To: zeugma
How much does a entry level Sun box run?
I'm assuming they are trying to offer the hardware to a broader market then what they are able to obtain with running their OS on. On any forums concerning Unix/Linux I rarely see Sun's name mention. Usually its AIX or one of the BSD variants. If I was Sun I would see that as a big marketing flop. Plus Solaris 10 requires a lot more in resources then any of the Linux variants.
I see this as the same as IBM embracing Linux a few years back. It insures that IBM hardware continues to get used in the entry and mid level server market, which helps keep the manufacturing cost of the PowerPC chip down. Otherwise they would have be relegated to being just a high end server manufacturer.
7 posted on
01/30/2006 11:01:42 AM PST by
neb52
To: neb52
Note: I looked at Sun's website and the prices are about $1,000 higher than comparable IBM Servers.
8 posted on
01/30/2006 11:05:54 AM PST by
neb52
To: neb52
I see this as the same as IBM embracing Linux a few years back. It insures that IBM hardware continues to get used in the entry and mid level server market, which helps keep the manufacturing cost of the PowerPC chip down. Otherwise they would have be relegated to being just a high end server manufacturer.That could well be. I'm not sure how well that will work out though. Have you ever tried to install Solaris on an Intel box? I did several years ago and it was disappointing to say the least. You basically ended up with an OS. Even such basic tools as gzip had to be installed separately. Kinda reminded me of what you end up with once you install a Microsoft OS. I don't know if that is still true, but for low-end systems, it was definitely easier to install Linux as so many of the really useful tools were bundled with it. On the plus side, you can now install KDE and/or Gnome for Solaris. CDE was the Worst Window Manager Ever.
11 posted on
01/30/2006 11:21:12 AM PST by
zeugma
(Muslims are varelse...)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson