Slashdot Mirror


Sun Java Desktop 2 Review

Anon. writes "Linux.com is carrying a pretty damning review of Sun Java Desktop System version 2. JDS seemed to have issues with almost each and every machine the author tested it on, support was quite bad - and to top it all, the software comes with a seven page license document. Something seems to be terribly wrong somewhere - otherwise why would Sun decide to ship JDS with kernel 2.4.19 at this stage?" (Slashdot and Linux.com are both part of OSDN.)

44 of 304 comments (clear)

  1. Kernel versions are very often "behind" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Something seems to be terribly wrong somewhere - otherwise why would Sun decide to ship JDS with kernel 2.4.19 at this stage ?"

    I dunno. Why are you not asking a similar question of Debian???

    1. Re:Kernel versions are very often "behind" by gorre · · Score: 5, Informative

      I dunno. Why are you not asking a similar question of Debian???

      Because Debian has pre-built images and source packages for up to and including 2.6.5 and 2.4.26?

      --
      "Madness is something rare in individuals - but in groups, parties, peoples, ages it is the rule." -- Nietzsche
    2. Re:Kernel versions are very often "behind" by Curtman · · Score: 3, Funny

      Why are you not asking a similar question of Debian???

      Haha, thats hillarious. Mmmmmmm, Sun is baaad.. Mmmmkay?

    3. Re:Kernel versions are very often "behind" by elmegil · · Score: 3, Insightful
      Well, I don't know about that. JDS is targeted to corporate desktop users. The x86 hardware we sell is targeted to "edge servers" aka web servers et. al. and is all rack-mount equipment. At least today.

      On the other hand, the chances of a corporate entity rolling out a lot of cutting edge desktops like the power users bitching about this are having problems with is REALLY unlikely. Personally, I'm running JDS 2 on my Sony VAIO PCG-K15 laptop which I just bought three weeks ago, and there were two problems, neither of them particularly difficult. 1) to get video drivers for the ATI 354M ICG card I had to download some mods from SuSE which were not terribly difficult to find (and the default drivers worked, they just didn't give me full color depth and resolution), and 2) to use the Atheron wireless chipset I had to use the madwifi drivers available from sourceforge. I bring up the interfaces manually because the stupid dhcpcd when it tries to run on two interfaces and only one is active, the inactive one stupidly copies the "original" resolv.conf back over after it times out--of course this isn't Sun's fault.

      I dunno, these power user "negative" reviews of JDS because it's not the latest and greatest cutting edge stuff just don't seem to get it. JDS is (as far as I can tell anyway) primarily targetted at corporate windows users, not Linux power users.

      And of course, I'm just speaking off the top of my head; while I do work for Sun, I am not part of the JDS product groups, nor do I speak in any official capacity for Sun.

      --
      7 November 2006: The day Americans realized corruption and incompetence weren't addressing 11 September 2001
  2. Seven page license document? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Wow, they really shortened it.

  3. here is why they'd use 2.4.19 by jbellis · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Corporate clients are far more interested in stability than in the latest & greatest. Look how long RH goes between updates of their workstation and advanced server lines.

    Java Desktop R2 seems to be more of an upgrade to the bundled apps. Nothing really major here.

    1. Re:here is why they'd use 2.4.19 by Welsh+Dwarf · · Score: 4, Insightful

      in that case use 2.4.26, old tree, stable. Seriously, doesn't 2.4.19 have some serious security bug (read local root exploit)?

      --
      Ask 8 slackers a question, get 10 awnsers (a citation, but I can't remember from who)
  4. Disclosure by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Paper documentation would be nice. How are you supposed to read PDF files on a CD if you can't even get the system working?
    Maybe they have to say in the box to use any Windows PC to read the manual before install.

  5. The problem here seems to be hardware support... by TexasDex · · Score: 5, Interesting
    but for once this doesn't appear to be the manufacturers' fault.

    Trouble with hard disks, especially SATA but also regular ATA, seems to be a common problem this guy is having. That should not be a problem with any modern Linux distro, and why Java Desktop manages to screw it up I suppose we'll see.

    I'm waiting for the next version.

    --
    The Cheese Stands Alone.
  6. Media Bias by turgid · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Sun isn't flavour of the month in the media just now, and especially in the "Linux" media, where Sun is considered to be in league with Microsoft and SCO. To expect a fair and balanced review from linux.com is therefore misguided.

