So said Sun Microsystems’ COO Jonathan Schwartz at an Asia Pacific press conference in Shanghai today. “I don’t want to say when that will happen. But make no mistake, we will open source Solaris,” he declared. The move is a widely anticipated one. Still, what will keep users and the press guessing for now is what form the licensing model of its longstanding server operating system will take as Schwartz refused to elaborate.
Sun Confirms Plans to Open Source Solaris
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
Great news!
I’ve always been told (I can’t really tell myself, since I haven’t really tried out Solaris yet) that it is a very stable and robust system.
What I’d love to see, then, is Solaris with a KDE desktop (or Gnome, it’s just that I prefer KDE).
We could be in for some intersting stuff here
Something restrictive but still mostly free like the Apple one? I’d be willing to wager it /won’t/ be GPL.
Less and less people are using Solaris.
I would like to try out Solaris once but I doubt it would work on my hardware.
Making an OS is not as hard as everyone thinks . It’s just a program. Even the Monolithic Kernel of Linux is not huge.
What makes an OS useful is that it recognizes your hardware. I don’t use QNX because my hardware doesn’t work on it.
As of Solaris 9 I believe that gnome 2.4 runs prefect and sun has ported it themselves. As for KDE probably not going to happen unless they open source or for some reason there is a big demand for it.
What I’d love to see, then, is Solaris with a KDE desktop (or Gnome, it’s just that I prefer KDE). (Thom Holwerda)
If that is what you want to see, why not just go to http://www.sun.com and download Solaris 9 and then go to http://www.kde.org and download KDE 3 for Solaris (it comes with GNOME)?
Unless it is gpl compatible, this announcement is nothing but pr crap. (foo)
I am inclined to agree with that, without specifying a licence it is no different to MS ‘open source’ claims.
Still, what will keep users and the press guessing for now is what form the licensing model of its longstanding server operating system will take as Schwartz refused to elaborate. (Euginia)
No doubt it will keep some users and press guessing. As for me, I will just ignore it until they actually release some details. Judging by SUN’s recent history (i.e. JDS 2), I wouldn’t be surprised if the licence(s) were lengthier than the code.
As of Solaris 9 I believe that gnome 2.4 runs prefect and sun has ported it themselves. As for KDE probably not going to happen unless they open source or for some reason there is a big demand for it.
I know Gnome 2.4 already is available for Solaris, I said it kinda wrong there. I was just trying to say that I wanted KDE instead of Gnome.
What makes an OS useful is that it recognizes your hardware. I don’t use QNX because my hardware doesn’t work on it.
First of all (off-topic I know, but I couldn’t resist): QNX is quite capable, you know, but, I agree, it does take a lot of manual configuring. Had it running for months on my Laptop
(needed MSN Messenger though).
Solaris’ x86 HCL has doubled it’s size already, and undoubtedly it will grow even more after the open-sourcing of Solaris
I don’t believe they can fully open source Solaris due to its SV4 roots.
If they can somehow figure this out, Solaris will have to go through at least a year of serious security patches, once the wider audience finds holes Sun couldn’t find or wouldn’t admit to – only an idiot would presume a closed source OS is airtight.
In any case, even if they can get around these issues, its a day late and a dollar short.
Yesterday’s Sun story was that hardware will be free and today’s is that Solaris will be free. So what services will Sun be offering that we will pay for? Why will we want to get those services from Sun?
“I don’t believe they can fully open source Solaris due to its SV4 roots.”
My thought, as well. Has not Sun paid a healthy fee for the rights to use SCO’s code? Has all of it been removed prior to this, otherwise how can it be released without them ending up in the same situation as IBM?
Well, SunOS used to be based on BSD, so they could probably swap out the SV4 core for a BSD one if they had to. I dont think SCO would like that however.
The only parts of Solaris that might be interesting, they’re unlikely to open source. And I’m sure that they won’t be actually “opening” the source, it’ll be more like “shared” source is from Microsoft. Who knows, they might prove me wrong.
