Slashdot Mirror
Sun COO Schwartz Promises Open Source Solaris
Alapan writes "According to C-Net Asia, Sun plans to make Solaris open source soon. While I hardly expect Sun to make it GPL compatible, I wonder how much restrictions Sun will place on distributing modified solaris systems. And will we some integration of Solaris' strong points into other open source OSes like Linux and BSD?" Update: 06/02 14:16 GMT by T : Correction: Schwartz is Sun's COO and President, but not CEO (as the headline originally had it).
Doesn't anyone else find it strange that we have a Microsoft and Sun deal and now Sun starts touting, "You should not be using Linux, as some day we are going to be making Solaris open source." Yeah sure but are we certain that "some day" will arrive? It has long been a tactic of M$ to announce something as being "almost ready" to forestall interest in a competing product that they really have no answer for. Then by creating enough uncertainty and doubt, they repeatedly harm their competitors with vaporware announcements.
Addressing the question of how Sun plans to make money with an open-source Solaris, he simply said that Sun doesn't have to rely on only the operating system. "We have hardware, storage, services and support. What we are doing is taking that whole thing and selling that whole thing," he said.
This looks like the exact opposite approach of Apple, who makes really cool closed source software to sell their hardware.
It seems to me that it's pretty easy to slap together hardware systems, but developing software systems is a little more daunting of a task. In hardware, it's like putting legos together.
Software tries to do that too, but everybody and their brother tries to make a better lego, and so you end up with millions of incompatible partial solutions that are very difficult to build up into a complete solution.
I wonder if sun will accept comments on their system from those who write linux and BSD?
Evolution or ID?
Open Source Java is on its way?
On the subject of a probable licensing model for the open-source Solaris, John Loiacono, executive vice president of Sun's Software Group, said: "We have to consider what licensing model we use and what levels of free usage we want.
I'll tell you what level of free you should use. The only one that exsists. FREE. Not free with reservations, not free with restrictions, not free blah blah blah, FREE.
Some time in the last few months, Sun Microsystems has lost their collective mind. Not that I don't agree with their decisions, but they have changed quite a bit. I'm just not sure yet whether it's good or bad.
If SCO would sue ... everyone ... without being open source, then how difficult would it be for Sun/Solaris to make claims that Code / IP was stolen? I'm just sayin...
I wonder how long until solaris is ported to other archicecture. Could this be a full functioning 64 bit supported OS on the x86 systems?
Evolution or ID?
maybe they will do what Apple is doing with OS X???
Can't wait. Love those live CD's that are so much fun to use to freak out co-workers when they boot up in the morning.
"Do the Right Thing. It will gratify some people and astound the rest." - Mark Twain
"Do the Right Thing. It will gratify some people and astound the rest." - Mark Twain
Just yesterday we were talking about this...which just leaves me saying huh!? Unless they meant Shared-Source and not really OSI-Style open source...
Even if I knew that tomorrow the world would go to pieces, I would still plant my apple tree. -Martin Luther
So if the software is free and the hardware is free...
1. give away everything
2. ???
3. profit!
no seriously, do they think they can pull off a profit from providing support services a la red hat, or will they try to squeeze profit from their other software offerings? makes no sense to me... have then gone insane?
Sun and Microsoft never did disclose the details of that deal that went down. I'd be willing to bet that Sun is now just another exotic car parked in Bill's garage (or at least a nice new lease)
"And will we some integration of Solaris' strong points into other open source OSes like Linux and BSD?"
Mmmm. Some integration will we make.
"The danger is not that a particular class is unfit to govern. Every class is unfit to govern." - Lord Acton
Sun's idea of "open source" is sometimes a peculiar one. What license will Solaris be OSed with?
Great news though... free hardware AND software from Sun. How does Sun make money? Volume!
it'll be simple to them if it's good or bad.
Make money = good decision
loose money = bad decision
Now, if they are loosing money but still happy with this then they are loosing their minds.
Evolution or ID?
Would it be possible -and I'm no expert by any means- that this is a direct attack on Linux. By that I mean that in all likelyhood Sun will probably use a GPL incompatible license, and aim to steer development effort away from Linux and on to Solaris; over which they would have more control, causing, in essence, a fork in Linux Kernel Development. I bet Microsoft got a good deal of influence on Sun's business decisions for $2Billions.
Probably the most interesting quote in the article:-
But one problem that Schwartz wants to avoid is having Solaris splintered into different distributions like Linux, which he said creates application incompatibilities. Going the way of Linux-type licensing, he suggested, creates open source but not open standards.
"There is a big difference between both (open source and open standards). There is one Linux company in the world today that's confusing the two concepts, and that is Red Hat. And it is very dangerous," said Schwartz.
"They are saying that because they are open source, they are open standards. But they are losing track of something that we've always been focused on. Which is that open standards enable substitution, choice and competition. Customers want to use our application server, or they may want to use Websphere, or BEA or a J2EE-compliant JBox," he added.
So, the salient points:-
Open source does not mean open standards
Splintered distributions is bad
So when did Sun become Microsoft?
Depending on your personal definition of 'open'. But I purchased the full source to x86/SPARC off the Sun site 4 years ago - it cost me around $40. They canned that program pretty quick.
:wq ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Firstly, I really really doubt that it will be real open source, so much as Sun's pseudo open source (aka Java). I can understand Sun's desire to prevent forks and retain compatibility, but that doesn't make it real open source.
Secondly, won't SCO have something to say about this? I would have thought there were some contracts to do with Unix that would prevent them open sourcing it. I know Sun "bought out" the rights, but surely that didn't include open sourcing the whole thing and destroying SCO's ability to licence Unix to other people?
