Announcing: Slashdot Deals - Explore geek apps, games, gadgets and more. (what is this?)

Thank you!

We are sorry to see you leave - Beta is different and we value the time you took to try it out. Before you decide to go, please take a look at some value-adds for Beta and learn more about it. Thank you for reading Slashdot, and for making the site better!

Free Solaris 8

Hemos posted about 15 years ago | from the free-let-them-free dept.

Sun Microsystems 344

quakeaddict writes "It seems Scott McNealy has some new ideas for Solaris 8 according to this article. " It's not free as in software, but free as in "no license fees". Evidently, this is going to be the center-piece of their new public-relations campaign, with the official rollout of Solaris 8 starting in February. However, a top Sun official also went on to say that Sun will "never" adopt Linux and expressed amazement that folks like IBM and others were "chasing after" Linux.

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Bye Bye Microsoft (2)

stevew (4845) | about 15 years ago | (#1339950)

I think this is GREAT! It carries the message that Linux started delivering to it's logical conclusion. The OS isn't a profit point anymore, but merely part of the iron. Sun makes the majority of their money from the HARDWARE!

But ol' Microsoft can't say that. How do they justify thousands of dollars for W2K when their largest competitor (in the server arena in particular) isn't charging ANYTHING!

I just love it!

What was it Gandhi said? (3)

Russ Nelson (33911) | about 15 years ago | (#1339951)

First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, then they join you? Sun is clearly somewhere between the ridicule and the fighting stages.

versioning (2)

Signal 11 (7608) | about 15 years ago | (#1339952)

Apparently Sun's versioning scheme goes "one, two, skip a few, eight, nine..."

Re:RIP linux (1)

DougBorg (133992) | about 15 years ago | (#1339953)

A point well made.... Win2k is very stable and quite good (no flame intended), now if i were an admin in charge of a large server system i would rather run it on a commerciall supported *nix than somthing coded (no offence) by the general public. Linux is wonderful but commerce breads commerce. Beos is a multimedia system and will find its own snug corner in the market - but i think linux will co-exist nicely with win2k on the desktop/office workstation....

Should be fun, but I still won't use it. (1)

Count Spatula (103735) | about 15 years ago | (#1339954)

What I'm waiting for is the release of the OS-X source.

What are the Differences? (2)

Insanik (141027) | about 15 years ago | (#1339955)

Hello, I am a fairly new linux user, but I am sure others have the same question:

What are the differences between Solaris and Linux?

From what I've seen, they look very similar. Thanks to all.

what did we expect? (1)

Duke of URL (10219) | about 15 years ago | (#1339956)

I can't say I'm suprised how they "scratch thier heads" in confusion at the way other co.'s like Linux. They do have their flagship product and they probably like it too (tho selling hardware is their bread and butter). Linux eats away at their smaller sales, which probably isn't all that imporatant to them.
Whats the phrase, the enemy of my enemy is my friend, at least for the moment.

Remember folks (4)

/ (33804) | about 15 years ago | (#1339957)

It's not just an operating system. Solaris is an "operating environment".

Let's see. Solaris=environment while linux=penguin. Environments (as we all know) get abused by developers whereas penguins swim around and micturate [dictionary.com] on the environment. Highly metaphorical, no? Ok, maybe no.

Re:RIP linux (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 15 years ago | (#1339958)

Yeah right. Linux can't be defeated.

They will change their minds... (2)

TeddyR (4176) | about 15 years ago | (#1339959)

They will change their minds...

I always laugh at any place that makes such a bold statement as "we will never use Linux"...

In 1997 an administrator for a local .edu [wtamu.edu] once told me that they would NEVER use linux on their network... (They were an NT and Novell shop)

They have now converted several of their servers to use Linux... (about time; even though hey were "enlightened" about it ~1996...)


They will come around.. it may take a while... but sooner or later those disbelievers will realize that Linux is here to stay..... and can only get better.. :-)

Re:versioning (1)

crmartin (98227) | about 15 years ago | (#1339960)

Sun just got tired of Microsoft claiming that buggy version 98 of Windows was somehow better. It's not Sun's fault that they only need to go through a couple of decimal versions to get something working....

(ObHint: Solaris 8 is still SunOS v 5.8. Can you say "Marketing"?)

Not free as in software (2)

yamla (136560) | about 15 years ago | (#1339961)

http://www.zdnet.com/ zdnn/stories/news/0,4586,2426200,00.html [zdnet.com] says that the source is opened under Sun's Community Source License. Now, I know this isn't as free (as in software) as Linux but it is certainly more free (as in software) than it is at the moment.

WOW! /. posted before the release of Solaris 9!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 15 years ago | (#1339962)

Looks just like this thread from way earlier in the LinuxONE thread: Real UNIX Sun releasing Solaris 8 source code [slashdot.org]

Thank gawd for the regular users positng real news.

Thank you for finally posting this... (1)

Smack (977) | about 15 years ago | (#1339963)

...maybe now that dumbass who posted it on every other thread for the last few days will shut the hell up. Why exactly did you have so much invested in this particular story, Mr. AC? I mean, it's not THAT big a deal.

Especially since it's not exactly unexpected or undercovered. Past slashdot stories on this theme...

"Sun to release Solaris source code" by HeUnique on Friday October 01
"Solaris to be Community Licensed" by sengan on Thursday February 25
"Sun plans open source Solaris?" by CmdrTaco on Tuesday January 12
"Solaris 7 available for $10" by sengan on Tuesday October 27
"Solaris 2.6 free" by Hemos on Monday August 10

See a pattern there?

Traditional Business People (2)

pb (1020) | about 15 years ago | (#1339964)

There are times when I'll take free beer over free speech. Because sometimes you just want to shut up and drink some beer. But it's good to see that the Open Source community is having an effect on traditional business models, even if traditional businessmen still don't get it.

Yeah, it'll probably be released under the SCSL again. Big deal. We need a generic, DFSG-compliant (or whatever it's called this week) software license that doesn't scare corporate lawyers. Convincing them to use that because its good for them would be a big step for hackers everywhere.

(Almost as big as stopping people from taking our stuff because we code programs that lawyers do not like or understand. My favorite, IIRC, is probably when they did this to Steve Jackson Games in The Hacker Crackdown. That was a classic.)
pb Reply or e-mail; don't vaguely moderate [] .

Is the future of Linux really that obscure? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 15 years ago | (#1339965)

I can't understand, how even with the rapid grown of the Linux scene, companies like Sun that seem to be on 'our' side refuse to join in. If anything, Sun should recognize the Linux movement as an effort to stamp out Microsoft. You'd think that they'd like the idea of ridding themselves of the petty competition.

