And reply that is generated almost immediately is...
Licensee/Company: Entity in receipt of Software from an authorized source Beginning Date of License Term: the date of receipt of this Entitlement Software: Solaris 10 3/05 Permitted Use: Commercial Use License Term: Perpetual (subject to termination under the SLA) Licensed Unit: Registered Computer System Licensed unit Count: Unlimited
Now what exactly is the problem?
Also, Solaris is the Sun Branded Product. OpenSolaris is the Open source Solaris. Further down the track, Solaris (the Sun Branded Product) will be sourced from a snapshot of OpenSolaris.
Please don't fall victim to the conspiacy theories.
That's because the license has not yet been finally decided upon and announced. I believe that at the NC event last week everyone was told that there would be an announcement along those lines in 45-60 days.
Now, speaking as someone who does work with Solaris, you will certainly be able to do everything you list in that last paragraph once the release has happened.
1) Linux is already ahead of Solaris on Intel hardware, not behind as this guy believes from reading Sun press releases.
I'd say Solaris is in front in some areas and Linux in others. There are way too many features and differences to be able to make that kind of comparison. That's not just a go at you, but a go at the original article.
2) Solaris is not known to be portable beyond Sparc, Sparc64 and ia32. ia64 and AMD64/x86-64 might happen but as far as I know don't yet exist.
Is known by whom? Solaris has run on x86 hardware for more than ten years. I'm currently running Solaris on my notebook and it's wonderful for the work that I do. The AMD-64 port is currently being run on a selected number of beta sites and will be in the next release of Solaris Express (this month I think).
3) Sun has yet to announce a license for Solaris, it is very doubtful it will be actual Open Source and almost certainly not Free Software in the FSF sense of the term.
You are confusing two issues here. For right to use Solaris, Sun has announced $0. The License for open sourcing it has not yet been anounced, BUT Sun has committed to an OSI compliant license. I think that might just qualify as open source.
4) Sun is almost certain to keep parts totally closed due to licensing terms with third party suppliers.
That would not be Sun keeping it closed, that would be the license owner. Let's put the blame where it would belong.
5) Sun will rig things to retain ALL creative control from the Java experience. This will preclude any sort of community involvement on the scale needed to compete with Linux.
Assumption on your part. I guess we'll just have to wait and see. I have an idea how things are going, but unfortunately I can't talk about it yet.
On the whole I can't see how anyone could possibly have marked this as insightful. It contains no substantiated information and is full of assumptions and bias.
Jmorris, your reality check bounced.
Tp.
Re:Shoot your marketing department.
on
Sun-isms Debunked
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
Soko, you ask some very good questions here which I think are deserving of comment.
I started to reply in here, but as it started getting longer, I decided that my blog might be a better place for it.
I find the bashers who claim that Sun is going to play a bait and switch with Open Sourcing Solaris a continuing amazement.
There is a commitment from Jonathan and from Scott that Solaris will released under an OSI compliant license. That's a pretty clear statement.
I am one of the engineers taking part in the pilot. The pilot is coming along nicely and there is a lot of good discussion going on. There are things that are still being ironed out, but progress is being made, and its not just internal folk.
The thing that won't surprise me is that when it does get released as advertised, is that the foksk who are bashing now are not going to come out and say "Oops, guess I was wrong". But that's slashdot.
Thanks for posting the reference and comments. Now if we can just get folks to read it. I agree that it really is a broad patent and doesnt really go very deeply into the process. Unfortunately, with all of the scutiny that it got, they probably do have a case.
Given the scrutiny I'm kind of surprised it was granted, but given that it was it's going to be interesting to see the fallout of this one.
I find it amazing (I guess I shouldn't) that we are seeing all of this commentry, but as of yet no reference to the actual patent.
As far as I can see the article does not mention it.
Does anyone have a reference to it so we can actually discuss this sensibly, or would we all prefer to keep shooting off our mouths in ignoarnce of the actual issue?
Keep your eyes out, Solaris is being open sourced. The pilot has been underway now for a few weeks. I'm sure that there will be a big announcement and press release when it happens, and you can bet that Jonathon will certainly mention it.
Before the license flames start, there is a commitment that the license will be OSI compliant. There would be little point to the exercise otherwise.
The other thing that pretty much everyone has glossed over are the words "if any".
It is basically saying if there is a place to put such acknowledgements, it must be acknowledged there.
My reading of it tells me that there is a converse to thsi statement. ie if there is not a place for third party acknowledgements, it need not be done.
Slashdot Mirror
Hmmm, no response, could it possibly be that there aren't any?
Tp.
Now what exactly is the problem?
Also, Solaris is the Sun Branded Product. OpenSolaris is the Open source Solaris. Further down the track, Solaris (the Sun Branded Product) will be sourced from a snapshot of OpenSolaris.
Please don't fall victim to the conspiacy theories.
Tp.
I'd be interested to know exactly which lawsuits you are referring to that Sun is "whipping out"?
Tp.
ZFS (once integrated) will be a part of the code that is being open sourced.
Would that be sufficiently published?
Tp.
have a look at "nohup -p" in Solaris 9.
