Sun is gunning for some of Linux’s rising popularity in the enterprise with the newest release of its Unix derivative, Solaris (screenshots). In this Clear Choice Test, they found that Solaris 10 has been torn from its SPARC-only roots now runs very quickly and very easily on generic 32-bit x86 Intel- and 64-bit Advanced Micro Devices-based servers. It also has new security features and supports a range of Linux applications. And it’s free.
Solaris 10 Heads for Linux Territory
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
This article shows Solaris running JDS 3. OSDir also has screenshots of Solaris 10 running CDE, if you’re into that…
http://shots.osdir.com/slideshows/slideshow.php?release=278&slide=3…
The installation was really simple, but the most striking, to me really surprising, feature was the JDE 3. Everyone, and I mean, every single one who saw it, was very satisfied or amazed at how good and functional it is.
It’s not glitzy, but it’s pleasant looking and it realy does the job perfectly and in a friendly fashion.
It’s GNOME, and Sun calls it Java Desktop?
“It’s not glitzy, but it’s pleasant looking and it realy does the job perfectly and in a friendly fashion. ”
if thats perfect then everything is
Can I use solaris 10 as a soho webserver platform?
Peace
“It’s GNOME, and Sun calls it Java Desktop?”
yes. its a fork of gnome
Sun is gunning for some of Linux’s rising popularity in the enterprise with the newest release of its Unix derivative
Well, even though they’re gunning, they missed me:) And now I’ve hidden my self very good
With a large corporation such as Sun backing it up, Solaris 10 might be a good choice for those higher-up types that may think Linux is just a hobby OS.
umm… that’s an interesting desktop, I guess
As soon as they get more device drivers..i’m there.
It’s free for everyone.
“With a large corporation such as Sun backing it up, Solaris 10 might be a good choice for those higher-up types that may think Linux is just a hobby OS.”
so you are saying that solaris is a good OS for such idiots who believe that IBM, HP, DELL, Novell and Red Hat are not good enough?
I am not sure thats a good compliment
Is JDE really a fork of GNOME? From what I’ve heard SUN hires GNOME developers full time, you know to work on GNOME. I don’t really see anything wrong with them repackaging GNOME and calling it “Java Desktop”, I mean they put enough money into the community they can do whatever they like, they’ve earned the right. Ximian/Novell does the same, why can’t SUN?
I’ve used CDE before, ugly but usable. I suppose it either keeps you busy trying to make it look pretty, or it keeps you busy working long enough to avoid from facing the desktop.
IBM, HP, and Dell just provide the hardware with Linux installed. And Red Hat doesn’t count.
“umm… that’s an interesting desktop, I guess”
You should use it… It looks like cr*p but it’s extremely intuitive and easy to use.
On my UlstraSPARC my root account is set to load CDE, while my ordinary user account loads Xfce4.
Honestly, I think it’s a great choice for that function. Not so much because of the speed (the TCP/IP stack was rewritten from scratch, and I think it shows) and responsiveness on limited, cheap commodity HW, but mostly because of the excellent online documentation that’s available for all Solaris operating environments. When you google or search docs.sun.com, for a Solaris-related issue, you always find exactly what you’re looking for. I think it’s comparable to the excellent FreeBSD and NetWare documentations.
personally i hope solaris becomes a platform for 3d animation, linux is just too difficult for the major software vendors to support. solaris would bring a level of stability and performance that windows lacks at present.
CDE is way more professional looking. Why isn’t anyone investing in a simplified API for Motif?
“personally i hope solaris becomes a platform for 3d animation, linux is just too difficult for the major software vendors to support. solaris would bring a level of stability and performance that windows lacks at present.”
Linux is difficult therefore solaris would be better than windows… yeah that makes sense
My problem with solaris is the same problem I have with windows. Only one distributer. Linux has a plethora of Distributions. If Red Hat raises there prices, I can go to Suse, or Mandrake. If Sun raises there prices, I’m stuck! sorta like Microsoft!
Yes I know Sun is giving Solaris away for free, but in an environment where TIME=MONEY, you need a level 2-3 engineer to contact 24/7 and that cost money no matter what OS you are running.
Long Story Short. If I have problems with one version of Linux, I can go to another. If I have problems with Solaris, I’m stuck!
JDS3 is based on GNOME, but a number of apps are written in Java (several J* type names in the menus), and the default JDK version is 1.5 (nice and fast). On one hand the Java in JDS is a lot of branding fluff, but, on the other hand, Sun is trying to reinforce that Java (the development platform) spans JDS desktops and Java Enterprise servers. I guess they want Java to be the preferred development environment on these systems, with C and C++ being more for systems programming.
“so you are saying that solaris is a good OS for such idiots who believe that IBM, HP, DELL, Novell and Red Hat are not good enough?”
Linux is more of a PR toy for IBM, and HP, Dell, and Novell don’t have anything else to sell (HPUX on Itanium…sure I’ll take twenty…on second thought, no I won’t).
> Yes I know Sun is giving Solaris away for free, but in an environment where TIME=MONEY, you need a level 2-3 engineer to contact 24/7 and that cost money no matter what OS you are running.
Actually it matters a lot which OS you’re running if quality of support is important to you. Linux support pretty much sucks regardless of which distribution you go with. Talking about any sort of guarantees for problem resolution is laughable regardless of which Linux vendor you’re talking about. I would say Sun has an order of the magnitude better support than RedHat for instance. Reason for the poor support by Linux vendors is the fact that none of them really owns the IP they are selling and none of them has real control over developers that maintain the products — forget about uptime and SLA guarantees with Linux. Sun with Solaris on the other hand can address everything mentioned above — Sun can always get needed people on the case because they actually own the developers who build and maintain their products.
“Linux is difficult therefore solaris would be better than windows… yeah that makes sense”
Solaris provides stability (in the reliability sense) that Windows lacks, and Solaris provides stability (in the configuration management sense) that both Windows and Linux lack. Sun is pretty serious about binary and source compatibility across versions, and they seem to document where stuff changes so ISVs can see what they need to do.
