernel is packaged with.
-------------------------------------------------
It was mentioned:
"Ummmmm, yeah that is why Sun is no more and Red Hat is making money hand over fist. Yes I know Solaris has some cool tech. But its convoluted to use, installing software is a pain in the butt. Oh may fault on Open Solaris its not a pain in the butt cause they hired a Linux guy Ian Murdock to make Open Solaris WHAT?? More Linux like."

The issue at hand is OpenSolaris, not Sun.
OpenSolaris is not Linux or linux-like, it is a real UNIX (Re: OpenGroup accreditation).
Linux is a unix-clone.
A UNIX accredited system is a proven system. What is the point of achieving a UNIX accreditation and then throwing it away and becoming a unix-clone ?

See Crimson Consulting whitepaper comparing real-world experiences between Solaris and RHEL. RHEL is basically a "toy", a "joke" for any serious environment. Read about RHEL's suspicious licensing model and Linux' scalability issues. There are quite a few news articles on the net about small/large shops initially using Linux but then replacing it with OpenSolaris due to workflow-scalability issues with Linux. If Linux were so good, why do IBM/HP still support AIX/HP-UX ?

I am a serious C++ developer and I find OpenSolaris admin fine. Software installation using "pkg" command from XTerm or GUI IPS program is simple. What's the problem here ?
Who care's who Sun hired to do whatever, the open-sourced OpenSolaris technology is fine and Sun has allowed me to use it for commercial (i.e. "bread and butter") ventures for free. If I ever need to scale up to SPARC platform then Sun/Oracle will be ready at hand for any serious communication.

You should realise that the good thing Linux did was that it made Sun go back to it's roots and open source their flagship operating system. I look forward to OpenSolaris getting more enhanced as time goes by.
-------------------------------------------------
It was mentioned ...
"I am comparing the fact that Open Solaris is being pushed against Linux on the desktop not the server.
If you look at it that way on 386/X64 hardware then in reality things like Dtrace, Zfs etc dont really matter."

What's the problem ?
Are you afraid of competition ?
Linux will not disappear.

Your comments on the relevance of Sun's technologies are a bit puzzling. Are you a coder, an admin, a casual operating system user/sampler ?
If you were the latter, then okay you do not realise the benefit. But if you are a coder/admin person then you probably have not realised what you have stumbled upon with the Solaris technologies (and by the way these technologies are open-sourced). I say this not as someone who "hates" Linux. I am happy that Linux exists since it adds to the existing pool of unix type systems in this world and I have noticed when people use a unix type system they end up knowing more about their computer environment unlike many Windows users. It just happens that I prefer OpenSolaris.

FYI, I used Slackware Linux during my engineering doctoral work in the 1990's for massive amounts of coding and I was happy for it as Microsoft's operating systems were not a suitable solution for my software development needs.

Competition is another reason why Linux would get better. To think that Linux is the be-all/end-all and that there it not enough room in the WORLD for unix clones as well as real unixes (e.g. (Open)Solaris, AIX, HP-UX) then you need to re-think your philosophy on this theme.
e.g.
Linux is not a UNIX, it has no accreditation from the OpenGroup. It is a UNIX clone. The lack of standardisation in Linux is not surprisng due to the unbridled way it's distributions are developed. You would not risk using a non-standardised system for life-support systems, nuclear reactor management systems, multi-million dollar scientific equipment, etc.

My friend is network admin at Alcatel. They use multiple systems as one system does not satisfy all their needs. The use multi-process SPARC system for database infrastructure, HP-UX boxes for engineering work, RHEL for fileserving/etc., and Windows client for desktop duties.

Technologies like {Dtrace, Zfs, etc.} do matter as they are also relevant while developing software on my workstation.
e.g. ZFS allows me to patch my system with rollback support. Keeping a system up-to-date is a good idea. If I do not like the new patched system I then just rollback to the previous system (i.e. boot environment) and patch later with newer patches.

DTrace allows me to diagnose my system but also perform experiments on my newly built software to get an enhanced view of the dynamic nature of the software not readily available from a debugger and other tools, leading to a higher quality software development process. If you believe good quality software is not important then that's your opinion but as a developer my responsibility/philosophy is to always strive for something good.
-------------------------------------------------
It was mentioned ...
"I mean do you think they brought in Ian Murdock to make Open Solaris more easy to use on servers??"

