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.
“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…”
Sun has made a huge change over the past couple years and started to integrate GNOME, StarOffice, Mozilla, Evolution, and other popular apps into their Java Desktop System (which runs on both Linux and Solaris). So it is aimed at general users.
If you consider that JDS is pretty good, coupled with SunRay Server now workable over broadband Internet, coupled with Sun’s friends in the telecom sector, and coupled with metered virtualized environments in the Sun Grid, leads to a pretty cool conspiracy theory that full-blown GNOME desktops will be delivered over the Internet to SunRay terminals in peoples’ homes sometime in the next few years. All the technology exists in Sun’s portfolio and needs only to be refined and organized.
If Sun is successful, they would have turned the entire home PC into a genuine web service. Talk about something to keep Microsoft up at night!
We use Sun Rays at work to connect to the “high” side network, pretty sweet! If all you need is a basic desktop that can “follow you around” then the Sun Ray is the ticket.
This is silly; I have seen people actually references Sun’s stock, as if they had a significant stake in the company. And people defend Sun, as if Sun actually was their mother.
I don’t know why people would defend Sun, a company that at one point charged thousands of dollars for simple workstations. Its perverted, and is similar to 90’s ultra-fad of inner city youth wearing Tommy Hilfiger; a man who cares about money and selling clothes to rich people(businesses in Sun’s case), not the people who actually love his clothes. Likewise, in the suburbs kids wear over-priced Abercrombie and Fitch, which has the muster to advertise on the clothes wearers body and the clothes wearer is happy for this and his store bought ripped up jeans.
The Solaris/Sun people need to rethink their allegiances, unless if they are Sun employees. And Linux systems did overtake Sun, atleast for workstations and low-end servers; as it is superior. Solaris 10 only just came out, Solaris 9 was utter crap/joke on x86, not because it wasnt properly ported/etc, but because it was just not as good as Linux systems.
Spoken like someone who never installed an early Slackware system.
Thank you for your concern. I have been using Linux since SLS, and also includes Slackware at later times. And I have been further using Solaris x86 since version 7.
Maybe I should remind you to the history of computing, that at 1990, there was no W-LAN, there was only elementary hardware graphics acceleration, etc. The alternatives to SLS was using the MS-DOS shipped with the computer, which featured with 640 kB segmentation memory limit, and that on a 32 bit machine.
According to your theory, Linux should have died about 10 years ago.
Well, according to _your theory_, everything in computing was developed in 7 days?
Comparing the initial public release of the Linux source to the release of Solaris 10 is laughable.
Solaris 10 is the first Solaris release? No, even with Solaris 7, the hardware support was a joke, even compared UnixWare. Only supporting Soundblaster 16 and two AGP graphics cards – one of them with a buggy and crashing Xsun driver – in 1998, was definitively a joke.
By the way, if Sun wishes Solaris to look fine compared to SLS or old Slackware, this is also a joke.
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.
Thank you very much that you did not even notice my other arguments. And no, I will never comment on such a ridiculous stuff as car comparison.
Spoken like someone who never installed an early Slackware system.
Thank you for your concern. I have been using Linux since SLS, and also includes Slackware at later times. And I have been further using Solaris x86 since version 7.
Maybe I should remind you to the history of computing, that at 1990, there was no W-LAN, there was only elementary hardware graphics acceleration, etc. The alternatives to SLS was using the MS-DOS shipped with the computer, which featured with 640 kB segmentation memory limit, and that on a 32 bit machine.
According to your theory, Linux should have died about 10 years ago.
Well, according to _your theory_, everything in computing was developed in 7 days?
Comparing the initial public release of the Linux source to the release of Solaris 10 is laughable.
Solaris 10 is the first Solaris release? No, even with Solaris 7, the hardware support was a joke, even compared UnixWare. Only supporting Soundblaster 16 and two AGP graphics cards – one of them with a buggy and crashing Xsun driver – in 1998, was definitively a joke.
By the way, if Sun wishes Solaris to look fine compared to SLS or old Slackware, this is also a joke.
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.
Thank you very much that you did not even notice my other arguments. And no, I will never comment on such a ridiculous stuff as car comparison.
