Slashdot Mirror
SCO Fiasco Over For Linux, Starting For Solaris?
kripkenstein writes "We have just heard that the SCO fiasco is finally going to end for Linux. But Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols at DesktopLinux.com points out that the favorable result for Linux may cause unpleasant consequences for rival open-source operating system OpenSolaris: 'At one time, Sun was an SCO supporter ... Sun's Jonathan Schwartz — then Sun VP of software and today Sun's president and CEO — said in 2003 that Sun had bought "rights equivalent to ownership" to Unix. SCO agreed. In 2005, SCO CEO Darl McBride said that SCO had no problem with Sun open-sourcing Unix code in what would become OpenSolaris. "We have seen what Sun plans to do with OpenSolaris and we have no problem with it," McBride said. "What they're doing protects our Unix intellectual property rights." Sun now has a little problem, which might become a giant one: SCO never had any Unix IP to sell. Therefore, it seems likely that Solaris and OpenSolaris contains Novell's Unix IP.'"
Don't forget ...to pay US your $699 licensing fee you cock-smoking teabaggers.
Now that the Novell ruling has been handed down, reaffirming that Novell owns the copyrights Caldera Systems claimed and wished to have had, most of McBride's public statements are now worth less than zero. Before the judgment, there was some intangible value in the FUD factor, especially for Microsoft (and maybe SUN Microsystems).
Just because you get modded "insightful" on Slashdot doesn't mean you actually are in real life.
For some reason, I can't help but feel a little smug about that. If your going to choose a side, Make sure you know your side is going to win.
Restore the madness of youth's lechery
Not to mention OpenOffice, Java, etc. Sun has brought a lot of good stuff into the Open Source world lately. I personally would hate to see them get spanked.
weirdest thing I ever saw: scientology advertising on slashdot.
novell officially owns the copyrights on Unix and whatnot, who's to stop somestar capital from offering to pay them to restart something similar against other linux vendors? it isn't like they aren't already in bed with microsoft blah blah blah (donning my triple-layered gold-plated tinfoil hat ... and let the conspiracy theories begin)
Does anybody actually run OpenSolaris in production on non-Sun hardware? Open-sourcing Solaris seems more of an end-of-life abandonware move than a product line.
Linux and Solaris come from different code bases. Linux is Linux and Solaris is UNIX System V R4.
Secondly, Sun didn't "license unix" from SCO. Sun bought some device drivers.
There, settled.
Stick Men
...can Microsoft buy Novell?
I mean like 'em or hate 'em thats one firm with awfully deep pockets and the ownership seems to be settled now. Please, please tell me that I have missed something and I am being naive.
Not so fast! Solaris' roots go back to before UnixWare. UnixWare wasn't released until 1992. The SVR4 code that went into Solaris split off before then, according to the UNIX History Timeline. The sale of UnixWare to Novell took place later. And don't forget that a lot of the Solaris code was supposedly taken from BSD-based SunOS, plus there's no doubt that a lot of it was also written by Sun or for Sun.
Somehow, I don't see Sun and its top-notch legal team making a mistake on this matter. This isn't the sort of scenario that would have been overlooked.
- John
Knowledge is power. Knowledge shared is power lost.
Two, actually.
Remember, they also bought a license. I wonder what Novell IP made it into Microsoft products, and if that wasn't the REAL reason Microsoft wanted a deal with Novell - not because of Microsoft IP in linux, but Novell IP in Windows?
Plus, if Novell and/or IBM and/or Red Hat manage to piece the "corporate veil" surrounding the PIPE invenstment, there's another problem, which will be much worse for the convicted monopolist.
Wasn't it released under GPL2 just recently? I think by most people's standards, that is both "Free" and "Open Source".
Beware he who would deny you access to information, for in his heart he dreams himself your master. -Anonymous
You are (depending on how you count) between about 3 and 9 months out of date.
I am in the middle of building a X86 server that I intend to run OpenSolaris on. Trying to find a board that I know in advance is supported has been frustrating. However, I *think* the major problem is the lack of updates for documentation and not that new devices are not supported.
You'll know how it went if you see me trying to sell a server, cpu, RAM combo.
Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity.
weirdest thing I ever saw: scientology advertising on slashdot.
Exactly, in version 6 Java really matured as desktop, server and mobile holy grail open source platform. Only thing they did wrong was not open-sourcing it earlier (so they give traction to _now_ meaningless projects like Mono, classpath, gcj, kaffe, ...
839*929
Every time I see that name, I think SCrOtum.
I honestly don't know why.
If Sun has to deal with Novell, it's not the same as anybody having to deal with SCO. SCO didn't care if it existed or not at the end of its legal battle with the rest of the world. Their strategy was all about monetizing their precious IP. Sun and Novell, on the other hand, think of themselves as ongoing businesses. They have no desire to run up huge legal bills. If there is an issue between them, they will negotiate like adults, money will change hands and everyone will go about their business.
Bottom line: Novell isn't going to sue Sun.
Novel has a tool to destroy Sun. It looks like Solaris is doomed to die slowly.
I'm just some grad school kid setting up a server in his apartment, but within a few months I'm gonna get a new desktop and move my current one to a server. I'm debating between FreeBSD and x86 Solaris for it.
If Sun didn't exist, open software would probably be way behind where it is today. Most open software of the 1980's and 1990's was developed on Sun's. Why? Because back then, Sun had the most open documentation and open architecture. Go look where Linux was distributed for the first 5 years or so, Sunsite's.
Sun also, through greed, vaulted GCC into the mainstream. When Sun decided to no longer include compilers with the base operating system, GCC really took off.
Now then, the community may have a legitimate beef with Sun today, but let us not forget how much Sun has helped the community.
"To those who are overly cautious, everything is impossible. "
so they give traction to _now_ meaningless projects like Mono, classpath, gcj, kaffe, ...
.NET to run on other platforms, or a free platform on Windows. That's not meaningless. It will also allow people to choose the .NET languages, like C#; that too is not meaningless. (I happen to think that the C# language is notably more fun and better to program in than Java, but that's just my opinion.)
Mono will still allow some programs written for
GCJ provides a compiler for Java that goes to native machine code rather than bytecode. Open-source Java doesn't do this; this project too is not meaningless. (Though there was, I'm sure, a good bit of duplicated effort.)
This is just it. I find it fantastically funny that their bankrolling SCO may come around and bite them on the bum, and they've hardly been a friend to Linux, but overall it would be a shame for that to happen when they've given a fair bit up as open source.
Whats this IP in every Unix they keep talking about ?? 127.0.0.1 ?
bah
True, SCO had no "IP" (as Darl would like to put it, frequently) to sell. However, they were Novell's authorized agent for handling licensing for UNIX. The deal was that ALL money from such deals would go to Novell, and a 5% administrative fee would be remitted back to SCO. Furthermore, SCO had no authority to initiate new deals with SYSV without Novell's authorization.
