Mass Speculation Suggests Oracle May Kill OpenSolaris

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Mass Speculation Suggests Oracle May Kill OpenSolaris

Posted by ScuttleMonkey on Monday July 13, 2009 @07:44AM from the corporations-excel-at-killing-thiving-communities dept.

CWmike writes to point out that Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols is one of many people questioning where Oracle may land once the acquisition of Sun is complete. One concern that I have heard many people express is that there may be a good chance of OpenSolaris getting the axe for not fitting in with the overall corporate vision. "People outside of IT seldom think of Oracle as a Linux company, but it is. Not only does Oracle encourage its customers to use its own house-brand clone of RHEL (Red Hat Enterprise Linux), Oracle Unbreakable Linux, Oracle has long used Linux internally both on its servers and on some of its desktops. So, what does a Linux company like Oracle wants to do with its newly purchased Sun's open-source operating system, OpenSolaris? The answer appears to be: 'Nothing.' Sun, Oracle and third-party sources are telling me that OpenSolaris developers are afraid that they'll be either moved over to working on Linux or let go once the Sun/Oracle merger is completed."

44 of 205 comments (clear)

Already Open by Major+Blud · 2009-07-13 07:46 · Score: 4, Insightful

It would be kinda hard to kill since the code is already "open" and out in the wild. Oracle can't prevent the current code base from being forked.

--
If you post as Anonymous Coward, don't expect a reply.
1. Re:Already Open by gomek-ramek · 2009-07-13 07:53 · Score: 5, Interesting
  
  The question, though, is whether a fork would be successful. Without the Sun-paid developers, would OpenSolaris keep its development momentum? My guess is that it would not.
2. Re:Already Open by mewrei · 2009-07-13 08:09 · Score: 2, Interesting
  
  Maybe we'll all get lucky and Oracle will just GPL the OpenSolaris code and merge some of the more useful stuff like DTrace and (dare I say it) ZFS into the Linux kernel.
3. Re:Already Open by Bandman · 2009-07-13 08:29 · Score: 2, Funny
  
  At the very least, it would diverge far enough from Solaris to be an almost entirely different product.
  OpenSolaris....OpenBSD...
  Maybe the next version could be called NetSolaris. We could install it on very large toasters.
  
  --
  Check out my sysadmin blog!
4. Re:Already Open by MadFarmAnimalz · 2009-07-13 08:41 · Score: 4, Funny
  
  Or you could just move to FreeBSD.
  I would, but it keeps dying. Don't believe me? Ask Netcraft.
  
  --
  Blearf. Blearf, I say.
5. Re:Already Open by diegocgteleline.es · 2009-07-13 08:50 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  Without the Sun-paid developers, would OpenSolaris keep its development momentum?
  Another similar question is: Even with the Sun-paid developers, can OpenSolaris keep its development momentum? I very much doubt it, in fact if you look at the trends, you could say that solaris lost that momentum years ago. The only thing that keeps the interest in opensolaris today is ZFS (which is great, but it doesn't make the traditional filesystems irrelevant - LVM and traditional raid suck, but it works and it can do almost everything that ZFS does, even if its a bit slower and crappier), and it's impossible to release big innovative features like ZFS every few years, things like zfs only happen one time every n-decades.
  My take: Ellison is not going to follow the anti-Linux competitive attitude that the old Sun had. Its clear that Linux is here to stay, and Oracle couldn't win a fight against Linux, because pretty much everyone except Microsoft and Apple back it. I can't guess what they will do with opensolaris, but it's clear that they aren't going to start a war against Linux, because that would mean starting a war against the huge and increasing share of their Oracle Linux customers.
6. Re:Already Open by ttldkns · 2009-07-13 08:51 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  haven't heard anything exciting to me personally about solaris in 10 years.
  
  ZFS, Nuff Said
  
  --
  How many computers are too many?
7. Re:Already Open by nurb432 · 2009-07-13 09:31 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  True, but unless you have the powerhouse ( with a vested interest ) like sun working on it, it might as well be dead as it will stagnate.
  