> I’d say that Linux became successful because it was/is the best Unix like OS available on x86.
I’d say Linux is no longer the best Unix like OS available on x86, that crown now belongs to Solaris 10
> 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.
Agree, the other major components of the cost equation are hardware costs and the cost of support. Since the hardware costs are the same with both Solaris x86 and Linux, it is really the cost of support that makes a difference. And on that front it looks like Solaris is at least 40% cheaper than RedHat and SuSE. So whichever way you put it, Solaris is cheaper OS and is better vaule for the money. It looks like Solaris just outlinuxed Linux.
I’d say Linux is no longer the best Unix like OS available on x86, that crown now belongs to Solaris 10
Considering that I haven’t seen Solaris even install on any hardware I have available, I’d beg to differ. But, that’s the joy of life, everyone can have a different opinion.
Agree, the other major components of the cost equation are hardware costs and the cost of support. Since the hardware costs are the same with both Solaris x86 and Linux, it is really the cost of support that makes a difference. And on that front it looks like Solaris is at least 40% cheaper than RedHat and SuSE. So whichever way you put it, Solaris is cheaper OS and is better vaule for the money. It looks like Solaris just outlinuxed Linux.
You say Solaris is a better OS for the value, I don’t have any hardware that it’ll run on. Seems like it has 0 value to me. I’m sure that all of Sun’s thrashing around regarding Solaris 10 may get some people to evaluate it. But they’re still going to be evaluating it against Linux. And I still listed quite a few good reasons to choose Linux over Solaris.
And finally, what I don’t think all the Solaris fanatics here have realized is that Linux doesn’t need to prove itself anymore. People aren’t choosing Linux because it’s free or because it’s cool but because it’s proven itself in the market. Sun has quite the uphill battle to throw off it’s history of dropping x86 support, high prices, slow overpriced hardware, etc. Those aren’t problems people imagined, those are the reasons that people have been moving to Linux and Intel for years now.
> You say Solaris is a better OS for the value, I don’t have any hardware that it’ll run on. Seems like it has 0 value to me
This is the most laughable argument that I have ever seen. I bet you’ve never even tried Solaris. Solaris runs on pretty much all server and workstation type hardware that Dell and HP has put out for at least few years. A lot x86 IBM gear also works out of the box. If you’re looking for a hardware platform to run Solaris server, the overwhelming majority of the server hardware out there already supports Solaris. So to recap, lame argument.
> People aren’t choosing Linux because it’s free or because it’s cool but because it’s proven itself in the market.
If you put Solais and Linux side by side, the only reason Linux will get chosen the blind hype still being spread by GPL fanatics. Solaris wins on any other ground. To people signing the checks all this GPL mambo-jumbo surrounding Linux means absolutely nothing and the purchasing decisions are made based on the hard dollars you can save choosing the product. Solaris costs less to buy and support, so now tell me why would anyone choose an inferior product (Linux) and then pay more for it that for the superior alternative? Solaris is clear win for any business making this sort of decision.
This is better than reading the comic strip in the newspapers
yada… yada… yada… my light sabre can cut thru yours, my dads works with higher pay, whose car’s faster, mig-29 vs f-18, my girlfriend has bigger eyes than yours…
Where does it all end?
> Solaris runs on pretty much all server and
> workstation type hardware that Dell and HP
> has put out for at least few years.
Better dischard the “workstation” word. I think calling either buy a ~ $100 third party X server (and avoiding all Nvidia hardware) or running Xsun/X.org in 2D acceleration only even with Nvidia Quadro or ATI FireGL is not considered by most people as “run on workstation type hardware”. These are for example the typical “workstation type hardware” that HP/Dell sells at the moment.
> If you put Solais and Linux side by side, the
> only reason Linux will get chosen the blind hype
> still being spread by GPL fanatics.
What would be the point to have Dell Precision Workstation budled with Solaris x86, for example? As for most workstation ISV products, customers would have to run Alias Wavefront Maya or PTC Pro/Engineer in Linux emulation mode, if only the graphics hardware would be supported properly to begin with.