How Linux/*BSD (can,will) benefit from this. (4)

Teferi (16171) | about 15 years ago | (#1339966)

What has been the major objection of many PHBs to using Linux on servers or workstations?
"We're not willing to trust something that's free".
Now that a defintively mainstream OS has become free (as in beer, alas, not as in speech yet), perhaps they'll start taking Linux more seriously.
Just my $0.02.

"If ignorance is bliss, may I never be happy.

He can be amazed all he wants (5)

dsplat (73054) | about 15 years ago | (#1339967)

IBM is still embracing Linux, regardless of what Sun says. I think the real point is that Linux is portable across an amazing range of hardware. It is easy enough to leverage a known OS, with a good reputation, and an active community of open source developers. If you want it on your own hardware, you dedicate a team of programmers to writing device drivers and any other code you need specific to your iron.

Now I am well aware that AIX has some things going for it that Linux doesn't have ... yet. Solaris can say the same. But the question is whether Sun can sustain Solaris development as a freebie. If it gives them a platform on which to sell other stuff, probably for a while. I don't know what their costs and margins look like. We'll all have to watch and see if it works for them.

I for one am not going to criticize them for keeping Solaris closed source. It isn't my choice. It doesn't detract from the open source OSs that I have to choose from. Hmm. Linux CDs are still here. FreeBSD was still on the bookstore shelves at lunchtime.

Wow! Only 1 month late (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 15 years ago | (#1339968)

Man, this "news" is like a month old at least. Seriously, I got an email from Sun dated Jan 10th concering Solaris 8.


aTRaTiCa (141651) | about 15 years ago | (#1339969)

Yes, please boycott /. That would make many users happy :)

too little too late. (1)

JustShootMe (122551) | about 15 years ago | (#1339970)

As a comment in the article stated, if they were serious about this, then they would have done it a long time ago.

Solaris may be more robust in some ways, but the fact is that they simply cannot compete well against Linux. This is, to me, just a simple admission of this fact.

They're playing catch-up now against an OS with much greater potential and much greater momentum. This is encouraging, though. This means that the OS is starting to become a commodity. MS will be the last to go... but when they do, it'll be spectacular.

If you can't figure out how to mail me, don't.

just a marketing trick (1)

zyqqh (137965) | about 15 years ago | (#1339971)

All they did was rename what was going to be Solaris 2.7 to Solaris 7, since it became obvious they weren't getting out of 2.x in the observable future.

Re:RIP linux (2)

stevew (4845) | about 15 years ago | (#1339972)

I don't think this is really the case.

First consider the large number of manufacturers that have adopted linux as a second OS. It's likely that a few of them will migrate to Linux as their MAIN OS. Certainly SGI seems to be putting a large piece of their efforts into such a path.

Then there are the manufacturers like VA Linux that use it as their MAIN OS. These guys could go with another OS like one of the BSD's...but Linux has the most momentum (and external support..)

Solaris being "free" doesn't enable either of these two classes of manufacturers. It takes a third player.

Lastly - the open source movement has it's own reason for being and is it's own success story beyond linux. Solaris doesn't play into this part of the story at all.

Re:Should be fun, but I still won't use it. (1)

Insanik (141027) | about 15 years ago | (#1339973)

Apple is just releasing the code to the core of the operating system. It is called Darwin. Most of the APIs will be closed sourced. They have released a networking API under the APSL.

Darwin and such [apple.com]

Re:What are the Differences? (5)

The Man (684) | about 15 years ago | (#1339974)

The most important difference is that Linux sucks substantially less.

More specific differences:

  • Linux runs on a proper superset of the platforms Solaris runs on.
  • Solaris is pretty strictly system V, while Linux is some SysV, some BSD, and some "other."
  • Solaris uses the UFS filesystem. Linux uses primarily the Ext2 filesystem
  • The obvious differences, like licensing (Linux is Free, Solaris is only pseudofree), sourcing (Solaris is single-source, Linux gives you choices), etc.
  • On common hardware, Linux tends to be faster, especially for interactive tasks.
  • (Personal observation) Solaris is stuck in the 70s and has obsolete administration tools; Linux is much more modern.
  • Solaris might be faster on machines with 16 processors or more.
  • If you need to do Java work, no surprise, the environment for Solaris is MUCH better.

finally (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 15 years ago | (#1339975)

this is great! i've been waiting quite some time for something like this to happen, because i've heard alot abuot this OS and wanted to test it out on my box, so i'm really happy about it :)

Re:What was it Gandhi said? (1)

Foogle (35117) | about 15 years ago | (#1339976)

Or maybe the Linux community is.

Bear in mind that statements like that don't get remembered by losers. And, by the way, this isn't a contest, remember?


"You can't shake the Devil's hand and say you're only kidding."

What's Going On? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 15 years ago | (#1339977)

Someone's actually posting news about real tech stuff? I thought this site was turning into People Magazine. Oh well, I guess I was wrong.

Coolness (3)

Oscarfish (85437) | about 15 years ago | (#1339978)

Free is one of the most misused words to ever have been thrown around, however, and I wonder exactly how much people will have to pay...

There's always something hidden. My school [ssu.edu] offered "free" OEM copies of Microsoft software this past semester (Win 98 SE, Win NT Workstation 4.0, FrontRage 98, etc.) through this agreement [ssu.edu] and naturally I was interested in picking up a few "legit" copies of Win NT. You guessed it, it wasn't exactly free - they weren't letting people take the CDs as they please.

Instead, you paid $5 for the "media" (although I don't believe it costs MS $5 to burn a CD in volume). Fair enough, I say, here's a $5 bill. Now hand me my NT!

Nope, you have to sign a contract first. Oh, this is some fun shit. I'm supposed to use it only on one machine, and only when it's in the best interest of the school, and I can forget about reselling it, or anything else...so I sign the contract and get my CD. Part of the contract I signed said that I'm only able to buy one copy - I guess MS isn't sympathetic to people with more than one PC, because if I can't buy more than one copy, and I can only use the one copy I do get on a sinlge machine, I'm SOL. Now was the software *really* free, or was it equal to the cost of the media plus agreeing to the contract?

Anyway, I got four friends to each buy me a copy and I slipped them each a $5 bill as soon as I got out of the university bookstore.

[bs]By the way, I have a couple copies of NT workstation available, $15 OBO :) Just kidding. I saw an anti-piracy expo at a recent computer fair [marketproshows.com] this past weekend and it turned me into a fine Internet citizen(TM). I even destroyed those other four semi-legally acquired copies of NT as per the agreement I signed.[/bs]

Re:Remember folks (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 15 years ago | (#1339979)

mistletoe means to urinate?