As for KDE on Solaris, back in ’97/98/99 I ran an Ultra 5 on my desk with dual-boot KDE or CDE interfaces. KDE ran just fine, although of course the control panel wouldn’t see much of the Solaris hardware.
“Well, SunOS used to be based on BSD, so they could probably swap out the SV4 core for a BSD one if they had to. I dont think SCO would like that however.”
Gosh, there might actually be someone remaining in this world who cares what SCO thinks? I’m guessing not.
What’s the point of open sourcing Solaris when people have Linux? Solaris is never going to capture the wider community development and contribution that Linux has.
Schwartz also mentioned that they would do something similar with Solaris as they have with Java. That isn’t open sourcing (so I wasn’t aware Java was open sourced), and it is probably creating some sort of licensed specification as they have done with Java out to companies like IBM and BEA. However, given that people have Linux, what’s the point of licensing the specifications of Solaris and selling it? There’s not going to be very many takers.
“”There is a big difference between both (open source and open standards). There is one Linux company in the world today that’s confusing the two concepts, and that is Red Hat. And it is very dangerous,” said Schwartz.”
Still more FUD from Schwartz.
Is this not the second iteration?
I recall, c. 2000 or thereabouts, their much ballyhooed “Community Source Program” … look but don’t touch.
It’s not the OS, it’s the applications.
“Yo’ mama runs Linux!”
Just kidding.
“What’s the point of open sourcing Solaris when people have Linux?”
How about choice? Linux isn’t the only open source game in town you know.
KDE runs on Solaris just fine. You obviously have not played with it much.
This will be a look but don’t touch deal.
As others have said, too little, too late. In fact,this whole move reeks of desperation. Sun looks like a deer staring at the open source headlights.
And we learned from Schwartz that it is about open standards, not open source. This is a Java-type deal. We are the only real holders of the true java beans. You cannot call it Java if it doesn’t come from us. As good as Java is, if the current rate of adoption continues, .NET will be the mainstream architecture for Windows, with all the buggage and instant success that that sadly carries with it.
The only way to spread Solaris knowledge fast, to get drivers fast is to adopt a true open source license, be it BSD or the GPL. Otherwise, the real developers will not even touch your stuff. Sun knows this and is using this open source annoucemenet as a preemptive move against wider Linux adoption.
I have not been asked once in the past two years that I have been setting up servers for people, “Hey, why don’t we get one of those super-duper expensive boxes from Sun”. Not once.
People are buying Linux boxes from Dell and HP, and IBM in that order, at least that’s my experience. And these boxes keep on ticking for years at a time, which means lots of happy customers. Next time they want a box, guess what they get: more of the same.
I have seen places go from one lowly Linux web or email server to moving all of their server boxes to Linux within 2 years. I think Sun has real competencies that it can bring to the world of open source world, much like IBM has done, but it has to get on the ball now and a restrictive license for Solaris and claiming that it is being open sourced is no going to do it. I hope to be proven wrong, but I know that I will not.
they can do it. they have the equivelent to the ownership of sys v……….. im guessing this will shoot SCO in the foot big time.
If solaris goes GPL I’ll shoot my own foot.
This is a good strategy: the Linux momentum is too strong for vendors to maintain effect closed source Unix’s today, especially now that Linux has better SMP and HA capabilities so large applications vendors like Oracle are moving to it. Once upon a time, Sun had a niche in that top end market. Not any more.
What Sun would be smart to do is release Solaris in such a way that parts of it can be either independently learnt from and reproduced to make Linux better, or even grafted into Linux. Sun actually destroying its own baby in the process, and in the background largely moving its whole business over to Linux and refocusing, so “Solaris” as a product in itself has no value for it.
I’d be interested to know what people’s thoughts are on how Sun is repositioning itself.
“What’s the point of open sourcing Solaris when people have Linux? Solaris is never going to capture the wider community development and contribution that Linux has.”
Well, geez golly. What is the point of anything if Linux is out there, right? You should let the people working for all those *BSDs maybe they did not get the memo.
“what’s the point of licensing the specifications of Solaris and selling it? There’s not going to be very many takers.”