I guess he hasn't been talking to his COO lately, considering that just yesterday we were reading that Sun says that hardware will be free. So if Sun's hardware is going to be free, and their OS is going to be free, where do I sign up?
-Todd
"The details of my life are quite inconsequential..."
So, yesterday they told th ehardware would be free, today, it's the software, so will this be the support, tomorrow ? :)
If yes, then I wonder whether their business plan looks like Swiss Cheese or not.
Trolling using another account since 2005.
10 years ago, it might have worked but it's too late now.
Agile Artisans
...Considering how they licensed their Gnome-based Java Desktop System. And that software was LGPL to begin with! Pray tell, what kind of god-awful monstrocity of a license are they going to come up with Solaris!?
Lesbian Nazi Hookers Abducted by UFOs and Forced Into Weight Loss Programs - -all next week on Town Talk.
I seem to remember that sun allowed people to buy cheap solaris source licenses a few years ago. I think there were a lot of restrictions on what you could do with it, but this won't be the first time for opened solaris source.
"Look, you only need to look at what we've done with Java to understand how Sun views the value of incorporating community feedback. Java could not exist if only Sun is supporting it. It exists because there are hundreds and thousands of partners. We need to now take the model with Java and bring it to Solaris," he said.
... according to Mr. Schwartz, Solaris will be open source soon, just like Java is open source today. Evidently this is some new definition of "open source" that I was not previously aware of.
Ok, so
I want some of whatever he's been smoking.
It's a shame, because if they would truly open source Solaris and Java, the open source community would rally around both products and actually help Sun get out of the death spiral they seem to be in right now. If they have any doubt about that, all they have to do is look in their own source repositories to see how well it's worked for OpenOffice.org.
Sun needs a regime change. The current crop of morons are not fit for management.
Tired of FB/Google censorship? Visit UNCENSORED!
This is an epic thing. If Sun does what Sun usually does and makes Solaris available under the BSD style licenses this will boost all unix like OS's. However I think they will end up using a Sun specific license (one that was developed for this specific purpose). I also think they did this because by opensourcing solaris they can start some serious cutbacks, a large amount of the OS can be handled by the community, and this might be a major cost cutting move motivated to save sun's ass.
Solaris has probably the best security and stability out of any of the widely used *nix's. Not to mention the superior threading of the actual OS and its core.
However the article makes mention of using something similar to java's licensing, which is *NOT* open source in any way shape or form. This sounds like another wait-and-see thing from the leader of wait-and-see (although not leading in much else these days.)
"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe." --Albert Einstein
According to C-Net Asia, Sun plans to make Solaris open source soon.
Yep, just like they'll open source Java soon.
This is just another half-assed attempt of SUN trying to compete with IBM. Move along, nothing to see here...
-B
Java you morons, not Solaris. Almost nobody gives a flying fuck about whether Solaris is opened or not.
I don't know, but in my humble opinion, Solaris has a lot more going for it than does Linux. No, this isn't meant to be a troll or flamebait. I've used Solaris since 4.1.3 and through 2.5, 2.6, 2.7, 2.8, and now 2.9 and can tell you that this is a really nice operating system. Simple, logical, and extremely robust. Granted, I've used it on SPARC machines and that is where it really shines. I have used 2.7 and 2.8 on the intel platform with decent results. Maybe it's just the familiarity and comfort level associated with working on Sun hardware, but Solaris is solid and a dream to work with. I've used (and still do) RedHat and SuSE and though they look good, and in many cases is more suited to the intel platform, I can't believe that if Sun took to making Solaris more available that more folks wouldn't use it. I know, you need applications and other vendor support, but still ... this is welcome news!
The x86 port has existed for years, with every new Solaris release since 2.5 ? (maybe earlier) At Solaris 2.5.1 there was a PowerPC port. It only lasted that release though... It would be cool to run Solaris on my Mac!!! (Yes I can be perverted at times...but I always thought Sun and Apple should join forces...Apple makes a better desktop UNIX workstation now than Sun ever could, and that used to be Sun's bread and butter).
do they think they can pull off a profit from providing support services
Yes, they have the experience and cred in the industry to do just that, unlike Red Hat who were (are) viewed as an upstart by many CTOs.
One thing holding back the adoption of Sun (and it was true in my office when we started looking to replace HP-9000 MPE based systems) is uncertainty as to the future of the OS. If we drop a boatload of cash into a bunch of Solaris boxes, and MSFT buys up and dissolves Sun tomorrow, then what?
Hell forget the hardware, what happens to our all our apps that we've tightly integrated into Solaris? Do we port all that stuff yet again to another unix?
With the source, that worry is gone. This is why Linux is succeeding, and because of Linux and the various free BSD's, folks who write checks are nervous about proprietary Unixes. Thing is, they want the support and expertise of a company like Sun, but they see the value in the openness of systems like Linux.
This is a very smart move on Sun's part, it'll push a lot of folks onto their side of the fence, and they should net a metric assload in support contracts and hardware sales.
I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
After R-ingTFA this move is just a FUD announcement against RedHat and Mirosoft who are kicking Sun's ass in thems of name recognition, performance, price, availablity, compatibility, etc.
There is nothing wrong with being gay. It's getting caught where the trouble lies.
I bet you they will make sure that whatever licence they use is GPL-incompatible. That way Solaris code can't be incorporated into Linux. They are in effect trying to splinter the Open Source world - in a way that benefits them, and ultimately, Micro$oft.
On the assumption that this is what they do, I wouldn't go near this with a bargepole. They are clearly not motivated by wanting to make Open Source (and in particular GPL) software better, only that they think they can drive a wedge into the Open Source movement for their own gain.
43 - For those who require slightly more than the answer to life, the universe and everything.