So, yes, it does make sense.
Anytime soon?
“Long Story Short. If I have problems with one version of Linux, I can go to another. If I have problems with Solaris, I’m stuck!”
Not really, as Solaris is UNIX(tm). Also, OpenSolaris is comming this Summer.
BTW, the amount of effort to move from Red Hat to another distrubution is the same as the effort to move to or from Solaris. This is a common misconception in the OSS world.
I thought IBM sell Windows? And AIX?
Lots of choice of vendors there.
And Websphere is only supported on two distros – RHEL and SUSE Enterprise? Three if you include Red Flag Linux, but only in China.
http://www-306.ibm.com/software/webservers/appserv/doc/v60/prereqs/…
Lots of choice there as well – two vendors – thats it.
Good fud though Aaron, good fud.
“IBM, HP, and Dell just provide the hardware with Linux installed. And Red Hat doesn’t count.”
IBM, HP. DELL, Novell Red Hat et all are also pay *developers* and your blank statement that Red Hat doesnt count is very mysterious
” OSDir also has screenshots of Solaris 10 running CDE, if you’re into that… ”
My god, it’s looks like Windows 95 on a bad day. People are still running an atrocity like that in this day and age??
It’s already starting, yet another Linux vs Solaris flame war on OSNews.
I hope the inevitable flame war dies, or never really gets going, and that people talk about features/benefits, and exchange info about using/deploying Solaris. That would be an entertaing, informative discussion thread, and a stark contrast to the usual boring flame war.
I prefer Linux for my purposes, but Solaris looks quite nice, running Gnome/JDS, in those screen shots.
And reading about many of Solaris’ features (DTrace, Zones, etc), and it’s track record as an excellent big iron server OS, Solaris appears to kick some serious booty. I’ll be glad to try it if there is a CD with good HW detection somewhere to be found.
Seconded.
As for Solaris 10 cd’s you can download the iso’s from http://www.sun.com/software/solaris/get.jsp
For hardware support, there is the hcl list, but what are you going to try install it on? Most recent machines have no problems at all.
But what are you going to try install it on? Most recent machines have no problems at all.
Well, it depends on the level of hardware support you demand. HW equipments like hardware MPEG-2 encoders or even to get full support for a plain ATI graphics card is certainly going to cause trouble.
that’s the ugliest thing I’ve seen. How can one be productive in such a graphical nightmare?
For a change it doesn’t seem to be all that bad! The Rednova article is short on details and discusses for the most part topics that have been covered elsewhere.
The UI looks scketchy to me at best. Event ubuntu looks more polished than this. Putting lots of big images on splash screens is a poor choice. I cannot comment on functionality but I think Sun would better buy a UI specialized company to handle this. Same goes for Swing.
$50 for the media:
http://store.sun.com/CMTemplate/CEServlet?process=SunStore&cmdViewP…
I wouldn’t trust Sun with anything other than Solaris running on Sun hardware. And maybe not even that.
Sun has a long history of ambivilance towards anything “not invented here.” Solaris supported x86, then it didn’t, now it does again. Sun supported linux, then tried to kill linux (as we know it) by supporting scoxe and claiming that Sun had the only legal version of Linux.
Sun management leaves a lot to be desired, an awful lot. When Sun ran into to trouble, the solution of Sun management was to run around like chickens with their heads cut off; changing the company’s direction, and their positions, on important matters about every two months.
Also, Sun management has a snarky, immature attitude. They don’t know when to shutup.
As a company, Sun is in trouble. Deep trouble. Yes, they have some great technology, so does SGI, so did DEC, and many other such companies.
I thought the Solaris x86 and SCOXE trolls ran out of steam weeks ago. And, if you listen to Sun’s management speak about these things, especially at the last couple of quarterly announcements, they’re pretty much spot on. It looks like they put the head back on the chicken.
A lot of companies really like using Sun/Solaris. It seems Wall Street is returning to Sun after a period of uncertainty. Their Grid is very attractive (fully virtualized–it’s like having your own server). Solaris 10 is a big step forward from Solaris 9, even beyond the biggies like JDS3, DTrace, Containers, etc. For example, the new SMF makes managing services much easier. There are more goodies in /usr/sfw, including GCC. StarOffice is now fully integrated into the system. The JDK 1.5 even makes Java apps feel faster than native.
Solaris 10 can practically sell itself, IMO.
> As a company, Sun is in trouble. Deep trouble. Yes, they have some great technology, so does SGI, so did DEC, and many other such companies.
LOL, 2000 called, they want their bullshit FUD back! Sun is long over the period when things looked sort of shaky, Sun’s stock is going up fairly steadily and a lot stock analysts already upgraded the advisory to “BUY” on SUNW. Sorry dude, this FUD that you’re trying to spread is so out of vogue that its not even funny any more. Get a clue and read some news for a change!
> I wouldn’t trust Sun with anything other than Solaris running on Sun hardware. And maybe not even that.
Who do you trust then? IBM who decommitting from its own products and whoring itself out to RedHat and M$ while having an absolute mess of a product line no one can decypher? Or maybe HP who lost almost all of its technology and having nothing to sell of their own except for printers? I trust Sun even after some of the mistakes that they’ve made because they’re the only company that truly stands behind its products and is willing to go an extra mile to deliver truly ground breaking tech. Sun is still the #1 company that bets on innovation and not on stupid commodity.
Does anyone sell an x86 equipped Solaris box?
mdk : have you ever even used 95? cde does not look like windows 95..
anonymous : since when do you need a pretty UI to be productive? That has got to be one of the dumbest statements I’ve read here in awhile. and thats saying something
Thanks, I wanted to try out something other than linux for which I use Mandrake as my file server.
Peace
Why isn’t anyone investing in a simplified API for Motif?
Ummm, it’s called lesstif (mo’ or less):
http://www.lesstif.org/
Hi,
I tried to install it on a athlon xp 1800 with a 7200 rpm IDE drive and it took forever to install, and after about 1 1/2 hours I gave up and through ubuntu and that installed in 15 minutes.