    1. Re:Media Bias by KimiDalamori · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It's one thing to assume that us "Linux bigots" are going to tell you that Sun's product is harder to use than Linux, or that their desktop is uglier than GNOME or KDE. But if the product does not install correctly, that's probably a bit more serious than just "media bias".

      --
      Lagito ergo expectabo
    2. Re:Media Bias by ValourX · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I was there when the reviewer did the install, and I believe everything I write.

      I tried different hard drives on different computers. I tried four different configurations, three of which were distinctly different. Sun could have easily updated the kernel in JDS2 but they chose not to.

      It's not my fault they shipped a prehistoric kernel. Did you expect me to write a puff piece on an operating environment that doesn't work on all of my test equipment?

      -Jem

    3. Re:Media Bias by njcoder · · Score: 5, Informative
      Sun has open sourced a lot of products. JFS is good but I don't know of many people using it and can't think of any distributions that use it as their default filesystem. What else has IBM open sourced?

      With sun you have the obvious OpenOffice and NFS. They've also open sourced a lot of other software and have provided resources for other projects. Have a look at http://www.sunsource.net/ to see how much Sun contributes to open source projects. People don't like some of the licenses Sun uses because it gives Sun too much control still. Having something GPL'd doesn't make that any better. Just look at what happend with Emacs and XEmacs when a company started paying the FSF to make enhancements to Emacs that they needed but had an uphill battle with RMS who had final say into what happened with Emacs. That's when XEmacs was forked out of it.

      Sun has contributed a lot of code to Gnome (accessibility api, work on sawfish, improved usability, tons of documentation and help). They do provide kenel patches, Tim Hockins used to be very active on the linux kernel mailing lists when Sun was working on Sun Linux and still supporting Cobalt servers.

      Also Sun is pushing a linux desktop, JDS. And it's pushing hard in different areas. Where is IBM in this? IBM's take on linux, provide it with our servers since we can run websphere on it so that websphere seems cheaper because you don't "have" to buy a Windows Server OS.

      Also do a search on the kernel mailing lists. You'll see more references to Solaris than to AIX. Sun had published a lot of papers regarding how they did things and these served as a good guide for many linux kernel hackers. You'll see lots of comparisons to how sun does things. Not just how well it performs to solaris but actually details on how it was implemented in solaris, especially in the case where solaris performed better.

      Not saying that linux is a rip off of solaris in case anyone misreads that. I'm saying that Sun has a history for supporting open standards and shares a lot of what it knows and people could benefit from that. Tanenbaum

      Everyone needs to remember Open Source is not Linux. Sun does a lot with the Apache Software Foundation.

      Sun even provides "scholarships" for open source projects and non profit entities to pay for licensing of some of it's technology that for profit entities have to pay for.

      Pointing to a list of kernel changes made in one version to indicate that IBM is the better open source participant is a limited view of open source.

      I don't listen to much that RMS has to say. Only so many people in this world can be college proffessors, develop software for free and eventually get a few 100k every so often in awards and money in speaking engagments. The majority of software developers need to be able to make money developing software, they don't have the luxury of clinging to such lofty ideals. How far would all of this gone if RMS had a family to support? Maybe this is why RMS has no family to support? According to him, his child is the GNU project. How many of you can do something like that? Nothing against RMS, it takes a lot of dedication to do what he's doing but it's not very practical for everyone to be doing that.

      The Java Community Process Sun set up is pretty good. Individual membership is free. You can help guide the direction of Java. It helps keep things from really going to far astray the way Sun set it up. Which is good for the people that build apps on Java.

      Open sourcing Java doesn't really do much for the developer community as most developers build on top of Java, not in it. The people that would benefit would be people like IBM, BEA and Oracle as well as OS companies. The majority of the developer community is made up of the ones building their apps on top of j2se and j2ee. Open Source some great tools and then you're talking. Sun opensourced NetBeans. There's a lot of debate over NetBeans vs IBM's Eclipse. I'v

  7. A bit irresponsible by mariox19 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I guess Sun deserves what it gets, but I think the reviewer was a bit irresponsible. Perhaps he had a deadline and couldn't wait around for replacement media (assuming that you still couldn't rule out defective media) or for Sun support to resolve the issue. I think however that it would have been a much more useful review if the reader found out exactly why the reviewer couldn't get it installed on all but one machine and couldn't get it to run on the machine on which it did install.