  --
  ---- Booth was a patriot ----
8. Re:Already Open by tenco · 2009-07-13 09:42 · Score: 2, Funny
  
  Maybe the next version could be called NetSolaris. We could install it on very large toasters.
  I always wondered if they would run Linux. But you cleared it all up now. It's just so obvious.
9. Re:Already Open by harlows_monkeys · 2009-07-13 09:58 · Score: 4, Interesting
  
  It would be kinda hard to kill since the code is already "open" and out in the wild. Oracle can't prevent the current code base from being forked
  The notion that once you make something open source, you can't revoke that, is interesting. It's widely believed, but I've seen very little legal analysis to support that belief. What little I've seen from open source lawyers has said that it might NOT be true. I'd love to see a test case.
  Some of the factors that would affect a particular case are whether or not the open source license involved is a contract or a bare license. Bare licenses ARE revokable at will by the licensor. In Rosen's book on open source licensing, that is one of the reasons he recommends against using them, in favor of making sure your license is a contract. This is interesting, because one rather prominent open source license, GPL, is not a contract, according to its authors. They are quite insistent about that.
  If a particular open source license IS a contract, then whether it is revocable or not will depend on the terms of the contract. Even then, it may be possible to revoke it, if the licensor is willing to suffer a penalty for breach of contract. Contract penalties are almost always just monetary damages, not an order of specific performance. I'll leave it to others to speculate how that would work out.
  Another issue is sublicensing. With some open source licenses, if you give me your software, I get my license from you. If I then give the software to a third person, they get their license from me. With other open source licenses, the third person gets their license from you, rather than getting a sublicense from me. GPLv3 is one of the latter kinds of license--it has a specific statement in the license that you cannot sublicense it.
  For licenses that are not sublicensible, what happens if the original licensor simply announces that they are giving out no new licenses? People who have the software could still distribute it, free of risk of copyright suit, since they have a license to distribute. But the recipients would not have a license, so they could not redistribute. It might take a way to kill off some open code this way, because it could take a while for all the current owners of copies to stop distributing, but those would probably eventually go away.
  Note that I am NOT saying that open source licenses ARE revokable. Just that no one has given a convincing reason that they are not, and that almost nothing else in contract/licensing law is irrevocable, so the notion that open source licenses are irrevocable should be treated with skepticism at this point.
10. Re:Already Open by jvillain · 2009-07-13 10:49 · Score: 2, Interesting
  
  Ask the dip shit behind proprietary ssh what happens when you open source and then try to take it back. It ain't pretty.
11. Re:Already Open by tyen · 2009-07-13 10:58 · Score: 5, Interesting
  
  Only in user space on Linux, and on BSD some features (integrated iSCSI support for us) that are critical to some sites are missing. We just deployed a new Solaris (paid for the basic subscription support service to get the patches) server to run an inexpensive JBOD disk array that can expand to 384TB of raw disk space using 1TB drives, and ZFS on a paid-for Solaris was the only way to make that project come together on reliability, value, and performance. It is backed by an LTO4 tape library. I treat OpenSolaris as the rough equivalent to RedHat's Fedora; for certain key pieces of infrastructure, there is no substitute for paying up and getting the right technology to get the job done right. I don't see Oracle dumping Solaris, but I wouldn't be terribly put out if Oracle stopped active development for OpenSolaris, and only kept pushing regular updates from upstream with Solaris down to OpenSolaris. Now, if Oracle stopped supporting ZFS, I'd be miffed, but we would migrate over to a LVM and ext4 and live with that.
12. Re:Already Open by Ilgaz · 2009-07-13 14:03 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  Isn't that some kind of justice that BSD in one form reached 10% Desktop use share as OS X?
  If we listened to what people said, iPod would never take off, Apple would release 5-10 tablets and go out of business like 5 times, it would be year of Linux on desktop, Microsoft would be dead like 10 times etc.
  Oracle is a OS company and produces Linux? I have gave up reading after it. Yes, I didn't read submission even and proud of it. Just like I just laughed at ''Java is doomed'' junk.
Complete rubbish by saleenS281 · 2009-07-13 07:47 · Score: 4, Insightful

Oracle aligned with the Linux project because they could have a say in the direction the OS went, and put back code to the project that they wanted/needed for the wares they were selling to be successful.