I would like to try it again, but I don’t know what the heck the install is so slow, is there some kind of issue with AMD CPU and IDE drives?
This has been mentioned before, Solaris 10 sets the speed of IDE CD/DVD drives to PIO Mode 4 (16.6 Mbits/sec) for maximum compatibility. If you look at /var/adm/messages you will see entries:
Feb 11 23:25:39 robert4 genunix: [ID 846691 kern.info] model DVD-ROM DDU1621
Feb 11 23:25:39 robert4 pci: [ID 370704 kern.info] PCI-device: ide@1, ata1
Feb 11 23:25:39 robert4 genunix: [ID 936769 kern.info] ata1 is /pci@0,0/pci-ide@
11,1/ide@1
Feb 11 23:25:39 robert4 genunix: [ID 935449 kern.info] ATA DMA off: disabled.
Control with “atapi-cd-dma-enabled” property
Feb 11 23:25:39 robert4 genunix: [ID 882269 kern.info] PIO mode 4 selected
Feb 11 23:25:39 robert4 genunix: [ID 935449 kern.info] ATA DMA off: disabled.
Control with “atapi-cd-dma-enabled” property
Feb 11 23:25:39 robert4 genunix: [ID 882269 kern.info] PIO mode 4 selected
This is easy enough to fix using the eeprom atapi-cd-dma-enabled=1 and reboot (as root).
its not free for commercial use
Actually is free up to 4 CPU sockets (if memory serves me – it may be 8 CPU sockets). You only pay if you want support regardless of architecture. When OpenSolaris hits the streets you’ll be able to do whatever you want with it and never pay a dime to anyone. Yes I do work for Sun…
My Solaris 10 Entitlement Document says so. Sun’s website says so. Jonathan Shwartz and Scott McNealy said so.
Given the evidence, I am inclined to think that Solaris 10 is indeed free for commercial use.
As a user I just feel uncomfortable with Sun’s Common Development and Distribution License (CDDL). Rather stick with GNU General Public License (GPL). Anyhow, it’s just a feeling. Don’t put anything too much into it
I’ve already mentioned that Solaris seems to kick some booty. I also think their hardware is good, and Java certainly has it’s strengths.
On the other side of the coin, Sun’s management has been flakey to say the least. They’ve been rather inconsistent in their strategies and in their rhetoric.
They, do however, seem to be getting their act together a little bit. They seem to now be completely committed for the long haul to x86, as well as Open Solaris.
That said, Sun’s anti-Red Hat, anti IBM, anti HP, FUD grows both tiresome, and is quite non-sensical. The anti Red Hat (a fine company that puts out fine products and services) was absolutely ridiculous. Calling RHEL proprietary was really something else. I about fell out of my chair laughing when I first read about that one.
Anyway, other than Sun executive’s propensity for diarhea of the mouth, Sun seems to be getting their act together, both in terms of their products and their market strategies.
>>LOL, 2000 called, they want their bullshit FUD back! Sun is long over the period when things looked sort of shaky, Sun’s stock is going up fairly steadily <<
Funny, Looks to me like sunw is exactly where it was a year ago, and way down from where it was a few months ago. And down about 90% from where it a few years ago.
http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?s=SUNW&t=1y
>>and a lot stock analysts already upgraded the advisory to “BUY” on SUNW.<<
Uh oh, sunw must be doing worse than I thought. I hope you’re not stupid enough to believe stock analyst. Those are probably the same guys who called sunw a strong buy at $60 a share.
>>Sorry dude, this FUD that you’re trying to spread is so out of vogue that its not even funny any more. Get a clue and read some news for a change!<<
I’m just giving my opinion, which is based on facts – facts which I have cited. I’m not just some ranting sun fanboy.
>>Who do you trust then? IBM who decommitting from its own products<<
When did IBM do that? You must know something that nobody else in the world knows.
>>and whoring itself out to RedHat and M$<<
So let me get this straigt, you think ibm is the company whoring itself out to msft – and not sunw? Please cite your basis for that bizare claim.
“Sun has lost six points of share in the UNIX market with Solaris in the last three years, and AIX has gained 8 points of share.
[…]
Sun has 1% share of the x86 market.“
http://www-128.ibm.com/developerworks/library/pa-chiphopper/
Oooh I’m shaking in my boots.
Kudos to Sun for opening the source to Solaris. It is definitely an enterprise OS and has very neat features. You deserve lots of credit for improving the state of operating systems.
Now for the suggestions, some are for the operating system maangement, most are for the compilation environment – I am a developer, not an admin.
1. In addition to pkgadd you need a proper way to manage software installations on the machine via a “smit” or “yast” like interface.
2. the Studio compiler should work with distcc, there is no reason why you should let gcc beat you with distributed builds. Stop wasting time with dmake and figure out why Studio doesn’t work properly with distcc. Even a gcc installation on a solaris box can be run against distcc w/o any problems!
3. inline assembly is great! http://developers.sun.com/solaris/articles/x86_assembly_lang.html#3
Please give us more examples, especially with sparc instructions!
4. Fire one of your underperforming managers and hire Walter Bright of digitalmars.com to write your optim izerfor you, he is an amazing c++ compiler programmer (esp for x86) and you would be lucky to have him.
5. Submit your atomic increment APIs to POSIX, you did a great job on them!
“As a user I just feel uncomfortable with Sun’s Common Development and Distribution License (CDDL). Rather stick with GNU General Public License (GPL).”
First – As a “user” I’m confused why the type of OSI license really matters?
Second – Solaris 10 as downloaded/used from the sun.com site is not covered by the CDDL, OpenSolaris on the other hand will be released under CDDL (later this year). Sun provides Solaris 10 users with a “Commercial Use” entitlement to run Solaris on whatever SPARC or x86 type system you wish (read–FREE).
Third – It’s good to see others being exposed to the Solaris operating environment that I’ve had the pleasure (and some pain) to use for more than 13 years. I hope all are able to give it a fair chance. It’s not the “end all of OS’s”, but from my experience it is a very stable and predictable computing environment. When running UNIX (UNIX-like) server based applications whether proprietary or open source, I find it usually meets the challenges thrown at it quite well.