Re:versioning (1)

helo (128311) | about 15 years ago | (#1339980)

Yes, it is "Marketing", but what disturbs me is that many linux companies are doing the same thing. *cough*slack*cough* I don't see the need for marketing gimmicks with free products like linux... marketing stuff just gets in the way and makes you look bad

The reason IBM et. al. are chasing Linux (1)

Dwonis (52652) | about 15 years ago | (#1339981)

Is because of the GPL. If Sun GPLs the Solaris source, then there will be competition for Linux. Until that happens, people who use Linux are likely to stick to it.

Before you yell "BSD!", think for a moment. If people were comfortable with the BSDL, why is Linux enjoying large-scale success, while *BSD is not? It doesn't matter what's more free, it's what developers and users a like are at ease with.

"I already have all the latest software."

Open Source Solaris in "Takedown" with Don Knots (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 15 years ago | (#1339982)

CNN Entertainment Story here [dorsai.org] Don Knots plays hacker Emmanuel Goldstein in the soon to be released movie.

And patches too? (3)

bbk (33798) | about 15 years ago | (#1339983)

At my work, we got a bunch of new solaris boxes. Solaris has a pretty nice install, and is decently polished out of the box. On the flipside, it is missing a lot of things people take for granted if you come from the Linux or *BSD world, like gcc, perl and apache.

On a sour note, I had a bad experience with Solaris 7. If you wanted to set up diskless clients, you were out of luck - out of the box, setting them up was broken. To get the patch, you had to have a service contract with Sun (ie lots of money!) and then search for it for quite a while. It wasn't in any of the free patchsets they distribute over the net - its like buying a car and then having to pay the dealer to fix something that was wrong with it when you bought it! This really sucks - documentation and fixes should be free!

Solaris 8 supposedly has a lot of GNU tools (including the ones mentioned above). They're finally getting a clue it looks like....

Who's chasing who? (5)

sansbury (97480) | about 15 years ago | (#1339984)

IBM, Solaris, Digital, SCO, SGI. They all used to crow about how their UNIX was better than everyone else's.

Bill Gates, meet everybody. Sorry guys, your UNIX is no longer needed.

Fast-forward to 1999. Microsoft is everywhere. While the UNIXes argued, the fox made off with the chickens. Everybody, meet Linus.

Most of the UNIX vendors decided to support, if grudgingly so, this tiny little OS we all built for the hell of it. Oh, shucks, it's kinda good, ain't it?

Scott McNealy, meet Linus. You tried to own the desktop, but that didn't work. You declared year X the year of the Network Computer. Sucks being ahead of your time by a year every twelve months, doesn't it. You tried to own JAVA, and you may yet. Ever heard of a "Pyrrhic Victory?"

It sucks taking Bill Gates' sloppy seconds, doesn't it Scott? You don't get no respect. Here's a stinking, good-for-nothing, operating system getting ten times the attention your precious darling ever could, and will.

But really, Scott, who's chasing who here? Free Solaris? Who'd a thunk it! So what, now you're going to just make the $ on hardware, right. That's what we've been trying to tell you along, if only you'd listen.

Fragmented UNIX is dying, and if you want to go down with the ship, don't expect us to come along. I don't want your operating system, not because it's expensive, but because you'd be just as bad as your Big Brother Bill, if ever given the chance.

So you'll give me Solaris. Thanks, but no thanks. Okay, it's more stable than Linux by a long shot. But the gap closes every day, old chap, and you're feeling the heat. So what, now you think we'll suddenly all switch, and wait for you to pull the rug out from under our lemonade stand like you're trying to do with Java? Fat @#$%ing chance.

We're not going to let you. Not now, not ever. IBM? Anybody remember how close to the brink they were, ten years back? I don't know about you, but they had a near-death experience, and they see the future.

Scott McNealy, meet the ghost of Computers Future. It doesn't include Solaris. Whether it includes Sun or not is up to you.


Great News... (2)

costas (38724) | about 15 years ago | (#1339985)

...this will mean that Unix as a whole will move up in the enterprise as an alternative to W2K, Novell, etc.

Plus, more interestingly, it will put the pressure to Linux to become better. For one thing, NT was too easy a target ;-)...

engineers never lie; we just approximate the truth.

Re:He can be amazed all he wants (1)

Foogle (35117) | about 15 years ago | (#1339986)

Or maybe Linux has some things going for it that AIX doesn't have... yet. Why do people see Linux as ever-changing and improving, yet think that other operating systems (read: Windows 2000 and Solaris) are just getting worse and more bloated.

It's not like the guys working on Linux are th most absolutely brilliant software engineers in the world. They're good, but they're only human, and Linux does have limitations, just like every other OS out there.


"You can't shake the Devil's hand and say you're only kidding."

Linux is "low end" (2)

Greg Lindahl (37568) | about 15 years ago | (#1339987)

It's funny that Sun says that Linux is "low end", while my company beat Sun (and IBM and HP and SGI) on a $15 million dollar supercomputer bid with a cluster running... Linux.

I guess that's just too little money for Sun to be interested.

SCO chiefs used to say same things (1)

bitwiz (95663) | about 15 years ago | (#1339988)

Hey, do not forget that SCO bossess used to bs like that too.

"Next release is going to be free, plus nobody wants linux."

Where is SCO now? The place Sun is headed to. hahaha

Re:versioning (2)

Vladinator (29743) | about 15 years ago | (#1339989)

If you want to bother to get that right, it should be *cough*RED HAT*cough* since they did that BEFORE Slackware, and were the main reason that Slackware did that in the first case.

Solaris is no different in this instance. It's still a good thing. What F*&*ing difference does the number make? CAN YOU USE THE D$$$ THING OR NOT?

Hey Rob, Thanks for that tarball!

Re:Is the future of Linux really that obscure? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 15 years ago | (#1339990)

More likely, they've never used Linux on their Sparc boxes. Once you have, you can never go back.

Say it with me, for effect: Sun really believes Solaris is superior.

So, goodbye, Sun. If you are betting your company on Solaris, you're going to lose. Buy Sun hardware now, while you still can!

Probably they made Solaris free because nobody can bear the thought of paying money for it. Plus, most people who buy Sun hardware will end up using Linux anyway, so at least there's no facade now.

DIE Solaris, DIE!!!

Re:versioning (0)

fsck (120820) | about 15 years ago | (#1339991)

companies? where can I buy Slackware stock?

Huh? What's this Dejavu?? (1)

seaportcasino (121045) | about 15 years ago | (#1339992)

Didn't we see this exact same announcement about 2 months ago? Is there anybody here who didn't know Solaris is going to be free and open-source? Why the hell do we keep repeating the same damn news day in and day out?

Why is it called "Slowaris" (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 15 years ago | (#1339993)

Hello, I've never used this OS before, but I'm curious about why it's referred to as "Slowaris." Why is this? Is it really slow, or is it just a misplaced insulting pun like "open soars"?

