On Feb 13, 2008 8:23 PM, Martin Bochnig <mb1x at gmx.com> wrote: > > > > Agreed. However, IMHO, a binary "OpenSolaris" already exists in a > > > downloadable form: it's called Solaris Express Community Edition. > > > > The thing that so many people already call or think *is* OpenSolaris > > online? > > > > So why not use the name as people expect it to be used? > > > > Having an OpenSolaris Distribution, such as Indiana, helps ease so > > many of the complaints users and others have had about SXCE (e.g. > > torrent, mirror sites, etc.). > > > > I think meeting user expectations is more important than stroking egos. > > > > -- > > Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst > > > Isn't it Sun who is "stroking ego" here?
I don't think so; they own the trademark; it's theirs to use and they pay for it (and all of os.org too). > And when speaking about "meeting user expectations": Many many other users > expect "OpenSolaris" to be the FREE kernel&&libs code base (believe me), and > SXCE to be "Sun's OpenSolaris Distro", just as had been reiterated for over > two years, until the release of Indiana. > That's the thing about user expectations. You have to adapt to the expectations of an entire market, not just a subset. It is my firm belief that the majority of the target audience for OpenSolaris wants to see *the* OpenSolaris distribution; not just *a* OpenSolaris distribution on OpenSolaris.org. > This does cause confusion, rather than meeting user expectations. You seem to understand it quite well. If anything, I think it's users that have never been involved with Solaris that are confused by the current situation. -- Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ "To err is human -- and to blame it on a computer is even more so." - Robert Orben