However, Sun bargained with the authorized agent. It was not Sun's job to make sure Darl was fufilling his contractual obligations.
Novell has asked for the money from this and the MS deal. THis means they are not trying to kill it.
Yes, many people actually do run Sun Solaris 10 on non-Sun hardware in production. What would you rather be running for your production on your brand new HP Opteron or IBM Opteron server: Redhat Linux or Sun Solaris 10?
Please note that you can actually buy Sun support for non-Sun hardware and that vendors are certifying their hardware for Sun Solaris 10.
Sun *NEVER* bought their rights off SCO - they bought drivers. Sun bought their rights off who ever owned SVR4 20+ years ago - IIRC Novell who bought UNIX Labs. Sun bought the most extensive rights to the code one could possibly have.
The issue in question *SHOULDN'T* be Sun but Microsoft who purchasing IP rights to UNIX for their Services for UNIX. Sun already bought them 20 years ago. The issue at play are sales of IP by SCO to third parties.
While SCO didn't own Unix, it did have a right to sell licenses. The recent court order seems to regard the sale to Sun as valid:
Finally, the court concludes, as a matter of law, that the only reasonable interpretation of all SVRX Licenses includes no temporal restriction of SVRX Licenses existing at the time of the APA. The court further concludes that because a portion of SCO's 2003 Sun and Microsoft Agreements indisputably licenses SVRX products listed under Item VI of Schedule 1.1(a) to the APA, even if only incidental to a license for UnixWare, SCO is obligated under the APA to account for and pass through to Novell the appropriate portion relating to the license of SVRX products. Because SCO failed to do so, it breached its fiduciary duty to Novell under the APA and is liable for conversion.
It's possible that Novell could act as Microsofts legal sockpuppet, but as we have seen, those who act as Microsoft proxies are doomed to failure.
The management of Novell should now deal aggressively with Sun's dirty triangulation. Novell should demand huge royalties on any UNIX code that Sun is using in Solaris. The royalties should be sufficiently large to ensure that any Sun server solution using Solaris is more expensive than any generic non-Sun x86 server solution using Linux.
Sun went to SCO for a SysV license because SCO WAS NOVELL'S AGENT. Want to bet Sun paid for that license for the express purpose of being able to open Solaris source up?
Sun probably just didn't want to get involved in the SCO/Novell/IBM war, so they paid the money for the license and just kept quiet. Anything else would have been misinterpreted in some way. Obviously.
Open-sourcing Solaris seems more of an end-of-life abandonware move than a product line.
That's the classic FUD statement that has been made with regard to many other formerly 'closed' projects which went Open Source. Several previous examples:
Mozilla (Netscape)
Open Office (Star Office)
Just because you think such a FUD campaign may now 'benefit the community' (whatever that happens to mean at any moment) doesn't make it less of a dirty FUD campaign than it has been in the past.
Microsoft says legacy (serial/parallel) ports are bad. They don't obfuscate the hardware enough.
I would be gratified if you could direct me to evidence that a vendor has successfully certified their hardware.
Recently!!
Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity.
Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
SCO possibly sold something to Microsoft and Sun that they didn't own, which is fraud. I'm not sure exactly what the agreements were (some vague unix licenses), but Sun and Microsoft might be able to sue them for that in addition to criminal charges.
Of course, I believe that Sun and Microsoft really didn't buy anything, they were just funneling money to SCO.
Do you have ESP?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sun_Microsystems
Sun is most well known for its Unix systems, which have a reputation for system stability and a consistent design philosophy.
Sun's first workstation shipped with UniSoft V7 Unix. Later in 1982 Sun began providing SunOS, a customized 4.1BSD Unix, as the operating system for its workstations.
In the late 1980s, AT&T tapped Sun to help them develop the next release of their branded UNIX, and in 1988 announced they would purchase up to a 20% stake in Sun.[42] UNIX System V Release 4 (SVR4) was jointly developed by AT&T and Sun; this partnership triggered concern among Sun's competitors, many of whom banded together to form the Open Software Foundation (OSF). By the mid-1990s, the ensuing Unix wars had largely subsided, AT&T had sold off their Unix interests, and the relationship between the two companies was significantly reduced.
Sun used SVR4 as the foundation for Solaris 2, which became the successor to SunOS.
Yes, but this is why I don't think that would be funny:
I need Open Source. I make my living with Linux. I need Linux to be strong and healthy. I need Apache and PHP. I need Bluefish, Kate and Quanta Plus. I contribute financially to a couple of products, although I don't have much to give. I learned how to do what I do by following Open Source documentation, asking questions on web forums, and mostly by downloading and installing the software to learn to use it for free. I never could have afforded to buy Windows Server 2003 with IIS as ASP just to learn, but it took me one evening to install and start learning debian, apache, mysql and php, and now I make my living with those tools. Do you understand how liberating that is? I was a sand-pounding infantryman for god's sake, and now a year later I am a skilled worker in the IT industry, thanks to Open Source.
If different members of the development community (and Sun is and continues to be a huge member of that community) perpetually sue each other, it hurts the Open Source reputation (which equals fewer customers and fewer developers) and it prevents them from working together toward the common goal of a better set of software for everybody.
The prospect of that is horrifies me.
weirdest thing I ever saw: scientology advertising on slashdot.
Whoa there... completely off target...
Solaris has had more innovation in the last 5 years than Linux I'd say.
D-Trace, ZFS, Containers - 3 HUGE items - all developed by Sun, then converted to opensource.
Trust me, Sun's got no plans of going anywhere. Solaris will not be abandoned any time soon.
Who is general failure, and why is he reading my hard drive?
Not sure about the x86 world, but Fujitsu have been selling Solaris 10 on their SPARC64 machines for a while. Some of the high-end Sun machines contained Fujitsu SPARC64 chips for a while, but I'm not sure if they still do.
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
umm.. it did?
bill joy, etc.. see BSD UNIX
friggin ubuntard n00b..
Novell is asking Judge Kimball to force SCO to give the money Sun paid to SCO to Novell. If Novell wins this point then they cannot accept the Sun money and not give Sun what they paid for. So in this case Sun should be OK. Another option for Novell would be to repudiate the SCO-Sun agreement. In this case Novell could not collect the Sun payment, Sun would have no rights to the Novell UNIX code, and Sun would have to sue SCO to get their money back. --------------- Steve Stites
I always thought Solaris was a BSD unix where ad what Novel had bought was system V rights, any Unix historians know for sure? If Novel is system V and sun is BSD all should be well for them.
Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
Just like the old 'threat' to BSD that SCO was spouting.
yep. Runs great on my Dell desktop.
-- @rjamestaylor on Ello
Hooray for open source software - code that builds our cultural heritage! Hooray for justice.
Hurd is good enough for Richard Stallman. I'll pass.
After all, I am strangely colored.
If Fujitsu runs a Solaris newer than 8 I'm not aware of it.
Besides that's regular Solaris and I'm looking for hardware that will run X86 OpenSolaris.
Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity.
"Does anybody actually run OpenSolaris in production on non-Sun hardware? "
I'd run it if they sent me the DVD I requested.
Solaris is System V. SunOS 4.x and earlier were BSD based, but that all changed with the advent of Solaris 2.x in the early 90's.
Better yet, Novell should assign the UNIX copyrights to the Free Software Foundation or the Linux Foundation. Perhaps then they could begin to earn back the trust of the FOSS community.
I hope Novell will take advantage of this and threaten to sue Sun.
I think a good compromise settlement would be to force Sun to place Solaris under a Linux-compatible license so that Linux can reuse whichever bits and pieces of Solaris seem useful.
Friend, you have entirely too much time on your hands.
My wording was not very good, and you are quite correct. The point I was trying to make was that Sun provided many of the resources that many of us used to download Linux from. I would hazard to guess that more copies of Linux were downloaded from Sunsite's than from any other single source. I am not trying to suggest that Linux owes its success to Sun, but I am saying that Sun did make major contributions to the environment we have today. Also, they have been doing so far longer than almost anyone else. Although there are many thinks not to like about Sun, these contributions should be remembered and acknowledged before attacking them.
"To those who are overly cautious, everything is impossible. "
I need Open Source. I make my living with Linux. I need Linux to be strong and healthy. I need Apache and PHP. I need Bluefish, Kate and Quanta Plus
None of the software you mention depends on Sun. And that's fairly typical: a normal Linux install contains very little Sun software (except maybe OpenOffice).
If different members of the development community (and Sun is and continues to be a huge member of that community) perpetually sue each other, [...]
There are lots of ways in which people and companies hurt the open source community. I think that Sun's contributions have been overall negative; while they have released a lot of code, they have also badmouthed other open source projects, supported SCO, and picked licenses deliberately designed to be incompatible with other open source projects. So, if a lawsuit by Novell could shut Sun down, or at least shut them up, I'd be all for it.
Do you love the cock?
C# is the antithesis of a decent language. It's a wrapper for java-esque syntax and rules on top of C.
And let's not forget that if a library is written and a class has a method not declared with the "override" keyword, it's equivalent to a Java library with a method declared "final". I'm sure libraries have never been inadvertently made useless in C# because someone was too lazy to add override to all methods except those that needed to be final.
That's just one major flaw with C#.
The cesspool just got a check and balance.
rms doesn't use Hurd, though. He uses Linux.
"You can either have software quality or you can have pointer arithmetic, but you cannot have both at the same time."
So what if they have done bad things in the past? Right now, they support open source. As long as they keep supporting open source, I will support them.
weirdest thing I ever saw: scientology advertising on slashdot.
Fixed URL:o c/2006-11-20-flossimpact.pdf
http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/ict/policy/d
weirdest thing I ever saw: scientology advertising on slashdot.
Early on, Sun had no complaints against LInux. It was no more a threat than Minix or even the small-player *nix clones like Coherent. Times changed in the mid and late 90s when Linux started showing up on more and more servers, and when some people began actively questioning why they should be sending large licensing fees to guys like Sun when they could port their software and infrastructure over to Linux. At that point, Sun was not pleased.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
You'd pick Red Hat over Solaris simply for the sake of package management? I hate to tell you this, but it's not exactly rocket science to figure out how to keep a Solaris system up to date and manage third party software packages on one of those systems.
Solaris, especially on Sun hardware, is a very solid operating system.
You certianly don't live up to your name here, "Professor UNIX".
Fujitsu runs Solaris 9 and 10. I've used them both on Primepower servers. As a matter of fact, in Solaris 10, There was no "Fujitsu" distribution... it was just Solaris. Also, the new APL Line (Replacing the Sun 15-25K line) is a joint venture between Sun and Fujitsu and uses the best parts of both of their high end platforms and is sold by BOTH companies.
That's a surprisingly uninformed post you made there buddy. First, of all the open source licenses out there, the one that take the most childish attitude of "my ball, my rules" is the GPL. Compare the GPL with the other major licenses and it's the one that puts the most restrictions on people who would incorporate the code into their deliverables.
Secondly, Novell would have a really hard fucking time suing Sun over Unix because Sun didn't buy their license to unix from SCO. They bought it from AT&T way back. What they bought from SCO several years ago was licenses for additional drivers. Which wouldn't be under the rights Novell purchased from AT&T when they bought Unix.
Sun has built more core technologies and released more code open source than almost any other organization. You are disingenius with you claims of bad mouthing. The most recent spat comes from Linux people shitting on Sun and Sun responding. Eg. systrace and Andrew Morton's claims that Sun is fracturing the non-windows market. Hey Andrew here's a clue for you, Sun was shipping a non-windows product before Linus ever started work in Linux. If you can grasp that little fact it would make a lot more sense for you to say Linux is fragmenting the non-Windows market.
Hurd is really cool technology. It's just not finished yet.
If it ever gets finished, I will consider using it. After all, Linux is just a kernel. It's quite easy to assemble a decent GNU/Something OS on top of some other kernel. Solaris runs the Gnome desktop, Nexenta adds APT and an Ubuntu userland on top of a Solaris heart. Most people would not be able to tell them from any Linux desktop.
http://www.dieblinkenlights.com
The GPL isn't an open source license. It's a free software license. Those 'restrictions' are to ensure that the software remains free. Don't like it? Write your own code to reimplement the stuff that's GPL-d and use whatever license you like.
These are not the keywords you are looking for...
...The keywords you are looking for are "virtual" and "abstract". "Override" is for overriding a virtual or abstract member.
Actually Sun bought out their license from Novell in 1994
9 4_March_24/ai_15082383/
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0NEW/is_19
No, rms uses Gnu/Linux, you heathen!
Speaking of Sun adding open source to Linux...
Isn't NFS a Sun project? What implications would this have for Novell? I'm not sure if NFS has ties to the original Unix from Dennis R. and co., but it would hurt just about every Linux server distro if somehow NFS were to be entangled to this whole thing. Along those same lines, I just started an OpenSolaris NAS using ZFS, which will probably be connected to my Linux server over NFS (or SMB, depending on the complexity of directory services). Should I be weary that in the future these might not play well together? It would be a shame as we just got ZFS via FUSE, and from what I can tell ZFS really does seem to be the "last word in file systems", as Sun has put it. At least for the near future. Any thoughts from those who have a good grasp on the issues and licensing involved?
If I mod you up, it doesn't necessarily mean I agree with what you've said, sorry.
He uses GNU+Linux now (says it GNU plus Linux).
While I'm posting: Who owns UNIX?? Does anyone still actually have a legitimate claim to owning UNIX? I thought this was a late 1980s problem, why is it cropping up now?
// MD_Update(&m,buf,j);
If different members of the development community (and Sun is and continues to be a huge member of that community) perpetually sue each other, it hurts the Open Source reputation (which equals fewer customers and fewer developers) and it prevents them from working together toward the common goal of a better set of software for everybody.