Sun would be remiss to adopt linux (1)

rambone (135825) | about 15 years ago | (#1339994)

Frankly, they have a better piece of software in Solaris - they would be remiss at this point to drop an effective OS in favor of the "flavour de jour".

Most Sun customers don't appear to be fazed by the fact the Solaris isn't free or even cheap.

On the other hand, Sun, like other unix vendors, are in danger of becoming boutique shops. Most web farms can be run adequately on intel boxes (they need not even be cutting edge), and commodity solutions are even making inroads in the database market (my employer is rolling over NT Oracle installations in favor of linux Oracle).

Re:Bye Bye Microsoft (1)

Arctic Fox (105204) | about 15 years ago | (#1339995)

Sounds alot like the IBM-Microsoft conversation, "There's no money in the OS, it's in the hardware".
I'm not sure where you got your figure for "thousands of dollars for W2K".... that would be an idiotic price for their software. They wouldnt sell a single copy.

This signature contains text from the worlds funniest signature.

Re:Traditional Business People (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 15 years ago | (#1339996)

Great, so shut up and have a beer. We'll all be better for it.

Who really benefits... (3)

WombatControl (74685) | about 15 years ago | (#1339997)

Actually, as a web server platform, Solaris is top-notch. The only thing that made it less attractive than Linux was the cost factor. For Sun, releasing a free version is a Very Good Idea. The whole point of the exercise is to get people hooked on your OS and therefore evangelize it to others. The same theory applies to the decision regarding BeOS 5 and others.

This is a good thing for several reasons, even though these aren't being GPLed. First of all, it gives Linux a little extra incentive to progress, as it better have more to offer than just being free. If Linux wants to survive, it had better be able to compete. As we all have learned by now, competition makes for better products.

Also, hobbyists like myself get a chance to play around with a new OS and see how it ticks. I intend to install BeOS when it comes out and see how it runs, and now I'll add Solaris to that list. I probably will only dabble in both, but it is an opportunity to broaden my OS horizons.

The only drawback I can see is that we may yet have an OS market Balkanization. With all these free OSes flying around, we need common standards to make sure that the free exchange of data can continue. Things like XML and other open file formats are crucial. The Linux ELF binary format is supported by both BeOS and Solaris via an emulation layer, but that's only a start. It would be nice to have the same apps work across multiple OSes.

Still, despite that, the release of Solaris is a good idea for all involved. Hopefully this free software boom will continue as companies find new ways to maintain good software development and expand new technologies while keeping the results of that research free for all.


Anonymous Coward | about 15 years ago | (#1339998)

Re: SOLARIS SUCKS yes, you are a 6th grader... I see...

Ho hum... (1)

The Man (684) | about 15 years ago | (#1339999)

Big deal. More Slashdot non-news. Solaris is a second-rate operating system at best, and if we ever see the source it'll be under the not-even-close-to-Free-but-we're-muddying-the-wate rs SCSL. Not that the source would be worth much anyway. Probably better that we don't get it, lest some fools try to pollute good operating systems with it.

The only things Sun sells that anyone would want are made of metal and run Linux.

Re:Not free as in software (1)

robserver (87613) | about 15 years ago | (#1340000)

It's not free as in beer it's free as in refills

can't think of a subject (1)

RaVeR (142850) | about 15 years ago | (#1340001)

First of all, I'm so glad that Solaris 8 is out, second of all I don't mind about Win2K. Third of all, theres an operating system that "X" eyes linux. It's called the MacOS X, and I also don't mind about that either. I wonder what the screen shots would look like in Solaris 8. I just don't get the point where large computer networks should switch to Linux just because it's stable. Even though other people out there have trouble installing Linux on to their computers. And minux, is an other old operating system that I never heard of before. And whoever said "Linux can't be defeted.", what have you been smoking lately?

Re:RIP linux (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 15 years ago | (#1340002)

Sun can keep spending money maintaining Solaris by itself while IBM SGI and more are combining their efforts into one OS, they see the benefit in not duplicating efforts maintaining their propreitary OSes. Sure Linux not as good now and has some disadvantages, but give it a while, and it will soon be a lot better. Sun is obviously not thinking long-term.

Windows is probably going to keep going for a long term, W2k seems pretty nice, not sure about BeOS, but it is a solid OS.

Do you think SGI and IBM really went with Linux just because of the hype? That's probably what Sun thinks, and well, they can keep thinking that....


Anonymous Coward | about 15 years ago | (#1340003)

This puts a ding in Microsoft but the secondary emmissions will put a hard whack on companies like BSDI (and SCO perhaps). Linux probably won't be affected too much since Linux occupies a different niche, plus Linux has the backing of Sun competitors SGI, Intel, IBM, HP, and a few others. Linux R&D at these companies is in full force. I don't see any affect at all on BeOS. OTOH, the various variants of BSD will be put under strain, how much is hard to say. We'll have to wait for the shake out.

Re:Bye Bye Microsoft (1)

athom (88135) | about 15 years ago | (#1340004)

They justify it by having a market capitalization of $524 billion. Sounds to me like their strategy works, like it or not.

Tattoo DeCSS source on Natalie Portman's buttocks! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 15 years ago | (#1340005)

Gentle reader:

End MPAA oppression once and for all! Put the DeCSS source code somewhere where it'll be in public view FOREVER, and they'll NEVER be able to supress it and take it away: Natalie Portman's bare naked ass!

That's right, once the DeCSS source is tatood on Natalie Portman's nude butt, it'll be ours FOREVER!

Re:What was it Gandhi said? (0)

garcia (6573) | about 15 years ago | (#1340006)

umm, Microsoft ignored it, ridicules it, fights it (w/W2k I guess), I wonder if we will have a PenguinMicrosoft Baby-Bill... Hmm.

Re:Not free as in software (1)

alangmead (109702) | about 15 years ago | (#1340007)

No, they say that it won't be distributed under the Sun Community Source License. Sun doesn't own all the code in Solaris and can't give it away.

This is free as in gratis (sometimes called freeware) [gnu.org] , not free as in libre [gnu.org] . You get a binary, you can pass it to your friends (or enemies, they don't care) You don't get source. You can't make changes. (You probably can't even disassemble it to find out how thing were done.) You can't hire someone else to make changes for you.

You pretty much have to depend on Sun maintaining it.

Re:Linux is "low end" (1)

The Man (684) | about 15 years ago | (#1340008)

To be fair, an E10k is an awfully nice machine. Linux would run on that too, if anybody could afford one. Your customer (and you!) can just be thankful that their application is suitable for clustering. Otherwise, the iron is essential. Operating system has little to do with it.