Let me qualify that:
In the past, sun never tried to support x86 too hard. It was always an afterthought, making it a laughable choice for an OS in the server world.
Because of Linux (and NO other reason) Sun is now heavily pushing x86 (but really only doing it’s best on AMD64).
ISV support-wise, Solaris x86 is where Linux was years ago.
It will take time for ISVs to support it.
Doesn’t mean it’s not a great OS for most things that don’t need a costly, non-free third-party app (web, email, file, print etc).
It really needs Oracle binaries (if they don’t already exist) and, once ZFS comes out, won’t need Veritas FS support (unless you really have to mount VxFS volumes).
The codebase is so clean that most things will work with a recompile anyway – it’s only a strategic decision for an ISV to accept to provide support.
Let me throw one thing out there:
SPARC boxes are actually not bad VFM nowadays, when we’re talking proper server hardware. That way you get all the ISV support you need – and more!
The problem is people perceive S10 as a threat to Linux on the workstation level. It’s not such yet due to lack of 3D/audio drivers. It’ll come.
On that note though, I find, unfortunately, ALL Unix OSes lacking when compared to windows.
I do Unix for a living but am still forced to use windows since the apps and drivers I need to use simply don’t exist on ANY other OS. Some exist on OSX but that becomes an expensive proposition. My future holds dual-core AMD.
So, to end this rant: use what’s best for the task at hand (yes, even if it means paying M$), don’t be a zealot and be mature about Linux – it’s not the solution to everything that ails humanity, and neither is Solaris.
And remember: Redhat is the M$ of the Unix world!
D
> The problem is people perceive S10 as a threat to
> Linux on the workstation level. It’s not such yet
> due to lack of 3D/audio drivers. It’ll come.
No, definitively not. By your theory, we can also start argue that FreeBSD is a threat to Linux, and in fact it would be a bigger one since both vendor-supported 3D and audio drivers ARE readily available. Solaris starts at a position where FreeBSD competed against Linux several years ago.
But it still isn’t a threat. Even given the limited IHV support, there is virtually zero ISV support for FreeBSD.
> On that note though, I find, unfortunately, ALL Unix
> OSes lacking when compared to windows.
What do you miss in Linux in term of audio and 3D graphics driver? Nvidia Quadro, ATI FireGL, and 3DLabs are fully supported, ALSA and OSS/commercial has also a good coverage of a significant part of professional audio hardware market.
In fact Xsun’s XFree86 driver, derived from its Linux/FreeBSD origins, is significantly higher quality than the original Xsun drivers.
Linux is pretty much the only vendor independent Unix/Unix-similar variant with a sizable driver market.
> And remember: Redhat is the M$ of the Unix world!
Where is this coming from? Red Hat has been wide open in term of RHEL source codes years before Solaris 10. How interesting to hear the average FUD from your mouth…
This is the most laughable argument that I have ever seen. I bet you’ve never even tried Solaris. Solaris runs on pretty much all server and workstation type hardware that Dell and HP has put out for at least few years. A lot x86 IBM gear also works out of the box. If you’re looking for a hardware platform to run Solaris server, the overwhelming majority of the server hardware out there already supports Solaris. So to recap, lame argument.
Look, you can stick your head in the sand and pretend I’m lying, but I’m not. And not everyone buys Dell and HP hardware. The Solaris supported hardware list is woefully short and it does not support the hardware we run. Are you trying to say I should go out and replace a few hundred servers with something else so that I can run Solaris? Otherwise, what value does it have for me?
If you put Solais and Linux side by side, the only reason Linux will get chosen the blind hype still being spread by GPL fanatics. Solaris wins on any other ground. To people signing the checks all this GPL mambo-jumbo surrounding Linux means absolutely nothing and the purchasing decisions are made based on the hard dollars you can save choosing the product. Solaris costs less to buy and support, so now tell me why would anyone choose an inferior product (Linux) and then pay more for it that for the superior alternative? Solaris is clear win for any business making this sort of decision.