Choosing an OS is similar to choosing a mate…
…”look and feel” always makes a big initial impression, but it’s not until you have to deal with “command lines” do you start to fully understand the task at hand!
Regards
“As a user I just feel uncomfortable with Sun’s Common Development and Distribution License (CDDL). …”
This isn’t even a good troll. It reads like some sort of labor union vote-getting campaign.
The CDDL is actually a really good license, especially in conjunction with Sun’s patent grant for OpenSolaris. As far as I know, OpenSolaris will be the only OSS operating system that is guaranteed to be not infringing on patents. Some blogs at Sun (WebMink, IIRC) indicate that Sun’s lawyers really worked hard at this problem for quite a long time before coming up with the CDDL and patent grant solution.
The GPL is the kinder and friendlier Borg assimilation license of the OSS world. When people cry out “GPL compatibility”, what they really mean is that any code that intermingles with GPL code _becomes_GPL_. It’s a one way street, with no route around the block to get back. This is just one reason, I believe, that Sun could not go with the GPL for OpenSolaris. Sun needed flexibility in licensing, especially with regard to third party code, being able to commercially distribut binaries, etc. Sun exists in the real world (not FSF fantasy land), where lots of interests compete against eachother and need to be navigated.
I think OpenSolaris is really going to hit it big in the commercial sector with companies who use Solaris a lot, governments around the world will appreciate its transparency (e.g., Brazil), and ISVs can use it without needing to disclose trade secrets or without fearing the software patent minefield.
Kudos to Sun for opening the source to Solaris. It is definitely an enterprise OS and has very neat features. You deserve lots of credit for improving the state of operating systems.
Now for the suggestions, some are for the operating system maangement, most are for the compilation environment – I am a developer, not an admin.
1. In addition to pkgadd you need a proper way to manage software installations on the machine via a “smit” or “yast” like interface.
2. the Studio compiler should work with distcc, there is no reason why you should let gcc beat you with distributed builds. Stop wasting time with dmake and figure out why Studio doesn’t work properly with distcc. Even a gcc installation on a solaris box can be run against distcc w/o any problems!
3. inline assembly is great! http://developers.sun.com/solaris/articles/x86_assembly_lang.html#3
Please give us more examples, especially with sparc instructions!
4. Fire one of your underperforming managers and hire Walter Bright of digitalmars.com to write your optim izerfor you, he is an amazing c++ compiler programmer (esp for x86) and you would be lucky to have him.
5. Submit your atomic increment APIs to POSIX, you did a great job on them!
“As far as I know, OpenSolaris will be the only OSS operating system that is guaranteed to be not infringing on patents.”
LMAO Ok I have to control myself.
So your saying that the 1600 patents that Sun recently gave to the CDDL community covers any and all (present and future) patents that are implemented in the (currently non-existent) OpenSolaris operating system?
Your kidding me right?
>> Who do you trust then? IBM who decommitting from its own products
>> When did IBM do that? You must know something that nobody else in the world knows.
IBM has been steadily decommitting from AIX for a few years already. AIX development has been slowing down pretty steadily and AIX is already uncompetitive with Solaris on pretty much any ground and I don’t see IBM putting much effort into AIX to catch up with Solaris. I would be more delighted to see IBM develop AIX instead of pushing RedHat, SuSE, or worse yet Windows kit. It looks like IBM didn’t learn anything from their OS/2 fiasco — IBM will feed RedHat until RedHat won’t need IBM anymore. I want to see IBM develop their own products and not reselling something they could have done themselves.
>>and whoring itself out to RedHat and M$<<
>>So let me get this straigt, you think ibm is the company whoring itself out to msft – and not sunw? Please cite your basis for that bizare claim.
You got that right — IBM is whoring itself out to M$ and Sun is not. Sun was successfull extorting $2B from M$ for a good reason and more power to them. Sun didn’t bend over for M$ and Sun is still trying to steal as much market share as possible from M$, just look at StarOffice, JDS, JES, etc, they are all aimed squarely at Microsoft market share. IBM on the other hand generates massive revenues from their Microsoft partnership and presently employs about 3000 engineers dedicated full time to making Windows a success. IBM needs M$ because it doesn’t have a competent enough product of their own to run on commodity x86 hardware especially in a desktop-type setting (IBM flirts with Linux, but they know that the real cash cow for them is Windows). Now tell me who is the real M$ whore.
When people cry out “GPL compatibility”, what they really mean is that any code that intermingles with GPL code _becomes_GPL_.
Define “intermingling” please.
Code that has already been released under a different license cannot be “GPLed” through contact with the GPL. For someone claiming to fight FUD, I can’t believe you would make such a blatantly misleading statement.
I have nothing against Solaris, however (as I’ve said before) I don’t think it has enough momentum nor the massive community necessary to overtake Linux – nor should it be its goal, despite the fact that so many anti-Linux posters would portray it as a Linux-killer.
I agree about not starting another flamewar on the subject. Let’s just agree that both Linux and Solaris are fine OSes, and that both the GPL and CDDL are good licenses (and, why not, that Windows and proprietary licenses for OSes suck!)
> I have nothing against Solaris, however (as I’ve said before) I don’t think it has enough momentum nor the massive community necessary to overtake Linux
Overtake Linux in what sense? Amount of garbage and hype posted accross the web? As far as I’m concerned Linux never overtook Solaris neither quantitatively (there still more Solaris servers deployed than Linux servers) nor qualitatively (Solaris is still a more full featured and more technically advanced OS). So far Sun managed to stay ahead of the competition with Solaris doing all development in house, if Sun makes Solaris open source and even if Sun doesn’t geather quite as numerous of a crowd as Linux, chances are Solaris will still be a more capable OS than Linux. You don’t need hordes of developers to make a decent OS, Solaris 10 is perfect example of that.
Does anyone sell an x86 equipped Solaris box?
SUN do. Best to wait for the next quarterly annoucement, which should have a line up of new workstations and updated configurations.