Re:Bye Bye Microsoft (2)

Rombuu (22914) | about 15 years ago | (#1340009)

How do they justify thousands of dollars for W2K when their largest competitor (in the server arena in particular) isn't charging ANYTHING!

Um, maybe 'cause a) Windows doesn't run on Sparc and b) Solaris on x86 (at least last time I checked which was a while ago), was, well, lacking in many ways (device drivers, speed, applications...)

Re:What was it Gandhi said? (1)

Mac (10471) | about 15 years ago | (#1340010)

I believe the quote is: "First, they ignore you. Then they laugh at you. Then they fight you. Then you win."


The Inphidel (19931) | about 15 years ago | (#1340011)

Do you think before you type?

Re:Bye Bye Microsoft (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 15 years ago | (#1340012)

That's a little short sighted. I can steal single-ply rough as sandpaper toilet paper from my employer (or college as the case may be), but I'd rather pay money a 2-ply roll that won't leave my ass bloody.

I'm not alone here; Charmin isn't terribly worried that people will stop buying their brand when they can get a "FREE" roll elsewhere. Linus isn't "FREE" in terms of cost. The question is is it's true cost of ownership is less than NT/95/98/1900's cost. For most people & businesses, the answer is no, at least not yet.

Sun vs IBM (1)

Taco Cowboy (5327) | about 15 years ago | (#1340013)

To say that I am amuzed by Sun's contention is a little bit of an understatement.

Sun is scared, very scared, and yet the people in Sun is trying to put up a brave face, and think that the world will buy their "I am not scared of nobody" ploy.

IBM, by comparison, is more honest in their approach. IBM knows that in the coming decades, whichever OS the users use is not important, what is important is that the APPLICATIONS and the HARDWARE the users will choose. That is why IBM has embarked on its journey in adopting Linux, and IBM is not apologetic on what they are doing.

Unlike Sun, IBM is not scared of Linux. IBM looks at Linux as a UTLITY, while Sun looks at Linux as a THREAT.

I think that sums up the difference between IBM (a winner) and Sun (a loser).

Linux optimism (2)

rgmoore (133276) | about 15 years ago | (#1340014)

Or maybe Linux has some things going for it that AIX doesn't have... yet. Why do people see Linux as ever-changing and improving, yet think that other operating systems (read: Windows 2000 and Solaris) are just getting worse and more bloated.

Derivatives. Windows* and Solaris were big deals five years ago, and while they've been improved it has been fairly incremental. Linux was barely on the radar five years ago and it's improvement since then has been amazing. This gives the impression that Linux is getting better much faster than the other guys. Whether this is reasonable or not (i.e. whether it's just that Linux has benefitted by chasing others' taillights) seems to be ignored.

Even other BSDs are choking off BSDI. (2)

rambone (135825) | about 15 years ago | (#1340015)

NetBSD and BSDI both seem to be fading from public view as FreeBSD takes the lionshare of the BSD audience, with OpenBSD capturing the niche security audience.

Frankly, in a world where almost all of the cheap hardware is x86 commodity components, the allure of NetBSD (emphasizing portability to esoteric platforms) isn't really compelling, and I never could figure out why poeple liked BSDI.

Re:What are the Differences? (3)

ajs (35943) | about 15 years ago | (#1340016)

Solaris is a descendent of a long history of what were glibly refered to as "The UNIX Holy Wars". Basically, Bell Labs' UNIX was picked up by Berkely, poked, proded, added to, etc. and thus was born BSD. Sun began when BSD (renamed SunOS by an infant Sun Microsystems) became fairly stable and added IP networking to the kernel. System V UNIX was a derivative of Bell Lab's original UNIX and many of the features of BSD. After a while, many industry camps began to form around this new version of UNIX, and Sun worked very closely with this effort. The result was eventually SystemV R4, which was what Solaris was based on (replacing the now aging, but still much loved BSD-derived SunOS).

Ok, 'nuf background Solaris, being a SystemV derivative has a few key features that Linux does not. For example, the streams interface is, in some ways, superior to the way Linux kernel modules work.

On the other hand, the Linux kernel has: IP Masquerading/firewalling/port forwarding/packet marking; numerous filesystems that Solaris does not support; and of course, source.

The various Linux distributions go another step. Theoretically, Solaris 8 will finally ship with Perl! Linux distributions, however, usually ship with Perl, Python, Scheme, TCL, Fortran, C, C++, and many other programming languages (scripting and otherwise). Linux distributions also commonly have:

  • Relational databases
    The world's most popular Web server
    TCP port wrappers
    A slew of debugging tools
    A slew of editing/development tools
    GNOME or KDE (to which Solaris merely has CDE)
    Photo editing tools (e.g. Gimp)
    Network debugging/analysis tools
    Web mirroring software
    GUI builder (GNOME has one, I think KDE does)
    Shells: tcsh and bash

All of this, and did I mention source? Oh, and Solaris' turnaround time on security fixes is pityable.

Now add to this that Linux exists for SPARC, x86, ARM, Alpha, PowerPC and others.... well, Solaris just doesn't have much to compete on except that it runs real fast on real fast hardware. So, if you want to spend megabucks on a single-point-of-hardware, you can run Solaris on it.

I use Solaris at work, and I can honestly say that it occasionally makes me want to look into W2K (then the head trauma wears off).

Re:RIP linux (2)

Foogle (35117) | about 15 years ago | (#1340017)

It's not that I *totally* disagree, but your argument doesn't make much sense:

Yeah, a number of vendors are choosing Linux as their second OS. But why would that make it likely for them to make it their first OS? Ham is my 2nd favorite deli meat, right after Turkey. That doesn't mean I'm about to switch to packing Ham sandwiches in all my lunches. SGI might be moving towards packing Ham in their lunches, but that's just because they weren't successful in packing their own deli-meats (in this case, Bologna).

And sure, VA Linux is packaging Linux with their systems, but what does that say? VA is a good company, and their getting on their feet, but they're not even close to being in the same class as vendors like Dell and Compaq (who choose Ham-lunches as 2nd, and 3rd-choice, respectively). Don't confuse stock-value with anything other than stock-value.

Also: Sun doesn't need a 3rd-party manufacturer; they make their own systems. They can *give* their software away all they want and it won't matter as long as their selling hardware. And believe me, the hardware business is still looking a lot better than the "support" business.

To you're final point -- You're right, Open Source has it's own reasons for success that have nothing to do with Sun. Keep that in mind. Just because Sun is giving their software away now, doesn't mean they're throwing in the towel. Not hardly. Remember when Microsoft *gave* their browser away? They're just trying to regain market-share here, and I for one say "More power to them". It makes the consumer happy (they don't have to pay hefty fees for their favorite OS) and it gives Sun the ability to compete with Linux's infamous "price".