    I'm left wondering if it wasn't in fact defective media, and just how bad Sun's support is: meaning, what does it take to get a problem resolved.

    --

    quiquid id est, timeo puellas et oscula dantes.

    1. Re:A bit irresponsible by slamb · · Score: 4, Insightful
      I guess Sun deserves what it gets, but I think the reviewer was a bit irresponsible. Perhaps he had a deadline and couldn't wait around for replacement media (assuming that you still couldn't rule out defective media) or for Sun support to resolve the issue.

      He did everything right.

      First, he made a reasonable attempt to install it. He tried several computers; he tried both the graphical interface and the text one. If there had been a "check media" option (like RedHat's installer has), I'll assume he would have used it, given the other steps he took. Defective media is understandable. But we don't know that's the problem, because they didn't provide a way to check. Why not?

      Then he called support. He didn't use any special reviewers-only support channel. He called the normal number like everyone else has to. He got the same horrible support experience. And he criticized them for it. Why do we just let large companies off for having horrible support? Why don't we yell and scream until they do better?

    2. Re:A bit irresponsible by LuxFX · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I guess Sun deserves what it gets, but I think the reviewer was a bit irresponsible. Perhaps he had a deadline and couldn't wait around for replacement media (assuming that you still couldn't rule out defective media) or for Sun support to resolve the issue

      Whether or not you think the reviewer could have done more -- the reviewer definately did more than Joe User would. If a reviewer 'only' tried installation on three or four computers, that's still three or four more than most people have access to.

      --
      Punctanym: alternate spelling of words using punctuation or numerals in place of some or all of its letters; see 'leet'
  8. pretty sluggish on a relatively powerful machine by very · · Score: 5, Informative

    Used it on P4 2.4GHz, Geforce4 Ti 4200, 1GB RAM

    It's so sluggish on this particular machine.
    SUSE 9.1 Live CD works better on this particular machine.

    That's what I've experienced.

    asdf

  9. Dead company walking... by hagbard5235 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Sun's pretty much a dead company walking.

    Their hardware is more expensive, and slower.

    Their OS is less feature rich, but has more bugs, and doesn't perform as well in most cases as Linux.

    Look around, everyone who possibly can is getting off of Suns and onto Linux x86. The major things holding most of Suns customers back in this regard are proprietary software support, and that's improving all the time.

    And as to Java... I'm not sure exactly how they intend to make money there... IBM does the Java services market SOOOO much better than Sun does.

    1. Re:Dead company walking... by mrm677 · · Score: 4, Informative

      Their hardware is more expensive, and slower.

      Slower for single-threaded cache-bound apps, absolutely. But Sun hardware has superior multiprocessor performance, scalability, and memory bandwidth. It is also far more reliable. I point you to this anecdotal story about what happened when photo.net moved from Sun to Dell hardware.

      Their OS is less feature rich, but has more bugs, and doesn't perform as well in most cases as Linux.

      Oh man, Solaris has far more enterprise features than Linux. Intimate shared memory, a performance counter interface, hot-swappable CPU support, a solid device driver interface, the list goes on and on. And the future is multiprocessors...Sun has a huge advantage with Solaris as it readily scales beyond 100 processors out-of-the-box. The Linux stock kernel scales to what, 8 processors maybe, until falling flat on its face due to lock contention.

    2. Re:Dead company walking... by hagbard5235 · · Score: 3, Informative

      Since another poster was kind enough to address most of your software points, I'll address the hardware:

      Chip for chip the UltraSparc is slower:

      1.28Ghz Ultra IIIi (the newest Sun chip for which
      I can get spec benchmarks):

      Specint: 704
      http://www.specbench.org/cpu2000/results/res2 004q1 /cpu2000-20040112-02710.html

      Specfp: 1063
      http://www.specbench.org/cpu2000/results/res 2004q1 /cpu2000-20040112-02709.html

      Opteron 146:
      Specint: 1354
      http://www.specbench.org/cpu2000/results/res 2004q1 /cpu2000-20040209-02854.html
      Specfp: 1394
      http://www.specbench.org/cpu2000/results/res 2004q1 /cpu2000-20040112-02709.html

      So the Opteron is about twice as fast at int and 30% faster at float. So while you can get more processors from Sun than an x86 base, you may not get more performance.