“So your saying that the 1600 patents that Sun recently gave to the CDDL community covers any and all (present and future) patents that are implemented in the (currently non-existent) OpenSolaris operating system?”
IIRC, the CDDL requires it. Also, OpenSolaris does exist, but is currently in a pilot program leading upto the release sometime this summer. People at blastwave.org and cuddletech.com are in the pilot program, for example, and they’ve shown screen shots of Solaris boot screens with custom kernel names (i.e., not Sun’s build of the OS).
“Code that has already been released under a different license cannot be “GPLed” through contact with the GPL.”
Then why the whole distinction between the GPL and the LGPL? Even linking against GPLed code is problematic.
So your saying that the 1600 patents that Sun recently gave to the CDDL community covers any and all (present and future) patents that are implemented in the (currently non-existent) OpenSolaris operating system?
Please read the information carefully. The grant of 1600
patents covers what is presently patented. Sun can’t
grant rights or whatever to things/ideas/etc which it hasn’t
received patent rights for. Think about it!
The OpenSolaris OS does actually exist, I am a member of the
pilot. It is coming, and soon.
Directed at James and Anonymouser
First, when I can fully download, compile, and run OpenSolaris in its entirety, I’ll agree with you both.
Dtrace != OpenSolaris
Secondly,
James says:
“The grant of 1600
patents covers what is presently patented. Sun can’t
grant rights or whatever to things/ideas/etc which it hasn’t
received patent rights for.”
Anonymouser says:
“OpenSolaris will be the only OSS operating system that is guaranteed to be not infringing on patents.”
James, your just reconfirming my point. Sun does not have all patents relating to OpenSolaris.
OpenSolaris is *NOT* “guaranteed” to be free of patent infringment.
IBM alone has over 30,000+ patents, wanna bet that Solaris/OpenSolaris infringes on atleast one of them?
More lies from the Pro-Sun fans.
“More lies from the Pro-Sun fans.”
No, Sun really is building up the patent portfolio in OpenSolaris to protect it. Sun has made every indication that OpenSolaris will be in quite a good position with respect to patents, moreso than other OSS projects. Sun can’t abide by the CDDL if they don’t have the rights to the code, anyway.
Perhaps “guarantee” is too strong a word, but I don’t think it’s way out of line. The patents issue will be minimized, if you prefer that phrasing.
there still more Solaris servers deployed than Linux servers
Really!? How many Linux servers are there out there?
I’d like to have your sources, please (and yes, I was talking quantity, not quality).
> OpenSolaris is *NOT* “guaranteed” to be free of patent infringment.
I don’t think there is any single OS in existance that is absolutely guaranteed from infringement, just take a look at IBM being sued by SCO over AIX and Unix code misteriously migrating to Linux. Even IBM being the largest patent holder is not immune! Nevertheless if I were to rate safety from infringement I would definitely rate OpenSolaris as the safest option out of all open source operating systems out there simply due to association with Sun. Sun has a huge patent portfolio and in terms of Unix licensing enjoys the most freedom out of all Unix ISV’s out there. So yeah, OpenSolaris is relatively free from potential infringements as compared to Linux.
I love it when the Linux zealots pull up stock charts when the don’t have any technical facts to use.
But you should really do a comparison walter. The same 1 year chart versus redhat
http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?t=1y&s=SUNW&l=on&z=m&q=l&c=rhat
Interesting is it. Novell is left as an exercise for yourself.
The markets must have a reason for the 40% drop in Redhats share price since the start of the year. Or is that only when it applies to Sun.
Then why the whole distinction between the GPL and the LGPL?
That’s irrelevant. But I’ll answer your question when you answer my request to define what you mean by “intermingling”.
Even linking against GPLed code is problematic.
That’s why most libraries are LGPL. But again, that’s besides the point. You made a misleading comment on the GPL, insinuating that it could somehow contaminate other code, when in fact such a thing is impossible due to the way copyright law works.
It seems to me you’re more of an anti-GPL advocate than a Solaris fan. Solaris just happens to fit in with your anti-GPL philosophy. The fact that you evaded my direct questions on the matter leaves little doubt in my mind regarding your agenda in the matter.
“Perhaps “guarantee” is too strong a word, but I don’t think it’s way out of line.”
Sun will never be able to apply/purchase all patents relating to Solaris/OpenSolaris. Too late to back pedal now friend. In my neck of the woods a “guarantee” infers an absolute state and to an extent is legally binding.
You are not safe.
Sun will never be able to apply/purchase all patents relating to Solaris/OpenSolaris. Too late to back pedal now friend. In my neck of the woods a “guarantee” infers an absolute state and to an extent is legally binding.
All patent information is public, if you really think Sun’s lawyers aren’t going to be keeping track of IBM and other companie’s patent portfoilio to ensure OpenSolaris is not infringing on any of them. You would be mistaken.
Also once code is alreay in OpenSolaris and the idea and implementation is open another company may not be able to file a new patent.
BTW, not all of IBM’s 30000+ patents are software, IBM has a huge patent portfolio in hardware, semiconductors ,…. etc.
Raptor, your missing my point. No one is safe from patent infringment. Yes, not even Solaris. Hear that Anonymouser?
“Also once code is alreay in OpenSolaris and the idea and implementation is open another company may not be able to file a new patent. ”
Yes they can. Do you know how pathetic the USPTO is? Prior art everywhere.
Heck, I would bet you a shiny new 200GB HD that some(most?) of MS’s patents pertaining to .NET are invalid due to prior art, in paticular by the JVM.
“BTW, not all of IBM’s 30000+ patents are software,”
I never said they were.
It’s interesting that……
By Anonymous (IP: —.anonymizer.com) – Posted on 2005-03-15 06:33:22
By A nun, he moos (IP: —.85-202-24.mc.videotron.ca) – Posted on 2005-03-15 06:59:11
Seems to always try to provoke some sort of confortation concerning this topic?
Focusing on snipettes of postings instead of the main focus of the post. I’ve been monitoring OSNEWS for awhile now, and the previously mentioned individuals are rarely on focus of the main post.