Hopefully they will also open-source the SunRay Server software. Cheap fuctional Linux X terminals anyone? We have about 60 SunRay 1's just sitting around here that would work perfect for LTSP.
So don't hold your breath.
Solaris X has been released I believe.
Err...thats Solaris 10...sorry...
Is that free as in beer, speech, GPL, or BSD? Not everyone agrees what FREE means. The BSD crowd claims that the GPL is not free because you force people that use GPL code to release the source so you are limiting their freedom to do what they want with the code. The GPL people claim that the BSD people are letting the code be locked away. A lot of people only want free as in I don't pay for it.
Sun could say that it is GPL but only from the Sparc chip AKA QT. Which many feel is free but I do not.
Or it could be you get the source code but you may not sell your changes and must give them back to Sun so they can distrubute it to other Solaris users. This is Free as in getting free labor. Could it be free as in GPL but only for a single CPU?
I do not see it as free as in pure GPL or BSD but who knows.
See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
Sun has some seriously strange ideas of what 'open source' means. I expect them to use Microsoft's shared "all your code belongs to us" source license.
Wow, first Sun tells us that hardware will be free. Then Sun tells us that Solaris will be open source.
As for me, I'm holding out until they pay me to run their stuff. Shouldn't be long now. I think I hear someone at the door....
Jonathan Schwartz is Sun Microsystems' president and chief operating officer, not CEO as the title, "Sun CEO Schwartz Promises Open Source Solaris" suggests!
But one problem that Schwartz wants to avoid is having Solaris splintered into different distributions like Linux, which he said creates application incompatibilities
Application incompatibilities? I've never heard of an application that will run on, for example, RedHat but not on Slackware (unless it's a package ofcourse, but even then you have rpm installers for non-rpm based distros).
Solaris may end up open source, but you are going to find it work very much like Java.... if you want to make your own implementation, you have to follow VERY VERY strict guidelines as to maintain PERFECT compatibility.
I am sorry, but I dont want another linux mess, where there is a "Debian Solaris" and a "SESolaris", etc. I am happy with a single one... maybe two... for workstation and server.
"When life gives you lemons, don't make lemonade. Make life take the lemons back!" -- Cave Johnson
What do you suppose the odds of that are?
jim frost
jimf@frostbytes.com
No, the GPL says "here's the code, use it how you want but you have to give it back if you make a binary publicly available." This is one clearly-defined use condition that is easily met. The way you describe the GPL is more fitting of SharedSource or any of a number of other, proprietary vendor's license on source. Many of whom started with or included BSD-licensed code.
Open source but non-free (as in Freedom) software has its problems, even for those of us who love openness. There will always be some idiot developer who has been reading a lot of non-free, open Sun code who decides to contribute something to a GPL'ed project such as Linux - and boom, there you have it - disaster! It's "impossible" for the maintainers of Free software to be 100 % sure that contributed code is not already distributed under a non-Free license.
Okay, help me out here... I thought that Solaris was basically SVr4 Unix with a bunch of Sun extensions (OpenWindows, etc.). If so, then isn't the core OS tied up somewhere in the whole Novell/Caldera/SCO mess?
Or am I missing something here?
Jonathan Schwartz is Sun's COO and President.
Scott McNealy is the CEO.
Microsoft Windows is, fittingly, the official Desktop OS of Olig
That's a disaster waiting to happen. Java needs to be under strict control, else we'll have a dozen forks that won't play nice with each other. Open Source and Free Software are all well and good, but when it comes to Java, I'm drawing a line in the sand. It's a noble goal, but not worth the risk of shattering the language. The "write once, run anywhere" mantra would go right out the window. It'll be like 1997 again.
Auto-reply to ACs: "Truly, you have a dizzying intellect."
So when did Sun become Microsoft?
They became Microsun on April 2, 2004
Of course, there have been messages from Jim Gosling telling us to have faith and not to panic. But then Schwartz opens his mouth...
Solaris is a top-notch system under the hood, and even though I'm less involved with Sun systems by an order of magnitude these days, I'd still welcome the chance to get ahold of the code.
-Watchful Babbler
the major advances in civilization are processes which all but wreck the societies in which they occur - A.N. White
replace 2 with 'get everybody to sign a support contract'
sun hardware: $0
solaris: $0
java: $0
watching the Sun go down: priceless
I bet if you shipped a dozen of those SunRays over to Jim at LTSP.org he'd have it running on them toot sweet.
...just be sure not to put any return address on the packaging :) .
If you ship one, it'll be the new door stop. If you ship lots, somebody will get interested in the problem.
The greatest power Linux has is not its technical qualities (though they're pretty adequate) but it's unique position as a concentrating point for (almost) all open-source development. More "free" OSs would de-focus the effort, giving the competitors to the open source an advantage.
./ -- it's nothing in itself, but functioning as a place where *everyone* goes makes it really important. For some things the lack of choice is better.
Same as
And will we some integration of Solaris' strong points into other open source OSes like Linux and BSD?"
I hope not, as unpredictable and indecisive as Scott McNealy is, Darl McBride is relatively stable.
One week McNealy likes Linux, the next week he doesn't. That and the fact after years of slamming Microsoft (as much as they deserve it), and making himself appear like a raving lunatic to the detriment of other important business decisions, Sun and Microsoft kiss and make up, and everything is suppossed to be OK now.
Well, its not OK, this looks like another desperate move by a company seeking something, anything to gain mindshare and revenue. If solaris becomes free, and their hardware will be free, how exactly is Sun supposed to make money again? And why should the open source community use source from Solaris from a company with such conflicting outlooks on open source and Linux?
Here's what's going to happen in a few years: You'll be able to get "free" Sun-branded x86 boxes running Windows for a reasonable annual subscription of $200 dollars.
Open sourcing Solaris and putting out JDS is just a way of saving face in the meantime.
