Posted on 09/15/2005 7:29:08 PM PDT by Halfmanhalfamazing
Despite the obvious driver problems experienced on commodity x86 hardware, there is not much else to criticize about Solaris 10/OpenSolaris. There are some obvious gaps which should be addressed over the long term--better updates and patching processes, for example, and an improved administration framework would go a long way to help new users unfamiliar with the Solaris environment. Is it a viable alternative to Linux? Absolutely. In the last six months I've had no problems with Solaris 10 crashing, locking up or exhibiting odd behaviour. By comparison, my Gentoo-based systems have not been so well behaved. A SPARCserver 20 running Gentoo simply freezes after about six days and requires a hardware reset. My PC-based Gentoo installation often freezes if there's an NFS issue on the network and I have to reboot it.
I'd trust Solaris FAR before I'd trust Linux. I'd trust AIX before either.
'Course, he's running Gentoo--nobody else can tell what his system is doing.
Yes.
No argument here. I'd trust Solaris more than linux too.(and yeah AIX too)
I'll definately be giving S a try in the not so distant future.
Though, I trust linux more than windows.
And macos..... the jury is still out. It's about even in my eyes to linux.
What about HP-UX?
Heh....
User error. Replace user and hit any key.
Just curious.... have you used both?
Unix Admin by trade. Don't mention SCO/DGUX/IRIX...
Good for you. Wish I had your paycheck.....
:-)
I don't know about the OS, but it was a terrible movie (both the Russian and American version)...
Solaris is a great solid OS, and I would buy Suns hardware running it any day but they have not shown enough long term commitment to the x86 platform for me.
Solaris was the better OS pre kernel 2.4, but its so close to a draw now I concern myself more with the upgrade paths than the performance..
bwhahahahaha..
> ... I would buy Suns hardware running it any day but
> they have not shown enough long term commitment to
> the x86 platform for me.
Well, they seem to have pretty much bet the company on it.
Or did you mean that their track record on x86 is short?
The latter is certainly the case.
If Sun isn't committed to x86 long term, then there will
be no Sun long term. Sun's strategy may fail, but I don't
see any abandonment of x86.
Heck, even Apple is on x86 now, and it's unlikely that
they will jump to another ISA anytime soon. I'm no
advocate for x86, but the message is pretty clear here
(except, apparently, to the remaining passengers on the
good ship Itanic :-)
I mean when it suits them they can say, nope were not supporting x86 anymore, and they have done that in the past!
> I mean when it suits them they can say, nope were not
> supporting x86 anymore, and they have done that in the
> past!
Twice as I recall, but in those days MC68K clobbered
x86, and SPARC had a future.
There's a cliche that goes" "In bacon and eggs, the
chicken is merely involved. The hog is committed."
Sun looks pretty committed to x86 at this point.
An ancedote...
I was standing next to Bill Joy after a presentation (circa 1990) and someone asked a question. He answered that he was thinking about rewriting Sun's OS Kernel, as soon as he found the time...This was BSD4, I think. Definitely pre-Solaris.
Now, I'm not an engineer of any type, but to think, "I'm thinking about rewriting the Kernel..."
Is that complex, simplex or amazing?
I've never had the opportunity to work with HP-UX, but from what I have been told it's a decent variant, and seems somewhat similar to Solaris, but not quite as refined. I think it's pretty solid.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.