Yes, it does do all that. Now...try to think of who could possibly benefit from such an arrangement, and everything will conveniently fall into place.
What?
The Open Group owns the trademark on the name UNIX®, so whoever owns code that TOG says is Unix owns a Unix product.
TOG currently gives the nod to any set of code that conforms to the Single UNIX® Specification, as maintained by The Austin Group. Thus, from a product point of view, Unix is not a set of code but a set of specifications.
So, if Linux were to evolve to the point where it met the SUS, Linux could be UNIX®. :-)
I'm running OpenSolaris on an IBM x305 file server attached to a 1.6TB RAID array (buy yourself a 10 megapixel camera that also shoots video and you'll need one of those, too...), an x335 DNS/LDAP/Samba server, an x335 DHCP/SunRay server (yeah, my kid's first computers are SunRays...), and an e326m with two dual-core Opteron 280s that I use for programming. For some reason, IBM X-series servers are dirt cheap on EBay as they seem to sell for about half what a comparable HP or Dell goes for, despite the fact that the IBMs IMO are engineered a whole lot better. I picked up an x335 dual-core 3.06GHz Xeon with dual 36GB U320 disks for about $250 including shipping. Hell, brand-new e326m's still sealed in the IBM box are going for under $500, and ones with dual-core Opterons can be had for $600 - and like I said, that's new, sealed in box.
My third x335 runs CentOS 5, but I'll probably convert it over to Win2K3 server, run turdball, er, terminal server and convert the wife over to a SunRay. You can get SunRay's on EBay for about $5. Put a keyboard, mouse, and monitor on it, plug in the Ethernet and go. Animation over the SunRay sucks, though.
As for Sun hardware, the E3500 in my basement now runs OpenSolaris, too. When it's running anyway, which isn't often because it sucks something like 15 or 20 amps. The Sun 250, would, too, if I were to bother replacing its bad hard drive. But it's a power hog, too, and an old UltraSPARC II or eight just doesn't cut it against dual-core Opterons or ~3GHz Xeons.
As for what OpenSolaris is, it's the next version of production Solaris. The latest version of OpenSolaris that I have (Nevada, build 66) calls itself SunOS 5.11, with a date of October 2007. It's not end of life abandonware, it's beta testing the next version of the production OS.
If those were my only two choices then I'd pick Red Hat. I've never used Solaris 10 for more than anything but messing around, but I've used Solaris 9 and below extensively and frankly, their package management system sucks ass.
My experience with packages on Red Hat has left me of the opinion that I'd rather find the original distributions from wherever Red Hat got them and roll my own distro than deal with the Red Hat Package Manager or anything that uses it ever again. If I didn't have experience with better free UNIX packaging schemes (which, as far as I can tell, means everything else) I might be inclined to assume the whole idea was a scam.
HP: http://h71028.www7.hp.com/enterprise/cache/492635- 0-0-0-121.html?jumpid=reg_R1002_USEN
b s/
EBS supporting IBM x86: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/09/07/sun_ibm_e
OF course, you can always check Sun's HCL, to see whose systems they will support...
http://www.sun.com/bigadmin/hcl/
To add onto that, Mac OS X Leopard has been certified as a Unix operating system, despite being based on BSD and their own (open source) kernel and (closed source) interface, none of which came from Unix.
i x.certified/
http://www.macnn.com/articles/07/08/02/leopard.un
http://watching-eyes.blogspot.com/
Classpath is not useless (even with the sun JDK). For one thing, it is the only way to get a fully open source implementation of the JAVA Cryptography libraries (I don't get how the FSF implementation of these libraries can be distributed without any problems yet Sun is unable to distribute their own implementations, citing "export controls". Or have the FSF already gone through the same export control process that Sun are presumably in the process of going through?)
Solaris 10 Hardware Compatibility List
Solaris Express Developer Edition (OpenSolaris, basically) Hardware Compatibility List
And just because it's not on there doesn't mean it won't run Solaris.
Admittedly 1.4 (though I will point out that C# has the major language features introduced after then, like generics (and .Net's are better), enums (though done differently -- I'm not sure which is better), autoboxing, varargs, and syntactic sugar for loops that iterate over collections; some of these features were in C# before Java), but I did use Eclipse.
I have to hand it to the Eclipse folks, when editing Java, that's a better IDE than Visual Studio was before 2K5. The main thing I liked about Eclipse was the refactoring support; I wish the C++ editors I use would support that. 2K5 does have refactoring support, though there seem to be less options than I remember in Eclipse. The ones I used most often though are in Java.
I should also say that I haven't done all that much with C#, just made a couple programs for myself with it. I just know that I got very frustrated with some things in the Java language, and C# would have gone a long way toward helping with those frustrations.
"Solaris" has almost always been used to refer to their bloated crapware based on SVR4, rather than their relatively slim but buggy SunOS, which was based on BSD.
Of course, late releases of SunOS got relabeled "Solaris" to confuse people.
Disclaimer: Modern Solaris doesn't suck so much, but SVR4 needed a lot more polish than it got early on, and it's always been sorta huge.
My blog: http://www.seebs.net/log/ --- My iPhone/iPad app: http://www.seebs.net/seebsfrac/
Friend, you have entirely too much time on your hands.
What did you think the Time Cube guy does with the other 3 parallel 24-hour days?
yawn.
e rse())) + cross(v3,v4) is not an option.
wake me up when Java supports operator overloading. And before you take the typical java stance of 'well-that's just syntactic sugar', bear in mind some of us write codes where 95% of the code is math, and we aren't adding and subtracting ints/floats/doubles/complex types.
vector.cross( vec2.times(matrix.identity.transpose()+mat2.inves
It's said that H-P boast that they have more customers running Solaris on their hardware than on Sun's x86 hardware. Not surprising given that H-P have been in the x86 game much longer than Sun, so have a much larger installed base of x86 systems. H-P (and others) will need Solaris to make good use of their systems.
For all the claims that Linux is a modern and superior OS, Solaris is much more scalable under heavy workloads. Solaris runs happily at 100% utilization for things like big transaction processing systems, whereas Linux on the same hardware collapses under the workload. It's no mean feat to build an OS that can handle big workloads on big multiprocessor systems, and this is becoming more apparent with multi-core/multi-socket systems - something the likes of H-P, Intel and AMD are probably beginning to recognize.
On big systems, Linux has only worked well for high-performance computing applications, e.g., on SGI; in these cases, the OS hardly has any work to do and things like contention in the kernel are much less of a problem. Before someone mentions IBM mainframes, Linux is running in multiple virtual machines on those; it doesn't handle the whole machine.
Page one from the doc you listed.
"Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in this Study are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the European Commission."
Fixed that.
http://dilemma.gulecha.org - My philospohical short film.
Well, it's obviously an option - you just typed it. :-) It just happens to fail in being a good option...