    3. Re:Dead company walking... by hagbard5235 · · Score: 3, Informative
      Yes, now all they need to do is spend the 6 billion in cash they have and stop grossing 1+ bill in revenue per quarter.

      Umm... if you check their financials you'll see they only have about 2.7 billion in cash:

      http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ks?s=SUNW

      And they are carrying about 1.47 Billion in debt. Given that they ran a negative cashflow of -20 million dollars last year, they could keep this up for some time. You revenue is irrelavent, it's your earnings and cash flow that count.

      Do 400,000+ transactions per hour 24/7 on your home built pc and get back to me.

      That must be why there are no Sun boxes in the TPC-C top ten.

      http://www.tpc.org/tpcc/results/tpcc_perf_results. asp

      I guess if you want your corporate IT department to rival that of a medium sized College, you could squeeze extra performance out of Linux.

      Or you could field twice that many people managing your relationships with the proprietary providers of the software you need. In most cases it's the proprietary code that is the bottleneck (in my experience in industry). Or you could also field extra sysadmins to work on compiling and integrating all the FOSS programs that your users actually need that Solaris doesn't ship with.

      Oh... and working around the issues and problems with Solaris, like the fact that they screwed up their version of BPF so badly that the libpcap folks found it was faster to filter in user space. Or the fact that their packet sniffing interface doesn't hand over the whole frame received, but trunkates it for you to the size indicated by the ethernet header making them useless for certain kinds of tasks. Or the million and one other little things that are broken in Solaris that will NEVER be fixed.

  10. Available distros suck ATM by ultrabot · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The Linux distro scene is in a rather bad state ATM:

    1) Debian sarge release was pushed further on - and you have to go via knoppix to install Debian on a modern SATA machine, leaving the system in a messy state. Obviously the Debian (non-)release is a standing joke, but Sarge will be so late, it's not even funny anymore

    2) FC2 was released, and it has several showstopper bugs (it keeps on crashing for me, it eats partition tables for dinner, keyboard layouts don't work, etc, etc). I'm sticking with FC1. FC1, OTOH, seriously rocks, once you beef it up with KDE 3.2 and kernel 2.6. FC1 is the best Linux I've ever used, and I was hoping it wouldn't stay that way after FC2 :-(.

    3) Suse is still non-free-beer. Come on Novell, letting hobbyists dabble with it at home isn't going to hurt anyone.

    So what's left, then? Mandrake, Gentoo? Warez version of RHEL? WBEL?

    And on the topic of JDS: they are always thrashed in reviews, but the media keeps hyping how "integrated" the system is, and finally Linux is of commercial quality. Go figure.

    --
    Save your wrists today - switch to Dvorak
    1. Re:Available distros suck ATM by (H)elix1 · · Score: 4, Informative

      3) Suse is still non-free-beer. Come on Novell, letting hobbyists dabble with it at home isn't going to hurt anyone.

      SuSE is free-as-in-beer, but you don't get an ISO install. Got to use the FTP installer, which is a pain but works. Novell also opened up YAST, the only bit of special sauce that had another license recently.

    2. Re:Available distros suck ATM by Netsnipe · · Score: 3, Informative
      1) Debian sarge release was pushed further on - and you have to go via knoppix to install Debian on a modern SATA machine, leaving the system in a messy state. Obviously the Debian (non-)release is a standing joke, but Sarge will be so late, it's not even funny anymore
      Not true; get your facts straight. The Debian Installer Beta 4 is working fine for 10 architectures at the moment and can be used to install a clean testing ("Sarge") or unstable ("Sid") system. You can also generate new Sarge CDs using Jigdo that will use the new installer. It's also using the 2.4.25 kernel right now and handles the popular SATA chipsets fine.

      --
      -- "I can't tell the future, I just work there." -- The Doctor
  11. I tried the OS and... by pyrotic · · Score: 3, Insightful

    All these distro reviews are so superficial. This one was worse than most. Rather than complain about how his fave window manager isn't included, he complains about how he couldn't intall it on his hot-rodded PC. So having not installed it, he doesn't have too much to bitch about.

