Linked by David Adams on Fri 16th Jul 2010 19:44 UTC, submitted by sjvn
Sun Solaris, OpenSolaris A Computerworld blog speculates that the open-source Unix distribution may live on, but Oracle won't be supporting it. At this point, "OpenSolaris' only real future is as a fork, which would not be easy to pull off. Still, with enough interest from developers it could be done. OpenSolaris is licensed under the GPLv3 CDDL and various other OSS licenses, so the base code is available."
Thread beginning with comment 433980
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
nt_jerkface
Member since:
2009-08-26


Hm? I didnt understand this one. OpenSolaris is like Fedora and Solaris 10 is like RedHat. OpenSolaris gets all new tech first, and then it is backported to Solaris. For instance, ZFS came first to OpenSolaris: just read wikipedia article on ZFS. So OpenSolaris code is the basis for Solaris 11. OpenSolaris contains all new tech. If it is scrapped, then all development on Solaris 11 has to start anew, from scratch. Highly unlikely.


ZFS was integrated into Solaris first but released publicly in OpenSolaris.

Solaris doesn't need OpenSolaris to progress, especially when all the work of OpenSolaris was performed by Sun employees. How ever did Solaris progress before the advent of OpenSolaris? Oh that's right, with paychecks to engineers.

OpenSolaris/Solaris on x86 is a dead end. Big iron is a shrinking market thanks to cpus like the Xeon 7500.

Sun waited too long to move against Linux. The technical advantages of Solaris aren't significant enough to counter the inertia behind Linux. Sun acted arrogantly by being dismissive of Linux during the late 90's and has paid for that arrogance with the Oracle takeover.

Reply Parent Score: 4

Kebabbert Member since:
2007-07-27

ZFS was integrated into Solaris first but released publicly in OpenSolaris.

Jesus. Not this one again. I have explained to you several times that ZFS came not to Solaris first. It is all written on wikipedia article, the same one you linked to. Yes, the same one.

Let us straighten this one out, so you stop spreading FUD and lies, ok? Read the wikipedia article and then come back and stop lie about ZFS and Solaris, ok? It is getting tiresome. You are just repeating the same old stuff all the time. Ok to repeat if you where true, but it is not. It is false. And I have told you are wrong, so either you are deliberately lying, or you just dont understand text. Or, just FUDing.


Solaris doesn't need OpenSolaris to progress,

Oh, no. Not this one also. Look. All new tech goes first into OpenSolaris, and then backported to Solaris. Solaris is the stable enterprise OS. You can not include new tech into a stable OS. First you introduce the tech into the beta OpenSolaris. And then backport it when most of the bugs are ironed out. Jesus.


OpenSolaris/Solaris on x86 is a dead end.

So, you say that Solaris on SPARC is the future? I dont agree with you again. x86 is developing faster than x86, so I think that x86 is the future. Not a dead end.


Big iron is a shrinking market thanks to cpus like the Xeon 7500.

This one, I agree with you. But x86 is far behind yet. But it is catching up. The question is if it ever will catch up? x86 is too buggy and bloated so will it ever be as reliable as SPARC or POWER? Some says no. x86 is broken by design. But truth is that x86 is developing faster than any other CPU.


Sun waited too long to move against Linux. The technical advantages of Solaris aren't significant enough to counter the inertia behind Linux. Sun acted arrogantly by being dismissive of Linux during the late 90's and has paid for that arrogance with the Oracle takeover.

You have lot of opinions. Anyone is free to have opinions. I would like it better if you backed up your opinions with somewhat credible links.

And please, stop lie. Ok?

Reply Parent Score: 2

gnufreex Member since:
2010-05-06

You tell someone to stop lying?

Lets see:

First you lied that OpenSolaris is commercially supported by Oracle. When I told you to find support contract and I will buy it for you, then you stopped talking about that and started lying about other things.

Like for example you linked HP advertising blog and acted like it is some credible source. Then you admired that is advertisement, but you still claim it to be a credible source. I really don't get.

Then like for example you linked Sunshiner blog where Sunshiner dig out some old statement from Linux dev, statement which is from time whem SystemTap was in it's infancy.

As for your SAP tests, I didn't expected to be any more credible than the rest. For those who won't bother to analyze it, here is what is wrong with it:

Linux box run MaxDB 7.8 which is pretty crappy DB. Solaris box run Oracle 10g which is very fast DB.

Linux box has 128GB of RAM while Solaris box has 256GB. That is probably the main reason why Linux utilized the CPU less - it lacks memory.

Also, why is SuSE used over Red Hat? I tell you why. Because it sux. Solaris probably can't outperform nicely set up RHEL box even if it has more memory and if test is not done with same DB. So they slip SuSE which Microsoft also use every time when they want to prove that Windows is faster.

What's that sound.... oh that's last shred of your credibility crashing down and falling on the head.

Edited 2010-07-19 15:08 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

nt_jerkface Member since:
2009-08-26


Jesus. Not this one again. I have explained to you several times that ZFS came not to Solaris first. It is all written on wikipedia article, the same one you linked to. Yes, the same one.


Yes and you never explained this sentence in the article:
Source code for ZFS was integrated into the main trunk of Solaris development on October 31, 2005[4] and released as part of build 27 of OpenSolaris on November 16, 2005.


Here's the original blog post from the head developer:
http://blogs.sun.com/bonwick/entry/zfs_the_last_word_in

ZFS went into Solaris first. It was released publicly first in OpenSolaris. Unless you want to claim that the creator of ZFS is also lying.


Solaris is the stable enterprise OS. You can not include new tech into a stable OS.


It's called a development branch. Does OSX have an OpenOSX? As I pointed out Solaris progressed before without OpenSolaris and can do so again. OpenSolaris has only been around a few years.

Reply Parent Score: 2