Previewing the Next Solaris OS 278
Eric Boutilier writes "Amy Rich has written an excellent Solaris Express (Solaris 10) how-to and general overview. It covers how the program works, using the community web site, and what's new in Solaris Express." Among many new features, the TCP/IP stack has been redesigned, IPv6 support improved, and both NFSv4 and USB 2.0 support added.
Nice (Score:2, Interesting)
Now, all I need is a PowerBook and I'll be set.
Re:Nice (Score:2, Interesting)
Darwin, isn't my thing, I'll wait for my PowerBook and run the real thing on it.
Linux, well, nothing against it. However, I'm not fond of the GNU GPL and LGPL so removed it from my list, though Debian looks like it is similar to the BS
Re:Nice (Score:3, Informative)
I saw him talk about Plan9 and Linux, but nowhere did I see "Solaris", "Windows", or "OS X". Did I miss something?
Re:Nice (Score:2, Funny)
I quote: "Darwin, isn't my thing, I'll wait for my PowerBook and run the real thing on it."
Here's your question for today: does "the real thing" in the above sentence refer to:
(a) OS X
(b) OS X
(c) OS X
(d) CowboyNeal
Re:Nice (Score:2, Interesting)
For example, as a kernel and driver developer these are very important issues, it might not matter to you, but it does to me. You might not agree to this, but that doesn't really mean I'm wrong, only that we have different views on freedom.
Think of it this way: The freedom of speech. The GNU GPL and LGPL is forcing you to speek even if you don't want to. You might think it's good, and th
Re:Nice (Score:2, Interesting)
This concept of remote TCP stacks is very useful for firewall policy etc.
Solaris doesn't suck... (Score:5, Insightful)
The market for Solaris is very different from Linux, it's datacentre-land, not home user. I still don't see it lasting too long though... One of the microsoft lines that really is true is that Linux is a larger threat to Unix than to MS, at the moment (MS forgot the 'at the moment' bit
Two wars: The desktop and the datacentre. Despite the cliche of fighting a war on two fronts, Linux is porbably uniquely positioned to fight a war on N fronts (where N is a positive, large integer). The way it's set up is to leverage groups of people whilst folding the advances back into the core.
SGI are turning to Linux, Sun will too. There'll be a few releases of both OS's first, though, IMHO.
Simon.
Re:Solaris doesn't suck... (Score:3, Interesting)
There is the same story with the Sun hardware... the Ultrasparc architecture. It is hard for one company to keep up with development of their own CPU's for long. The latest word has been that they have put new core's on the ice, and instead try to spinn on the ones they already have.
It is hard to compete with the main stream hardware, and at the desktop it's definitely impossible to beat x86 at best ba
Re:Solaris doesn't suck... (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Solaris doesn't suck... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Well, AMD... (Score:2)
Possible postion? [sun.com]
Difficult 8-way? [amd.com]
Re:Solaris doesn't suck... (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Solaris doesn't suck... (Score:5, Insightful)
The biggest difference (IMNSHO) between the open source community (including what is commonly referred to as the Linux community) and Microsoft is cultural. MS is a marketing driven organisation - features are chosen and development is directed based on what will shift boxes - even the current security initiatives are aimed at minimizing the amount of damage the reputation of the company was incurring due to its repeated and high profile security problems.
OSS projects seem to come in a huge range of styles and with a similarly huge number of objectives, however there is a larger emphasis on technical merit. Linus has a reputation for being draconian in what he will allow into the kernel, he is entirely willing to throw patches away that don't meet his standards no matter how wonderful the functionality they provide may be.
The result of this is that although OSS is generally not as "shiny" as MS products tend to be, it seems to be built on a much more solid foundation. Whether that is enough of an advantage for it to take a sizeable bite out of MS' market share remains to be seen.
Of course MS also seem to be their own biggest enemy. The new licensing arrangements and product activation seem to be designed to make life difficult for businesses. Likewise the way they seem to alternate between smear campaigns against Linux and running scared any time a business talks about moving there desktops over to an OSS solution has been raising the profile of alternatives to people who would not have otherwise heard of them.