Tried installing on an older X86 laptop (for experimentation/understanding) today morning. Did not succeed. Successfully installed and used (Novell) SUSE. I think I am losing interest in OpenSolaris after this experience. One more failure to install on good hardware and it is bye bye for me.
Sun paid SCO $10M for those "rights". SCO owes most of that money to Novell (and more). Novell will likely never get their money from SCO and they should make Sun feel some of the pain too. After all Sun failed in their due dilligance with regard to the IP rights they bought. Any competent lawyer can plainly see that there was no written conveyance of the copyrights to SCO. Sun should have known what they were doing. Now they should pay for their mistake and offset some of the huge legal costs that Novell had to bear.
*Weebit does the happy dance!*
Sun paid in full back in 1994, the rumor was that the price was $140 million paid to USL/Novell.
b rowse_frm/thread/75df829a49e688f9/426a4d8b1d3c933e ?lnk=st&q=sun+usl+purchase&rnum=3#426a4d8b1d3c933e
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.unix.solaris/
I never could have afforded to buy Windows Server 2003 with IIS as ASP just to learn, but it took me one evening to install and start learning debian, apache, mysql and php, and now I make my living with those tools.
.iso of windows 2003 server, absolutely free. It expires in 180 days, but that is lots of time to learn.
:)
Not to take away from open source, but your argument is BS. Microsoft will let download an
And if you subscribe to MSDN, you get pretty much everything from microsoft.
I was a sand-pounding infantryman for god's sake, and now a year later I am a skilled worker in the IT industry, thanks to Open Source.
I would say it's probably because you're reasonably bright, willing to learn, and willing to read. But that's just my opinion
If you inquire about a Solaris contract for a non-Sun machine, they'll be happy to sell it to you, but you'll also get a pretty good offering on the Sun hardware at the same time. :-)
The support contract is remarkably cheap, and it's clear that they want you to take it so that they can sell you their hardware. Nothing wrong with that, the deals are pretty good, and it's not like you have to buy their machines.
Just because you don't know about them, doesn't mean they don't exist.
This is the real problem with Dell hardware. You never really know what you get. You have to double- and triple-check with the salesman when you place the order so that you get the correct components.
Or, you can get the Sun Opteron servers. A bit cheaper, but much more robust and you know that the hardware will work.
Export control would only be an issue if the FSF libraries were written or hosted in the U.S.
If the desperately litigious SCO, thinking it owned the copyright to Unix, could announce that it found no reason to sue Sun over Solaris, how does it make any sense that the less litigious Novell would sue Sun?
Just because SCO was found to not own the rights to Unix does not mean Sun's OS is suddenly at odds with Unix copyright. In fact, that seems to make no sense at all. Am I missing something huge?
Can I ask you something? Is 2005 really so hard to say/type that you say/type 2K5 instead?
Gee, that's odd... why then does the European Commission say that Sun is the number one contributor to the entire Debian project?
Yes, there is a lot of code by Sun that is available as Debian packages, but you can't assess the value of that contribution by its quantity. For example, there is very little Sun code in Debian that is essential for running a Linux desktop or server system.
So what if they have done bad things in the past?
Plenty of things, like trying to market Solaris as a superior alternative to Linux, rebranding Gnome as a "Java desktop system", deliberately picking incompatible licenses for their open source releases, misrepresenting Java as an open standard, trying to sabotage Harmony, failing to follow through on their commitment to having Java become an ISO/ANSI standard, their involvement with SCO, their involvement with Microsoft, not accepting contributions under open source licenses to projects like Java, etc. That's in addition to foisting lousy technologies like NFS on the world.
Right now, they support open source. As long as they keep supporting open source, I will support them.
Well, my advice to you would be to check your facts and not take their word for it. If, after checking, you find that they support open source projects that matter to you, go ahead and support them (and I hope your contributions aren't limited to posting on Slashdot).
I did check, and I found that none of Sun's open source contributions matter to me, but that I do find several of their activities objectionable, and that's why I don't support them.
Eh? Wassat? Y'll 'ave te speek oop laddy, I can no' hear ya talkin'. All aah heard was "My ball, my rules".
I hate printers.
It's not finished yet, although they've been working on it for 17 years! .
I'll bet that after 17+ years of development, it's gonna be really, really cool technology!
Always keep a sapphire in your mind
Sun has built more core technologies and released more code open source than almost any other organization.
Sure, but quantity isn't the same as utility or significance. Because of claims like yours, I looked at Sun's actual contributions to the software I use daily, and I know that they have not made any big contributions that are useful to me. Without Sun, Linux would look pretty much the same (only that we might actually have a decent network file system).
Eg. systrace and Andrew Morton's claims that Sun is fracturing the non-windows market. Hey Andrew here's a clue for you, Sun was shipping a non-windows product before Linus ever started work in Linux.
You are so right: Sun was shipping a non-Windows product long before Linux. Now, what did Sun do back then and what was the result? They turned BSD into a proprietary product, talked a lot about openness and how superior their technologies were, and then they fractured the UNIX market and helped Microsoft to market dominance.
There are many indications that Sun is heading down the same path again, only that this time they are targeting Linux. I don't want to repeat that history.
Sun provide a device detection tool which will scan your hardware and should give you an idea of if drivers are available for the various bits of your system.
t .html
http://www.sun.com/bigadmin/hcl/hcts/device_detec
The only reason Hurd isn't finished is because Linux the kernel has made Hurd obsolete. few are willing to work on it and so development is slow. If the same amount of developers who worked on Linux worked on Hurd we would be at Hurd 2.6.xx too. I would love to see a GPL3 Hurd being initialised. A bit better than using a GPL3 Solaris kernel IMHO. The use of a Micro Kernel would be very interesting too, especially with Torvalds' flames against MINIX. I'm in the camp for the choice. I greedily await another choice. Unfortunately it will no doubt be a severely outdated choice :(.
I notice that some nimrod has marked a number of posts "trolling" when they are most definitely not trolling at all.
I think we should definitely all point and laugh at Sun for being stupid enough to be intimidated by SCO. As the previous poster commented, indeed this is poetic justice.
XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
They weren't real happy with the Sparc based Linux distributions, which took their fairly robust hardware and extended its life by many years with small Linux distributions, rather than paying expensive license fees for the next version of the software. Linux merely culminated Sun's irritation with open source projects like gcc, X11 with its forks, and gzip instead of their Sun compiler, Openview, and UNIX's compress tool.
Personally I use GNOME/X/GNU/Linux, even when I use a terminal I use GTerm. I also make sure to specify that is what I'm using...
My friend, you may be a champion in the Understatement of the Century Contest.
Sure, there are many entirely respectable reasons why Hurd never got finished.
But, ah, erm
It's time to give up!
The Hurd project has failed! Blue blazes, tarnation and a monkey, it's been seventeen fucking years!
There are software projects for which a delay of seventeen days is intolerable, although that is usually salvageable. A project that is seventeen weeks too late, on the other hand, is universally recognized as a failure.