The perfect sig is a lot like silence, only louder
Oh im sorry. Did I not understand yesterday's Slashdot story? So they will make money from hardware, which they are saying will be free in a couple of years? Does Sun ever pay attention to what they release?
I highly doubt SCO will say anything but positive about it, considering microsoft has contributed so much money to both SCO and Sun. Infact, i'd go so far as to say that MS has a very heavy hand in both companies now. SCO and Sun will never complain about anything the other does with that common controller holding them down.
Unix splintered into a huge number of different versions in the 80's and 90's. Now look at what's been happening over the past several years. SGI made significant contributions to the Linux kernel. IBM has stated that they can't open source all of AIX because of intellectual property that they aren't free to do that to, but they have been contributing what they can. SCO is likely to lose it's battle against IBM. Since it was established in the early 90's that a large portion of the historical Unix code base is in the public domain, that is safe from IP claims. Now Solaris will be opened.
The multiple versions were a source of problems, but also produced a certain amount of hybrid vigor. As the various companies tried to differentiate themselves, them improved all sorts of things in their versions of Unix. If this trend does absolutely nothing else, it could lead to stronger interoperability. Being able to build executables that will run on Linux, FreeBSD, AIX and Solaris without modification would be a huge boon to the whole Unix community.
Given Sun's complete misunderstanding of the concept of "Open Source Software", as evidenced by their opinion that the Sun Community Source License is "open enough" in spite of it's many obvious problems, I urge caution. Wait until we get to see the license under which the Solaris source code is made available. If it has *any* of the problems evidenced by the SCSL, then it won't be an Open Source Software license, but some marketing gimmick and it should be avoided.
He states the java 'open source' sun model which is not open source!
No to tmention he invalidates his own arguement that SUn open standards are open source..
Don't Tread on OpenSource
in the article he especially mentions he doesn't like the exact way linux is done, he says it leads to a company like redhat that has open software but closed standards (? no, I still don't get what he means there). He says something about having them both open. Now what license or model that might be he didn't specify, or at least it wasn't in there.
My best guess is they want to somehow leverage their hardware and software so that following the other announcement of "free hardware" with a pay as you go subscription model, they just want the free lunch aspects: get thousands of outside developers to submit work to solaris, then force end users to pay a subscription to deploy it beyond a single hobbyist machine. Something like that anyway, so they maintain control on the "totality" of the OS and apps combo. In other words, no forking or redistribution, Sun only releases, pay to play, but free to look at and develop and give back to Sun so they can rent it out. The OS might even be tied to a DRM like thing directly in the hardware, which you can only get from them.
schweet deal for them if enough people go that route. My next best guess is it will be a failure in the long run.
There are two primary forces running open source right now-the active developers "get it" on freely sharing,how everyone benefits from combining knowledge and resources (software as friends and neighbors cooperating in community barn raising) and businesses that adopt it don't get locked in to ridiculously expensive computing costs in the aggregate, and the real smart ones devote some of their coders efforts (time, money, etc) into giving back.
This is great, first the hardware is free and now the software too!
The SCO group announced today that it will be unleashing an army of lawsuits against SUN for distributing SCO's property to a large groups of code sharing hippies who are completely against the American ideals of profit and litigation as a means to profit.
Also, I'm not wearing any pants. Film at 11.
"Our funds have never taken part in toxic or death spiral convertible financings of any sort" -BayStar's managing partne
Janathan Schwartz is Sun's Cheif Operating Officer (COO) not CEO. Scott McNealy is still (and has always been) Sun't CEO.
--
I know what they'll do.
They'll "open source" the software to gpl developers that will be get paid by "line that is accepted" to their project(s).
That will certainly keep some work away from GPL but if you see it a job, it's not a bad idea.. necessarily.
Never underestimate the power of the Schwartz!
I think that the approach may be similar to the MPL (as I understood the 1.0 edition, the 1.1 Mozilla Public License is different) requiring people to submit to the Mozilla foundation the alterations that they had made to the code-base.
This allowed the foundation to maintain centralised control of the project without forked copies damaging it. I think that will allow Sun to nicely control Solaris.
Take care.
K3n.
"So, your Schwartz is as big as mine.."
Step 1. Give away hardware + OS
Step 2. Sign contracts
Step 3. Profit!
Sure - looks like they want to give away the software and the hardware, but I see it as a tactic to gain a renewable revenue.
Sun may be planning on "giving" away the hardware, iff you sign a 3 year gold contract for it and "giving" away the software iff you sign a 3 year support contract.
...yup...
I don't see anything negative about this, since Sun practically gives away the OS with a hardware purchase now.
From Sun's point of view, by releasing the source for Solaris they'll enjoy what Linux vendors now enjoy; A reduction in support and development costs necessary to keep up with current trends. There are thousands of trained, experienced programmers out there who can support their own hacks and bug fixes. There are thousands of Solaris Admins who can gin up one-off modifications as necessary based on the code itself. And because it's open source, those hacks and bug fixes are in the public domain.
It elevates Solaris to Linux status and gives Sun the benefit of having a ready market for their hardware and perhaps can turn their support overhead into a profit center, kinda like RedHat.
Mod me troll, if you must, I can't help it.
How long will it be until SCO sues Sun?
Stick Men
Oh, come off it.
All it takes is them retaining the rights to the Java (TM) name, ala TeX. I.e. you can't call it Java (TM) if it's not compatible. Same thing goes for TCP/IP - that's been open source for a long time, and you don't see a million incompatible versions.
Enforce compatibility through test suites and (open) standards, not by grabbing everyone by the balls via a proprietary platform.
http://www.welton.it/davidw/
but then, Sun says linux isn't open source, so...