You should really actually read what Sun is saying, rather than believe what people are saying that Sun is saying.
Let me say this clearly.
SUN HAS COMMITTED TO AN OSI COMPLIANT LICENSE.
I don't think there was anything ambiguous in that statement.
At no point has Sun stated that it is currently open source. It isn't yet.
Tp.
That's because the license has not yet been finally decided upon and announced. I believe that at the NC event last week everyone was told that there would be an announcement along those lines in 45-60 days.
Now, speaking as someone who does work with Solaris, you will certainly be able to do everything you list in that last paragraph once the release has happened.
Tp.
Let's take these one by one.
I'd say Solaris is in front in some areas and Linux in others. There are way too many features and differences to be able to make that kind of comparison. That's not just a go at you, but a go at the original article.
Is known by whom? Solaris has run on x86 hardware for more than ten years. I'm currently running Solaris on my notebook and it's wonderful for the work that I do. The AMD-64 port is currently being run on a selected number of beta sites and will be in the next release of Solaris Express (this month I think).
You are confusing two issues here. For right to use Solaris, Sun has announced $0. The License for open sourcing it has not yet been anounced, BUT Sun has committed to an OSI compliant license. I think that might just qualify as open source.
That would not be Sun keeping it closed, that would be the license owner. Let's put the blame where it would belong.
Assumption on your part. I guess we'll just have to wait and see. I have an idea how things are going, but unfortunately I can't talk about it yet.
On the whole I can't see how anyone could possibly have marked this as insightful. It contains no substantiated information and is full of assumptions and bias.
Jmorris, your reality check bounced.
Tp.
Soko, you ask some very good questions here which I think are deserving of comment.
I started to reply in here, but as it started getting longer, I decided that my blog might be a better place for it.
As such, please find my response at Reply to a reply on slashdot "Linux - Sunisms debunked".
Tp.
The pkg-get stuff at http://www.blastwave.org is fantastic. I use it a lot.
Tp.
Have a look at the following:
Tp.
Excuse me?
Just because you notice it after the cap is in place bears no relevance to when Sun started working on this.
The open sourcing project has been going on for some time now. The pilot itself (with external folk) was running before that cap was announced.
I think you've been reading too many conspiracy theory novels.
Tp.
I find the bashers who claim that Sun is going to play a bait and switch with Open Sourcing Solaris a continuing amazement.
There is a commitment from Jonathan and from Scott that Solaris will released under an OSI compliant license. That's a pretty clear statement.
I am one of the engineers taking part in the pilot. The pilot is coming along nicely and there is a lot of good discussion going on. There are things that are still being ironed out, but progress is being made, and its not just internal folk.
The thing that won't surprise me is that when it does get released as advertised, is that the foksk who are bashing now are not going to come out and say "Oops, guess I was wrong". But that's slashdot.
Tp.
The JDS is bundled with the current Solaris Express.
Janus will allow the running of linux binaries unmodified with none to little performance hit. Janus is not present in the current Solaris Express.
Thanks for posting the reference and comments. Now if we can just get folks to read it. I agree that it really is a broad patent and doesnt really go very deeply into the process. Unfortunately, with all of the scutiny that it got, they probably do have a case.
Given the scrutiny I'm kind of surprised it was granted, but given that it was it's going to be interesting to see the fallout of this one.
Tp.
I find it amazing (I guess I shouldn't) that we are seeing all of this commentry, but as of yet no reference to the actual patent.
As far as I can see the article does not mention it.
Does anyone have a reference to it so we can actually discuss this sensibly, or would we all prefer to keep shooting off our mouths in ignoarnce of the actual issue?
Keep your eyes out, Solaris is being open sourced. The pilot has been underway now for a few weeks. I'm sure that there will be a big announcement and press release when it happens, and you can bet that Jonathon will certainly mention it.
Before the license flames start, there is a commitment that the license will be OSI compliant. There would be little point to the exercise otherwise.
Tp.
It is already available on Solaris Express (Solaris 10 preview) for x86 (in fact a lot of the develoment work started on x86).
Tp.
You didn't read the post did you?
Nor did you even bother to tread the Sun Alert.
Why should there be a wrokaround, WHEN THERE IS ALREADY A PATCH?
Tp.
The other thing that pretty much everyone has glossed over are the words "if any".
It is basically saying if there is a place to put such acknowledgements, it must be acknowledged there.
My reading of it tells me that there is a converse to thsi statement. ie if there is not a place for third party acknowledgements, it need not be done.
Why do people get so religious about licensing?
Tp.
And pretty much all of the broadband in Australia becomes pay/mb after a set cap.
I for one really don't want to be forced to watch this crap, as WELL as pay for it.
Tp.
I'm kind of surprised that he didn't make the list.
Tp.
You are forgetting support nd updates.
Tp.
No, it's not Sun's Linux, it's Suse's.
.NET.
Sun is starting to use the Java brand name the same way that Micro$oft uses
Tp.
You actually managed to avoid the point. How is it bad management to ensure that you are licensed and have the appropriat rights to your software?
You will note that the licensing happened way before SCO took on IBM.
Tp.