Re: HP to distribute Solaris

In article <U7SdnQ_pDchOaTDUnZ2dnUVZ_vSdnZ2d@xxxxxxxxxxxx>,
"Richard B. Gilbert" <rgilbert88@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
Bill Gunshannon wrote:
In article <Kskrl.8148$jZ1.1649@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
Michael Austin <maustin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
IanMiller wrote:
On 3 Mar, 13:40, "John Smith \(not the one @ HP\)" <a...@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
http://www.informationweek.com/news/hardware/unix_linux/showArticle.j...

Press release from last month http://www.hp.com/hpinfo/newsroom/press/2009/090225xa.html

I guess this deal could sell more HP systems :-)

All I have to say is - RUN FORREST RUN!!!!!!

The context switching of Solaris is still horrendous. It does not seem
to have improved over the last 20 years at all... it is still crap.
(and I have a VERY large DW that can prove it...)

Solaris hasn't been around for 20 years. SunOS, their offering prior
to jumping on the (badly flawed) System V bandwagon was a very good
implementation of BSD with a lot of promise. But as we all know all
too well, technical superiority is not what decides the winner in the
marketplace.

bill



It's still called "SunOS"
sunblok_$ uname -a
SunOS sunblok 5.8 Generic_108528-13 sun4u sparc SUNW,Ultra-5_10
sunburn_$ uname -a
SunOS sunburn 5.10 Generic_118833-36 sun4u sparc SUNW,Ultra-5_10

Yes, but they no longer market it as SunOS. And, to be pedantic,
thew very first version actually called Solaris (1.0) was, in fact,
SunOS with none of the, to come, SYS V inanities. but once it went
to being a SYS V derivitive rather than being BSD based it went
downhill fast. The very first version was so significantly slower
that the majority of people didn't even change. By the second
version of Solaris, even though it was still dog slow and very unstable
users were forced to make the decision, either change to Solaris or
change to something other than Sun. (The primary reason being that
they had stopped all development, even security updates for SunOS and
this being the time when the INTERNET was opened up to the unwashed
masses attacks were ont he rise and security problems were showing up.
That was the point where we stopped being a Sun shop here.)

I think that takes care of the last eight or ten years!

I would have to look for a timeline, but regardless of what the
market-droids called it there was a sharp line when Sun abandoned
BSD in favor of the very inferior SYS V. Kinda like what people
are doing with Linux today!! The more things change the more they
stay the same.

bill

--
Bill Gunshannon | de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n. Three wolves
billg999@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx | and a sheep voting on what's for dinner.
University of Scranton |
Scranton, Pennsylvania | #include <std.disclaimer.h>
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Java History
    ... Sun does something similar with SunOs and Solaris: ... >> Being new to Java, I am trying to get a little history. ...
    (comp.lang.java.programmer)
  • Re: Linux distros... where do I start?
    ... I should have said BSD UNIX. ... SunOS" for folks concerned about compatibility, but "it's Solaris" for folks ... The Sun hardware is good: the Sun operating system I can live without, ...
    (comp.os.linux.setup)
  • Re: "Torn between two OS" - Solaris vs Linux
    ... > Sun had their OS running on x86 processors before that. ... > invented the marketing name Solaris, but SunOS was released on the 80386 ... > long before Linus even started on Linux. ... > This is the machine Sun sold with its x86 SunOS: ...
    (comp.os.linux.misc)
  • Re: "Torn between two OS" - Solaris vs Linux
    ... > Sun had their OS running on x86 processors before that. ... > invented the marketing name Solaris, but SunOS was released on the 80386 ... > long before Linus even started on Linux. ... > This is the machine Sun sold with its x86 SunOS: ...
    (comp.unix.solaris)
  • Re: Zero Copy, FreeBSD and Linus Torvalds opinion
    ... Solaris, are straight BSD. ... SunOS 5.x was the OS. ... regardless of how Sun labelled the distribution media. ... I use the handle gore on a lot of stuff. ...
    (freebsd-hackers)
Loading