"You can't shake the Devil's hand and say you're only kidding."

Re:Traditional Business People (1)

pb (1020) | about 15 years ago | (#1340018)

Fortunately, I can drink beer and type, not simultaneously, but in close proximity. While you, sir, are still rude.
pb Reply or e-mail; don't vaguely moderate [] .

Re:Bye Bye Microsoft (1)

Malcontent (40834) | about 15 years ago | (#1340019)

Actually it's not TCO it's value that rules. Every business weighs the costs and the benefits and whichever product/service represents the highest value usually wins (even with PHBs making the decisions. Linux and Solaris represent a tremendous value and I predict that for the first time in the history of Microsoft a significant minority of the people who are running NT will NOT upgrade to W2K. I know that where I work we are in the process of wiping NT servers off one by one and replacing them with Linux.

$30 distribution costs is free?? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 15 years ago | (#1340020)

C'mon Sun, I looked at your website and was eager to download Solaris 8 - if only to give VMWare something else to do and to fill up that spare 8GB lying around. Solaris 8 is still listed as early access - no sign of the annoucement. Also, what's with this $20 media cost and $10 postage and handling? Sounds like profit to me, unless I get a nice cardboard box and manuals. How about a download option?

Re:RIP linux (1)

Sarah_Serious_Bitch (142785) | about 15 years ago | (#1340021)

Linux is still great as ever!!

Win2K Pro is OK, barely. It runs my games and my other win32 bound apps. It, is, however, MS's usual. Missing features, massive size, slow, *sigh*.

I've ordered solaris 8 on the site. It should be good.

The BeOS, imho, is a fatally flawed beast. Its got a good OS, but, the hardware support is appalling, the apps are few and far between. I've got R4 installed. However, it does have its upside, the BeFS is an outstanding file system.

Having said that, R5 running on a 16 processor Merced machine would be utterly amazing. Oh well, I can dream.

LINUX FOREVER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Re:What are the Differences? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 15 years ago | (#1340022)

A few others:

SunX (the XWindows server) has licensed Adobe Postscript. Imagine...GNUStep without that shitty hack of display ghostscript...
Motif & CDE are included (I don't like CDE, though some poeple do...)
Solaris is a real UNIX, so it's more similar to BSD. Linux is a mangy mutt... minix, BSD, Sys V, etc. influences.
Solaris generally requires more RAM and a faster processor. A 486 with 16 MB ram can be used for a (very lightweight) linux server. If you want XWindows with Solaris but don't want to hear your disk grinding away everytime you move a window, 64+ M ram is better.
Solaris has better man pages. Linux man pages area a feeble joke.
"Free" Solaris 7, at least, didn't include a compiler. Sun's x86 compiler beat the shit out of gcc (what doesn't on x86?), but that's not free.

Whats the big deal (1)

oolon (43347) | about 15 years ago | (#1340023)

I am not sure what the big deal is and why this is ment to be the death of linux. For a long time I user Solaris 2 X86, Orginally I used it because the developement environment was nice, ie. include files worked etc. Tailoring my hardware to fit that they supported.

The I got a laptop, solaris would talk pcmcia to it, which is a pain if you want to do anything useful, like talk on a network! so it got linux

Next my mailserver network card kept stopping working under solaris (it was a supported 3com card) so I put linux on it the problem with the card went away!

So, its free whats the big deal? I do see IBM or SGI racing to make sun there OS vendor, why enhance someone elses OS with support for there hardware? Sun mainly sell hardware, the core OS is nothing compared to the price of that.

So Solaris 2 X86 may be free Driver support is nothing like as good as linux! Who is going to write drivers for that? When sun could snatch your work as they did to blackdown. What happens if they drop support for your old hardware in the next release, the decision is theirs.

Linux, BSD and hurd are both good choices because they are vendor independant, solathing solaris will never be.

I would like to see the future and see if sun eats their words about embrassing a free OS. Linux is on a roll, this seems a regyard action by sun. If they had done it 5 years ago it might have made a difference ... NOw I doubt it.

Re:Should be fun, but I still won't use it. (0)

Malcontent (40834) | about 15 years ago | (#1340024)

It sure is starting look like a very nice OS to me. Microkernel, bsd internals, very slick gui, native PDF support. I think it will finally make me buy a non intel machine.

Bridge for Sale! (5)

DragonHawk (21256) | about 15 years ago | (#1340025)

Alright, while I think this would be Really Cool (TM) and all, I think we have to remember who we are dealing with here. The company which has recently proven it has more faces then a pair of dice: Sun Microsystems [sun.com] .

These are the people who let the Blackdown [blackdown.org] Java porting effort do all the work, and then took it all from them with no credit [slashdot.org] .

These are the people who have said several times (here [slashdot.org] , here [slashdot.org] , and as far back as here [slashdot.org] ) that Solaris isn't just going to be free, but Open Source [opensource.org] .

These are the people who pushed Java [javasoft.com] as an open standard, and then -- once many companies had tied their future to it -- pulled out of the standards process [slashdot.org] . Then, when others suggested going forward with a Java standard without Sun, claimed that their own public documentation was not complete enough for anyone to do that.

So, when they say Solaris is going to be "free", I have to say: "Sure, and I have a bridge to sell you. It's in Brooklyn. Great view of the water."

I think Sun's products are pretty good (they're certainly a hell of a lot better then Micros~1) and that Java still has a lot of promise, but I'm still not gonna trust Sun any further then I can throw an E10K [sun.com] .

Re:Bye Bye Microsoft (1)

mdxi (3387) | about 15 years ago | (#1340026)

I got a CDW catalog the other day with a 2-page spread about Win2K in the middle of it (Preorder your copy now!). The "Advanced Server Edition", which seemed to be the one you got if you wanted high-end stuff like SMP support or...uhh...I dunno, really, there was almost no real data on the page, was listed as ~$1700 upgrade, ~$3300 non-upgrade.
I don't know how many users/whatever this was a license for, as I trashed the catalog almost immediately reading those pages.

Re:What are the Differences? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 15 years ago | (#1340027)

Windows is peddled by drug using baby killers
windows is used by drugged children

Re:The reason IBM et. al. are chasing Linux (2)

Anonymous Coward | about 15 years ago | (#1340028)

If People were comfortable with GPL, why is Windows enjoying such large-scale success while Linux is not? It doesn't matter what's more free, it's what developers and users alike are at ease with.

"Linux" is a buzzword. BSD could just as easily been today's hottest buzzword.

Re:What are the Differences? (1)

The Man (684) | about 15 years ago | (#1340029)

WARNING: Clue included!

SunOS was BSD-based. Solaris is nearly pure System V. Have you ever actually used a BSD system?