(sorry, couldnt find the specific article, but the one I linked to does mention it)
-- 'The' Lord and Master Bitman On High, Master Of All
1. Say you're going to give away everything
2. Everyone rushes to pay money while they still can
3. Profit!
-- I speak only for myself
They probably can, if they do it right. Hardware and software are not that important or valuable any more. Having them configured and easy to deploy / use are. Tight system integration and good support are a lot more important in a corporate environment than the exact hardware and software used, as long as your employees are able to work efficiently with it.
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
First they say hardware will be free. Now they're going to Open Source Solaris? Maybe they will adapt into a service company.
As a community, the OSS kernel writers need to be very wary of this. Let's try this scenario:
1). Sun releases its code as a "open" with a non-GPL compatible license, possibly a license that states clearly that you cannot use the code in any other product.
2). OSS kernel contributor writes something similar to a Solaris feature into his patch, having read or not read the Solaris code, just because it "makes sense".
3). Sun pulls a SCO and starts suing everyone they can find for the misuse of its IP.
This move could very well poison the free kernel projects out there.
Language differences are utterly irrelevant. What is relevant (and what the poster points out rather cleverly) is that C/C++ is hugely popular, as cross-platform as you want it to be, etc.
There are lots of implementations of C/C++ that all interoperate perfectly well as long as the programmer sticks to specifications and the compilers do. It will be exactly the same with Java if it's opened up.
You shouldn't rely on the "guts of Java" (by which I assume you mean "implementation of Java") to be the same everywhere. You should rely on the Java specification (that's what it's for!).
HAND.
It really hurts to see a company with many good engineers, and a solid history, driven toward the rocks at such an amazing speed. Sun at this point is quickly making itself irrelevant by not joining the market in acceptance of true open-source, and concentrating on industry compatible hardware. Phase out Sparc, in favor of PowerPC, or AMD. GPL Solaris, Java. Concentrate on making good hardware that supports Linux and their GPL's Solaris, and sell services. This is not a time in the company's history to start publicly daydreaming that they are in 1995, or that they are relevant.
Please don't flame me! I love Solaris!
BUT: I humbly predict that when Solaris is opened, people will pour through the code and find (a) many old security holes, unpatched, and (b) many new security holes, due to the number of eyes on the code.
This will probably result in:
- Frequent patching for a while;
- Frequent security alerts for a while;
- Many hacks into existing unpatched systems;
- Cross-polination of good (security and other) ideas from Solaris into xxxBSD and Linux;
- Gradual settling down of security problems to even lower numbers than before.
This is not a dire prediction - Solaris is already Pretty Damned Secure - and it'll be an unmitigated Good Thing once the initial flurry of patches come through. I'm just concerned for the interim timeframe when "Security Through Obscurity" goes away and hasn't yet been replaced by "Security Through Code Quality".--Kevin (at justanyone dooooooooootttt cooooommmmmmm).
Unitarian Church: Freethinkers Congregate!
if we drop a boatload of cash into a bunch of Solaris boxes, and MSFT buys up and dissolves Sun tomorrow, then what?
And what about all those users who are buying Microsoft products ? What happen if Steve Ballmer and Bill Gates die in a plane crash the day where Microsoft is punished in court and must stop all selling activities ?
It's POSSIBLE !!! (perhaps only at 0.001% but POSSIBLE)
Ploum.net.
Sun is not doing anything Free or Open Source as we know it. they aren't even doing anything free or with open source. Yesterday they redefined "free" to mean "subsidized". today they are redefining "open source" as "all your base..." followed by "someone set us up the bomb"
Of course they'll make money from the services... I'm probably restatng the obvious here, but when they say "Free Hardware", what they mean is that "if you buy a support contract from us, we'll give you the hardware for free for the duration of that contract". They don't just put thousands of SPARC systems on the loading dock and say "hey everybody, come and get 'em"!
It makes sense really, (and you can do this whether you open up the software or not) sell a contract which supplies you with hardware, software, and support systems all in one basket with a yearly payment which takes care of everything...
Sorta like Red Hat, but they do the whole widget, to use the Apple terminology.
- ------- There are ten kinds of people in the world. Those who understand binary, and those who... Huh?
If we can have "GNU/Darwin", built around the Apple kernel and GNU tools, I see no reason not to expect a GNU/Solaris system of some type to emerge. Many Solaris admins already install GNU tools and other things because the default tools Solaris ships are just old and very ugly. "GNU is an operating system and Solaris is one of it's kernels"?!
Because SUN has partnerships with other vendors, they cannot release all of their OS code.
This is similar to when they released the Solaris 8 source code. I believe anyone could download it for some period of time, or at least it was really easy to get (partners || edu). However, even limiting their distribution channel, they were bound by contracts to vendors to not release parts of their code. I.e. a lot of the fibre source was written by Qlogic or JNIC, so none of that will be released, Open Source or not.
I have to think Sun will release their code, since the Solaris 8 code was pretty publicly available for quite some time. It wouldn't be a major step to release the code publicly now.
I know for a fact it will not only be GPL compatible, but GPL itself.
Yesterday, hardware was free. Today, software is free. Tomorrow, people working at Sun will be free... to go.
How can Sun decide to unilaterally Open Source Solaris? Won't SCO come knocking on their door? Solaris is a direct descendant of original Unix just like AIX?
So, how can they Open Source it?
Schrodinger's cat is either dead or really pissed off...
My Opinion Only:
They can keep it. It hasn't been updated with cool new features in years. I'm using it on several of my servers now (forced to use it), and it is nothing but a problem. HPUX and AIX give me some real solid enterprise level features.
Gee, I'm grouchy today...