Well for starters Solaris is a real Unix, it has a decent threading model, pretty scalable, it has partitioning, etc. Features that are rather interesting, but hey it seems that for a lot of linux fan boys the computing world revolves around their self assmebled overclocked watercooled rig with flashing neon lights.
I’d be alot more excited about this if it were coming from someone besides Jonathan Schwartz.
I’d be interested to know what people’s thoughts are on how Sun is repositioning itself.
Well, I don’t think they’ll just let everyone copy/paste Solaris stuff into Linux (btw, kinda strange that people want Solaris stuff being ported to Linux, while, on the other hand, SkyOS is being attacked because they use GRUB :S).
Anyways, Solaris is too good a system, they won’t just drop years and years of development. And seeing the low improvement rate in JDS, I think Solaris might just be their focus, and not Linux.
This is how I see the picture, I might be wrong, but hey, I might be right!
Sun, as of now, are loosing money, so they figure out a new stradegy. They won’t sell hardware. They won’t sell software. They are going to sell maintaince.
You have a big company? You need a K of computers? we would provide for you. Will Install them, configure and update them. If somthing is broke, we will come and fix it. All the aspects of maintainnce, including yearly (!) upgrades of both hardware (!) and software is on us.
Just pay us a Y amount of money and you can go to sleep knowing that an expert is taking care of your computer needs for you.
Using this module, Sun can open source their software, even GPL it. What do they care? they are selling maintainnce.
No, I don’t think that Sun would GPL, but they might give it like they gave OpenOffice.
Then again, they might not
This could really change the dynamic of high end computing. A lot of admins will not use Linux, because it is not “real Unix”. If there were suddenly a “real Unix” open source alternative, it could take a real bite out of AIX and HP-UX. Sun has really lowered the cost of their hardware and the agreement with Fujitsu could lower it even further. Plus, with it open sourced, in a matter of no time we would see ports to a lot of other platforms. Then you could still run your favorite hardware, Sparc, PPC, x86, Opteron, Itanium, etc… and still run a “real Unix” open source OS.
Of course they would have to truly open source it first.
Funny how Solaris is the worst gaffer clock in histiry, and then all of a sudden it ‘should’ be opensourced? What for, of all things? Not for people to contribute to it, but for the Penguin OS to be able to legally rip everyhting it needs.
Like someone said ‘what’s the point in anything if we’ve got linux?’. Really, what’s the point?
‘What’s the point in any programming language if we’ve got C++?’
Well if you read anything on OSNews you can see that Linux doesn’t need anything that BSD, Solaris, or anyone for that matter has because Linux already does everything better.
Stop whining David. This is good news if they go for GPL.
BSD licences sucks for kernels.
Now we are only waiting for JAVA!!!!
I wonder if Schwartz is visiting OSNEWS frequently?
The world need many good OS’s, not just Linux.
“”There is a big difference between both (open source and open standards). There is one Linux company in the world today that’s confusing the two concepts, and that is Red Hat. And it is very dangerous,” said Schwartz.”
Still more FUD from Schwartz.
I know. What on Earth is this fixation with Red Hat?
Well, geez golly. What is the point of anything if Linux is out there, right? You should let the people working for all those *BSDs maybe they did not get the memo.
I’m looking at this from Sun’s perspective in terms of improving their lot – not a community one. This is going to do nothing in terms of making people choose Sun and Solaris over HP, IBM and Linux. Economies of scale are at play here, and Sun just cannot generate the wider development push that Solaris needs in view of what Linux has. BSDs certainly still exist, but they don’t have the weight of development and momentum to do what Linux is now doing.
Well for starters Solaris is a real Unix, it has a decent threading model, pretty scalable, it has partitioning, etc. Features that are rather interesting, but hey it seems that for a lot of linux fan boys the computing world revolves around their self assmebled overclocked watercooled rig with flashing neon lights.
Well, a real Unix (whatever that is) is obviously making people flock to Sun in increasing numbers
. You don’t think that Linux has a good threading model, is scalable (again doesn’t mean anything – depends on context), and has partitioning(?!!!). You need to get out more and work out why people are buying Linux on x86, or Linux on PPC. It’s certainly cheaper, as powerful as you want it to be and has clear direction from IBM and other companies selling them.
