On Wed, 2007-07-18 at 18:27 -0700, Glenn Lagasse wrote: > * Kaiwai Gardiner ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > > On Wed, 2007-07-18 at 09:53 -0700, Stephen Lau wrote: > > > UNIX admin wrote: > > > >> Do you MEAN that OpenSolaris distro only thats short > > > >> list ? > > > > > > > > I do not believe that there would be very many happy people in the > > > > Solaris community if we started seeing a number forks, pardon, > > > > "distros" of Solaris increase. > > > > > > > > One of the things we as a community have often communicated is that we > > > > abhore the Linux fragmentation and that we want a unified *platform*, > > > > in stark contrast with the Linux mentality. > > > > > > Really? I don't abhore the Linux fragmentation, and I don't recall a > > > consensus-community message where we communicated that at all. > > > > I do, various distributions, all incompatibile with each other, no > > standardisation process - people wonder why there are no commercial > > applications and hardly any third party hardware support on Linux - > > thats the elephant in the corner of the room. > > Your kidding right? > > Oracle isn't a commercial application? And that was just off the top of > my head.
For the desktop (forgot to add) - given the fabulous reputation that Oracle has for security (chuckles) I wouldn't be using that as a poster boy anytime soon. Side note though, I'd love to see Notes 8 client been made available for Solaris. > I won't touch the hardware support. But I don't think it's as dire as > you claim. Third party hardware support is probably better on Linux > than on OpenSolaris. How so? ATI drivers which are buggy and unreliable due to their unsubstantiated paranoia over 'IP'. I never said Linux was better, I said that when push comes to shove, and a company had to choose between supporting a moveing target, Linux driver API and ABI woes, and making their driver for Solaris - it makes no sense investing into something that yields more pain and missery than producing any more customers at the end of the day. > I'm not saying having so many distributions is a good thing, especially > when they all seem to implement things a little differently. But let's > face it, the kernel is the kernel (that's Linux after all) and that's > mostly compatible between distributions. Compatible?! talk to ATI customes who are at the mercy of whether AMD/ATI can be stuffed creatingn compatible kernel drivers for their distribution due to inter-distribution incompatibilities. > And if you don't want to deal with the fragmentation, you don't have to. > Pick a distribution that suits you and deploy it. It seems to work for > companies that run RHEL or Suse. > > Different strokes for different folks as the saying goes. The more > distributions of OpenSolaris hopefully equals into more adoption of > OpenSolaris and that can only be goodness imho. If by distribution, there is the same shared core, with different array of stuff floating ontop - great, variety is the spice of life. But when the differences go from top to bottom, one might as well say its a whole new operating system. Matthew -- Blog: http://kaiwai.blogspot.com _______________________________________________ opensolaris-discuss mailing list [email protected]