And we all know about projects that come in seventeen months too late. We all know that someone, somewhere in a project like that was thoroughly incompetent.
There are simply no words, no satire, no amount of acid-tongued vituperation that could do justice to a software development project that still isn't finished after seventeen years.
Always keep a sapphire in your mind
Its simple to see the game:
Imagine this conversation at the high seat of power:
"Linux is a community, it can be fractured by buying a few players.
They are soft targets. First we divide them and conquer, upto legal and marketing requirements.
Then we dump SCO - SCO's boss gave us a lot of support, we give him a nice house beside the beach in California. And a nice bank balance.
Now, Novell is SCO Reloaded!
With a hand in OIN and a big market following with SUSE, we can now fight the real emerging enemy who actually has a legal department to stop us at our game using our IP tricks, and that is SUN
Now it is SUN versus Novell, a newer, much more organized, battle where we have more powerful instruments - plus we have Linuxers hating SUN and we have SUN with all their best open sourced.
Now BOTH Linux AND SUN are soft targets,
Cheers Embalmer, Pearly!
To your wealth!"
(single "l", mind you)
Surely, Noorda is crying.
This is not apparently related, but after you read it, you will find just how deeply connected to this issue it is - you do not need to spend millions on marketing, just write the code and announce it on digg/here:
http://savannah.gnu.org/task/?7027
Note that they have also _threatened_ Jim Zemlin to say what he has been saying and they are going to _threaten_ everyone who tries to speak against them.
I doubt they have bribed anyone, especially because Jim Zemlin was the only person to say:
"dont touch the community, you touch even one of us and we will all unite and fight against you".
Now they've threatened Jim to say what he has said. He is not bribed, I am sure.
There's something very very fishy going on out there.
It looks like a threat from all angles, but IANAPolitican.
So the best we the community, could do, is this:
A thousand people shouting out loudly against _threats_ of all kinds will definitely help save these leaders who are being individually singled out as targets.
The mighty $$ powers are doing everything they can to stop _anything_ opensource that will give them even a minor problem. Linux, SUN, GNU, all are their daily _nightmares_
However, before speaking up or shouting loud, remember what they did to the guy who wrote: "show us the code" - he lost his job or website or both.....
Now that law isn't going to help them on the 235 patents and their product is exposed to be technically rubbish, they are losing market share because of _their_ _own_ technical mistakes - so many unfulfilled promises and such a bad product, they are using _threats_ to FOSS leaders and being opportunistic (sure?) with favorable judgements.
Really nice way to fix bugs in your program - sue your competitor.
They are extremely good legally and so they use other entities as proxies.
PJ might be happy that this is the end of SCO.
But dont think they have waited for more than a day or two to file against SUN, now that they have succeeded in breaking Linux unity.
Someone has to do what PJ did all this while. Who is PJ v2.0?
Essentially, no company _likes_ their users. They all like _money_. Users are, well, users.
Use and throw. That's why they are "user"s.
Why WASTE MILLIONS marketing linux when web2.0 and http://savannah.gnu.org/task/?7027 allow dummy installation training?
Some being the operative world. Real world .NET applications are infested with Pinvokes, ActiveX and dependencies on ASP.NET (IIS) and MS SQL Server. Unless you are dealing with an open source .NET application (e.g. NUnit), the chances of the app running on Mono are close to zero. So while Mono is cool technology, it is essentially useless if you were expecting .NET code to just run on Linux.
This is in stark contrast to Java where the APIs are pretty rich and invoking native code has have never been encouraged. Most calls to JNI are in runtimes (e.g. to invoke native theme engines) and not the application level. Java code generally does run anywhere, often requiring no more than copying the .jar from one machine to the other. Hence the reason that GCJ & Kaffe have had better luck supporting Java than Mono has with .NET. That isn't to say they're perfect though - running Eclipse on GCJ brings a whole new definition to pain and suffering.
Um hm. That's what I meant by could, but technically your version is more precise. All the details tend to obscure the irony, though. :-) :-)
See the Solaris 10 HCL - in particular the OEM vendors page:
v iews/oem_and_system_vendor_products_all_results.pa ge1.html
http://www.sun.com/bigadmin/hcl/data/sol/systems/
There is plenty of Compaq/HP gear on there, not to mention IBM BladeChassis machines etc. Probably not that interesting for
those on a budget or the slasddot "my whitebox is teh leet" crowd, but for real IT shops it is a reasonable list.
"If everybody is thinking alike, somebody isn't thinking" - Gen. George S. Patton
These project aren't meaningless for the same reason that both KDE and Gnome aren't meaningless. They allow for options. It means that nobody has to depend on one single source for a given open-source implementation, and that, in my opinion, is one of the most fundamental benefits of open-source. Just because it's open source doesn't mean that competition and alternatives aren't a good thing.
Sadly, it even beats Duke Nukem Forever.
Now take a minute for that to sink in.
i hate to bust your bubble pal, but package managment is the least of any big company's concerns when choosing a unix system. specially because is a ROYAL PAIN IN THE ASS to even change a simple configuration on those boxes.
lots of planning and preparation goes on top of this. it involves filling change request forms, getting management approval (implying explaining to a non-techie boss what that thing does), meetings with managements, supliers and users, you need a full backup of the server in some cases, other departments must be on stand by just in case... it's burocracy gone mad.
the result is that patches and fixes are not installed that often, even security patches only get installed when there's a clear and present danger and no workarounds (disabling the service, changing configs, etc.) are found.
if you ever get to work for a fortune 100 company, (like my last 3 jobs as unix admin) you'll understand what i mean.
not to mention that your comparison was the most unfortunate one. RPM sucks even more than solaris pkg tools. if you have to wade through dependency hell during a change and it ends delayed, you're toast. the next change you'll be making will be to your resume.
What ? Me, worry ?
The issue in question *SHOULDN'T* be Sun but Microsoft who purchasing IP rights to UNIX for their Services for UNIX. Sun already bought them 20 years ago. The issue at play are sales of IP by SCO to third parties.
And with the ruling Novel has the UNIX license, and SCO does not this is why Microsoft went for a Novell alliance. They know SCO is on it's last legs and yet need to keep enough alliances going for the next concept Microsoft borrows.
Microsoft knows it's kernel is a PoS, they are just milking it for what it is worth. Even they know in their think tanks that someday they need a clean kernel with full memory protection and pre-emptive multitasking. They know the message passing is a '60s kind of thing and shoe horning in stability will fail in time as the current windows kernel is a nightmare mess.
Heh, SUN paid for a bridge, Novell might even get that money as it is rightfully theirs. They cannot take the money AND sue SUN. If Novell doesn't let SUN to do what they want for that money, Novell must give back the money they didn't even take from the corpse of SCO.
Patents Drive Free Software as Hurricanes Drive Construction Industry
1. Those lists have been updated recently.
2. You apparently want some vendor to suck your dick while you piece together a machine out of random parts.
So, yeah, you're an idiot. And a rude one at that.
