Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Oracle Reaffirms Supporting Solaris 11 Through Part Of The Next Decade

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Originally posted by aht0 View Post
    Poor boy thought he got bullied in a school by certain nasty individual. Now he has a gun and shooting dead whole class makes for a perfectly justified revenge? Nice attitude you've got there.
    You're a master in making poor analogies. It's more like: he was punished, because he wanted to give people freedom. Now he's strong and his oppressors can't harm him anymore and they have to go away. I think some psychologist should take a look at you.

    Sun contributed before Linux became wider-used and out of it's little niche.. Meaning FreeBSD 5.X SMP implementation issues - which took few years to properly get sorted out and made many companies meanwhile looking for alternative and they found it in Linux. In the early 2000-s lots of companies and ISP's used neither Linux, Solaris or Unix but BSD. That's the moment Linux started gaining momentum, which got amplified by Sun's economic mismanagement. Just coincidental unluck of it's competitors, not anything like being somehow inherently "better"
    Thanks for confirming FreeBSD sucked. What contributions did Sun made then?

    Which it is now seemingly gambling off, you'd be surprised how often can one see "Im systemd refugee"-kind of 'asking advice' or introductions in BSD lists/groups/subreddits/forums..
    Yeah, good joke.

    Comment


    • #32
      Originally posted by Volta View Post
      They were spreading FUD against Linux. Linux hit them hard in some areas, so they weren't playing fair. Linux conquered HPC, NASA replaced Solaris in favor of Linux and so on. There were more bad things about Sun, but it's an old story, so it's hard to remind everything now.
      Man some of you people aren't capable of being honest. Sun, like Apple today, wasn't about selling operating systems. They were a hardware company. Sun got beat by Intel's x86. It was cheaper and faster. Linux simply made it possible to run a Unix-like OS on x86. That's why all those companies moved to Linux, because they moved to x86. Nobody was running Linux on SPARC or buying Sun hardware and installing Linux on it.

      For Sun, Solaris was about adding value to bring customers into their hardware domain and keep them there (like OS X today). But with IBM dominating the high-end and Intel scooping up the low-end, and with the dot-com bubble popping, Sun's hardware market pretty much evaporated overnight.

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by johnc View Post

        Man some of you people aren't capable of being honest. Sun, like Apple today, wasn't about selling operating systems. They were a hardware company. Sun got beat by Intel's x86. It was cheaper and faster. Linux simply made it possible to run a Unix-like OS on x86. That's why all those companies moved to Linux, because they moved to x86. Nobody was running Linux on SPARC or buying Sun hardware and installing Linux on it.
        Solaris supported x86 since 1993, so I don't know what you're trying to show. If I remember correctly its process creation was one of the slowest thus the name slowlaris.

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by Volta View Post
          Solaris supported x86 since 1993, so I don't know what you're trying to show.
          Maybe re-read it and you'll get the gist: Sun was a hardware company.

          Comment


          • #35
            Originally posted by monraaf View Post

            I don't think Alan Coopersmith lives in India: https://twitter.com/alanc
            Sure, but he's only one person. As much as one person can get done when it comes to single applications and smaller systems, a single person doesn't really matter that much in a project as large as a modern operating system.

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by Volta View Post

              They were spreading FUD against Linux. Linux hit them hard in some areas, so they weren't playing fair. Linux conquered HPC, NASA replaced Solaris in favor of Linux and so on. There were more bad things about Sun, but it's an old story, so it's hard to remind everything now.
              Different eras, different stories.

              The Linux crowd (including me) were gunning for Windows. But the actual victims were the commercial UNIX companies (which we didn't have animosity to).

              Red Hat built a business out of replacing UNIX for, oh, 10 cents on the dollar. It's a natural: it was easy to port stuff from UNIX to Linux. Partly because most UNIX code was already portable between UNIX flavours. And it's all (roughly) POSIX.

              In the early days, PC hardware was not up to the task. It wasn't well-engineered. For example, all Suns had memory with parity checking or ECC. Not common on PCs. But PCs improved. That was the basis of the only FUD that I heard from Sun.

              By the end, Sun was in deep trouble and it started lashing out, sadly and ineffectively. But it is good to remember that Sun won the UNIX wars by creating or adopting the most open standards.

              So: Sun was mostly a force for good. With some problems on its deathbed.
              Last edited by Hugh; 09-30-2019, 02:26 PM. Reason: fix typo

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by Volta View Post
                k1e0x
                I know the case with SCO, but the FUD I was talking about was indeed coming from Sun. For example creator of ZFS Jeff Bonwick was doing this. Sun is probably the last company that supported the Linux kernel. IBM, SGI, Intel have done much more. In userspace it's little different, but it's hard to name a single thing from Sun that I would like.
                dtrace? ZFS?

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by starshipeleven View Post
                  The general period was called "unix wars", everyone was trying to compete with each other and all dirty tricks were used. At the end Linux more or less won because it was an outsider to all this bs going on.
                  Linux came long after the UNIX wars. It was not a combatant.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by Volta View Post

                    https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.net...uting.amp.html

                    ​​​​​​Yes, something like this.
                    That's actually quite wrong. It's mixing up different eras.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by johnc View Post

                      Maybe re-read it and you'll get the gist: Sun was a hardware company.
                      Sun was software company as well. Furthermore your point was Linux ran on x86 while Solaris ran on sparc which is bullshit.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X