Truly we live in interesting times (in both senses of the phrase.)
Re:Solaris doesn't suck... (Score:5, Interesting)
Linux is still a long way behind Solaris with things like NFS
Behind yes, but not a long way, and the gap has been closing over the past several years.
I'm really looking forward to performance and security of NFSv4, but am apprehensive that the setup [lwn.net] appears to be more complicated than just editing a couple files in /etc.
BTW, given all the recent hoopla over Sun's commitment to free and open source software, they ought to be recognized for sponsoring the CITI group at UMich [umich.edu] that had a lot to do with Linux NFSv4, and for sponsoring the Connectathon [connectathon.org] series of conferences that I'm hoping will make my Linux desktop NFS client interact better with my Sun NFS fileserver.
Sun/Solaris will survive (Score:5, Insightful)
I have no problem with Solaris and Linux side by side and neither do the management. We are actively and with prejudice trying to kill off HP-UX as soon as possible though.
bleahh (Score:4, Interesting)
I've worked with HP-UX, and the new hardware seems way better than their old crap (though it's hot and power hungry), but I don't like the O/S much. Too geared to their buggy sysadmin gui, and too flaky in the way it stores patches. I have repeatedly seen HP-UX boxes die to the point of tape recovery during patch installs, I've never seen a Sun die on patching, or reach as unrecoverable a software state for any reason.
HP support is really, really, bad compared to Sun, as well. The Sun guys know what they are doing fix hardware, and offer advice on software stuff. The HP guys have trouble with the hardware and flee if you ask about software (and no, I'm not just talking about one or two techs, it's a pattern).
I don't think HP knows where it is going in hardware or O/S, either. They've changed their minds a few times in the last few years. Intel, PA-RISC, HP-UX, Linux...
Re:Solaris doesn't suck... (Score:4, Insightful)
The biggest reason this cliche doesn't really hold water is because Linux isn't really fighting in the same sence of the word as Microsoft, Sun, SCO (not flamebait) and other OS-makers are.
Linux, or rather the development of it, isn't based on sales and income. Linux development will (and does) go on without having to produce financial profits and results.
Sun for example wouldn't be able to produce an OS that nobody use. It just wouldn't go down well with shareholders, and would frankly be a right out stupid idea businesswise.
Linux on the otherhand isn't dependand on one single company or entity. It's made by the people for the people. So it hasn't got anything to loose, and we all know that those who can make the ultimate sacrifice usually wins the battle, if not the war.
Re:Solaris doesn't suck... (Score:3, Interesting)
When you see what these guys are doing with big boxes (Sun 6500's up to the 15K) you realize how much of apples and oranges this dicussion really is. Anyobody who thinks that Linux on Intel is a threat to this type of a market is crazy.
That being said, Linux is making a little ground on other architectures, but to be honest I haven't seen a single customer yet who is actu
Re:Solaris doesn't suck... (Score:2, Funny)
But seriously, ebay/sun/solaris is perfect way to run a small home or business op. Friends/family all have nice relaiable web and email services cheap and I have a place to play with my root.
Cheers,
)-(ellbilly
Re:Solaris doesn't suck... (Score:5, Interesting)
The only place where Sun is really threatened is in the real low-end, and for that space they also have now x86 based systems.
Is the Unisys/W2000 a contender with Sun in the 8-32 CPU space ? Not really, because all W2000 processes run in their own small protected space, whereas one application on Sun can take advantage of all CPU's on the system if necessary.
A happy Linux user, which happens to work with Solaris on his job.
Re:Solaris doesn't suck... (Score:2)
Explain to me, maybe I mis-understand. 1 process / thread on sun will only take 1 CPU. If you have a program with multiple threads of execution, it will take advantage on n number cpu's with a little bit of overhead.