They bought the rights FROM ATT (prior to the sell off to Novell). I believe it was a 100 million. And yes, IIRC, the press said that Sun had full rights to the source code for THEIR use. It was a 1 time fee. BUT ATT had just concluded a lawsuit with BSD and ATT was trying to close the source code, so I SERIOUSLY doubt that it included the right to distribute the source. In addition, it is VERY doubtful that McNeally paid SCO 20 million for some USB drivers. So I am guessing that Sun had it set-up to allow them to open the source (as well as fund anything anti-linux). All in all, Sun will surely be working closely with Novell, either in a deal or in the courts. They will also have to explain their actions shortly to Novell, as in why did they fund SCO on this? I do not like the deal that Novell cut with MS, but it was not designed by Novell to undercut Linux or the other distros. OTH, Sun OBVIOUSLY was funding SCO to knock the legs out from under Linux.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
So what if they have done bad things in the past?
... odd.
Plenty of things, like trying to market Solaris as a superior alternative to Linux, rebranding Gnome as a "Java desktop system", deliberately picking incompatible licenses for their open source releases, misrepresenting Java as an open standard, trying to sabotage Harmony, failing to follow through on their commitment to having Java become an ISO/ANSI standard, their involvement with SCO, their involvement with Microsoft, not accepting contributions under open source licenses to projects like Java, etc. That's in addition to foisting lousy technologies like NFS on the world.
Excuse me? How does Sun promoting Solaris somehow count as something bad? Sun considers Solaris to be one of the company jewels so why shouldn't they promote their own product? Does this also make all of the other Unix projects out there bad (FreeBSD, OpenBSD) ?
As for rebranding Gnome as the Java Desktop System, that was just silly, not bad. Plus some Linux companies come up with their own rebranded names for the desktop. I would hardly call that bad.
Sure, Sun dickered around with open sourcing Java for a long time, but you have to understand what they went through with Microsoft attempting to embrace and extend (and effectively break) Java. In the end, they eventually did move towards an open source license. Hardly bad.
How are they bad for contributing NFS to the world? Just because you don't like it or think the product is not as good as you would like, how does that make Sun bad?
Your examples of Sun being bad are quite
Actually the company I work for is running a little over 50 Solaris10 boxes in production running on x86 hardware, and as time goes on we look to replace all our Linux boxes with Solaris. Yes I am a long time Linux fan and yes I still think it is a great OS. So why the change? It is easier to manage in a data center and has a lot of tools and features that Linux doesn't have like zones and the zfs file system. Also the EOL policy for Solaris is longer. I would rather not have to rebuild an OS on a box because of lack of updates before the hardware is either outdated or dies.
Yes they are lacking in the driver department but they are working on that and have made big improvements in the last two years on that.
No I am not saying that one is better an the other. Yes I am still a big fan of Linux. All I am saying is yes we use it and love it and for our needs it fits best.
Please remember that over 25% of the code in your Linux box was given freely to the Linux Community by Sun Systems. Remember they are buying up the IP patents that are owned by others and Open Sourcing these patents.
Yes a long time ago they were worse than MS about being propriety but you have to give them respect for their change it heart. They have seen the change and changed with it. Something MS has failed to do.
No, KDE allows for options. GNOME allows for removing options :)
Well, the Hurd is *free* enough for me. It might be good enough if they'd stop going back to the beginning and re-writing everything. (I know the trap...I'm in it too. But I do know that it's a trap.)
I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
Why do you say it's failed? I wouldn't.
Now it's true that with Linux around the Hurd has no particular reason to rush to conclusion. It's being run as a continued research project. As such it's a current success, even if it get no closer to completion.
It's also a totally independent free software OS that could mature quite rapidly if there were need. There were a few times during the SCO vs. the world trial that I was quite glad that such a backstop existed. (True, OpenSolaris makes this less necessary...but first we need to gauge Novell's reaction now that it's been "confirmed in it's ownership of Unix". Probably nothing to worry about, but in such matters care is advisable.)
Still, I've always been a belt AND suspenders kind of guy, and I'll continue to appreciate the Hurd's existence even if(when?) OpenSolaris becomes GPL3. (But I might switch from Linux to OpenSolaris...or some close offshoot.)
I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
You could look into D or Python (or Ada, or possibly even C++...but I'm less sure about that). They all support the kind of overload that you want, with differing advantages and drawbacks. Except for speed, Python is the best choice. If you want speed, then of the languages that I know the best choices are D or Ada (and I prefer D).
... but there's no way I would know.
... but I don't think you would find the syntax acceptable. So I left it to the end as well. I'm not sure about the speed of various Schemes, but it would have essentially the same syntax problem as LISP.
N.B.: There's more than one D, so the particular one that I mean is: http://www.digitalmars.com/d/index.html
With Python you might get the speed that you need either via Pyrex or NumPy (or possibly it's now PyNumeric). This actually operates via calls to C libraries, but they get hidden by syntactic sugar.
D and Ada are type sensitive to varying degrees. (Ada tends to be verbosely fanatic about it.)
I'm not familiar with Mono, because I don't trust it not to have embedded MS IP of some sort (patents probably, if anything). It's probably safe enough...but I tend to be nervous. That's also why I won't have anything to do with Novell unless through an intermediate who has their own lawyers. Probably there's no MS IP
And since I won't let MS products be installed, (Not since I read the last MS EULA!) I can't speak WRT C#.
Another possible choice is ObjectiveC or ObjectiveC++. That gives more flexibility at run time than C or C++ (well, unless you wriggle and turn a lot) with good compatibility. (C libraries are directly callable, and I believe that C++ libraries are as well.) I'm not sure that you could redefine the primitive operators over class operations...but I believe that you could. The major problem with ObjectiveC/C++ is that there doesn't seem to be any significant amount of tutorial material. Still, every legitimate c program is a legitimate ObjectiveC program, so you could learn slowly. And it transfers easily to the Mac. (I'm less sure how well it runs on MSWind.)
I didn't yet mention Ruby or Smalltalk. Both of them can do what you want (though the Smalltalk syntax is peculiar...and might be unacceptable). Unfortunately, Ruby is slower than Python, even though I like the language design better. Smalltalk comes in a variety of forms, but tends to be faster than pure Python code. Unfortunately, it's far easier to link to an external library from Python. Smalltalk tries to be a closed system. So I basically left both of these out of the discussion.
Then there's LISP and Scheme. A good LISP would be essentially as fast as C
If interpreted Java is fast enough for you (you didn't mention speed as a consideration), then you should probably give Python a look-see. It's a bit slower when you're using pure Python code, but a lot of stuff is done via library calls, which are generally optimized C code...and thus quite fast.
Otherwise I'd give D strong consideration.
I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
In that sense, I'm very grateful to all Classpath developers for providing at least some of the impetus to Sun's management's decision. Even though I wonder what will now happen to all that effort.