    I'm probably the only one around here who wants to know how a distro functions for the purposes of doing usefull work. Reviews of the install process are pretty pointless, unless your interest is in cloning large numbers of X clients or servers. Next!

    1. Re:I tried the OS and... by clk23 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I would generally agree that many distribution reviews are lacking in actual content. However, I don't believe this review is pointless.

      The guy tried four different systems, two of which were 'hot-rodded,' one of which was a pretty standard budget PC config, and the last of which as an older laptop. I think it's a valid point to illustrate that he couldn't get the thing to successfully install on any of those systems.

      And, further, I think it's a valid point to describe the support structure and quality of support he received when trying to resolve the problem.

      The install process is important. I've personally grown tired of encountering install processes which require pseudo-arcane knowledge, loads of custom configuration, and hours of hand-holding. Show me something that offers an install that is functional, intuitive, while still offering options for customization, and I'll be impressed.

  12. Solaris...? by psi42 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    With all this abysmal hardware support and horrid tech support, I often recall that Sun has made many a conficting statement in the past, and also that Solaris, Sun's glowing flagship, is still Top Dog as far as this 7-page-license company is concerned.

    I would believe that running JDS on linux is just a prototype, to generate hype especially among the linux crowd.
    Sun seems to be going out of its way to implement this on Solaris...perhaps the final incarnation of JDS will be on Solaris itself, without any Linux or GNU code at all, and completely proprietary. It seems that they will say "Linux just isn't up to par, but if you upgrade to the $599 Solaris JDS, all your hardware will work."

    Or so it seems.

    --
    Defenestrate Windows...
  13. Re:This begs the question by Tarantolato · · Score: 5, Informative

    JDS isn't really another distro; it's preconfigured SuSE. What JDS offers, which no one else does, is ready plugability into Sun's Java Enterprise System server stack. (Unlike JDS, JES actually is substantially Java-based).

    The usefulness of JDS would hinge on how good JES is. So far I haven't found a good review of it, either alone or in comparison with similar stacks from Novell, IBM, Microsoft, etc.

    C'mon, OSDN, let's get with the program.

  14. No Problems Here by cbowland · · Score: 4, Informative
    I installed JDS version 2 on Friday on a generic pc at work without any problems. Don't have the exact specs, but nothing should be older than a year. From what I could tell, the only difference between JDS Release1 and Release 2 is the addition of the client piece for the Sun Control Station. I will be installing that on Monday. BTW, the requirements for SCS are a little goofy, as least to me.
    Software
    • Red Hat Enterprise Linux AS/ES 2.1
    • J2SE Version 1.4.1_03 or higher.
    • Tomcat 4.0.3 or higher
    • Desktops running Sun Java Desktop System, Release 2

    Hardware
    • 600 Mhz Intel Compatible processor or better
    • 512 MB of RAM
    • 160 GB hard drive, at least 400 MB of free disk space in the directory /var
    • 10/100 Base-T Ethernet network interface
    Kinda steep on the HD size. Plus, what the deal with requiring Red Hat? Doesn't Sun have its own linux or Solaris for x86? For what's it worth, Sun has a great opportunity in the corporate desktop market. I hope the can get some traction with this effeort.
    --

    Give a man a fish and he will eat for a day.
    Teach him to eat and he will fish forever.

  15. You can copy SUSE CDs! by SoTuA · · Score: 4, Informative
    You can copy the CDs freely and install it on n+1 machines, but you can't _sell_ those copies or sell machines with SUSE preinstalled unless you sell them the license (and the CDs, and the manuals, and...)

    An email was sent to SUSE to settle an ongoing discussion on the legality of copying the CDs in the local unix/linux newsgroup chile.comp.unix :)

    This is from the response email from Frank Schmachel of the SUSE sales team:

    Many thanks for your inquiry to our SUSE PreSales Service and your interest in SUSE LINUX.

    Most applications that come with the SUSE LINUX distribution are licensed with GPL or LGPL, some have their own licenses.

    Each of these licenses applies to the single package it comes with and allows you to make as many copies of the software as you want and give them to whoever you want, provided you do not _sell_ the software. You may sell support for the software, but not the software itself. Also, you have to make the source code available for free.