Unless you have written your application to run in mu
Re:Solaris doesn't suck... (Score:3, Informative)
Surprisingly, while a single application might not be able take advantage of SMP, often an expensive computer will run
Re:Solaris doesn't suck... (Score:3, Insightful)
That doesn't take into account that the current generation of UltraSparc processors (not the US4 which was just announced), suck in comparision to Itanium 2 and Power 4. Those companies willing to spend a few million on just one system, they want the fastest one.
Sun's sweet spot i
Re:Solaris doesn't suck... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Solaris doesn't suck... (Score:3)
IBM is in a much better position than HP. The Power 4 processor from IBM still maintains backwards compatibility all the way to their PPC 604e's. In the past, Sun and TI may have been able to make a good processor. Many people were eagerly waiting for the UltraSparc 3, since the USparc 2s had been suffering computing performance wise for some time. Instead of getting a processor that was compet
Re:Solaris doesn't suck... (Score:3, Insightful)
My username did not give it away? :)
Glad to be aboard. I have long wondered what everybody else is on. You should have seen my jaw drop when I went to a local Sun event (mind you I had already been using Sun equipment and had been very happy with it) when I learned just how long they support their OS's. I also learned that if you certify you app on Solaris and a newer version of Solaris is released and ends up breaking your app, they will either fix Solaris or they will pay you to fix your app on Solaris
Re:Solaris doesn't suck... (Score:3, Interesting)
Tell me the application that needs more than 8 CPU's that doesn't cluster? I won't go far on a limb to say -most-, but a LOT of new applications that are being developed on the enterprise are web based, or using web services. These applications are a natural fit for clustering.
Database you say? Take a look at 10g from oracle, it's built from the ground to cluster. DB2 does the same AFAIK.
If your stuck running SQL Server, your definately going to have a problem... but , I have little need to run our
Gnome ? (Score:2)
Will the next Solaris version ship Gnome as the default desktop ?
And also important, what are the Solaris users opinion on Gnome(vs CDE) ?
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Gnome ? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Gnome ? (Score:2)
IMHO, the Solaris Gnome is not too pretty. Some stuff doesn't work right, and integration with Solaris tools is not as good as it is in CDE. Of course, CDE is not the perfect desktop either, so the main advantage is that now you can choose the way in whic
Program? (Score:4, Funny)
But can you run this program called Solaris 10 on Linux? Or do you need wine for that?
Re:http://66.90.75.92/torrents/1194/winex3_3.3-1-A (Score:2)
Omigod! It's the Windows source code! [slashdot.org]
;)
Hope they have Bash, OpenSSL (Score:5, Insightful)
I know this is a trivial thing, but it's a real pain in the butt to have to use ksh all the time because most Solaris boxen I've worked on don't have Bash installed by default.
The same goes for OpenSSL [openssl.org] and a bunch of other tools that would be great to have but that I cannot count on being there.
On the other front, having Gnome [gnome.org] as a gui readily available is definitely deserving of kudos. If only I had more than ssh access to most of the boxes I work with, I could actually use it. We have Hummingbird [hummingbird.com] Exceed, but it's such a HUGE pain to set up. Neither myself, a reasonably good programmer, nor any of the sysadmins at the very large bank where I work know how to set it up.
Alas.
-- Kevin J. Rice
Re:Hope they have Bash, OpenSSL (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Hope they have Bash, OpenSSL (Score:5, Informative)
If you're not averse to free software then I suggest you try Cygwin (http://www.cygwin.com/). It's a lot easier to set up than Hummbingbird eXeed. It's also free. I've been using it for a few years now to get X access to remote *nix boxen, never had any problems cos it's easy to setup and use. And did I mention that, unliek Hummingbird eXeed, it's free?
Stephen
Re:Hope they have Bash, OpenSSL (Score:3)
There are two things that I particularly hate about cygwin. One, its package management. The interface for that is just awful and I'm both shocked and appalled that there's nothing for the command line to manage cygwin packages.
