Slashdot Mirror


Unix Isn't Dead

windows bios world writes: "Compaq, Sun, SGI, and IBM are releasing new machines running Unix. From cnet.com: 'Compaq has begun shipping test versions of a new line of AlphaServer Unix servers using the EV7 "Marvel" version of the company's Alpha processor. ... As expected, IBM released on Monday its p670, a 16-processor machine that's essentially a smaller version of Big Blue's top-end 32-processor p690 "Regatta" server introduced in late 2001.' Also, Sun teamed up with Sony to release video-on-demand servers." And of course, there's OS X.

14 of 436 comments (clear)

  1. How by PD · · Score: 4, Informative

    How about a fricking link?

  2. who ever said it was? by dcstimm · · Score: 3, Informative

    Who ever said unix is dying? thats BS!! go to netcraft.com and see what 80% of the people use for their webservers, UNIX! GOD BLESS UNIX

  3. Here's a Link to the Actual Story by nathanm · · Score: 4, Informative

    Here's a link to the actual story. It'd be nice if the /. editors could include it.

  4. Re:64-bit life? by grungeKid · · Score: 2, Informative

    Unix (first OSF/1, then Linux) has been running on 64-bit Alpha processors for the better part of a decade. Also, Solaris and linux runs on 64-bit Ultrasparc processors. Win64 is so late in the game it's not even funny.

    A lot of (C/C++) programs which assume things about how large a int is is going to break spectacularly when compiled to native 64-bit code. I would guess this will be a bigger problem in the proprietary (windows) world, since a lot of open source software is routinely compiled to, packaged for, and tested on Alpha and/or UltraSPARC, so a lot of it is 64-bit clean.

  5. That would have made MUCH more sence... by Matey-O · · Score: 4, Informative

    If the article title was 'ALPHA isn't Dead. Unix's lifespan really isn't in jeopardy.

    --
    "Draco dormiens nunquam titillandus."
  6. Re:bsd by reynaert · · Score: 2, Informative

    According to this diagram of Unix history, the first version of OSF/1 (later True64) was based on a mix of SVR4, 4.2BSD en Mach 2.6. (isn't this true of just about any Unix?)

  7. Re:OSF Mach by Don+Negro · · Score: 3, Informative

    OS X is based on Mach 3.0

    See?

    --

    Don Negro
    Perl 6 will give you the big knob. -- Larry Wall

  8. Re:OSF Mach by Salsaman · · Score: 3, Informative

    Before Tru64 was born, Alpha's and VAXen used to run Digital Unix, created by DEC.

  9. Re:But linux is killing unix..for better or for wo by cmowire · · Score: 3, Informative

    There's a difference between an OS being used and an OS being a viable platform for future growth.

    For example, there's LOTS of people using VMS. Is VMS a viable platform anymore? Probably not, it's just easier for people to buy a newer faster Alpha for their apps then trying to port an app built around VMS features to Unix or Windows.

    What you will likely see is that, as Linux gets better, Solaris/AIX/Irix/etc will get pushed to platforms where Linux isn't yet viable.

    For a company who makes higher-end servers, Linux makes perfect business sense. The OS doesn't sell the hardware, the hardware forces you to use a particular OS, unless it's Windows. Thus, if you can lay off 25% of your OS development staff and put the other 75% to making Linux work on your platform, you save money and get geek points. Your only risk is that nobody else will make the gamble and you will be left holding the bag. Or that your hardware innately sucks and people are buying it because they got locked into your OS many many years ago.

  10. Re:Missing X tools... by weave · · Score: 3, Informative
    X-Window systems was not installed by default.

    X can be easily installed (from what I've been told, I intend to try it tonight). Go to fink.sourceforge.net. Their stuff is pre-compiled and packaged using dpkg.

    The one thing about OS X from user viewpoint is that you just don't see Unix or can even tell it's there... I had to hunt in the app folder to find the terminal app to open up a shell. Not that that was difficult, but the box I saw in the store had terminal in the dock.

  11. Re:64-bit life? by Refried+Beans · · Score: 5, Informative

    IRIX 6.5
    "SGI Fifth Generation 64-Bit UNIX Operating System"
    http://www.sgi.com/software/irix6.5/

    AIX 5.1
    "AIX is fully integrated to support existing 32- and 64-bit hardware..."
    http://www-1.ibm.com/servers/aix/os/ index.html

    Solaris 8
    "Designed for multiprocessing and 64-bit computing..."
    http://www.sun.com/software/solaris /ds/ds-sol8oe/

    Tru64 UNIX
    With a name like that, do you have to ask?
    http://www.tru64unix.compaq.com/index.html

    Any questions?

  12. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 5, Informative

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  13. Re:Silly people *tsk,tsk,tsk* by josh+crawley · · Score: 4, Informative

    Trye, but has it changed? Programs still have problems (crashes). Still the major problems were SUID's.

    Take good old colorview from SGI machines. It was a X-server color profile viewer, but it was suid. Guess what.... it didnt even look to see if it was a valid color profile. You could read people's mailboxes with this one, or the shadow passwd file. My personal opinion of older SGI boxes were that SGI didnt care a rat's ass about thier software. They just whipped crapplications up and gave them all root access.

    Or next in the list, is the /dev/audio bug. This is NOT a crash, but just a weird setting. Older Sun boxes sold in the earliy ninties came with mics. Net admins usually connected it, usually for the novelty. Another detail is that these mics had no ON light or button (you couldnt tell if it's being used or recording) However, Sun screwed up (accidently) in the permissions. it was 0666. For those who don't know *nix, this means everybody can read and write to the sound device (essentially, listen and play over the speakers). Eavesdropping itself is *NOT* a hole. This just let users eavesdrop.

    Bugs have always existed and will always exist. Just saying it really sucked then but now is ok is just a cop out. It sucked at first, cause software is revamped by developers. That doesn't just happen immediately.

  14. Re:It means that Sun is dead meat. by Art+Deco · · Score: 2, Informative

    I thought Sun was dead in the early 90's. They were last in price/performance and they pissed off half their users by pressuring them to migrate from SunOS 4.x to Solaris 2.x which in the beginning really did suck. I thought DEC was the rising star with fast cheap Alpha servers and OSF/1 while bloated at least was comfortable to both BSD and Sys V hacks. Sun continued and with the release of the UltraSPARC CPU was respectable again in price/performance but has been drifting back ever since. The company who has the current hot box will change every year; things like support and preserving your investment are as important as raw performance in business and Sun does a comparitively good job in the other areas. I can tell you horror stories about dealing with IBM when I managed RS6000's at my last employ. I'm not saying that I'd never buy another AIX server but IBM would have to convince me that they do a much better job supporting their hardware and software than they used to. Because of this I'll pay a hefty premium to get a Sun instead of an IBM.