You don’t try to sell someone a Linux server and then say “Well actually you’d be better off with this.” The problem is compounded by the fact that Sun sub-consciously give out these messages. Your customers just go elsewhere, whether they want Linux or not.
Fantastic. Another clueless person spouting the ‘virtues’ of Solaris, without any idea that those ‘virtues’ are nothing special (or totally non-existant) and are not doing anything for Sun’s position.
“I know. What on Earth is this fixation with Red Hat?”
I am sure it has something to do with that big announcement that they made, I think around a year ago, about how RedHat was going to package Java in everthing and Sun was going to be selling RedHat. That deal fell apart for some reason, so there are probably some sour grapes there. Then the fact that RedHat is providing and supporting RedHat EL3 on all of IBMs hardware probably makes it worse.
>What on Earth is this fixation with Red Hat?
Because RH is bringing in the cash and SUN isn’t.
Sparc is smashed by Opteron and Solaris is smashed by Linux.
Schwartz should be spending less time looking at RH and start produce something themselves instead.
<inside Scwartz mind right now>How can RH making all this money in selling free software?</inside Scwartz mind right now>
Stop whining David. This is good news if they go for GPL.
Judging from the Java comments then they won’t go GPL. Using the GPL would also mean that Solaris code could be used within Linux. This isn’t likely to happen even if the GPL is used, but Sun can’t afford that chance if they want to sell Solaris.
The world need many good OS’s, not just Linux.
Yes, but not in Sun’s world.
“Using the GPL would also mean that Solaris code could be used within Linux.”
Hmm well i’d rather say SunOS, not Solaris. Since that’s more specific. I think also the most interesting part.
Also, since the licenses are compatible with each other, it is X <-> Y therefore the other way around as well (SunOS using Linux code).
Question is what can be used. Since SunOS is similair to BSD, SUN developers should already be able to grab drivers from the BSD’s. Those are BSD licensed. Certainly SUN cannot use all that code though. For example, OpenBSD cannot use FreeBSD’s SMP code. Hurd can use Linux driver’s code. When it comes down to Linux and BSD i’m really wondering what could be used in the SunOS kernel from the Linux kernel and the other way around and even more in what is interesting to share around.
Maybe it doesn’t matter, and it is i think more theoretical than practical, since i agree it most likely won’t be GPL since Sun prefers control and doesn’t trust the GPL (based on their forking rants). I think rather Sun is pulling off a “Real Helix” here…
sun will have a problem – they can’t open source everything as some of it doesn’t belong to them.
they may release what they can and let people do what they will with it.
this was why openoffice and staroffice are separate. maybe they will have solaris and opensolaris?
“Well, a real Unix (whatever that is) is obviously making people flock to Sun in increasing numbers
.”
Nice strawman argument. There are some very very very nasty elements in the Linux kernel, which is fine because of the development model. There is a clear opportunity to take a peek at how a true UNIX vs a UNIX-like system solve some of the same issues. Not for bragging rights or marketing hype, but rather as a simple matter of comparing solutions and learning from both. Was that so hard to understand?
“You don’t think that Linux has a good threading model, is scalable (again doesn’t mean anything – depends on context),”
No it is not a good model, hence Solaris has a far more interesting technology with its native kernel threads than Linux hack on top of a hack model.
“and has partitioning(?!!!). You need to get out more and work out why people are buying Linux on x86, or Linux on PPC. It’s certainly cheaper, as powerful as you want it to be and has clear direction from IBM and other companies selling them.”
You do not know what multiple domains and system partitioning are and you are telling other people to get out more often? And believe it or not SUN actually sells x86 system with linux in them (some of the top performing x86 systems are SUNs actually), to that extent SUN and IBM are pretty much on par with each other when it comes to “clearness” of direction.
“Fantastic. Another clueless person spouting the ‘virtues’ of Solaris, without any idea that those ‘virtues’ are nothing special (or totally non-existant) and are not doing anything for Sun’s position.”