Me thinks thou protest too loudly!
Please explain how Solaris 10 has anything to do with CDDL and patents. Then there is the “now and in the future” reference; just how do you protect a published work against a future patent?!? Isn’t that an oxymoron? Kinda’ like linux is UNIX!!!
LOL
I love it when the Linux zealots pull up stock charts when the don’t have any technical facts to use.
Now let’s look what kind of proposal you have to offer:
But you should really do a comparison walter. The same 1 year chart versus redhat
http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?t=1y&s=SUNW&l=on&z=m&…
Interesting is it. Novell is left as an exercise for yourself.
To be honest: I have never seen such a ridiculous comparison as you have proposed here: A (predominantly) hardware vendor and two software vendors. What is the next thing you want to suggest? HP vs. Kodak?
As in everything else in life, there is nothing perfect for everyone at all time and at anywhere.
With dozens of software licences and millions of software users there are bound to be situation where one will be more suitable than the others for one situation and vice versa.
Many factors and reasons come into play when choosing a licence (as a developer, business entity, or end user) such as financial, legal, philosophy, personal taste and etc.
The only thing that can gurantee a type of licence to survive is:
– as developers to keep developing software under that licence and,
– as users to keep using software under that licence and help the developers with feedback and etc.
No amount of talk, rants, and shouts can change the outcome (maybe a little) especially if our will is against the will of a giant business entity.
To GPL supporters, let’s stop arguing here and get back to developing, testing and bug hunting GPL and GPL compatible software.
“Code that has already been released under a different license cannot be “GPLed” through contact with the GPL.”
But the license that it was released under is faulty! You cannot mix and match GPL and a non GPL license.
If I have a closed source projects, and I mistakenly include some GPL code, then that particular release (or untill I remove the GPL code) is then required to be released under a GPL license too.
If that is not the case, then enlighten me with a passage in the GPL license which states that I can release mixed BSD code and GPL code without any problems whatsoever.
Sun with 32600 employees is fighting a battle for survival against Red Hat which has 681 employees. Some of Sun’s layoffs in recent times has been equivalent to several times the total number of Red Hat employees.
Sun has some interesting products, but their focus and direction is being dictated by what is happening in the Linux community. Solaris today may be technically better than Linux, but this won’t be the case for much longer. Sure, you can download and use Solaris 10 for no cost. You can thank the Linux community for this. Sun is hoping to gain many Red Hat customers in an attempt to starve Red Hat of revenue and to weaken Linux overall. If they are successful, Linux suffers and innovation will decrease in the Linux community. Suddenly Solaris isn’t so ‘free’ anymore.
The lessons of the past have not been in vain. Linux has freed us from the strangehold of proprietary UNIX. As more companies buy RHEL subscriptions, Red Hat has more money to spend of Linux development, all of which is GPL and goes back into the community. This benefits all Linux users and all Linux distributions, not just Red Hat customers. Would you rather have your money go to Sun execs or to Linux kernel developers?
I think the problem Sun and Solaris will face is two fold: You do not get voluntary developers by offering a OS almost entirely unsuitable for desktop (Where is a multimedia HW support, or even W-LAN?). And without voluntary developers there is no competitivity to Linux.
Or: Numbers of developer is not determined by how fine the system is in term of enterprise deployment, but things that are rather (too) trivial (for Sun) like ACPI support or Nvidia/ATI drivers.
And Solaris will also ultimately face the fate that people have forecasted for Linux with Wine: With Linux compatibility, there will be no and never a serious or large ISV market for Solaris x86. And how are you going to convince people that they should run Linux binaries in system API emulation mode on Solaris x86?
> Sun has some interesting products, but their focus and direction is being dictated by what is happening in the Linux community. Solaris today may be technically better than Linux, but this won’t be the case for much longer.
Yeah right, Linux dweebs have been repeating this mantra for about five years now. What changed? Nothing, Linux is still technologically far behind Solaris. And guess what, the technological gap between Solaris and Linux actually widened after Solaris 10 came out — I don’t see Linux catching up to where Solaris 10 is right now for a few years at least, but by that time Solaris will be leaving Linux in the dust. RedHat is already faltering if you read the news, the number of RHEL new subscriptions have been declining steadilty. RedHat is past its pinnacle with the great Linux hype and it will be an uphill battle for them from now on — RHEL is absolutely uncompetitive compared with Solaris 10 regardless of what criteria you consider (features, price, performence, etc). RedHat will never be able to compete with Sun on price or technology.
> With Linux compatibility, there will be no and never a serious or large ISV market for Solaris x86
What a bunch of drivel, do you know anything about Linux development? Anything developed for Linux will always be 99% compatible with Solaris simply because of the common ancestry (Unix). A simple recompile will always work in 99% of the cases to transfer the app from Linux to Solaris. Guess why almost all Linux software runs quite happilty on Solaris (configure; make; make install; doh). Regardless of your wishful thinking Solaris is very attractive to the ISV’s and IHV’s alike and has a technological edge over Linux while being cheaper than any commercial Linux alternative — guess why Solaris scored almost half a million downloads in just two week after it was released. The only reason Linux was successful is because it was perceived to be cheap, but it looks like Sun has already addressed that issue — there is absolutely no reason to pick Linux over Solaris, period.
> I don’t see Linux catching up to where Solaris 10 is right
> now for a few years at least, but by that time Solaris
> will be leaving Linux in the dust.
So, beside the only DTrace that seems to be always and only that is keeping popping up in discussions:
– Platform choice (Sun’s reason #6 – a joke at best): What about running Solaris x86 on top of z/VM, or maybe in NUMA?
– RHEL 4 also has RBAC. And what about RBAC with process granularity and rule enforced transitions on standard (non-“Trusted”) Solaris x86?
– Xen is being merged into the mainstream kernel. Are you able to run other OS in Solaris Containers?
> RedHat is already faltering if you read the news, the
> number of RHEL new subscriptions have been declining
> steadilty.
Do you have sources? I think your statement is pretty untrue. Also “new subscription” is not the benchmark for the total subscriptions. Maybe you should make a statistics for how many _new_ customers Sun are getting, too.