Two, don't even think of using cygwin for Win32 development for non-GPL code. I first got interested in cygwin because I wanted an easy unix-style environment in which to develop a couple of trivial BSD-licensed programs. Turns out, however, that the cygwin libraries are GPL'ed (not
Re:Hope they have Bash, OpenSSL (Score:2)
The last time I looked around (which was several years ago), Exceed was the only product that came
Re:Hope they have Bash, OpenSSL (Score:4, Informative)
Yes it does now, 2 weeks ago I installed cygwin on a winxp box, and it comes default with a XServer installed, configured to run in rootless mode, so it just uses winxp itself for the windowmanagement.
The last time I tried to do that (maybe one year ago, something like that), it was a lot more work for sure.
You can download Bash, OpenSSL (Score:2)
Re:Hope they have Bash, OpenSSL (Score:5, Informative)
# pkginfo SUNWbash
system SUNWbash GNU Bourne-Again shell (bash)
Perhaps not always installed by default, but it is available. That's on Solaris 8, BTW. As for other stuff, check out www.sunfreeware.com [sunfreeware.com]
Re:Hope they have Bash, OpenSSL (Score:2, Redundant)
A couple years back, I worked at a mid-size datacenter that used Sun boxes almost exclusively (Solaris 2.6 and 7), and as far as I remember, we had to manually install bash (meaning, there wasn't an option during install to install it).
Re:Hope they have Bash, OpenSSL (Score:2)
BTW, all packages prefixed by SUNW are Sun packages.
Re:Hope they have Bash, OpenSSL (Score:4, Informative)
Sun is now reverse-engineering GNU instead of the way it was in the 80's when the GNU Project goal was to reverse-engineer UNIX.
Re:Hope they have Bash, OpenSSL (Score:3, Informative)
% uname -srv
SunOS 5.10 s10_49
% which bash
%
Who else thinks Solaris Express is a dumb name? (Score:2)
Christ. And what will they do when they get to SunOS 6.0?
Re:Hope they have Bash, OpenSSL (Score:5, Informative)
We keep a local sunfreeware mirror for new sunos installs. Bash, updated Perl with modules, wget, lynx, openssl, bzip, sudo, lsof, openssh, and ncftp. (no gcc) If it wasn't for sunfreeware [sunfreeware.com], I'd go nuts using Solaris. Anyone that has to move/push/alter data, needs common tools on all platforms, thank god for Sunfreeware.
Re:Hope they have Bash, OpenSSL (Score:2)
The only drawback is that it doesn't integrate with the Solaris-native package management scheme, it uses its own database and utilities. It is also not a good idea to use it with the Sunfreeware
blastwave.org over sunfreeware (Score:3, Informative)
automatic package dependancy handling, bugtracking, and staffed by 30 volunteers instead of just 1 person.
Plus, 64bit versions of libraries, if you ever need that sort of thing.
Re:Hope they have Bash, OpenSSL (Score:4, Informative)
if it is not, do "export DISPLAY=your.ip:0.0" and execute an xterm, or start gnome, or do whatever you want to.
Re:Hope they have Bash, OpenSSL (Score:5, Informative)
??
When I do
my X network traffic is nicely hidden taken caer of by ssh; the Solaris box puts X traffic onto a fake local framebuffer DISPLAY like before sending it back to my realbox:0.0.It might be slower than what you suggest, but I think it's a lot more secure. Without ssh doing the job of making your X network traffic secure you'll have to worry about Xauthority. Too many people (and I was one once) get around Xauthority hassles with an
and I can't begin to tell you just how Bad that is.Re:Hope they have Bash, OpenSSL (Score:2)
However, in either case, there's no reason to do xhost + on the server. You could use xauth +server on the client, but you're right, that sucks too, because anyone on the server can display applications, read keystrokes and grab screenshoots. Also, DISPLAY=client:0 probab
Exceed's easy (Score:2)
Re:Hope they have Bash, OpenSSL (Score:2, Informative)
If you install the Sun bonus CD (? I forget the name, anyway its one of the ones that comes with the media if you have that, and you can also download it), you also get a load of free software packages including emacs (both of them), most of the gnu stuff including gcc &c &c, kde and so on. And ther
Re:Hope they have Bash, OpenSSL (Score:2)
I don't really have a problem with Sun giving you the bare minimum tools. I admit it can be a PITA to install stuff, but if you're doing a lot of builds, Jumpstart should be churning out boxes exactly how you like them.
