Slashdot Mirror
Solaris 9 Support On x86 - But With A Price
choka writes "According to this ZDNet UK article, Solaris 9 will return to x86 platform for $99 instead of being free. There will also be a $20 early access version for testing. Support and update will cost $75 per month. However there is no mention on the Solaris web site yet." There's more than just not being free -- originally, rumor had it that Sun was not going to be supporting, in a major way, Solaris 9 on x86 at all -- that decision has now been reversed. See our past article for information about the original decision.
I think I'm going to adopt Sun's policy on this one and start charging all my QA testers instead of paying them a salary.
We can all throw out our 32-bit DOS extenders now that Sun has graced us with an x86 UNIX.
I am a little disappointed that Sun has decided to charge for the x86 version of Solaris, but I guess it's better than the alternative of not having one at all. Besides Solaris is quite the advanced operating system and I for one would rather pay $99 for a copy than pay the current price for that Redmond made OS.
Now the $25/month for updates, that worries me.
Signatures are for Nerds!
I thought the whole idea was to get people to try Solaris, and then if they like it to get them to 'upgrade' to Sun Hardware? (You know, the first hit is free...) Or is Sun going to actually support x86? I think it would be wish for Sun to get behind Hammer... Or I think it might just loss out to the lower cost x86-64 based hardware suppliers....
Actually, it isn't. The $99 for the initial cost is not bad, Windows and Mac OS X run for over that. The catcher is the support. Is the support for the testers or just in general? It seems to be ambigious. If its in general then it isn't too bad, that is if you know Solaris. Otherwise, its a bad idea.
It also seems that Solaris is coming to the x86 platform alittle late. Intel is moving away from the x86, and AMD also seems to be moving that way with the bridge with their x86-64.
The time may be wrong, and I don't think many mainstream users (non-Solaris know-how people) will attempt to start to learn it with this move.
Who knows, there may be some network admins that go and get it for their home pc.
both x86 versions and Sparc (I have an Ultra and I run x86 on a Dell Optiplex). Solaris is SLOW on x86 because of I/O. But as a server, it runs like a champ. The funny thing is, It takes a lONG time to get a usable system with Solaris. A default install is practically useless. It takes hours to install GNU tools, Apache and any other tools I need. I've been using Solaris for about a decade, and I STILL forget that you need to edit 2 files to change the IP. (/etc/ifconfig and /etc/nsswitch). I always thought that was dumb. I only remember that I screwed up when CDE no longer works. Oh well. I will not upgrade to x86_9 unless it has REAL benefits.
If you're not a Liberal in your 20's, then you have no heart.If you're still a Liberal in your 30's you have no brain.
You're mistaken. You can download patches from http://sunsolve.sun.com Support is for businesses who want someone to yell at or help replace machines or something like that. Realistically, you don't need to buy the support (I never have and my system is up to date in patches at least).
Solaris has always been just another argument for buying sun servers - that you get support and free updates to the os when you buy the hardware. I mean, if you make your own/buy other unix-based x86 server, what's the point of later buying solaris for it? It won't offer anything more, then, say, linux. Now sun has made their x86 servers look more expensive - that you've got to pay for the updates + service too.
Solaris only makes a real difference on sparcs - and that's where they can charge for it, because if you already have a sparc server, then you are much more likely to pay money for a solaris update, then if you have an x86 server and the ability to switch to other OSes without losing performance or compatibility.
Join the elite! Post at score:2! Ghostwheel is online.
I used to work in the group at Sun that promoted Solaris on Intel. There is a core group of morons that is very good at dodging layoffs, signing large contracts that don't deliver revenue, and bitching to Scott McNealy that Solaris on Intel really isn't dead. This leads to all sorts of pathological decisions.
Solaris is an operating system, and a pretty good one. Solaris generally has oddly optimized drivers for large boxes that make it very useful for large sites. Also, Solaris is the vehicle for pushing Sun's special talent; networking more processors more effectively. Solaris on SPARC works well.
Solaris on Intel is the bastard child of an unresolved angst over controlling the client desktop. Sun has never figured out that it has a special weakness against making a decent client. Sun has never turned around to the niche market and embraced Apple clients, or PC clients, or anyone else. The wierd waffling on Solaris on Intel is a sickness from a lack of decision.