Sometimes true. But it's worth mentioning that many PHBs (purchasers, CFOs, etc.) are fincancially rewarded based on the percentage or number of dollars "saved". Sure, it may not be the best technical (or financial) solution for their business, but if they are able to negotiate 30% savings on solution A versus 10% savings on solution B, they may get a much larger end-of-quarter bonus if they "save" the company the 30% by choosing option A.
You may want to chat with the folks (read: Board of Directors) who establish potentially counter-productive incentives like this.
This one gang kept wanting me to join cause I'm pretty good with a bo staff.
So they think Java is open source, and want to do the same fake-open-source to Solaris.
according to Mr. Schwartz, Solaris will be open source soon...
Actually, despite the headline's claim, Schwartz never actually said "soon"; in fact, he was very vague: 'I don't want to say when that will happen. But make no mistake, we will open source Solaris.'
So, what does that mean? At the latest possible hour, when all other options are exhausted?
And before we get too excited about an open Solaris, consider this: "one problem that Schwartz wants to avoid is having Solaris splintered into different distributions like Linux" (Ong Boon Kiat). If that statement is true, then it doesn't portend well for modified versions of the operating system, does it? I'm hoping that the author merely extrapolated from Schwartz' dim view of Red Hat.
A variety of Solaris distributions would be excellent, but it's probably not going to happen. John Loiacono of Sun adds: "We have to consider what licensing model we use and what levels of free usage we want. Then we also need to consider if we want to [segment the licensing model to address] commercial, private and academic use."
These deliberations suggest that the community will not get anything close to ideal licensing terms.
It's a shame, because if they would truly open source Solaris and Java, the open source community would rally around both products and actually help Sun get out of the death spiral they seem to be in right now.
True, but it's probably a pipe dream. Call me cynical, but it almost seems like Sun just wants free labor to bolster a dying product. I would be surprised if the eventual licensing terms concur with the notion of being "truly open source"; more like, "just open source enough to extract some patches and drivers from the open source development community." How many video cards do they support now? Six?
Don't get me wrong, I would love for Sun to open Solaris, but consider the source (no pun intended).
I'll trust anything they say AFTER they prove it. It will certainly be interesting to see what they consider to be an open source license. I doubt that many others will consider it open source. Remember, these are the same people who announced yesterday that hardware was going to be free, and software was going to be via subscription only.
Now there's nothing wrong with a software subscription, I subscribe to a disk of the month club myself (KRUD Linux)...but when that subscription includes the hardware bundled into it, I become a mite suspicious that it will be more expensive than valuable. And will involve vendor lock-in. It doesn't necessarily have to work that way, but...
So now these same people are promissing an Open Source version of Solaris? Or is it just an open source version? Perhaps under the SCCCCL license?
Well, I guess I'll reserve judgement until after I see what transpires. But I'm not going to be holding my breath in joyful expectancy.
I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
Debian, RedHat, FreeBSD, NetBSD, GNU/HURD and even Cygwin on win32, can all run the same software. I don't see what your objection is.
"I don't want another car mess, where there is a "Ford Solaris" and a "BMW Solaris, etc. I am happy with a single one.. maybe two... for driving and hauling."
We have standards for the things which need to be standardized (ELF, XML, TCP/IP), and we have freedom for everything else.
Does anyone recall licence for Jinni? It was supposed to be some protocol for smart connecting of devices. Noone heard of it? Because licence was not open source at all, no matter how they tried to call it. (Actualy, first and only time where I heard of it was in Linus' "Just for Fun")
When there was idea about opensourcing Java, Sun said they would not OS it. I understood that they consodider Java as non-OS; sudenly this COO says that Solaris will be OS like Java. Something changed last days in Java licencing?
Anyway, they do not earn a peny from Java and still do not want to OS it, just because they do not want to lose control. I think that there are no chances Solaris to become something like OpenOffice.org, because such licence will not give enough control to Sun. And Solaris is their main product, so they probably believe that the control is essential.
I would like time to prove me wrong, but I think it will not happen.
No sig today.
Sorry, couldn't resist.
``Sun needs a regime change.''
.com bubble days were over...
They just had that regime change. Since Schwartz was promoted, Sun seems to have gone on a campaign that Santa Claus might envy. Anybody have a good explanation what the rationale behind giving away everything is? I thought the
Please correct me if I got my facts wrong.
It could be that Microsoft is run as poorly as every other company on the planet...where the development team tells marketing, "No, there's no way it'll be out this year" and marketing hears, "Blah blah blah blah this year". I have never worked with, nor heard of, a company that works so efficiently together, for evil or otherwise, to believe that Microsoft has found that golden goose of efficiency and productivity that has managed to elude every other company on the planet run by management-seminar dropouts.
I believe, when dealing with Microsoft or any other company, that the sig "Don't attribute to evil that which can easily be explained as stupidity" applies always.
Which is more painful? Going to work or gouging your eye out with a spoon? Find out!
http://www.workorspoon.com
i know it seems crazy and probably would never happen (because someone has to make money off of something sometime - it seems). and i'm sure this idea has come up on /. countless times before...but...
has anyone ever actually tried to open source hardware? maybe it's just my limited mind but the potential seems limitless.
devlopers get so wrapped up in having to figure out just how to make their babies work with hardware X or hardware A. what would happen if someone created hardware who's specs and designs were always available for everyone to see? don't like how something works on that hardware? take the designs and create your own version.
i don't know. maybe i've been out in the sun too long today.
nature loves variety::society hates it get your variety at http://www.monkeypantz.net
If they were to do this (soon), and do not fall victim to SCO-like legal antics but can show they have full rights to GPL it, this would be amazing and have significant impact.
Under a Sun-specific license, it is far less significant.
The Hardware will be free and the software will be... oh shit...
Maybe Sun is thinking along the lines of what Apple(tm) does with MacOS X: Open Source the OS but hold the add-ons closed source.