I personally don't like the way more and more stuff has been creeping in to the standard Solaris install, even into the core cluster. If I'm building a DNS server. I don't *want
Re:Hope they have Bash, OpenSSL (Score:2)
Uh, all of them. What are you doing, using telnet?
Start method is rexec
Oh, I see. Even worse.
Which very large bank is this? I would like to make sure my money isn't there. I prefer banks which take security seriously.
Re:Hope they have Bash, OpenSSL (Score:3, Insightful)
For SSH?
Wrong. You only need OpenSSL on the system where you compile SSH. (You don't have compilers on all the systems, do you?)
You compile SSH so the SSL libraries are included, and push the package out to all of your hosts.
Oh, and a really convenient way to turn off the r* services is to shut off inetd altogether.... who needs it?
The only port a system needs open by default is 22/TCP... the rest are just holes waiting to happen!
(Well, so is SSH, b
Re:Hope they have Bash, OpenSSL (Score:2)
rexec? ha. haha. haaahaha. (Score:2)
It's trivial to get a remote root shell with rexec if it's running out of inetd (which I'm sure it is in your case). It's not quite as trivial if your rhosts is set correctly, but it's really easy if you have access to a laptop and a network drop in the appropriate location.
Wishlist - Global file system (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Wishlist - Global file system (Score:2)
Not sure till I try it. (Score:2)
AFS for instance, single heirarchy which is the same on all machines doesn't sound important but in reality it makes a huge difference when you can rely on the location of a file no matter which computer you are on, which site you are on or which country you are in.
Though it supports replicated fi
devfs (Score:3, Funny)
Re:devfs (Score:2, Informative)
Solaris lack of change is one of the main reasons why it's so damn stable as an OS. They do not want to be like Linux where there is a new API every year. A new API or new low level things are not bad per-se but it's something else that needs to be debugged, something else that needs to be learned and something else that may not be compatible with current software.
Case in point: Oracle on Linux, or any commercial a
Re:devfs (Score:2)
Re:devfs (Score:2, Informative)
DTrace (Score:4, Interesting)
As the article does not indicate -- but it seems to be worth mentioning -- DTrace was introduced in a comp.unix.solaris post here [google.com]. Seems pretty damn cool...
more power to them (Score:5, Insightful)
Of course Microsoft's market share won't go down if this OS just replaces one *nix variant with another, but that's another story.
Fire Engine (Score:5, Interesting)
A quick summary of the story:
The new stack has:
- Efficient at handling multiple NICs
- Low CPU usage (30% lower than Linux)
- Build for targeting 10/100 Gbps in the future. Has a new construction where it is possible to offload the cpu by routing packet to dedicated packet processing processors.
The last part seems like a preparation for the Sun hardware of tomorrow.
cool feature i am using (Score:5, Interesting)
gta3# ppriv $$
1124: bash
flags = 0x0
E: all
I: basic
P: all
L: all
Ok, so I am root I have all privileges I think
but now look at rpcbind, it is runnign as daemon but has less priviliges even than normal processes
gta3# ppriv 100182
100182:
flags = 0x2
E: net_privaddr,proc_fork,sys_nfs
I: none
P: net_privaddr,proc_fork,sys_nfs
L: all
see, it does not have privilege to do 'exec'... there are 30 or more privileges and it has only 3. So i guess this means some stack attack will not work against it like exec shell
also i can run and see privileges like thids
gta3$ ppriv -D -e cat
cat[100619]: missing privilege "file_dac_read" (euid = 77293, syscall = 225) needed at ufs_iaccess+0xd2
cat: cannot open
not sure what this means?