Now that they own an entire OS stack, they have no need. If nothing else, I expect unbreakable Linux to fade away rather quickly once the acquisition is complete, as well as Oracle shifting the focus of all future DB enhancements to have a Solaris focus with Linux as a secondary, as was the case historically.
1. Re:Complete rubbish by saleenS281 · 2009-07-13 08:09 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  They can't control Linux, and they know that. Larry wants to own the entire stack, and he's made that very clear for a very long time. There's some choice quotes out there to support that initiative, unfortunately I appear to fail at finding them.
2. Re:Complete rubbish by drummerboybac · 2009-07-13 08:12 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  Solaris needs to exist to support the Sun SPARC64 and UltraSPARC T2+ processors, the latter of which is a multithreading whiz. It is used extensively where I work, and I hope they keep making it, as 128 simultaneous hardware threads in a 1U can be some powerful stuff when programmed for appropriately.
3. Re:Complete rubbish by davecb · 2009-07-13 08:51 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  There's a good proof of concept Linux that's run on a T2000, but how many years, how many staff and how many debates on LKML would it take to get from a POC to something you could bet your company on?
  Honorable bird in hand beats however many in the South Atlantic (;-))
  --dave
  
  --
  davecb@spamcop.net
4. Re:Complete rubbish by saleenS281 · 2009-07-13 10:06 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  Not to mention SPARC is the cash cow for Oracle. All the Linux deployments in the world STILL do not equal the amount of money Oracle makes on their legacy SPARC licensing.
5. Re:Complete rubbish by upuv · 2009-07-13 21:05 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  Solaris is not need for UltraSPARC. That's a myth.
  UltraSPARC needs Solaris to live on is the more likely scenario.
  In the next 12-18 months the we are going to see a fair amount of cheap x86/x64 multicore come on line. I mean more than 8 cores.
  For the most part this is going to obsolete the SPARC. Since SPARC development has slowed to a narcoleptic snails pace.
  I personally love working with Solaris. It's consistent and strong. Linux is still not up to the Enterprise levels that Solaris is. But man Linux has made massive progress in the last 24 months.
  In 36 months those Uber T2 SPARC machines are going in the tip. Sure there is going to be some lost tech when the SPARC dies. There is lots x86/x64 has to catch up on. But one thing it doesn't have to catch up on is price. I can solve the performance gap fairly quickly by tossing another Dell blade in the rack and still be cheaper.
  RedHat and Conical(Ubuntu) both are excellent contenders to usurp Solaris as the Enterprise OS in the server room. ( It could be argued that RedHat already has. )
  P.S. I won't miss Solaris package management give me a debian packaging any day.
Don't believe it.... by GuyverDH · 2009-07-13 07:51 · Score: 3, Interesting

opensolaris - the regular SXCE builds are Sun's testbed for new updates, patches, fixes and technology updates...
It's noted as 5.11 for the version, codenamed Nevada.
It's very similar to the way the unix kernel builds happened at one time (to be honest I haven't looked lately to know if they still do this or not) - in that the even number release is production and the odd numbered release is development...
Unless Oracle intends to kill off Solaris altogether, I don't see them killing OpenSolaris.

--
Who is general failure, and why is he reading my hard drive?
1. Re:Don't believe it.... by GPLDAN · 2009-07-13 08:04 · Score: 2, Interesting
  
  I agree here. The exact opposite may be true. Unbreakable Linux will become Unbreakable UNIX - and it will be increasingly based on OpenSolaris. There are a lot of developments in Solaris - and I think Ellison is perhaps unhappy with his relationship with Linux.
  