    SUSE LINUX as a Linux distribution is a work with its own rights. Our license can be found on CD1 as /COPYRIGHT.yast. This license too allows you to make as many copies and installations as you want from one set of discs, provided you do not long for or get any kind of reward for it. Reward implies value in money, benefit in kind and supply >of services.

    This also implies that it is _not_ allowed to install SUSE LINUX on machines that you will sell except that you will sell a full license (boxed CD set and books) with the machine to the customer.

    So you can copy the SUSE cds. Why don't they offer the ISOs directly is beyond me. More user familiarization with the product would lead to more recommendations when it comes to buying enterprise-supported linux.

  16. what sort of user is Sun targetting? by dankelley · · Score: 3, Interesting
    According to my tests, the answer is...
    1. Not science folks like me, given the lack of (f2c or g77) fortran, which means no Octave for my analysis and no R for statistics.
    2. Not home users, given the non-inclusion of e.g. a working movie viewer. (Their java media player was completely busted -- it showed a few frames and then died.)
    3. Not cutting-edge linuxers, given the use of the 2.4 kernel.
    4. Not the home market, given the use of soffice (aka openoffice) which still won't handle complex msoffice documents well, and given the use of a stumbling movie viewer.
    5. Not future java-app users, since the java apps included (movie viewer, text editor) are ugly and slow.
    Having noted the above in my own tests, I switched back to Fedora for my home box [my work boxes are osx and solaris]. Using fedora [core 2] gives me (a) a newer kernel, (b) newer versions of software such as openoffice and mozilla and (c) easier updates.

    The real advantage may be in work-groups that have loads of existing Suns as well as linux boxes; there is benefit in having a similar GUI and similar software on each. This reveals the answer to the question of my subjectline, I argue.

  17. We had a SUN demo by novakane007 · · Score: 4, Informative

    We had a rep into our office to demo JD from SUN. I haven't tooled around with the live CD that we were given, but to be honest I wasn't very impressed. We asked about why everything is so old on it and they said it was designed that way for stability. The market focus in their mind was for large numbers of very simple desktops, like call centers. The strength of the system is that it can be completely remotely managed on the fly. Application and OS properties can be manipulated on a central server which are then replicated to the desktops. This was demonstrated by changing the desktop colors on the central repository. After a few minutes the background magically changed on the desktop machine. The modifications can be made to a set of standard apps like mozilla, evolution and staroffice. For example you could push out a new proxy server setting to every client. The limitation is that you can't add to the managed apps. For example if you wanted to use KDE instead of the default Gnome you could no longer remotely manage it. Or if you wanted to use opera instead of mozilla, etc. Keep in mind this is still a very young product and they were frank in telling us that a lot of work is still being done. That being said I just don't see this desktop catching on. Suse 9.1 on the other hand is a terrific product that Novell is spending a pile of development dollars on. SUN shouldn't be wasting it's time fragmenting the desktop competition. Let RedHat and Suse duke that one out.

    --

    WURD!!
  18. Sun doesn't know how to approach this by ChiralSoftware · · Score: 3, Insightful
    Rolling your own desktop distro is a subtle thing. Sun has always been a hardware company, and so they have always had control over the hardware their OS runs on. They have never yet had to deal with the tangled mess that is PC hardware, with conflicts, obscure devices, and all the rest of it. And the one thing missing most from the Sun Java desktop is Java. Where are all the Java apps? Sun should be all over this: "The Sun Java Desktop is a collection of apps, protocols and file formats which let you run your desktop environment anywhere that runs Java. We have partnered with Suse and Redhat to provide an environment which we certify is Sun Java Desktop compatible, but any Java 1.4 environment will work." What about doing that? But Sun is not doing that. Is anyone? Yes. But if you look at their website, you see that they are backed by American investors, but not Sun! What's going on? Sun should buy them and make that the cornerstone of the Java desktop.

    In future, if Sun really wants something it can call the Sun Java Desktop, it would have all the applications in Java, and a Java runtime which is perfectly integrated into the OS, like OS X's Java environment.