Pot calling pottle do you copy? Linux and Solaris are tools, if one of them fits your bill, then by all means use it. However trying to make it as if Solaris is without merits is silly, ignorant and just ill informed. Solaris has some very interesting technologies in it, and it would be wonderful to take a peek at them or to incorporate them in other system.
Linux has great things too, but this stance of making it to be the end all of the OS development is just pathetic.
.. they won’t GPL it.. they open source all of it. Think of Darwin is to Mac OS X.. as to ____ is to Solaris.
Sun wants to cut costs and theres a buncha people that will apparently work for free. Plus they know Linux will eventually overtake Solaris.
wait until you use solaris express.
What’s the point of open sourcing Solaris when people have Linux?
What’s the point of Linux when you have Windows? What’s the point of Apple when you have E-Machines? What’s the point of OpenBSD when you have NetBSD?
All silly questions.
The more the merrier, that’s what I say.
I mean, Linux, the *BSDs, and Syllable, ReactOS, etc, have all got different priorities – and they’re all useful for someone somewhere.
An Open Source Solaris/SunOS would be great, because it’d add another ingredient to the mix, and with Solaris’s admitted strengths on the high end, that would put additional pressure on Our Favourite Monopoly – since they’ve already admitted – Halloween Papers – that they can’t cut off Free/Libre Open Source Software’s air supply.
In addition, it’d up the ante for Sun’s Un*x-ish competitors to follow suit on the high end, or go all out for Linux.
We live in interesting times – now all I ask is that Sun follow through, the way they did with StarOffice and its reincarnation as OpenOffice.org.
Wesley Parish
only an idiot would presume a closed source OS is airtight.
Only an idiot would assume *any* OS is airtight, open source or closed source.
because Koffice was still very much in its infant state; there was no Office package readily available in the Free Software panorama at the time.
Sun had paid 375 million dollars to the developers of StarOffice, and they weren’t making any money from it. On the other hand they wanted to break Micro$haft domination in the market of Office packages.
Present circumstances are completely different, so open sourcing Solaris doesn’t make any sense at all, and is not going to have any significant impact in the growth of Linux. It certainly is not going to bring Sun any extra revenue.
So I would say it just qualifies as another one of Schwartz’ mind farts, just like his constant attacks on RedHat.
He’s not really showing any leadership at Sun, so I can only wonder how long he’s going to be allowed to go on with that kind of thing.
” What’s the point of open sourcing Solaris when people have Linux? Solaris is never going to capture the wider community development and contribution that Linux has.
Schwartz also mentioned that they would do something similar with Solaris as they have with Java. That isn’t open sourcing (so I wasn’t aware Java was open sourced), and it is probably creating some sort of licensed specification as they have done with Java out to companies like IBM and BEA. However, given that people have Linux, what’s the point of licensing the specifications of Solaris and selling it? There’s not going to be very many takers. ”
There will be plenty of takers its called a fan base. Windows has a fan base, Sun has a fan base, Apple has one and Linux has one. The Windows and Sun fans are less vocal than the Apple and Linux fan clubs tho. Despite what some in the Open Source community would like to believe Java is a very popular programming language and Im sure that when Sun releases Solaris Open Source it will be pretty popular. Undoubtedly Raymond and Stallman wont like it at all and they will give use 6 page editorials on what constitutes Open Source but serious developers and developers who wish for the platform to do well will help improve it, I know I will. Solaris is a very well tested and a very reliable OS and since the x86 version is starting to be taken seriously and we have third party support for it now, I think it will do very well indeed.
Of making Solaris open source is that Linux developers can more easily making Linux work better on Sun hardware, thus Sun is further allowing Linux to cannibalise its own business.
heh, I just spent a week compiling KDE 3.2.2 on Solaris 8. It was very very difficult with our setup, but now I’m a pro at it, hehe.. FWIW, KDE runs fine on Solaris.
You don’t have to compile it of course, you can just download binary packages (for Solaris 9, but might work on Solaris 8 as well).