You say it’s an inferior product, there are obviously lots of peopel who think Linux isn’t. And I’ve gotta say, I’d much rather listen to the “GPL fanatics” over Sun’s executive staff and the people who rant for Solaris on this site. I have yet to see a “Solaris fanatic” who has actually come to the table with reasonable arguments instead of flailing around about how “superior” Solaris is and how “there is no reason to choose Linux”. There might be some whacky Linux trolls on this site, but there are some might good pro Linux advocates too. And the funny thing is, the Solaris trolls never answer any of their good points, just go back to flailing around.
You, for example, still haven’t responded to me thoroughly debunking your argument that there is no good reason to choose Linux.
> Again, there’s nothing to prevent UT/AA from
> being ported to SOlaris.
By the way, maybe you didn’t notice. Both programs are quite picky in terms of available GL extensions. And I doubt it will run just with plain and DRI based GLX that comes with X.org, given the present status of DRI. The availability of drivers would in fact be a significant obstacle, if you want to port it to Solaris x86. And in reverse, requiring everyone to have Accelerated X on their machine would not realistically result in a software vendor to port it to Solaris.
And if there weren’t pixel/vertex shader capable graphics driver for Linux, some of the games he mentioned would even be quite prohibitive for Id Software to port, or being supported by Cedega (e.g. Far Cry), since you will have to to begin with writing a proper GLX driver.
> See how silly your arguments sound?
The argument isn’t that silly. You just have to think carefully about it.
Believe it or not, hardware support is not the end all and be all for an operating system. As long as Solaris supports the hardware Sun rolls it out on, it’s done its job because THAT is Sun’s core business. If it happens to support other systems out there that’s just an added benefit.
Why do Linux zealots criticize other operating systems for not excelling in uses they were never intended for? Just because Linux tries to be everything to everyone doesn’t mean that other operating systems should. In doing so, Linux has become pretty good at doing everything but there’s few things that Linux is truly the best at.
It’s great that Linux is doing well, and gaining market share in leaps and bounds. However, it’s not so great that it’s doing so at the expense of proprietary UNIX operating systems more so than the Microsoft Windows family. The proprietary vendors used to be real technological innovators. Since the Linux boom however, the vendors that adopted Linux have spent so much effort in porting over existing technology to Linux that they’ve failed to come up with very much interesting new technology. Just look at SGI for instance. SGI-MIPS was a fantastic architecture and IRIX was a terrific operating system. Now where are they? And if you’re going to say the Altix is a great technological achievement, you’re not realizing that SGI was already on the verge of such capability with IRIX on MIPS several years ago.
Very little real technological innovation has actually been taking place on Linux. Linux borrows features from other unix variants and calls them new because Windows doesn’t have them. Then it borrows features from Windows and calls them new because the other unix variants don’t have them. Most of the work on Linux has been playing catch up. Aside from that, driver support and point & click installers are the only crown jewels in its list of technological contributions.
We should all be happy that Sun has stuck to its own hardware and operating system, and will continue to be technologically innovative with them. I just wish the other vendors were doing the same.
No, FreeBSD never became the threat to Linux it deserved to be, not so much due to lack of driver support but just because the word “Linux” alone seemed enough to make everyone go nuts. Remember the Linux craze a few years ago? Was it REALLY justified to that extent? I mean, REALLY?
Being technically good is not even half of the equation – look at M$!
Itanic has it right: driver support is not that important for using S10 for what it’s best at.
If Sun really wants to push it in the workstation direction then of course it has to try harder. If it creates a big enough craze the support will come
Don’t forget, Sun does have what many other, smaller companies don’t: credibility, good support, pervasiveness in the corporate space. Good pedigree. Name recognition. A warm, fuzzy feeling.
Which is why it has a chance where FreeBSD didn’t (I LOVE FreeBSD, BTW).
Of course, that didn’t save SGI or DEC… Which is a pity, because if everyone else dies and only Linux remains, then what? Is that better for everyone in the long term? There cannot be a “one, true OS”.
About drivers: there’s more than 3D that (some) people need. I use some heavy-duty pro music apps as a hobby and NONE exist for Unix OSes (save some for OSX) and they need specialized audio hardware and drivers. It’s economies of scale.