My personal opinion of Solaris man pages is that they suck ass. Way, way too much space taken by tables with "SUNW,ZOIurgewqr" in them. Of course, since Solaris is seriously feature-starved, the man pages don't really have much to document, so they've got to fill them with something. But, again, that's just me. Now IRIX, there are some decent man pages.

Hahaha (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 15 years ago | (#1340030)

I just shutdown slashdot's mail server. I am the fucking man !!!

RHAT did version jumps? (2)

DragonHawk (21256) | about 15 years ago | (#1340031)

If you want to bother to get that right, it should be *cough*RED HAT*cough* since they did that BEFORE Slackware, and were the main reason that Slackware did that in the first case.

While I agree that the version number jumping game is silly and confusing, if not morally wrong, I am confused here. I am fairly confident Red Hat has gone through all the major version numbers, from 1.0 ("Mother's Day") to 6.1. Personally, I've run 2.1, 4.0, 4.1, 4.2, 5.0, 5.1, 5.2, 6.0, and 6.1. What makes you say Red Hat did any skipping?

AIX vs Solaris vs Linux? (1)

thogard (43403) | about 15 years ago | (#1340032)

AIX sucked. It just flat out it sucked. It was a result of AT&T and Sun hopping in bed together and IBM/DEC/HP had to do something. The result was an ill-concieved inbreed os. Sun had a very strong BSD based unix and AT&T had System V R3 (which had a single bsd feature called vi added after R2). Sys V was rock solid. It never went down (its close kin is still running many phone switches) but it was useless if you need a user interface of any kind (and I'm not even talking about the level requireed to run X)

So why is IBM going with Linux? They don't have a real unix and they need one. Sun has a real unix and doesn't need one.

Keep in mind the Bill Joy (co founder of sun, now a VP of some sort) was into writing "free" unix software early in the game. He wrote vi as well as lots of other things including some of the kernel bits.

Personaly I think that sun sys V sucks compared to the bsd stuff but once they went down that road, there was no going back. It was the first of a long line of stupid things they've done.

Anyone know why they took a 64 bit bus that ran well on a 32 bit cpu (sbus) and replaced it with a 32 bit bus (pci) that runs on a 64 bit cpu? I guess they like to see their expensive boxes die in preformace reviews so they can save a few bucks buy putting crap components in my servers...

And Bill Joy (3)

drivers (45076) | about 15 years ago | (#1340033)

After seeing Bill Joy speak at "Sun Market^H^H^H^H^H^H Technology Days" in Seattle, I don't think McNealy deserves to keep all of one's contempt. Bill Joy showed contempt for UNIX, Open Source, and anything that wasn't Java.

Paraphrasing: "Open Source? I don't want to see the source, I want it to work and be documented." To which the audience applauded. (This after he talked about how he worked on BSD UNIX's source in the early 1970's to make it more stable.)
He said that it was impossible to build a reliable library of code when you couldn't guarantee that your code wouldn't overwrite other places in memory. (It makes me think of Larry Wall who says that a language tends to be inversely useful to the number of axes the author has to grind.)

Winning, what? Everybody Vs. Linux? What? (1)

captredballs (71364) | about 15 years ago | (#1340034)

I'm a little worn of the "out to win" mindset that the linux community has grown (especially lately). Lets look to the long term. Not everybody everywhere is going to use linux and that is a good thing. We like variety, right? Linux has begun to occupy a very unique position in the computer world. It is being used because its widely available, easy modified, and useful for MANY different tasks. Plus, there is a sea of software for it. Personally, I hoping that linux becomes a standard, much in the same way that programming langauge and hardware standards came about. You don't have to look too close to see it happening: IBM, HP, etc... Solaris isn't going to "take over" linux. Linux is *fun* and *practical* and *easy* in ways that Solaris isn't. Of course sun doesn't like that. Jini and Java are supposed to take over the embedded market, right? Well embedded device companies are flocking to linux because its well suited for that. Personally, I'm hoping that the linux+java+jini relationship grows tight in the embedded market so sun won't see linux as a competitor, but as a VERY good tool that is good for everybody. Then maybe we'll get some free drugs and porn....

Ah, time to think (5)

Graymalkin (13732) | about 15 years ago | (#1340035)

Linux advocacy is nice until it reaches the point where you're kicking and scraping to convince yourself and others that it is the greatest thing since sliced bread. Solaris is a very good operating system on its native hardware (SPARC et al) it is however a little weaker on non-native hardware. You also have to remember that Sun is in the enterprise solution/packages business, not merely some hardware with a webserver on it like Dell and others. Since most of these packages are not development environments (the ones that are develope for Solaris on Solaris in a business to business sense for the most part) it would seem kinda silly for them to come jam packed with a bunch of source code and compilers, who is going to be using their brand new E10k ultra server box for hacking out some C++? Solaris also scales very well RIGHT OUT OF THE BOX, that is something I think open source people take for granted. Since you recompile the kernel to make changes it is really easy if you know what you're doing to scale it to a 10 node server farm. Solaris does this WITHOUT recompiling and does it very well. For the me toos out there that love to call it Slowaris, learn to read. There are what we called "system requirements" and we use that information to figure out if we can indeed run a certain piece of software on our hardware. Of course it runs slower on x86 hardware, it is natively run on SPARC machines! Solaris also likes to use alot of RAM, so you would be hard pressed to slap it on your old 486 with 16 megs of RAM. Come on people, quit the "if it ain't Linux we bash it" attitude. I think it's really cool that Sun is going to release Solaris 8 for free, I have my copy already. They aren't releasing it free to copy Linux (which should be stated as copying the GPL rather than Linux itself since Sun isn't trying to make the Solaris kernel run like the Linux kernel), it's an appetizer so sysadmins can get ahold of a copy and see if they want to invest in Sun or want to stick with what they have.

A Lesson from History (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 15 years ago | (#1340036)

It's not like the guys working on Linux are the most absolutely brilliant software engineers in the world. They're good, but they're only human
Whatever. The continued success of Linux is invetitable. History offers insight.

In the Viet Nam War the Americans used high tech multi-million dollar airplanes in an effort to bomb North Viet Nam's supply line--the Ho Chi Min Trail--out of existance. It didn't work. Why? The Ho Chi Min trail was built with a multitude of dedicated workers using shovels, picks, and buckets. No they weren't the most absolutely brilliant civil engineers in the world. But after each bombing the trail was quickly rebuilt. Even after years of bombing the trail grew and grew in quality and size. The Americans were never able to stop its growth. After all, how do you bomb a shovel?

The moral: The persevering multitudes armed with picks and shovels will usually win.