Not surprising and this is a good thing for the OpenSolaris community. With Solaris' server lineage it is obvious that Sun wanted to make Solaris geared also for the workstation/desktop type user. I use the "dev" repository and as I have been regularly patching my system I have seen that this goal is steadily being reached.
e.g. For me, OpenSolaris 2008.11 would cleanly shutdown in about 1 minute. OpenSolaris 2009.06 shutdowns in 10 seconds.
-------------------------------------------------
It was mentioned ...
"Anyway all this point will be moot if and when Oracle changes the license. The Solaris kernel will be dead and all the fancy stuff will be on Linux.

Linux is the future of computing between Linux and
Solaris. Solaris might as well be dead, Sun is."

OpenSolaris, not Solaris, is licensed under CDDL.
Oracle is not saying a word about OpenSolaris.
OpenSolaris is a different issue as the formal OpenSolaris community is involved here.

Just because Sun was bought it does not mean it's technologies have to disappear. If Solaris/OpenSolaris
scares you then do not worry too m

Reply Parent Score: 1

Windows Sucks Member since:
2005-11-10

LOL! Why would I be scared of Open Solaris or Solaris in general. Remember it's Linux that helped kill Solaris not the other way around.

On top of that tell me ONE OS that has large market share that is not made or managed by a corporation? Which means if Sun goes away and Oracle does not become a corporate sponsor of Open Solaris then Open Solaris will be right there like Slackware. Something that coders use and people who have nostalgia for Solaris will use and that will be that!

And you can say that Linux is a joke. But last time I looked Sun was losing money and Red Hat was making it. So the joke is on Sun and Solaris.

I am sorry but Linux is everywhere. And yes its a Unix clone that took the Unix model and made it more flexible. That is why Linux is in phones and devices and on almost every super computer in the world.

That is why companies and orgs like:

Sherwin-Williams (Moved from HP-UX to Red-Hat)

Axiom (Moved from Slow Laris to Red Hat)

Orange County Public School (Moved from AIX to Red Hat)

NYSE (600 servers from HP UX, IBM AIX, and SUN Solaris to Red Hat Enterprise Linux.)

Dartmouth University (Sun ONE Directory Server to Red Hat Directory Server)

And the list goes on and on and on. Scared of Open Solaris. Please don't make me laugh anymore my sides are hurting. LOL!

Oh and I am a sys admin for the US Government. We moved from Solaris and AIX to Red Hat, Windows and Debian.

And I know a lot of what I am talking about is Linux against Solaris and not Open Solaris. But who uses Open Solaris? Oh yea coders such as yourself. Not real sys admins like me who are actually running systems in the field.

Open Solaris is not even a blip on the radar for real world deployments. I bet even though Open Solaris is backed by Sun there are more real world deployments of Debian (That has no support or company backing) then Open Solaris. Crap might be more real world deployments of Deb then Solaris proper at this point! LOL! (Don't quote that as fact, I will have to research that)


So what if Linux includes OpenOffice by default.
Some people might use Abiword, other's may use KDE office, others may use OpenOffice. So, should OpenSolaris contain all these by default. The choice is there to download it or not. Personal responsibility, it's a good thing !

If you cannot be productive while updating/patching your system then that's your problem or your computer's problem. I patch OpenSolaris while I code and build my C++ libraries and am still productive. With a cable modem (my broadband plan being slower than ADSL2+) I patch my system leading to a new boot environment in ~15 minutes.


I am lost on your logic here. First off it would not take any longer for someone to remove Open Office and install Abiword (Open Solaris is Gnome based so not many people gonna use KOffice there) then it would to install Open Office, so since WAY more people use Open Office then Abiword why not just include it. Now maybe its just too big to fit on one CD. That would make sense.

It was mentioned:
"On the hardware I tried it on Linux worked 100% out the box. Open Solaris did not. "

You can either accept "hardware is hardware" and what that entails in the proprietary world of hardware tech or contribute to the free operating system world with hardware-related research or wait until hardware support broadens.


Here again I am confused, If Linux works out the box (Fedora 11 and Ubuntu 9.04) then that would mean that the "Free OS world" has already worked on the drivers etc for this hardware. Oh yeaaaa, that stupid license that Sun put on Open Solaris wont allow you to mix in GPL stuff. So that would mean you have to write it all over again for Open Solaris! Darn.

You should realise that the good thing Linux did was that it made Sun go back to it's roots and open source their flagship operating system. I look forward to OpenSolaris getting more enhanced as time goes by.


As I said above, if Oracle does not sponsor Open Solaris then its dead.