    -----------
    WAP Apache software

  19. Linux has those features too by r00t · · Score: 3, Interesting
    Intimate shared memory
    We call this hugetlb, or did. The name keeps changeing. All this really means is that you support shared memory locked into RAM, hopefully with some sort of large-page notion.

    a performance counter interface
    We call this oprofile. We also have the user-space kcachegrind and the perfmon patch, so you get some choice on Linux.

    hot-swappable CPU support
    We have this too. It works great on IBM's zSeries mainframe. Oh, PC hardware? Solaris can't do that either because the hardware will die if you go ripping out a CPU.

    solid device driver interface
    Nice non-factual FUD there... you work for Sun? Linux has a sane, clean, simple, and high-performance driver interface. This is because the kernel developers don't contort the design to be more tolerant of binary drivers.

    And the future is multiprocessors...
    Your "beyond 100" is nothing to a 512-way SGI Altix running Linux. There are 1024-way systems under development. Sun can't touch this.

    1. Re:Linux has those features too by Decaff · · Score: 3, Informative

      And the future is multiprocessors...
      Your "beyond 100" is nothing to a 512-way SGI Altix running Linux. There are 1024-way systems under development. Sun can't touch this.


      Even the Altix doesn't touch this - its a supercluster system. The suggested configuration for individual nodes is pretty small - a max of 12 or 16 processors. You can specify up to 256 processors, but its unlikely to scale well unless you are using specialised application code.

  20. Re:This begs the question by mcc · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Do we really need another distro?

    A few years ago when Gentoo popped up, a lot of people said "Do we really need another distro? We already have RedHat, and Debian, and SUSE."

    Now, a few years later, RedHat has abandoned its consumer line to a group of volunteers (Fedora), Debian is just.. years behind the other distributions in terms of installed software and catching up at a snail's pace (leaving its excellent toolset and great stability a bit frustratingly useless in practice for the main distro), and SUSE has been purchased by Novell (which has turned out to be benevolent, but it might as likely have turned out not to be). Meanwhile Gentoo, while still not yet a general purpose solution, is maturing at a great rate and is currently a far more attractive solution for many people's purposes than any of these.

    I'd say then that the answer to "Do we really need another distro?" Is always yes. The more the merrier. Choice and redundancy are good things.

  21. I can understand the problems but... by the+melon · · Score: 5, Informative

    I think the reviewer needs to take into account the target audience of JDS. The reviewer certainly dose not fall into this category.

    I have installed JDS 2 on a Emachines 6805 Athlon 64 notebook with almost no trouble. The only issues were ACPI, built in wireless and Video. The video was an ATI Radeon 9600 that was not supported by the version of the XF86 driver in JDS. Simply download the ATI FGL drivers from ATI and install/configure. Worked great. As far as ACPI is concerned your just going to have to disable it. Most mainboard implementations of ACPI are horribly buggy anyways and Linux kernels have not until 2.6.3(read the change logs, almost everything was from Intel and ACPI related) had very good/complete support of it anyways. The built in wireless was something that had windows only drivers and I did not have the time to try the NDIS wrappers tool.

    I have people in my office that have JDS2 running with little effort on IBM T40's, Toshiba Tecra M1/S1, Toshiba M100, various desktops including Dell PW650, Tyan K8W based Dual Opterons, HP XW4100 workstations, plus all kinds of misc homebrew machines.

    As I believe someone else has pointed out, JDS is not intended to run on the latest hardware, it is designed to run very well on slightly older but much stabler hardware. It is intended to be a corp desktop, easy to deploy from a reference image to tens or thousands of similar machines and then work consistently. How many people need a 3.2Ghz P4 Prescott to run StarCalc? Mozilla? Your certainly not going to game under it.

    This really brings up one of my favorite aspects of Linux, its adaptability to different tasks. The Sun JDS "envronment" servers a different purpose than Fedora or Gentoo. It dose several things much better than either of those two do with minimal work on the users part. Sure you can probibily get Gentoo or Fedora to do the same thing that JDS dose but it would take a great deal of work and even more so to make it easily reproduceable.

    On a slightly differeny note I do really get tired of all the Sun bashing that goes on. Just as I have grown tired of all the Microsoft bashing the used to go on at the top of Sun. Sun is just a company with a great deal of excellent people working there that generally are working towards a common goal: building better software and hardware that makes peoples lives easier and more enjoyable and have a good time in the process. Sun is not dying. Far from it. They are only becomming stronger.

