Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 29th Jan 2010 16:08 UTC
Oracle and SUN "Several of the concerns about Oracle's acquisition of Sun have revolved around how Unix technologies led by Sun would continue under the new ownership. As it turns out, Solaris users might not have much to worry about, as Oracle executives on Wednesday affirmed their commitment to preserving the efforts. In the case of Solaris, Oracle had already been a big supporter of the rival Linux operating system. Oracle has its own Enterprise Linux offering, based on Red Hat Enterprise Linux. For Oracle CEO Larry Ellison, the idea that Linux and Solaris are mutually exclusive is a false choice."
Thread beginning with comment 407116
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[8]: Could be worse
by tylerdurden on Sun 31st Jan 2010 20:24 UTC in reply to "RE[7]: Could be worse"
tylerdurden
Member since:
2009-03-17

I am not missing anything. First off Xenix was also derived from the original Unix code base. And Solaris only added the interfaces to support some of the old SunOS BSDness. There is a reason why SunOS lived for almost a decade after Solaris had been introduced.

What you are trying to claim is akin as claiming that DOS 5 was not really DOS because it was a significantly "improved" version from the original DOS 1.0 release. Which makes little sense to me.

I am not claiming anything, the source code is there for people to see. And indeed there are tons of SYS V stuff in there.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[9]: Could be worse
by Laurence on Mon 1st Feb 2010 09:03 in reply to "RE[8]: Could be worse"
Laurence Member since:
2007-03-26

I am not missing anything.

Well yes you have because you keep reiterating my point: Unix is alive and well

What you are trying to claim is akin as claiming that DOS 5 was not really DOS because it was a significantly "improved" version from the original DOS 1.0 release. Which makes little sense to me. .


No, what I'm trying to explain is that you keep arguing with me by reiterating my fraking point.

I'm stating that Unix is still alive and well but just in an updated sense.

I've said this, you've said this, so why are we still arguing?!

I am not claiming anything, the source code is there for people to see. And indeed there are tons of SYS V stuff in there.

Clearly you have some other kind of definition of "claiming" than the rest of us because you state you're not claiming anything and then go on to make a claim.

http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&q=define%3Aclaim&meta=&saf...
Claim:
assert or affirm strongly; state to be true or existing; "


I'd say, under most peoples definitions, that your statement regarding SysV was a "claim".

As for the claim itself, I'm not going to argue whether it's true or not because quite frankly I'm not about to start running difference engines against the two sources just to resolve an argument when you're clearly just as apathetic towards backing your point up and the the underlying argument we already agree on (despite your continual attempts arguing otherwise).

So are we done now?

(and yes I am being particularly moody today. It's Monday morning and I had to "sleep" on the couch last night as my fraking laptop exploded yesterday destroying the bedroom in it's wake).

Edited 2010-02-01 09:09 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2