Nice strawman argument. There are some very very very nasty elements in the Linux kernel, which is fine because of the development model.
This is not a straw man argument – Sun are in trouble. Again this doesn’t mean anything without detailing what these problems are, and detailing all the problems IBM and HP’s customers are getting with all these ‘nasty hacks’. Talking about how nasty Linux is isn’t going to improve sales of Solaris – quite the opposite. Linux can’t be doing anything nasty otherwise people wouldn’t be buying it, and wouldn’t be opting for it and x86/PPC over Solaris/SPARC. This just doesn’t tally with what is actually happening.
No it is not a good model, hence Solaris has a far more interesting technology with its native kernel threads than Linux hack on top of a hack model.
Again, see above. Telling customers that Linux is hacked together isn’t going to improve sales of Solaris – quite the opposite.
You do not know what multiple domains and system partitioning are and you are telling other people to get out more often?
What do you think IBM does with their eSeries and PPC machines?
And believe it or not SUN actually sells x86 system with linux in them (some of the top performing x86 systems are SUNs actually), to that extent SUN and IBM are pretty much on par with each other when it comes to “clearness” of direction.
So why aren’t Sun talking about them and promoting them? Because they still expect people to spend a bundle on Solaris and SPARC when there is nothing compelling there. They discontinued good product lines like the Cobalt Cubes. Sun’s direction is very, very far from clear.
However trying to make it as if Solaris is without merits is silly, ignorant and just ill informed. Solaris has some very interesting technologies in it, and it would be wonderful to take a peek at them or to incorporate them in other system.
Compared to what people are buying Linux systems for, there are no compelling merits in the vast majority of cases. That’s why Sun are in trouble.
Linux has great things too, but this stance of making it to be the end all of the OS development is just pathetic.
It isn’t, but Sun need to work out where they stand with Linux and Solaris and why companies using Linux are taking chunks out of their SPARC/Solaris business. If they don’t, then continuing to promote Solaris is pointless.
This is not a straw man argument – Sun are in trouble. Again this doesn’t mean anything without detailing what these problems are, and detailing all the problems IBM and HP’s customers are getting with all these ‘nasty hacks’. Talking about how nasty Linux is isn’t going to improve sales of Solaris – quite the opposite. Linux can’t be doing anything nasty otherwise people wouldn’t be buying it, and wouldn’t be opting for it and x86/PPC over Solaris/SPARC. This just doesn’t tally with what is actually happening.
What is actually happening? Is sun suddenly selling less number of boxes. I have mentioned it to you time and again. People are buying more sun boxes than before. You make it sound as if sun’s volumes are disappearing into oblivion, when fact tells a different story.
First get things straight. People are opting for linux because it is the only viable UNIX like OS for the x86 platform. X86 hardware is cheap and fast. Linux would have gone nowhere had x86 hardware lagged the RISC based ones. I think if sun can sell Solaris 10 x86, and it will. Solaris 10 x86 has technologies the linux developers haven’t even imagined yet and it performs better than linux or as well as linux. Sun has made tremendous advancements is making ISVs and OEMs sign up for Solaris x86 in the past year. The HCL has grown 2-3 times.
Companies aren’t buying linux becuase it is open source. They are buying it becuase of the price/performance of x86 hardware. They are buying it becuase of the hype and mindshare linux has.
What do you think IBM does with their eSeries and PPC machines?
PPC machines that IBM sells can’t do LPARS. only the Power line can and they are very very expensive.
So why aren’t Sun talking about them and promoting them? Because they still expect people to spend a bundle on Solaris and SPARC when there is nothing compelling there. They discontinued good product lines like the Cobalt Cubes. Sun’s direction is very, very far from clear.
Go to sun.com ->products->entry level servers. Linux is on the catalog just as solaris. What more do you want? linux rules painted on the sidewalks of San francisco like IBM did.
Compared to what people are buying Linux systems for, there are no compelling merits in the vast majority of cases. That’s why Sun are in trouble.
if you mean linux/x86 systems. Solaris 10 has more than enough merits for those markets.