The problem will not go away until the group is fired. Deal with it.
As soon as this story was posted, this discussion forum seemed to turn into a Solaris-bashing free-for-all, filled with a bunch of uninformed attacks on the performance of Solaris and a bunch of trolling about how Linux or BSD performs so much better. These are the same kind of people who complain about Microsoft spreading lies (FUD) about Linux, but these hypocrites have no problems doing the same regarding Solaris, because it doesn't fit into their open source ideology.
I have been a Linux user for years, and I love Linux for lots of reasons. But I make my living doing parallel/numerical computing research and I know from runnings lots and lots of performance studies that Solaris beats Linux handily in several situations. I have seen vastly better performance under Solaris (compared to Linux) with some of my codes because of better cache management, superior mmap() implementation, and better job scheduling in the presence of system memory shortages. Solaris isn't just a unix that is for people "too stupid" to use a free OS. There is a huge amount of manpower devoted to its development, and in many respects it is quite clever. For certain categories of codes, it outperforms Linux handily. I'm not saying that Solaris is better than Linux. I am saying that it is foolish and ignorant to bash the performance of Solaris simply because it is not open source.
This is... bizarre.
I don't know anyone who runs Solaris on a x86 because they like Solaris on an x86, but it's a very good platform for keeping current on your Sun sysadmin and netadmin skills or prepping for the cert exams.
And that, in turn, affects our employer's decision on which hardware to buy when they need honking big servers.
Microsoft, for all of its other faults, does understand that the developers and admins are key people to get in the loop. These programs can be a real pain if you're a small consulting firm, but if they think you're large enough to be throwing business their way you can get access to a lot of software so your familiarity with it may be a line item when the CIO decides which package to purchase.
So why is Sun pissing on the SCSAs and SCNAs? They don't need to worry about the people who are already using Solaris-on-Sparcs at work, they need to worry about the people who are using HP/UX or AIX or Linux or *BSD and might not remain current on what Solaris offers unless they have that low-cost box to play with.
For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong. -- H L Mencken
Here's the Heliopod blurb *cough*shameless plug*cough* from Oct 4:
By the way, TechTarget.com posted an interview with Chris Baker, Sun's Product Manager for Solaris x86. They discuss quite a few aspects of the OS, including support, driver development, and pricing plans. If you run x86, it's probably worth checking out.-- null
This is a serious question!
What's the reason to run Solaris on x86 instead of Linux or Free/Open/Net BSD? From what I've heard it's slower and has much less support for hardware, besides the fact that it's so conservative that I often bang my head on the desk and install GNU stuff on all Solarisboxes we have at work..
The only reason I can think of is to learn it so one can put "Solaris" on the "list of things I know" when looking for a new job...
My other account has a 3-digit UID.
For $99 you get a great OS, which is a nice start, but what all businesses really want is to know that there will be someone there providing support if they run into trouble. They can't just rely on the open source community hacking up a quick solution "once I'm done playing Quake".
$75/month wouldn't even show up on the balance sheet of any decent business and would be well worth paying to guarantee your supplier will be there when you need them i.e. they didn't go bust.
I develop bespoke software for a living and part of what we provide for all out clients is a service level agreement, which means they pay us x pounds a month, and we guarantee them x days of work and support on their apps each month. Without this arrangement their applications would soon become abandonware.
All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain.
The point is not that people are actually running Solaris x86 on a high end server box. They're (me included) throwing it on one of the hundred or so old P3 500's you have in the back room(thanks to the dot.com layoffs) to add another service to an existing Sun environment. I run a small web development farm, consisting of 5 Sun Netra T1's and X1's. No big whoop. But you should hear the laughter from Up Above when I need to roll out, say, a Proxy server, and ask for $2000 + for another Netra. Why bother, when I have all those P3's gathering dust.
Sure, I could throw Linux on them, but keeping the same OS across the board was important.
I just got my Solaris 8 Admin I cert, and guess which platform I did the majority of my studying on? x86, right. No one cares if I kill test servers left and right. Hearing the screams from Up Above when I accidentally down the development Oracle DB (or Weblogic App server) for our $2 million dollar app is not cool. (Granted, I did have to come in on weekends to learn the OpenBoot PROM crap, but whatever.)