Solaris = SunOS + X/CDE/GNOME + BIND + DNS + Stuff
Maybe they'll release the OS parts and keep the "Stuff" parts closed?
Some of the "Stuff" is licensed from other companys and thus couldn't be Open Sourced by Sun.
Oh, wait, it's already OSS! How are they managing to stay in business?!
cpghost at Cordula's Web.
Correction: Schwartz is Sun's COO and President, but not CEO (as the headline originally had it).
I've got two words for you people.
Fucking incompetent.
Schwartz came to Sun when Sun bought Lighthouse Design, back before Java. Lighthouse Design had a big suite of office apps for NEXTSTEP. Wordprocessors, diagramming, spreadsheet, project management, paint programs, you name it. These were all high quality apps written in Objective-C.
It would be SWEET if Sun released these open source and the GNUStep project got them working on Linux.
The code is rotting, no one is doing anything with it, and it would be a big boon to Linux.
Yes, that's because Legos and computers are both hardware. Software, on the other hand, is just 'too soft' for humans to resist the temptation to constantly change it... ;-)
In software, an interface (API) is often seen as a contract; in hardware, that interface contract is actually embodied in the physical device, so people are forced harder to think before since any design will stay around for a long time.
This problem has been gradually on the increase with operatings being loaded from HDD rather than stored in ROM and with across-network installations and deployments as opposed to delivering media manufactured in bulk. The gained flexibility is as much a curse as a blessing.
I hope this brings an end to them killing off something via EOL'ing it (the ZX and Elite3D m6 framebuffers, oddly both being highend dual board types) and not releasing enough specs to get it working to its full potential. It might be a longshot, but I hope this kind of practice ends when they start opening code, especially when you can run a 6-10+ year old cg6 on solaris(which should be gone by now), but not a 4-5yr old 3d accelerated framebuffer if one so desires to. Just because it doesnt make you money, doesnt mean you have to be greedy and force people to cheap framebuffers or another expensive device that's EOL'ed as quickly through keeping the entire specs to yourselves.
Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
Now, Schwartz is apparently trying to pull the same stunt with the term "open source":
What does this mean? It means that Schwartz wants to put in compatibility testing requirements for Solaris derivatives that you create from Sun source, just like they have for Java. And that translates into something that is intrinsically incompatible with the open source definition.
With Java, Sun's betrayal actually mattered until a few years ago: Java could have been really important as an open standard. And since there was nobody out there to protect the meaning of the term "open standard", Schwartz's double-speak actually did considerable damage. But with Solaris, it doesn't matter: Solaris is already irrelevant. Furthermore, Sun won't be able to damage the term "open source" because the open source community is going to protect the meaning of the term "open source" vigorously.
Sun is pretty much doomed and they have nothing of interest to anyone anymore. The best thing for the OSS community is just to stay away from them as far as possible: the death throes of dinosaurs can hurt bystanders badly.
I'm not excessively familiar with Solaris from an admin standpoint, but I have done quite a bit of porting C/C++ stuff to it and a lot of admin'ing AIX. To be blunt, I don't care much for Solaris and should I ever be in the position to authorize a purchase I'd almost certainly look at Linux first and AIX second. Here's why:
... geez by this time you've almost got GNU/Linux again on Sun hardware. AIX 5L has at least started to reverse the trend -- you can get most of the GNU tools pre-installed. (Yes, the native compiler on Solaris and AIX produces much faster code than gcc. Most of my apps don't need the speed, they need the portability. I can optimize at the higher layers and get the speed I need.)
1) Linux is pretty darn good. It would take some *unusually* serious needs before you *have* to look outside the Linux camp to find a workable solution. Linux has XFS, JFS, and ReiserFS, really good support for reliable and fast high-end SCSI, SMP, Beowulf'ing, and a huge community to provide free-as-in-beer help.
2) On a per-processor basis, Linux-on-Intel/PowerPC is faster than Solaris-on-anything hands down. (This will probably change after the next generation of Sparc chips comes out.)
3) Solaris tends to be a pain to port code to. Much like AIX, it's got the AT&T-derived libraries and proprietary crud that doesn't function with as much polish as the GNU stuff. So you end up installing a huge set of GNU tools and libraries on Solaris and
I see plenty of places where *today* Solaris has a great role, but I don't see much in the future. And Sun hardware is nice, but certainly not extraordinarily better than IBM hardware.
This just seems like "too little too late". (Of course, this leads right into the critical question: is there *anything* Sun can do that would be worth paying for?)
Comments?
Wasn't there a post on /. yesterday where Sun was saying that the biz model of the future was to give away the hardware and sell subscriptions to the software? If they give away the hardware, and the software, where do they make money? Support?
You guys need to figure out the difference between open source and open standard. If you behaved yourself when writing code to an open standard it would be relatively painless to move to any Unix. I work on a commercial product over 10 million lines that runs on a BUNCH of Unix platforms.
If Linux ever gets fully open standards compliant then it could play just as easily. As it is, it is a bit more of a pain.
The freedom you seek is open standards, not open source. Always has been, always will be.
Hate to ask an obviously ignorant question here, but what about all the SCO driver code they just incorporated into Solaris last year?
This signature has Super Cow Powers
Nah i think he names Java because that's an in-house community process just like Linux is. Ofcourse Schwarz names Java instead of Linux because of that.
That's my bet.
Sun doesn't care much about open source, Sun cares rather about free labour (they get and take from the community thus together humanity creates better software and profit for Sun) and open standards (they got a great portfolio thus credit for this).
The Microsoft-Sun settlement was the resolution to a case that had been dragging on for years and the settlement was MONTHS in the making. As far as I'm aware it was documented to have started before this whole "let's open source Java" thing started.