> Regardless of your wishful thinking Solaris is very
> attractive to the ISV’s and IHV’s alike
How? At least right now, Solaris x86 has virtually negligible installation base compared to Linux. And how could the platform be attractive being supported by an ISV, if it runs Linux binaries just fine?
I guess your thinking is wishful.
And maybe you should calculate how many 1/2 million would be in term of total Linux market share… (just new pre-installed Linux server sales would be several million annually at the moment)
I think the problem Sun and Solaris will face is two fold: You do not get voluntary developers by offering a OS almost entirely unsuitable for desktop (Where is a multimedia HW support, or even W-LAN?). And without voluntary developers there is no competitivity to Linux.
Spoken like someone who never installed an early Slackware system. According to your theory, Linux should have died about 10 years ago. Comparing the initial public release of the Linux source to the release of Solaris 10 is laughable. Much like comparing a horse bridle to a Ford GT. Comparing the first useable (IMO) distribution to S10 is like comparing a saddle to the Ford GT. Your statement just doesn’t work.
>>IBM has been steadily decommitting from AIX for a few years already. AIX development has been slowing down pretty steadily and AIX is already uncompetitive with Solaris<<
Where do you get this stuff? Do you just make it up as you go? Cite a source please.
>>I want to see IBM develop their own products and not reselling something they could have done themselves.<<
WTF are you posting about? IBM develops *tons* of their own products. Are you completely ignorant about IBM?
>> IBM is whoring itself out to M$ and Sun is not<<
Maybe you review the terms of the $2B dollar lawsuit settlement between sunw and msft. While you are at, you might want to consider that IBM is giving up their x86 PC business, and thus severing ties with msft. IBM is also introducing a linux based PC – see Lenovo deal.
>>IBM on the other hand generates massive revenues from their Microsoft partnership<<
See above, IBM is selling their x86 PC business. I don’t think IBM is a msft “partner” however IBM has business relationships with all the major tech companies. I don’t think you understand what a huge diversified company IBM is.
>>I love it when the Linux zealots pull up stock charts when the don’t have any technical facts to use. <<
1) I am not a linux zealot.
2) I pulled up the stock because a certain ranting sun fanboy was carrying on about how great was was doing in the market. Unlike some posters here, I try to back up my assertions with facts.
“oo late to back pedal now friend. In my neck of the woods a “guarantee” infers an absolute state and to an extent is legally binding.”
It’s funny that you could ever think anything on OSNews is legally binding. No one here even remotely reprsents Sun in any legal sense. You are just a pedant troll like the rest (from anonymizer, no less).
>>Solaris is still a more full featured and more technically advanced OS<<
Linux Rules Supercomputers
Daniel Lyons, 03.15.05, 6:00 AM ET
“Linux has dominated the marketplace for high-performance computing,” says Mark Seager, assistant department head for advanced technologies at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in Livermore, Calif., which operates ten machines on the Top 500 list, including Blue Gene/L, the world’s most powerful supercomputer, and Thunder, which ranks fifth.
This is getting old!
-My- OS is better than -Yours-, because…
It has a faster install
The best GUI
A more benevolent license
Runs on more CPU’s (SMP or clustered or grid)
Has more developers
Has more users
Has more presence on the Internet
Actually invented the Internet (sorry Al Gore)
Plays more games
Compiles even the most obscure code
Is the best desktop
Is the best server
Can run on anything, even my shoe phone (try getting that thru airport security)
Boots faster
Has no security vulnerabilities
Was invented before -your- OS
Was updated more recently than -your- OS
Sold by at least 3 sources
Supported by at least 3 sources
Sales/Service provided by over performing F500 companies
And even my Grandmother uses it too
I can’t site any sources, ‘cuz it’s all BS….
….just like most of these postings!
“The only reason Linux was successful is because it was perceived to be cheap, but it looks like Sun has already addressed that issue — there is absolutely no reason to pick Linux over Solaris, period.”
That sounds great. Tell me, can I run Doom 3 under Solaris? What is the status of 3D drivers on that platform? How about UT2004 or America’s Army. Does it read DivX and Xvid files or play my DVDs? What is it’s stance regarding mp3 file format. I use Linux as a desktop system so how will Solaris be better than Linux for this? In what ways would I benefit by switching, as I don’t run a server or a database program.
> can I run Doom 3 under Solaris?
Why don’t you talk to John Carmac and tell him to port DoomIII to solaris?. DoomII and Quake are available for Solaris (the ones that were open sourced by id). Infact, QuakeI was originally developed on Next and ported to Solaris Sparc before it hit Linux x86 (perhaps you might want to google around)
> How about UT2004 or America’s Army.
Again, there’s nothing to prevent UT/AA from being ported to SOlaris. Tell me can you run Halo 2 on Linux?. See how silly your arguments sound?
> Does it read DivX and Xvid files or play my DVDs?
Yes – I’ve got mplayer ported to Solaris….no problems playing dvds.
If I have a closed source projects, and I mistakenly include some GPL code, then that particular release (or untill I remove the GPL code) is then required to be released under a GPL license too.
The GPL says either follow the license or you have no rights to redistribute the code. What happens next is up to the owner of the GPL code and yourself. You could work it out amicably by:
a) releasing your code under the GPL (but it sounds like you don’t want that)
b) coming to an agreement with the original author to replace the infringing code as soon as possible.
If you can’t work it out amicably then it would go to court and the court would injunct you to cease distribution of your program until the code is removed and, possibly, pay damages. Under no circumstances, however, would you be forced to GPL your own code.
This is how all copyright disputes are settled, though disputes between proprietary vendors don’t have the “release your code under the GPL” option available to them.
If that is not the case, then enlighten me with a passage in the GPL license which states that I can release mixed BSD code and GPL code without any problems whatsoever.