  I can tell you as a IT Director in finance that they have come pushing Unbreakable into big accounts, and want to cut Redhat off at the knees as much as possible. So the opening salvos have already been sent, and sinking Redhat and getting all Oracle installations off it is the goal.
2. Re:Don't believe it.... by gmack · 2009-07-13 10:16 · Score: 2, Informative
  
  Actually Oracle also employs some high level kernel developers. A lot of the FS work that has been done lately has been done by people with Oracle email addresses.
time to steal features by bcrowell · 2009-07-13 07:54 · Score: 3, Interesting

For anyone already committed to OpenSolaris, there are some obvious things to do: (1) Celebrate the fact that it's open-source, which limits how badly you can be screwed. (2) Write a plan to start transitioning to Linux or FreeBSD or whatever. (3) Help to organize a community operating outside of Oracle that will coordinate on maintaining the OS with security patches for the rest of its lifetime.
For anyone else, now would be a good time to think about stealing features. I know a lot of people really like DTrace. Well, it's already been ported to FreeBSD, and the Linux port seems to be nearing completion.

--
Find free books.
Makes absolutely no sense by javacowboy · 2009-07-13 08:06 · Score: 5, Insightful

Why would Oracle kill Solaris? Their first public pronouncement on the Sun takeover specifically mentioned Solaris next to Java as the reasons they want to acquire Sun. Killing Solaris would be almost as much of an about face as killing Java.
Solaris represents one of Oracle's differentiators. It has features that Linux can't due to licensing concerns, namely ZFS and DTrace. It gives them the opportunity to add value to their offerings, as opposed to being simply a reseller, which is what they'd be if they'd favour Linux.
What's more, Oracle's database is well-known to run better on Solaris than on any other operating system. Killing Solaris would remove that competitive advantage.
The only reason Oracle supported Linux so strong is that they didn't have an OS of their own. When they acquire Sun, they will.

--
This space left intentionally blank.
1. Re:Makes absolutely no sense by UID30 · 2009-07-13 08:33 · Score: 3, Funny
  
  What you talkin 'bout Willis? Oracle's primary development platform has been Linux for years now. I think the vague "runs better" test is pretty much a wash when you compare optimized code builds running on similarly powered hardware.
  
  I think Sun hardware is really more of a vanity thing in business nowdays ... so "company a" can look down their nose at "company b" and say "we dont use Dell servers, we're a Sun house"...
  
  OMG! THANK you for making me post this! I NOW understand the Oracle-Sun merger! They're both "vanity" business models! Its been bothering me since the merger was announced ... but now I see the synergy plain as daylight. Its all about super large corporate businesses and absurdly high maintenance contracts.
  
  Wow. That is some kind of evil genius. I'm going out to buy some Oracle stock.
  
  --
  "Glory is fleeting, but obscurity is forever." - Napoleon Bonaparte
Linux is the biggest fish in the "open" space. by reporter · 2009-07-13 08:06 · Score: 4, Interesting

Unless Oracle explicitly spends resources to develop OpenSolaris, it will fade away and die in the "open" space as Linux is the biggest fish there. The typical geek who builds a freeware application builds it for Linux first since Linux is the dominant freeware operating system.
So, what is the chance that Oracle will spend resources on OpenSolaris? The probability is exactly 0.
Oracle -- along with Intel and Cisco -- is notorious for viewing engineers as dots on a graph and rating them on a bell curve, firing the bottom 10% annually. These companies do not waste any money or time on "underperformance" by either engineers or products. If a product does not produce any revenue, then it is abandoned.
This shark-like mentality has gained popularity in recent years among American companies.
Dead?? by DaMattster · 2009-07-13 08:09 · Score: 2, Interesting

OpenSolaris will not be completely dead. The community at large will pick it up and it will take on a life of its own much in the same way as BSD UNIX was when the Berkeley CSRG group disbanded. OpenSolaris is still important and used heavily throughout industry. It is not my intention to start a flame war, but Solaris is even more mature as a platform than Linux. I am a fan of all open source operating systems and software because it takes computing out of the power of the corporation and puts it in the hands of the users.
One of my favorite quotes... by UID30 · 2009-07-13 08:11 · Score: 4, Interesting

I had enough exposure to Solaris in the 90s ... I remember when a Sun install team put in the 1st e4500 16 processor high availability box at my employer ... they had powered it up and had a bunch of our company VPs standing around the cold room oogling it ... the Sun rep was giving an executive overview of its HA features, full hot swap of processor boards, power supplies, yadda yadda yadda. My (then) boss, a lowly manager in the VP crowd, walks up to the e4500 and pops a processor card out ... the whole system seg faults an UGLY death. Ahhh ... good times.