Unfortunately, I NEED to use Windows for that stuff. Which is OK if you maintain it properly. I still use W2K for my music
And I don’t think I ever spread FUD – but it’s interesting to see how RH has changed tack the past few years (since they’re in the business of making money and not charity).
And why I think they’re the M$ of Linux: they don’t make the best product but have a great installation base that started with them offering it very cheap as a low-end product, making it easy to use, getting fantastic customer loyalty. Now many managers think RH=Linux and won’t even consider anything else.
Like it or not, we have our little Linux monopoly right there.
Not necessarily a bad thing, just a tad funny to someone sad like me.
D
If Sun really wants to push it in the workstation direction then of course it has to try harder. If it creates a big enough craze the support will come
If Sun wishes Solaris to generate a huge community base, this will be the inevitable path. And this is a remark that is quite unrelated to any personal feelings (especially as someone who was using mainly using Solaris x86 few years ago).
Don’t forget, Sun does have what many other, smaller companies don’t: credibility, good support, pervasiveness in the corporate space. Good pedigree. Name recognition. A warm, fuzzy feeling.
Being a user of Solaris x86 since several years (7?) by now, I must say, Sun has to earn the reputation in x86 first.
[…] and they need specialized audio hardware and drivers. It’s economies of scale.
As far as I am aware of the professional audio hardware market for Linux, the driver is a problem, but not the biggest problem. OSS/commercial and to some degree also ALSA do support several professional level audio hardwares. But the situation is of course not that you can just bet that one piece of hardware will run, you have to be careful what you buy.
The issue with lacking application is much more severe.
But still, in general I do not see the driver support as a massive bottleneck for Linux anymore in most areas. And that is quite important for survival or being competitive among open source operating systems.
Believe it or not, hardware support is not the end all and be all for an operating system. As long as Solaris supports the hardware Sun rolls it out on, it’s done its job because THAT is Sun’s core business. If it happens to support other systems out there that’s just an added benefit.
Hmm… So what is your proposal: Solaris x86 only on Sun blades? I think the point to open source Solaris and compete directly with Linux is quite a different one, and it goes beyond just “added benefit”. “Added benefit” was the x86 paradigm for Sun few years ago, and you can easily see how “popular” Solaris x86 used to be.
Why do Linux zealots
I think you need seriously more life experience. What people intend with critism is not to. I used to use Solaris x86 for most of my work, but was more or less forced to migrate to Linux. And there is more to the reason why I criticize unshifted defocus on workstations and driver suppsuort.
criticize other operating systems for not excelling in uses they were never intended for?
If you happens to also *READ* other people’s posting rather than just repeat yourself: Workstation support is essential for a community support basis.
Just because Linux tries to be everything to everyone doesn’t mean that other operating systems should.
Well, then Solaris is determined to eat all the consequences that goes along that – including limited community basis. As far as I understood, Sun’s (again changed) agenda dictates otherwise (at least at the moment).
In doing so, Linux has become pretty good at doing everything but there’s few things that Linux is truly the best at.
I guess being used as technical Workstation is already a purpose that by itself can give reason for Linux’ existence quite well. Also it is Linux that makes several high-end platforms competitive, like zSeries or Altix.
It’s great that Linux is doing well, and gaining market share in leaps and bounds. However, it’s not so great that it’s doing so at the expense of proprietary UNIX operating systems more so than the Microsoft Windows family.
Hmm… What exactly was the proprietary UNIX vendors doing with their desktop enviroments and the awkward Motif interface all the time before the KDE and GNOME, two being mainly carried by Linux and FreeBSD users?
The proprietary vendors used to be real technological innovators.
First of all, this is not mainly a software or OS issue, but mostly a hardware issue. And also, the keyword is *used* *to* *be*.
Most those innovations happened at early 90’s, and at later times – even until now – I would rather say that the the split UNIX market hindered innovation. I think many people do share the impression that those “UNIX vendors” were just sitting on their past attainments thereafter.
Otherwise, you might want to start explaining why SPARC and MIPS started to fall behind in their performance, compared to IBM (being one of the exceptional UNIX vendors), Intel and now also AMD, and also why proprietary graphics hardware ranging from Sun to SGI fall behind companies like Nvidia, ATI and 3DLabs.