If SUN ever makes Solaris Open-Source, and IF Linux is allowed to plunder the better parts of it (more multiprocessing capability, 'zones' etc) then Linux will be the OS of the future, much more so than it is today.
Some of the things that keeps Linux out of top-end shops are the reasons stated above. Sure, clustering is an alternative, but sometimes you *NEED* a big mainframe switching among thousands of processes. Linux has a difficult time of mega-multiprocessing now; but once the Solaris code is assimilated (or hijacked) it too will do one more thing Solaris is known for.
All of this just makes Linux better. Which just makes it tougher for Microsoft. Especially in the big-iron shops.
But the thing I wonder is-- is this what SUN wanted to gain from this?
making solaris open source is like going to the toilet and making the contents of your urinal open source by flushing the toilet.. time for sun to smell their own java coffee..
Funny that he wants to do it to bring Solaris into the model of Java, which they won't Open.
Actually, I wonder who's going to maintain all that code. All the out of work Solaris kernel developers? Hey, a new business strategy, "We can't afford to pay you, so we're laying you off and you should continue to work for free."
> The "write once, run anywhere" mantra
:)
You mean compile once, emulate everywhere?
JAVA the emulator/virtual machine is a dead idea, designed to allow closed binaries to sort of run on multiple platforms. JAVA the programming language may still have a future through native compilers like GCC's recent addition of a frontend for Java.
You see, in the Open Source world (the one with a future, unlike proprietary wares) we solved the portability problem long ago. It is called GNU autoconf. Now if I could only figure the son of a bitch out.
Democrat delenda est
If Sun release bits like the source to cfgadm for dynamic reconfiguration of uniboards or bits of io, they've lost it. It's the single coolest feature of Solaris, which is about in competitive OSs but not nearly implemented as well. I honestly think this type of stuff should stay closed source, it's a feature most OSes are dying for.
Unfortuantely, the tale turned sour when Sun downsized and the entire team that did all this wonderful work (and probably will have saved Sun money in the long run) got laid-off.
So, this story is both good and bad news. They've done smart things before in the OSS realm, but they've also laid off some of the people that really made it happen.
The next site to slashdot will be ready soon, but subscribers can beat the rush and start slashdotting it early!
I don't think StarOffice would be as successful as it is if there weren't an OpenOffice.
Hello? OpenOffice is here because of Sun. Is that not a contribution to the community and Linux?
Sun purchased a company (German?) that originally produced StarOffice. Sun retained StarOffice and then made it available to the community.
OpenOffice would not be as successful or even exist if it were not for Sun.
The grandparent post never said anything about "hippie hackers". Yet you harp on it. You are trying to discredit the argument made by the person you are responding to by misrepresenting it.
Yeah, under strict control. My bum. Things under strict control stagnate and get all tangled in ret tape.
It is possible-- not easy, but certainly possible-- to design a process which is highly structured yet encourages freedom and creativity within the process's bounds.
lollol omgomgomg roflroflrofllolomgomg
You are teh l337! You used M$!!!
You are teh funny m4n!!!
And...and....you bashed commercial software!
You are soooo on teh sp0ke!
roflroflrofl omgomgomg roflrofl
Use that pickup line at a club one day
"Hey $exy!" (spelling out $ - e - x - y). You will pick up in no time! That is so teh funny!
Interesting SCO tie-in???
Sun paid Novell for a non-exclusive, non-revokable license to the SVR4 sources prior to the sale to SCO, in the early 1990's, and far prior to the sale of SCO to Caldera. I believe the figure for this was ~$81M.
If they open-source it, this would be an arrow in the back of SCO, since it provides a route for all of the SVR4 source code to find its way into other code, eithout going through SCO as a gatekeeper.
-- Terry
I've always felt that Sun had great hardware and crappy software (with the possible exception of Solaris itself). They really don't make any money off of the thing they seem to be famous for now days, Java. How will they make money? Charge even more for JavaOne? Really increase the charge for J2EE certification? Convince people that Sun's web and application servers are a good choice?
Dr. Rick
- "It's such a fine line between clever and stupid" (Nigel Tufnel)
- Zort! (Pinky)
Finally I will be able to afford quite a decent server with open source Solaris running on my new free Sun hardware. I can hardly wait.
Sincerely,
Pan Tarhei Hosé, PhD.
"Homo sum et cogito ergo odi profanum vulgus et libido."
I guess they'll be pushing very hard for sales of StarOffice
If Sun really open-sources Solaris all I can
say is righ-on! I'll glady trade Linux for Solaris anyday.
Schwartz from eweek interview: We took a license from AT&T initially for $100 million as we didn't own the IP. The license we took also made clear that we had rights equivalent to ownership.
and the Register: "Sun has taken delight in watching this IP battle play out. Scott McNealy, CEO at Sun, said the company paid $100 million to use Unix "free and clear".
So does Anonymous Coward have good karma?
... then the software?
Ok, where does profit come in?
Glad I dont own stock in SUN right now. MS is right that all their competitors die by doing dumb things when MS is on their radar more then being outdone.
http://saveie6.com/
Yes, it's called "branding". Read up about it in marketing texts.
Sun has been pretty successful so far with the 'pure Java' effort, and I don't think that would stop were it to go open source.
The products of the Apache Software Foundation are covered by a BSD-like license, and yes, some of them have proprietary forks, like WebSphere, but IBM and everyone else keeps coming back to us for the real thing. Same goes for the Java stuff written by our Java-oriented people.
http://www.welton.it/davidw/
Sun, stop wasting time. The clock is ticking. Before you drop dead or get bought out, GPL Java and help us kick M$'s ass. Oh, wait, you've already been sucked into the dark-side. Never mind.
= 9J =