If operating systems are weapons, Solaris is a World War II German railway gun with a cracked breech block.
- Charlie Stross

--
"Glory is fleeting, but obscurity is forever." - Napoleon Bonaparte
1. Re:One of my favorite quotes... by Bert64 · 2009-07-13 08:27 · Score: 2, Informative
  
  You sure you had 16 cpus?
  The E4500 has 8 slots, 2 cpus per slot, but you need to use at least one of those slots for an IO board otherwise you have no scsi and no networking, so the practical limit is 14 cpus...
  
  --
  http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
2. Re:One of my favorite quotes... by hoggoth · 2009-07-13 08:38 · Score: 4, Interesting
  
  I had a similar experience when I was at N.E.C. We were showing off one of our fully redundant servers to some execs from a Wall St. firm (I won't name them, but they are still in business, but with a merger). While my manager was talking about how fail-safe the server is one of the execs walked around behind the rack and just jammed his pen through the fan in the back to see what would happen.
  Luckily back-up fans spun up and everything was fine, but there were a lot of sweaty foreheads in the room...
  
  --
  - For the complete works of Shakespeare: cat /dev/random (may take some time)
Look at the bright side -- ZFS for Linux! by Wrath0fb0b · 2009-07-13 08:16 · Score: 2, Interesting

I've long been immensely frustrated that you can't get kernel-space ZFS (sorry FUSE) compiled into a Linux kernel because of inane licensing issues*. Someone should write a patch for those of us that want to compile it ourselves on the theory that the FSF would be insane to sue a personal user of open-source software for daring to compile it with other open source software of a different flavor.
* Porting ZFS to Linux is complicated by the fact that the GNU General Public License, which governs the Linux kernel, prohibits linking with code under certain licenses, such as CDDL, the license ZFS is released under. [Wikipedia]
1. Re:Look at the bright side -- ZFS for Linux! by The-Pheon · 2009-07-13 08:34 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  I've long been immensely frustrated that you can't get kernel-space ZFS (sorry FUSE) compiled into a Linux kernel because of inane licensing issues*....
  Well it is a good thing FreeBSD does not have a restrictive license like that. FreeBSD 8.0 will have ZFS with zpool 13, and here is how to use it.
  http://wiki.freebsd.org/ZFSQuickStartGuide
  Cheers!
2. Re:Look at the bright side -- ZFS for Linux! by diegocgteleline.es · 2009-07-13 09:14 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  The problem with that is that ZFS is not just a filesystem, it's a complete "IO stack". It's everything that does from the VFS to the device drivers. Sun didn't improve their old stack, they wrote a new brand system and they left the old system there.
  Such thing would not be tollerated on the Linux main tree, it would be considered a very ugly design mistake. For them, the IO stack would need to work for ZFS and for FAT, and they would never buy the logic of "ZFS is special and needs special treatment to be better than the rest". If ZFS was released, Linus & co wouldn't accept it until ZFS is modified to fit the Linux IO stack, and/or they modify the Linux I/O layer to fit what ZFS needs.
One word: Dtrace by seifried · 2009-07-13 08:18 · Score: 3, Informative

One thing Linux is lacking (and will possibly never have due to politics) is Dtrace, which is sad because a) Dtrace kicks ass, b) it's mature and works well and c) system tap is... well.. one day when a vendor ships it I guess we'll find out how well it works. This is one spot OpenSolaris and Solaris (and Mac OS X which now has Dtrace) really shine, you can extract useful telemetry and performance data from the system easily.
Perhaps FUD - Complete rubbish by davecb · 2009-07-13 08:44 · Score: 2, Interesting