It isn’t, but Sun need to work out where they stand with Linux and Solaris and why companies using Linux are taking chunks out of their SPARC/Solaris business. If they don’t, then continuing to promote Solaris is pointless.
No IBM is taking chunks out of the SPARC/Solaris business with Power based systems.
Sun is lying. they simply cannot open source solaris because its base system v is encumbered. they can put it up under a restrictive license like what they have for java and promote it better but it will never be open source. they are just attacking redhat and spreading fud.
Is sun suddenly selling less number of boxes. I have mentioned it to you time and again. People are buying more sun boxes than before. You make it sound as if sun’s volumes are disappearing into oblivion, when fact tells a different story.
You’ve quoted a meaningless study from IDC. For example:
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/business/175921_sun02.html
Sun has reported losses in 10 of the past 12 quarters totaling more than $5 billion, and sales have declined for three years as rivals such as Dell sold cheaper servers. Sun’s server sales declined 15 percent to $1.22 billion in the first quarter. Industry sales of servers, which run company databases and Web sites, rose 9.3 percent to $11.8 billion, Gartner Inc. said. Sun’s global market share shrank to 10 percent from 13 percent, Gartner said. In the United States, Sun is in fourth place behind IBM, HP and Dell.
For every survey that says Sun is getting better there is three or four that paint a very different picture. You should have learned not to look at them by now. Vendors pay these companies quite a bit of money to make them look good. Sun is in the RED – something you don’t seem to understand. It is also cutting costs to survive, and this is in a server market that has expanded and provided growth for HP, IBM and Dell – their competitors. The situation is dire. You can quote IDC surveys until the cows come home – it doesn’t change Sun’s position.
First get things straight. People are opting for linux because it is the only viable UNIX like OS for the x86 platform.
No, and this is the part that is difficult to see with Linux. With Linux it is possible for many vendors to share the costs, burdens and innovations in developing and supporting a kernel and a wider OS. That is why Linux is in the position it is in – it is just extremely easy for HP, IBM and others to support and develop. The side-effect of this is that it has become predominant on widespread x86 hardware. Sun hasn’t got a hope of replicating that community of shared effort and work, and the cost of continually supporting Solaris themselves will take its toll.
Solaris 10 x86 has technologies the linux developers haven’t even imagined yet and it performs better than linux or as well as linux.
Sun has a lot of excellent technologies, but they’re still not making any difference. You can’t come out and say that it will perform as well as or better than Linux, because there’s no evidence of that. What are these mystical technologies coming to save Sun? Whatever they are, there’s no way that no one has thought of them before, and there’s not much chance of them making a difference – that’s just wishful thinking.
Companies aren’t buying linux becuase it is open source. They are buying it becuase of the price/performance of x86 hardware. They are buying it becuase of the hype and mindshare linux has.
You have to look at why that hype and mindshare has been generated. Rather than maintaining proprietary operating systems themselves, companies such as HP and IBM have discovered that sharing work, effort, technology and support really drives things forward for them. There’s no way they could do that with AIX, HP-UX and there’s no way Sun can do that with Solaris.
The reason the price/performance of Linux and x86 is so good is because it is just so much more cost-effective for vendors and hardware companies to use the shared effort and work of a community effort. That’s where the price advantage of Linux comes from – it is unseen. That’s why Linux has been the first UNIX-like system to really embrace x86 and ‘commodity’ hardware.
PPC machines that IBM sells can’t do LPARS. only the Power line can and they are very very expensive.
So what? That hasn’t stopped people replacing a lot of SPARC machines with x86-based ones. The problem for Sun is that many people have found that they can live without what Solaris and Sun hardware offers, or they can get a cheaper technology alternative elsewhere.
The people that want to do a lot of things with logical partitioning and other technology pay top wack – and even there, these days there doesn’t seem to be much of Sun.
if you mean linux/x86 systems. Solaris 10 has more than enough merits for those markets.