Re:cool feature i am using (Score:2, Informative)
"Solaris Express is moving from always requiring superuser rights to a privilege-based model. The system now restricts processes to only those privileges that are required to perform the current task. This results in the vulnerability of fewer root processes and the reduction in the number of setuid root programs."
Privileges (was Re:cool feature i am using) (Score:3, Interesting)
The closest thing to this that I have encountered is the kernel-level "Type Enforcement" in SecurOS, a BSD variant used for Secure Computing firewalls.
BSD and Linux can use Systrace, which offers some similar process-level controls (can set execution system call profiles per application).
While Solaris has offered file level ACLs forever, they weren't used by default to protect critical system files and very few admins knew to enable them.
One
Re:cool feature i am using (Score:2)
Another intro to Solaris 10 (Score:5, Interesting)
There is an alternative introduction on the main Solaris 10 page [sun.com] too. Eg:
The containers (previous called Solaris Zones) can also each have their own root password and own IP address, as well as min/max/QoS resource settings.
DTrace probes (Score:5, Interesting)
The fact is that we need as much insight in our processes as we can possibly get, as every little performance increase helps. Plus, we get to inspect possible sources of instability.
Typically our products interact with several third-party products, and the DTrace probes will be very useful in tracking down memory leaks and utilization details in such complex environments.
Solaris 10 on x86 Laptops? (Score:2)
Just installed 10 on Sparc yesterday. (Score:2, Interesting)
I toss the 10 installer CD, and slap in the "disk one" CD, whic
No previous Soliaris license (technically)required (Score:2)
The Software Express site says that in order to use Software Express, you have to have an existing Solaris license, but I downloaded the ISOs a few days ago just fine without having to prove that I had one.
suninstall (Score:3, Funny)
Did anyone else read this as s-uninstall? I was wondering why it was so important to include an uninstall option right away, and to feature it so prominently in the article. :-)
Solaris Express != Solaris 10! (Score:4, Informative)
Solaris Express is Sun's program to allow users to preview upcoming versions of Solaris. It IS NOT Solaris 10.
Now you know.
Re:Hopefully (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Hopefully (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
god-awful GNOME? (Score:5, Insightful)
Don't know if your flaimbait was intentional or not, but you should have at least elaborated on why it's "god-awful". In my opinion, Gnome is far less awful than CDE. And although it is less feature-rich and configurable than KDE, its behaviour seems more consistent. That is what businesses and Solaris' market wants. Assuming that KDE is your awe inspiring desktop of course.
Sun's move from CDE to Gnome is a good move, if not from Solaris to Linux completely.
Newsflash (Score:3, Funny)
That's CDE on Solaris 8 -> Gnome Solaris 9 and the users love it. Needs a bit of stability tweaking though it isn't bad. Also a current revision would be nice.
Re:god-awful GNOME? (Score:2, Funny)
That's right, Sun should keep KDE away from Solaris boxes. Experienced CDE-users could have a breakdown if they are suddenly exposed to a desktop with more than four settings
What about pluggable crypto? (Score:2)
Re:What about pluggable crypto? (Score:4)
so while the old crypt style sting looks like this:
Ely3JjNj4Vjz6
and the md5 hashes look like this:
$1$2ZIvIsPP$GqZ5GnNFOm1rgklvylPmP0
the new blowfish strings look like this:
$2a$04$TZ3DP5jgu9s7rbXTJ.i5P.lVl5HX1jWx3BR
(now if only i could find a niceacademic paper that discusses the relative advantages of each one)
I'm currently moving all of our systems from Solaris 8 to 9 and the support for md5 and blowfish in
Solaris 9 (Score:2)
There were assorted hardware updates made as new product lines were rolled out, including all the Serengeti machines and the F15K, all achieved without kernel API changes. But I would guess that there was a shed load of API queuing up for the next Solaris release.