If I wanted to capture business from Sun, I'd start a rumor that Oracle was going to get rid of big parts of Sun.
And, just to add insult to injury, the rumor would have them laying off the people Oracle most wants to retain!
--dave

--
davecb@spamcop.net
Dtrace on FreeBSD by witherstaff · 2009-07-13 08:48 · Score: 3, Interesting

Don't forget the nice Dtrace on FreeBSD. Great stuff for servers.
This just in... by Temujin_12 · 2009-07-13 08:57 · Score: 4, Insightful

This just in: "Mass Speculation" also suggests:
1) The world will end in 2012
2) Man never landed on the moon
3) Vaccines cause autism
4) Technology = magic
5) Science is infallible
6) Religion is infallible
7) Windows is better than Mac
8) Mac is better than Windows
9) Mac is better than *nix
10) *nix is better than Mac
11) Windows is better than *nix
12) *nix is better than Windows
I really need to meet this "Mass Speculation" guy. He seems to be all over the board on things.

--
Faith is a willingness to accept something w/o complete proof and to act on it. Reason allows you to correct that faith.
Solaris internal to Oracle by panic · 2009-07-13 08:59 · Score: 4, Interesting

I think most people underestimate how much solaris oracle uses internally...
There is marketing hype.. then reality
OpenSolaris == Fedora by jregel · 2009-07-13 08:59 · Score: 4, Interesting

The value of OpenSolaris to Sun is the same as Fedora is to Red Hat Enterprise Linux; it's the cutting edge release that allows the new features to be added without compromising the stable release. It's improving as a desktop operating system, but that's not the real point of OpenSolaris. Solaris is primarily a server operating system and that's where it excels. It manages to include things today such as ZFS and Dtrace that will one-day have equivalents in Linux. These technologies are already mature on Solaris. Code from OpenSolaris is also used by the Sun OpenStorage platform and presumably will be the basis of the Sun OpenNetwork platform.
Before I'm modded down as a Linux-hating, Solaris fan-boi, I'm posting this from my home Linux workstation, sat next to my OpenSolaris server. Sometimes it's about the technology itself and not technology religion.
Re:Solaris by Hognoxious · 2009-07-13 09:14 · Score: 2, Funny

is regular solaris going to come back to life?
FTFY

--
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
fuck you by mungtor · 2009-07-13 09:20 · Score: 3, Informative

you're probably right. As much as I wanted to find fault and prove you wrong, I can't and now I'm just bitter.
Let's ask the customers... by Catalina588 · 2009-07-13 10:38 · Score: 4, Interesting

About five years ago, Sun seriously considered killing Solaris on X86. What Sun customers said was "Do that and your SunFire servers will be out on the street as quickly as we can get them unplugged". These customers included the major NY city investment and merchant banks, and Sun was in no position to destroy relationships with key customers. Fast forward. Those same large financial institutions are still running Solaris, including Solaris on Sun-supplied X86. But the reason this rumor makes no sense is that Sun and Oracle grew on Wall Street together as less expensive alternatives to Big Iron IBM mainframes.
Kill Sun Solaris and Oracle commits suicide. Makes no sense at all. Won't happen.
Re:Old unix'es rarely ever really dies. by afidel · 2009-07-13 12:43 · Score: 2, Informative

Tru64 is dead, HP has announced that it will no longer be supported past 2012 and that the last maintenance release will come out next year. They even shelved the plans to grab the best parts and graft them into HPUX. IRIX is dead as of 2013. Openserver might as well be dead as no sane IT manager would touch it with a ten foot pole. Basically there is only Solaris, AIX, HPUX and OS X as true Unix and then the unix-alikes linux and BSD derivatives.

--
There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
"Is Oracle getting ready to kill OpenSolaris?" FUD by Zubby · 2009-07-13 20:30 · Score: 2, Informative

Blog response by Ben Rockwood - Quite a good read if you want some facts in your stories. http://cuddletech.com/blog/pivot/entry.php?id=1047