Re:What are the Differences? (1)

Uart (29577) | about 15 years ago | (#1340037)

SunOS versions before Marketing renamed it Solaris, were BSD. They got a hold of AT&T SysV code under an agreement they had, to co-develop Unix. (it fell through) So Sun may act more like SysV than linux, it has code from both.

a top (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 15 years ago | (#1340038)

"[A] top Sun official also went on to say that Sun will 'never' adopt Linux"

IMO, it's their loss, not ours.

Microsoft vs. Sun (2)

seaportcasino (121045) | about 15 years ago | (#1340039)

Why couldn't Microsoft sue Sun now for destroying the market for operating systems? Isn't this the same as what Microsoft did to Netscape? I'm not saying that Microsoft's not deserving (they definitely have it coming to them), but at the same time, how the hell can Microsoft possibly justify charging $250+ per license for Windows 2000 now? It really seems as if Sun is going for the juggular here. They did the same thing earlier with Star Office. But I guess that really didn't hurt Microsoft's sales of Office 2000 too badly. But I really think this might hurt Microsoft on their high-end Win2000 servers.

All we need now is for Oracle to make their dbs free and Microsoft is finished for sure!

Re:The reason IBM et. al. are chasing Linux (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 15 years ago | (#1340040)

I guess it depends how you measure success. Linux may be the (stock market|media|big computer company PR department) flavor of the month, but *BSD is still widely respected within the tech community and becomes more so everyday.

Nail on the head! (2)

crush (19364) | about 15 years ago | (#1340041)

The pulling out of the standards process is an expression of the true beliefs of Sun Microsystems. I don't think that anyone who cares about Free Software is going to be suckered by this one.

However, there are plenty of companies that are going to go for the Free Beer aspect of this and that is going to hurt Linux.

The article has a little dig at the end about Sun sucking up to the Open Source community by funding the next Apache conference. I can imagine that they're keen to get their co-operation and stimulate the Jakarta side of things there, but once again, if they had any intention of it taking off then they'd make it standard.

Big surprise? (1)

Trailer Trash (60756) | about 15 years ago | (#1340042)

Yeah, right. Did anyone really think that Sun was a friend of Linux or the open source/free software community? Come now, they never have been and never will be. They are making too much money being at the top of the proprietary Unix heap.

I would have more respect for slashdot if the nice little Sun logo icon were replaced with Scott McNealy (whose name rhymes with "Mr. McFeely") as a borg, a la Microsoft's icon.

Re:What are the Differences? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 15 years ago | (#1340043)

Here is what solaris is:

- Sun's solaris operating system is used by unix professionals, high-end system administrators, and maybe a few engineers/scientists for high end number crunching.

- Suns Operating system typical runs on very expensive servers and workstations that typically range from 6 to 100 thousand dollars. However sun ported solaris to the cheaper intel platform because its butt was begening to get kicked in by cheap NT workstations and servers

- The enthusiasts behind suns OS are unix professionals with little Windows knoweldge or exportise

- Solaris can easily support data-warehousing and scale to 64 processors

Here is what linux is:

- Developed because sun's OS was way too expensive and it was unfair for people who want to learn unix and for university students who had to go to a lab to use unix.

- Unlike the people in the solaris camp, most of the linux comunity are Windows users who want to learn something new and exciting on there pc at home and some want to learn unix and some just want a powerfull os to goof with

- Linux runs on a huge variety of hardware and it runs on much cheaper hardware then solaris does

- Linux is used mainly for small odd jobs on old pc's in bussiness like mail backups, routers/gateways and small internet servers

- Linux can scale down easier and perform better tehn solaris on 1 and even 2 cpu syste,s since its code isn't as conservative as sun's solaris

The different communities between solaris and linux create different environments which vary drastically. Lets look at the software for both OSes.

- For Solaris its mrp bussiness software and databases and huge interent servers

- For linux its kde, gnome, afterstep, gnome-linuxconf, code crusader, kdevelop, etc.

I am fully aware that solaris can run all these linux apps but the community for linux came from pc users who wanted these apps so it would feel more like Windows. KDE and kdevelop and code-crusader wouldnot exist today if it weren't for linux.

Solaris is very scalable and very corporate while linux is more splashy and more hackerish.

Re:Why is it called "Slowaris" (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 15 years ago | (#1340044)

It really is slow. If you haven't got 16 processors, don't even think about it. A rough guide to performance using made-up but reasonable numbers:

CPUs Solaris Linux 1 0.7 1 2 1.3 1.9 4 3 3.2 8 5.8 6.2 16 11 11 32 20 18 64 34 28

Re:RHAT did version jumps? (2)

Rendus (2430) | about 15 years ago | (#1340045)

3.9 --- A real release. Basically Slack4 with the 2.0 kernel.
4.0 --- Linux 2.2
7.0 --- glibc 2.1

5.0 -- glibc 2.0? Somewhere in here.
6.1 -- Graphical installer

Slackware just caught up to where it "should" have been if it were to version like RH.

Re:Ho hum... (1)

captredballs (71364) | about 15 years ago | (#1340046)

Thats funny, I used solaris every day and write apps for big Solaris boxes that DON'T (as in "have never") gone down, even under very heavy load for days on end.

Don't get me wrong, I LOVE linux and use it every single day, but all the talk of linux being MORE stable and MORE scalable than Solaris is NOT well founded.

Someday (probably very very soon!) linux might exceed Solaris as a server platform, but for now it does not.

Re:Blow up doll? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 15 years ago | (#1340047)

I seem to get enough action, strange about that, isn't it?

Is that because you're a dirty slut who fucks anything for $5 to support a crack-cocaine addiction?

If you're not some nutcase transexual/transvestite/crossdressor or fat chick with VD, maybe we should get together for some hot 3-way action between you, me, and my inflatable doll.

Solaris will never be GPL'd (1)

falser (11170) | about 15 years ago | (#1340048)

Solaris will never be released under the GPL - if it were it would certainly spell the end of Solaris, and Sun knows this very well indeed. Linux coders would simply incorporate Solaris's good parts (SMP etc.) into Linux. Linux would continue steamrolling ahead and leave Solars in the dust.

"I can only show you Linux... you're the one who has to read the man pages."

Re:Who's chasing who? (1)

jtosburn (63943) | about 15 years ago | (#1340049)

Amen! A cynic speaks and exposes Scott McNealy as just another wannabe monpolist trying to hop on the in bandwagon as a desperate ploy to position Solaris as the "better" free OS. Please. Same cost (dollars), bend over to experience the freedom. Scott McNealy wants to be seen as the visionist that Bill Gates is. That's all. What they don't realize is that, historically, its moot...they're the same, but of different success level. And neither will be relevant thirty years from now. Long live the enthusiasm behind software!!!!!!
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?