To Sun's very grea
Re:Hopefully (Score:2)
Re:SunOS, anyone? (Score:2, Interesting)
I agree. Especially if it is something they call a "server".
Although traditionally Sun called everything shipped without a graphics card for server. Back in the Sparc days a sparc4 server was cheaper than a sparc4 workstation. Same box basically, but one of them didnt have the graphics card..
Anyway, I have found that the low end workstations in thei
Re:SunOS, anyone? (Score:2, Interesting)
I've been using Unix-clones (BSD and Linux, now happy with SuSE) here and there for almost seven years now, not counting my first brief encounter with a real UNIX on a mainframe circa 1990. I've also read and highly recommend others to read The Unix Haters Handbook [microsoft.com]. Reading it in 2004 makes one cry over Windows that repeated the same mistakes all over again (note where the book resides), and, what's more important, it clear
Re:SunOS, anyone? (Score:5, Insightful)
You can design, write, compile, and test an application on your little one or two-processor workstation. Once you're satisfied that it'll correctly calculate the national debt to 100 significant figures, you can copy it over *completely unchanged* to a 108-CPU Sun E15K and it will run exactly the same. Exactly. Just a little faster.
Platform scalability of that sort is not available from any other vendor that I know of. It's also darn nice when you've got a 4-CPU server that is swamped and want to upgrade to a 32-CPU box. You don't have to change anything. I know a sys-admin who once upgraded their machine by literally swapping out the boot drive. Not exactly elegant (and he didn't tell his boss how he did it so quickly), but it worked for him.
So, you're right: if you're looking for a desktop machine that'll run web browsers and still give you all the CLI goodness of a UNIX or a work-alike, you can get it cheaper elsewhere, although the difference is less than most people think. Have you priced one out recently? Really? Oh yeah, and the support is simply awesome.
--Mid
We get them for the same price as Dell boxes (Score:2)
Re:SunOS, anyone? (Score:5, Insightful)
> the V100s did not boot.
> That's it, we almost ended up with a
> network-enabled FORTH compiler that cost us
> $1500.
My friend bought a new car, and the dealership accidentally gave him the wrong set of keys. That was it, he almost ended up with a sealed glass and metal box that cost him $35000.
One little tiny, easily rectified mistake does not mean the product sucks. If someone dismissed linux because they bought a preinstalled box which didn't boot because of a wrong jumper, would that mean linux was crappy? No. Of course not.
> I'm still glad we didn't wait for tech support
> to react (and I'm pretty sure it would take
> them several more weeks)
Have you ever *used* Sun support? To answer your later question, that's one of the reasons Sun are so expensive. They have great support. If you were on a decent support contract there could have been a guy with you inside an hour with a bag full of V100 parts. If you don't need support, go with linux/bsd or buy Sun kit off ebay.
Once more, FUD-ish Sun-bashing gets modded up as interesting/informative. Replies which dare to defend Sun are usually modded down. Flamebait, troll, whatever. (They should have a "-1 heresy" tag.)
Sun support (Score:3, Insightful)
I have tried to. When I started my first professional C++ project, I bought Sun C++ because at the time it had the reputation for being the best C++ compiler available. Unfortunately, the license key they send me didn't work, so I was unable to actually run the compiler. I spend the first three month of the project simply trying to make Sun send me a working license. And, to be able to do something meanwhile, I downloaded and installed G++ which obviously requires
cheap IDE Seagate drives in low end Sun? (Score:2)
Re:SunOS, anyone? (Score:2)
I'm talking out of personal experience only. We have several SUN workstation that use IDE drives. Said drives tend to last years of normal everyday use. When one of the drivers finally croaked, we replaced with a $100 off the shelf drive (WD). It lasted all of 5 months. After that, we replaced with another off the shelf drive (maxtor, I think) and it
Re:Vapor ports on Sun's! (Score:3, Informative)
Also, provided the usb device supports the mass storage spec, it will also work on a sun.
man scsa2usb