To be, or not to be: isn't that quite logical, Slashdot Beta?
Actually, SunSite isn't the most important contribution of Sun. OpenOffice is. At the time that Sun made StarOffice5.0 (I think that was the version) freely distributable in Linux there was *NO* competing word processor. I had actually been using Netscape's HTML editor as a word processor because there wasn't anything better. (This was actually worse than in 1966 when I was using nroff as a word processor. N.B.: Not text editor. I used a text editor to produce the files that I fed to nroff.) There were plenty of decent text editors around, just no word processors. Yes, groff was probably around, but that is so far inferior to nroff when it comes to a human using it to product formatted text that it isn't funny. Even troff was far inferior. I'd have been better off using Lyx. I almost did...I tried it several times, but never had enough motivation to make it over the initial hump.
I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
Don't debate. Try both. Then choose the one you like best.
I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
I believe since Sun and AT&T jointly developed SVR4 back in the late 80's that Sun bought the full rights back when AT&T still owned the whole smash; before UNIX Labs, Novell, etc. You better believe Sun has the ability to point out they or AT&T wrote every line of possible conflicting code.
Sun has 2 trees for Solaris, the OpenSolaris tree has been picked over with a fine tooth comb by the lawyers. The second tree is proprietary code that only goes into Solaris where Sun tracks who owns what. The second tree is getting smaller as they replace encombered code with freely developed replacement.
See opensolaris.org for details.
slashdot is the home of the linux fanboys, remember ;-)
Sig out of date
Oh man, don't!!! Most people here are parent-basement living kids who's religion is Linux... Your well-balanced, and informed comments won't go down well here!
Sig out of date
Operator overloading is a decision that makes or breaks the java language for those that write highly arithmatic code. Some prefer to see their standard symbols in code, and find the sort of code you presented unacceptable. I'm not in either camp on that one, since there are certainly very good and fast special purpose libraries in C, FORTRAN and others that would probably suit you better. I've not had the need to research Java's math capabilities, other than I know that a lack of understanding of Java's internals can create some incredibly slow code compared to what is achievable. (Mainly in multi-dimensional matrix algebra).
The cesspool just got a check and balance.
As I remember it. Altos was hired by USL to merge Unix System. Sun was hired to merge Berkeley code into Unix. Finally Sun was hired to merge the resulting code and that became SVR4. USL was only a management front and did no coding. Novel bought that management organization.
http://techupdate.zdnet.com/techupdate/stories/mai n/Could_Sun_hold_a_key_to_SCO.html/ as an example. For those too busy to read, Sun purchased "expansive" rights to Unix from USL shortly after it was acquired by Novel ... long before the deal between Novell and SCO. So Sun's rights predate SCOs. No doubt the legal team imaginative enough to craft the last lawsuits won't let a little matter of time and priority deter them ... but one imagines the Courts would.
Is that MIT X11r5, X11r6, XFree86, X.org, MetroX? Do you use just Gnome libraries, or do you have Qt and some KDE libs for certain applications? What window manager do you use: Evolution, WindowMaker, AfterStep, BlueCurve, GNUStep? Is your X framebuffer with a card-specific driver in the kernel, or is your card driver in the X server?
c /k3b/CUPS+hplip/vim/bash/VLC/VLC/Kghostview/Kghost view/KOrganizer+Karm/urpmi/gcc3/startitup/iptables /Basille+SELinux+custom/ALSA/kernel.org/AfterStep/ KDE/X.org/Apache/Postfix/MySQL/Postgres/Samba/gpm/ GNU+BSD+Mozlla+Apache+Postfix+CCL-SA+Commercial/Li nux.
That still leaves out browser, email client, news reader, office applications, text editor, file manager, cd/dvd burning software, printing system, firewall management software, shell, video player, audio player, Postscript viewer, PDF reader, PIM, and a bunch of other end-user options that could be named if one was particular enough.
I guess you could also specify the package manager you use, the compiler your stuff is compiled with if you compile packages yourself, which system init option you use, firewall kernel option, hardening options, and which audio driver platform. Whether you use a distro kernel, a stock kernel.org kernel, an Alan Cox kernel, or a locally customized kernel might be worth noting, too.
One of my systems is a Firefox+Opera+Seamonkey/mutt/tin/OpenOffice/vim/m
Now let's see you get a magazine to put that much detail in an article every time a system is mentioned.
ASUS K8N-DL is supported out of the box. Everything in it works with bundled drivers except for possibly the nVidia SATA controller (I haven't tried.) But no worries, as there is also a SIIG in there, which is.
I currently run this board in production with 2x Opteron 265's with 1GB RAM per core. It's quite nice.
Yeah, Novell. They bought the rights to it from AT&T and they never surrendered it to SCO as the ruling showed.
I used to be a ubuntu user earlier, I still maintain my ubuntu environment but the default has long been replaced by Solaris Express since a year. It is an amazong OS. Give it a shot. -Shiv
Solaris package management may not be the best or cleverest, but it gets the job done.
Companies with thousends of machines (cough, cough, cough) can happily manage their packages in Solaris, so not chosing Solaris for this particular reason sounds like a lazy excuse for not doing your homework.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
http://finance.yahoo.com/q?s=SCOX
Whoever bet that SCOX would be below 50 cents before noon has won, even before the market opened !The announcement this monday morning before the markets opened was:
In Soviet Russia, our new overlords are belong to all your base.
It's one thing to be a rabid fanboy, but something else to be THAT ignorant. ;-)
How on earth did that get moded as interesting when it was plain wrong.
Sun never bankrolled SCO, they did buy a bunch of x86 device driver code from SCO before SCO launched their suit against IBM. But to suggest that this amounted to Sun bankrolling the SCO legal case is rather like accusing any purchaser of UNIXware prior to the case of doing the same thing. Patently BS
But then the whole premise of the article is BS in the first place. Of course SCO didn't have a problem with Sun releasing Solaris Source code, how could they since Sun had very publicly bought the rights to the then SVR4 code from USL before Novell got their hands on it. Or put another way SCO knew that Sun could do what they liked with the code they owned whether SCO liked it or not.
Akkk. But Solaris is a superior alternative to Linux so why on earth should Sun not say so??????
As for Gnome, as Sun is the largest commercial donator of code to the Gnome project as far as I am concerned Sun can call a desktop system using it what they like. It was only a Brand in the same way that SuSE Enterprise Desktop is was called Enterprise Desktop and not SuSE Gnome Desktop.
Sun has not misrepresented Java as an open standard because it is, it even passes the final GPL test
The only involvement with SCO was Sun's purchase of x86 device driver code from them before SCO launched their case against IBM and as for Microsoft Sun successfully Sued Microsoft for over a Billion dollars and now receives payments from Microsoft in return for Sun not suing Microsoft for IP infringements.
I would suggest that you check your facts before posting. I was going to use my Mod points to mod your post down to Troll but I felt the need to respond directly instead.
Sun actually purchased the rights in 1991.