Your comments on the relevance of Sun's technologies are a bit puzzling. Are you a coder, an admin, a casual operating system user/sampler ?
If you were the latter, then okay you do not realise the benefit. But if you are a coder/admin person then you probably have not realised what you have stumbled upon with the Solaris technologies (and by the way these technologies are open-sourced). I say this not as someone who "hates" Linux. I am happy that Linux exists since it adds to the existing pool of unix type systems in this world and I have noticed when people use a unix type system they end up knowing more about their computer environment unlike many Windows users. It just happens that I prefer OpenSolaris.


Ok you want to talk tech so lets talk tech.

Solaris is better then Linux and so is Open Solaris because Open Solaris has all this tech from Solaris like Dtrace and ZFS right?

Well lets take a peak into the past shall we:

Hummmm, when MS came along making work group servers in the early 90's who had the better tech?:

Banyan
Novell
Or
Microsoft

Hummmm Banyan and Novell had scalable directory services and high level security, With Banyan being used at almost every government agency in the mid 90's. MS had crappy NT domains on Windows NT 3.51

Banyan had the Street talk protocol and Novell had IPX/SPX, Microsoft had NetBEUI. Blah. NetBEUI was not even routable at the time.

And here we are in 2009 and where is Banyan? Dead. Where is Novell? Selling Linux and in reality might as well be dead.

My point here is that having so called better tech means nothing. Does not mean at all that your product or whatever is going to become a market leader. What makes a market leader is perception.

This is why even though now General Motors makes cars as good in quality and cheaper then Toyota, people will still buy Toyota and pay $3000 to $5000 more for that car! Why? Because of the perception that GM cars suck.

Which is why you can never loose your job for buying Microsoft. Their products suck but there is the perception that you can do more with MS products and that MS will always be there to fix your problems.

While there is a white paper saying Linux is a toy, Linux is growing, Unix is not. Even Unix companies like IBM and HP are selling what??? Linux! In some cases against their own Unix products. Even Sun was selling Linux, till they realized they were helping kill themselves.

And I don't have a problem with Open Solaris. I was just pointing out the issues they need to fix if they are going to compete on the desktop front.

Like you said it takes 40 seconds to boot Open Solaris, in that time I could of booted my Fedora machine, logged in, sent an email and started shutting down with the new boot scripting Fedora has added.

Reply Parent Score: 2

akrosdbay Member since:
2008-06-09

LOL! Why would I be scared of Open Solaris or Solaris in general. Remember it's Linux that helped kill Solaris not the other way around.


Solaris is dead! That is news to me. May be the billions in revenue Sun made last quarter were fantasy.

Redhat makes $652 million a year. Sun makes $642 million in software revenue not including the service sales for software. If you assume they make even a few hundred million in software services/year from the $4 billion they make in service. Sun easily makes more money per year selling software than Redhat.

Sun's SPARC CMT server line alone makes $1.3 billion+ a year. That line only runs Solaris.

Reply Parent Score: 1

akrosdbay Member since:
2008-06-09


On top of that tell me ONE OS that has large market share that is not made or managed by a corporation? Which means if Sun goes away and Oracle does not become a corporate sponsor of Open Solaris then Open Solaris will be right there like Slackware. Something that coders use and people who have nostalgia for Solaris will use and that will be that!


Too many ifs and buts there. Oracle is deployed on Solaris more than any other OS. You are dreaming if you think Oracle is going to kill Solaris.

And you can say that Linux is a joke. But last time I looked Sun was losing money and Red Hat was making it. So the joke is on Sun and Solaris.


Redhat made $652 million in revenue last year. Sun made $13 billion. Redhat has very low R&D overhead because they are mainly integrators of software others produce.

Redhat's net income is $78 million. Oracle claims they can make $1.5 billion profit in the first year from the Sun acquisition. Don't kid your self redhat is not even in the same league.

Reply Parent Score: 1

akrosdbay Member since:
2008-06-09


Like you said it takes 40 seconds to boot Open Solaris, in that time I could of booted my Fedora machine, logged in, sent an email and started shutting down with the new boot scripting Fedora has added.


Bollocks. Fedora 10 takes more than a minute to boot.

This article lists it at 69.27 seconds.
http://www.junauza.com/2009/04/boot-speed-war-xubuntu-904-vs-fedora...

This one says 66 seconds:
http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=fedora_boot_perf...

Try to be honest in your comments. The pro linux hyperbole is unnecessary.

Edited 2009-06-04 07:59 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 1