So the point, (from Sun's perspective?), of Solaris 9 x86 isn't that its going to be doing hard-core production work right next to your Sun 220R screamers. No, its that you: a) use it to get more familiar / get certified with the SPARC version, b) deploy it on cheap and already available machines, for low-end projects, and proof-of-concept projects.
i don't think sun is aiming this at nerdy-home-geeks watching for hardware on ebay.
most people, and corporations, DON'T buy used hardware as much cheaper it could get.. especially not from ebay, ever heard about corporate buying decision based on ebay availability?
also, show me the sweet sun machine going under 100$ that's got plenty of power by todays pc standards?
the 'solaris available on x86-> people run to buy sun hardware from ebay with older solaris' thought chain doesn't work. it's like saying 'people can play n64 games on pc-> people run to buy used n64's. '
world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
...buying more expensive, used hardware with an old version of Solaris.
You don't quite understand. New versions of Solaris, such as 8 and 9, work fine on older hardware. Sun does discontinue support for really old hardware, but they are up-front about it in their release notes. A good example: I run Solaris 8 on an early-90's-vintage SPARCstation 10.
Also, used Sun hardware is very reasonably priced if you shop around. Some vendors are arrogant and still think they can charge like-new prices, but other vendors are very competitive. If you don't mind a little more risk, there are incredible deals on auction sites, like EBay.
There are genuine advantages of Sun-branded hardware over most x86 hardware. OpenBoot firmware (OS-independent configuration and diagnostics), very rugged enclosures, redundant cooling fans, clean component layout, and SCSI on the real workstations (modern low-end Sun's have IDE).
Linux, NetBSD, and OpenBSD run on Sun hardware, too, in addition to Solaris, but Solaris will consistently provide the best hardware support, except, perhaps, for a few older peripherals (24-bit 3-slot SBus graphics, for example).
Don't forget, what I said above also applies to other used RISC-based hardware, as SGI, HP, DEC, etc. have active secondary markets.
The only advantage of x86 is really percieved cost, but that isn't always true. I've had much more "top quality" x86-based hardware (motherboards and modems mainly) fail than Sun-branded hardware seeing similar use. Support costs for Sun hardware really can be quite low (formal Sun support is very optional; if you don't know whether you need it, you probably don't).
Healthcare article at Kuro5hin
I haven't heard "Slowlaris" since the mid nineties. I guess the System V vs. BSD debate is still going strong. Or, more likely, the poster just thinks the term has a nice ring to it.
/.'ers.
History of the term "Slowlaris" (according to me):
A long time ago there was a mobo named SUN, the Stanford University Networking board. Some folks took this tech and turned it into a product.
They needed an OS for their computer and, after losing their way initially, they eventually stopped upon unix, the Berkeley Standard Distribution (BSD). They used BSD as the base and created their OS, which they called, unimaginitivly enough, SunOS.
Time passed, Sun made more and more products, and eventually deciding on a multiprocessor architecture for their workstations. This decision ate up huge amounts of silicon and resulted in a dog of a machine called the sparc 10. The main problem was that there were no multithreaded applications for the multiprocessor hardware. That and the concentration on multiprocessor hardware meant that the cpus, on their own were pretty slow, AND, not to mention the fact that the cpus and mobos were so expensive, owing to the smp arch , that most clients could only afford 1 cpu.
Anyway, around this time Sun thought that, going forward they needed a better kernel to support all this smp shit, so they started on a new kernel, and, why stop there, a new layout to the entire OS.
About this time there was the BSD-SVR5 holy war going on. Most people probably don't realize that before MS, people actually used to argue about which unix was best.
So they renamed SunOS to Solaris 1 and then introduced a new SVR5 OS called Solaris 2. Nobody likes change and Solaris 2 didn't exactly make your sparc 10 run any faster, so most users kept on running SunOS (er. Soalris 1).
This is where the term "Slowlaris" came into vogue, the BSD'ers who didn't like the switch to system 5, talked up the fact that Solaris was sooo much slower than SunOS. Which was not entirely inaccurate, but the real issue was more likely the shitty software they were running on top of the OS.
And then NT and the MS marketing machine hit like an atom bomb and, if not for Sun and Gnu/Linux would probably have moved unix onto the os scrap heap with cpm, amiga, and all those other "speedy" os's loved by