Solaris/x86 rant (was: Any advice on Solaris laptops?)

Thomas Charron twaffle at gmail.com
Thu Jun 21 10:42:47 EDT 2007


On 6/21/07, Tom Buskey <tom at buskey.name> wrote:
> >   An easy one to target is the fact that every few years, Sun decides
> > to phase out Solaris x86, then rekindle it once again.
> They tried to phase out Solaris 9.  Solaris 10 was actively developed on AMD
> chips.  Solaris 11 is being actively developed on AMD and Intel.  Sun now
> sells servers based on AMD (and Intel recently).

  But my point is, historically over the last 10 years, Solaris x86
development cycle has ebbed and flowed back and forth.  I understand
that current versions are being actively developed, but if Sun where
to, say, release a 'new ubah chip', I would not be suprised to see the
x86 version fall to the side once again.

> Solaris x86 isn't going to go away.  I could see the Sparcs going away at
> the low end.

  It already went away at least 2 times.

> >   Additionally, one of the 'features' is Linux binary compatibility,
> > so Solaris x86 can use Linux drivers, as it's own support of x86
> > hardware is limited.
> I'm not sure the binary compatibility helps with drivers.  I know they're
> working on Zones that will allow linux to run inside (BrandZ).

  I know, I appologized to Ben offlist about confusing the two, but
Solaris x86 tends to rely on both binary AND Kernel module
compatibility.

> >   So in the end, you have questionable backing of the product in
> > general, but to make up for lack of support, it can use Linux drivers,
> I don't think this is true nowadays.

  True.  But what about 5 years from now?

> > and even run Linux apps.  So one has to ask.  What's the point?  :-)
> ZFS!  Dtrace.  Zones (though Linux has solutions here too).  A stable API
> with backward compatibility (Solaris 2.6 Sparc apps will run on Solaris 10.
> Will Redhat 6.0 apps run on RHEL 5.0?).  Stability and scaling under load.
> Multiple SMP (I think x86 goes to 32 CPUs.  Sparc goes to hundreds or
> thousands)

  ...  That's based on Distro, *NOT* on Linux in general.  As far as
x86 comparisons, I was not making comparisons of Solaris vs Linux, I
was comparisong Solaris *x86*.

> As a desktop, I think Linux has it all over Solaris though not as much as in
> the past.  As a server, I can see places where Solaris has advantages.  And
> Linux has many advantages too.

  Solaris isn't a server.  A physical MACHINE is a server.  :-)

-- 
-- Thomas


More information about the gnhlug-discuss mailing list