Oh, the upcoming messiah Solaris 10. Judging from recent performance, people do not see enough merits in Solaris and Sun (and not in the way Sun have sold themselves), and translating whatever Solaris 10’s merits are into sales is another matter. You’re just not going to understand this are you? The merits of Solaris mean nothing, because what is actually happening and the position Sun are in is a different story.
No IBM is taking chunks out of the SPARC/Solaris business with Power based systems.
Yer, so what? Linux Power systems have certainly replaced SPARCS, but many companies are using x86 Linux systems that have replaced SPARC/Solaris systems or chosen new x86 systems running Linux.
David, you say Sun has a lot of excellent technologies, but they’re still not making any difference. You can’t come out and say that it will perform as well as or better than Linux, because there’s no evidence of that.
in that case you maybe should start looking at solaris 10 yourself … just go ahead and download it from sun.com/softwareexpress and do whatever benchmark yop want … and BTW dont forget to look at dtrace and zones …. things which are in there (supported) and without any need to recompil the kernel
Solaris is not BSD-based, and hasn’t been since Solaris 2. (the old SunOS was BSD-based, and was retro-named Solaris 1).
The Solaris kernel is still called SunOS, but it’s SysV based.
Sun have bought full rights to the code with that contraversial SCO deal – so AFAICT they can do whatever they want with it – SCO can’t touch them.
People can moan all they like about “what license will it be?” whilst praising IBM’s commitment to open source… What license is AIX available under? How are IBM “concentrating” on Linux whilst selling more Windows and AIX boxes than Linux boxes?
Java isn’t open source – tons of Java developers want it that way, they want a stable, defined standard. Anybody can come up with code that fits that standard, but allowing forking vs. guaranteeing write-once-run-anywhere is self-contradictory. That’s not a religious point, it’s tautological.
I suspect that Enterprise customers will want the same for Solaris … in fact I can guarantee it. These are companies who’ll pay thousands for Sun to install Solaris instead of doing it in-house (when they’ve got perfectly competent admins in-house) – just because they’ve got somebody to blame if it all goes wrong. These are the customers who fear open-source (rightly or wrongly) because they want a butt to kick. Sun aren’t likely to abandon those customers – Real Computing is their bread-and-butter. X86 machines, by definition, in the Datacentre environment, are not Real Computing.
Solaris kernel is tunable from /etc/system – no “rebuild, reboot, see if you’ve caught all the modules”. Less flexibility in some ways, but easier to tune a certain parameter.
Sun is $7bn in the black, but the stock price is nowhere near what it was during the dot-com boom.
People are buying x86 because it’s cheap, and deploying Linux because it’s got the x86 hardware support.
Sun are sticking to quality – it’s not what people want right now, with the economy still not recovered from 2000, but they will want it. Dropping F15k, Solaris, etc, and (maybe) becoming an also-ran to Dell isn’t a great idea… if Sun have enough in the bank to wear out the storm, then once enterprises start getting more cash in their bank accounts, they’ll come running to Sun if Sun keep up the quality.
Solaris x86 HCL (http://www.sun.com/bigadmin/hcl/) is nowhere near as long as Linux’s HCL, though it is growing rapidly. Sun have backpedalled strongly from the announcement a few years ago to drop Sol_x86 – and all the cool stuff in Solaris 10 is there for x86 too – dtrace, etc.
Things like IPMP, SVM, crash dumps, have all been in solaris (SPARC and x86) for years; Linux is starting to catch up on these.
There’s nothing stopping Solaris x86’s HCL matching *BSD’s HCLs 1:1 – the core OS is different, but the code is basically there.
I got a Solaris 10 debug build, and it runs roughly as fast as Linux on my Dell C640 laptop – some things seem faster, some are slower. Nothing I can measure in seconds, more a “feel”. That’s not even the Solaris Express program (which I assume doesn’t include debugging code). “Slowlaris” doesn’t seem to apply any more.
SunCluster is now apparently supported on x86, too (though I don’t have details, like redundancy requirements, level of support, etc) but that sounds handy for lab-work, even if x86 isn’t suitable for the type of apps you’d want to cluster.
Before the doubters call any of this FUD, some of it is speculation and interpretation, but most of it is plain fact.