    I must insert this disclaimer: I work for Sun in Solaris OS Engineering. I have for the last 8 monthes and been enjoying every day of it.

    1. Re:I can understand the problems but... by Decaff · · Score: 4, Funny

      On a slightly differeny note I do really get tired of all the Sun bashing that goes on.

      Oh come on. Being nothing more than a pioneering and innovative open systems company with decades of experience, if Sun refuses to listen to the wise suggestions of thousands of open source zealots, many of whom have at least a year or two of software experience, what can it expect?

  22. The author's bio is worth a look.... by Tetravus · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Using subtle clues and hints in his first-person narrative to imply emotion and intention, Jem Matzan's critically acclaimed writing style is truly unique among fiction authors. Jem's extraordinary characters and distinct dialogue decorate his fantasy universe while coaxing readers' imaginations into providing the specifics.

    Also a professional actor and model, Jem spends much of his time performing in such productions as television commercials, stage plays, and interactive variety shows.

    Biography provided by the author, October 2002
    from here : http://www.scifan.com/writers/mm/MatzanJem.asp

  23. No choice by grahamlee · · Score: 3, Informative
    why would Sun decide to ship JDS with kernel 2.4.19 at this stage?

    Because the feature freeze was six months ago. That's how commercial UNIX works, and SUNW are traditionally a commercial UNIX company. If you want to be an über-l33t Linux h4>

  24. Re:This review is a waste of time by ValourX · · Score: 3, Funny

    How is it useless? If the only reviews I read of JDS2 were "wow its awesome on my P2/333 box d00d" and then I bought it for my systems and it didn't work, then I'd feel that review was a failure.

    If you read the review carefully, I didn't blast Sun on anything except licensing, support, and the poor decision that led to the old kernel. The included software, the new utilities and the customized UI I thought were great... but useless to me because my hardware isn't supported.

    It's not a very flattering review of the product, but at least it is honest. I shouldn't have to go hunting for a computer that will work with the software. The review reflects my experiences which could very well be your experiences too if you have similar systems.

    -Jem

  25. Sun installations suck for technical workers by The+OPTiCIAN · · Score: 4, Insightful

    If you want the system management utilities and development tools they must be installed afterward.

    I wonder when Sun are going to get their act together and start fixing the basic toolchains available on their environments. We work on Sun slices at work, and we're prevented from having access to all sorts of basic tools we need.

    Now I can understand wanting to restrict access to compilers, scripting languages, etc.

    But perl *is* available on the environment, yet the halfwits who set policy in our server sections prevent us from having access to tools like less (yes, we have to use more, tail and head forall of our gigabyte-log-scanning needs because the version of vi on these environments won't read long lines or too-long files); vim (sigh) or (perhaps less controversally) lsof.

    And the reason?

    These are disallowed for 'security reasons'.

    This is the second place I've worked at where my team has been limited like this. When are Sun going to get a clue and learn to install the basic tools geeks need to be happy?

    Until they do - avoid Sun.

    --


    Believe with me, my saplings.
  26. digging their own grave by discogravy · · Score: 3, Informative
    If they really wanted to get this out, they'd do a better job of it. There's a livecd version of the JDS -- suppoed to be based on morphix, I heard. They gave them out at some trade show (or maybe it was some Sun meeting thing) and supposedly sent you a copy if you signed up for (and attended) an online presentation that they gave. I was interested enough in it that I did this, and still didn't receive a livecd in a month's time. I called and emailed them about it and still haven't heard about it. Of course, there's no public .ISO for you to make your own: you have to buy the JDS for 100$ (or 50$ for now -- some early adopter promo I think.)

    That's not the way to get users to pick up your product. SuSE is the only linux distro that's wholly "pay for product" -- and even they have a liveCD and an ftp-installer ISO available. I understand Sun wants to get the product out...but does Sun understand that?

  27. redundancy? by Scott+Richter · · Score: 3, Interesting
    I'd say then that the answer to "Do we really need another distro?" Is always yes. The more the merrier. Choice and redundancy are good things.

    I agree with choice, but I agree with gparent, we have enough redudancy. I might agree with you if every problem inherent with linux were properly solved, but they're not. At this point, we have far too much wheel reinvention, and that's not generally a good thing.