The GPL says that you can impose no further restrictions on the code. The original BSD license and GPL code can’t be mixed because of the advertising clause (a further restriction the GPL doesn’t have). The modified BSD license, however, is perfectly compatible with the GPL. The reason is that the modified BSD doesn’t say you can’t include further restrictions and it only contains restrictions which the GPL also has. The result of this is the combined work would be redistributed under the terms of the GPL (because it’s the more restrictive license). This isn’t something that needs to be written into the GPL, this is the way contract and copyright law works.
You’d be a lot less confused if you learned about the legalities behind all of this.
What is it’s stance regarding mp3 file format.
I have been listening to mp3 files on my Sun Blade 100 since about 2 years. That’s on Solaris 8 SPARC.
Yeah right, Linux dweebs have been repeating this mantra for about five years now. What changed? Nothing, Linux is still technologically far behind Solaris. And guess what, the technological gap between Solaris and Linux actually widened after Solaris 10 came out — I don’t see Linux catching up to where Solaris 10 is right now for a few years at least, but by that time Solaris will be leaving Linux in the dust.
According to you Linux has been far behind Solaris technology wise the entire time so what does it matter if it gets further behind? Over the past several years, I’ve still seen article after article of this company or that company replacing Sun with Linux and Intel.
RedHat is already faltering if you read the news, the number of RHEL new subscriptions have been declining steadilty. RedHat is past its pinnacle with the great Linux hype and it will be an uphill battle for them from now on — RHEL is absolutely uncompetitive compared with Solaris 10 regardless of what criteria you consider (features, price, performence, etc).
Again, you seem to think RHEL has always been behind Solaris and it hasn’t mattered. You’d also look like less of a “dweeb” yourself if you link to where you’re hearing subscriptions are declining. I, personally, would be even more interested to see how many people have renewed vs. not renewed. That would show how well Red Hat has actually be servicing their customers. A period of less new subscriptions may just mean that the market is buying less subscriptions right now.
RedHat will never be able to compete with Sun on price or technology.
Since they have been competing with Sun pretty well so far, I’d say that saying they never will be able to is quite off the mark.
Regardless of your wishful thinking Solaris is very attractive to the ISV’s and IHV’s alike and has a technological edge over Linux while being cheaper than any commercial Linux alternative
So point out some of these ISV’s and IHV’s that are jumping up and down to support Solaris x86. It’s one thing to say they’re there, it’s another to point out a product (or at least an official announcement of one).
guess why Solaris scored almost half a million downloads in just two week after it was released.
Because it was free? We downloaded it at work just to take a look at it, doesn’t mean we’re going to actually use it (heck, we can’t, it wouldn’t install on our hardware).
The only reason Linux was successful is because it was perceived to be cheap, but it looks like Sun has already addressed that issue
There seem to be quite a few companies who are willing to pay Red Hat and Novell a bunch of money to use Linux. I’d say that Linux became successful because it was/is the best Unix like OS available on x86. As any large company can tell you, there is a lot more to the cost of running a system to the price of the OS.
there is absolutely no reason to pick Linux over Solaris, period.
What if you’re looking for an OS to run on an embedded system? What if your development team/sysadmins already know Linux but don’t know Solaris? What if you’re a CG Studio and the software you use isn’t even available on Solaris? (insert some other verticle market with no Solaris software available here)
There are lots of reasons to use Linux over Solaris, your inability to see them is your problem.
I have been listening to mp3 files on my Sun Blade 100 since about 2 years. That’s on Solaris 8 SPARC.
And I’ve been listening to mp3s on Linux for about 7 years now. That was on Red Hat 5.2. The question, if I understand it correctly, was whether Sun would deal with the patent problem related to mp3s, not whether or not Solaris could play them. If Sun doesn’t deal with the patent problem, then Open Solaris will be in the same boat as Fedora regarding distributing mp3 players in the stock distribution.
So we’re always hearing the geek viewpoints on Solaris. Is there any “average users” in the house that can say what Solaris is like, the installation, user friendliness of JDS, etc?
So we’re always hearing the geek viewpoints on Solaris. Is there any “average users” in the house that can say what Solaris is like, the installation, user friendliness of JDS, etc?
Nope, no “average users” would even know this site exists. Considering the number of “average users” that use Linux probably numbers in the thousands or 10s of thousands, you can probably the count the number of “average users” that run Solaris on one hand. I doubt that you could even install Solaris on the the vast majority of average user’s hardware.
If you are talking about home users you might want to check the newsgroups comp.unix.solaris and alt.solaris.x86. I am sure the Linux trolls here would say I am biased in my opinion of Solaris, I find it easy enough to use and no more difficult than any other Unix variant. There are some things about Solaris I don’t like, just like there are things about AIX, HP-UX, RedHat Linux, and Windows I don’t like. That doesn’t make them any less usable, just less comfortable and solutions to some problems less elegant than others.
The choice is yours.
Focusing on snipettes of postings instead of the main focus of the post. I’ve been monitoring OSNEWS for awhile now, and the previously mentioned individuals are rarely on focus of the main post.
Well, if you’ve been monitoring OSNEWS for that long, you should know that posts are very often off-topic. In any case, I’m mostly prompted to respond to posts that will make blatantly false of misleading statements. I also don’t always take the time to respond to the entire post because, well, I spend enough time on this site as it is! So sometimes I’ll latch on to a particular false or misleading snippet and focus on it. If you don’t like it, then feel free to disregard my posts. If they are so off-topic as you suggest, then they’ll get reported for abuse and modded down.
I wonder, however, what was the point of your post…
If I have a closed source projects, and I mistakenly include some GPL code, then that particular release (or untill I remove the GPL code) is then required to be released under a GPL license too.
Or, you could simply not release it at all until you remove the GPLed code. You’re in no obligation to release modified GPLed code at all, and if you mistakenly release it it won’t automatically make your code GPLed (though you will have to stop distributing it until it’s clean).
If you mistakenly include proprietary code to which you do not have rights in a closed source project, then you’ll face similar troubles. It’s not about the GPL, it’s about copyright law!
Correct me if I am wrong, but isnt solaris aimed more at the server market and not the general use desktop market? If thats the case then better graphics card support and game support blahblahblah is a nonissue…