> On Mon, Apr 6, 2009 at 10:39 PM, Shawn Walker
> wrote:
> > Alexander Vlasov wrote:
> >>
> >> Lurie wrote:
>
> Yes.. writing an entire package manager from the
> ground up is *less* work than maintaining the
> patches.
> >>>
> >>> This is called "moving forward", IPS is based on
>
On Mon, Apr 6, 2009 at 10:39 PM, Shawn Walker wrote:
> Alexander Vlasov wrote:
>>
>> Lurie wrote:
Yes.. writing an entire package manager from the
ground up is *less* work than maintaining the patches.
>>>
>>> This is called "moving forward", IPS is based on new novel ideas, a
>>> s
Alexander Vlasov wrote:
Lurie wrote:
Yes.. writing an entire package manager from the
ground up is *less* work than maintaining the patches.
This is called "moving forward", IPS is based on new novel ideas, a
secure package manager without any arbitrary post/pre-install scripts,
That's why
On Sun, Apr 5, 2009 at 1:54 PM, Lurie wrote:
>> So modern Linux package managers do not have any of these qualities ?
>
> Some of them ? Of course. All of them ? No. Just a few points:
> 1. They usually upgrade a live system (and while it's possible for some to do
> a non-live upgrade, the live
That's really strange. Have you read
/usr/share/doc/aptitude/README?
currently pkg has very rudimentary search ability, like you can't ask
`which packages were installed only to satifsy other packages'
dependencies', `show me all games' or `which packages has arrived into
repository since last
Alexander Vlasov writes:
> Have you tried aptitude?
I sure have. Having suffered long enough with apt and aptitude on
Debian is what eventually drove me to convert my home system from
Linux to Solaris. :-/
--
James Carlson, Solaris Networking
Sun Microsystems / 35 Network Drive
Lurie wrote:
Yes.. writing an entire package manager from the
ground up is *less* work than maintaining the patches.
This is called "moving forward", IPS is based on new novel ideas, a secure package manager without any arbitrary post/pre-install scripts,
That's why lots of packages delive
Have you tried aptitude?
Shawn Walker wrote:
Moinak Ghosh wrote:
On Sun, Apr 5, 2009 at 2:55 AM, Lurie wrote:
...
The user side experience of IPS is no doubt very good but is no
different
from a good Linux package manager like Smart/Yum (with the exception
of ZFS features). From a
On Mon, Apr 6, 2009 at 7:17 AM, Shawn Walker wrote:
> Moinak Ghosh wrote:
>>
>> On Sun, Apr 5, 2009 at 2:55 AM, Lurie wrote:
>
> ...
>>
>> The user side experience of IPS is no doubt very good but is no
>> different
>> from a good Linux package manager like Smart/Yum (with the exception
>>
http://www.nasdaq.com//aspxcontent/newsstory.aspx?selected=JAVA&symbol=JAVA&textpath=20090405%5CACQRTT200904052303RTTRADERUSEQUITY%5F0105%2Ehtm&cdtime=04%2F05%2F2009+11%3A03PM
Sun Rejected IBM's Offer .
I'm Using Opensolaris becouste this system never failing , opposite for m$ and
a lot of linux
>casper@sun.com wrote:
>> DTrace ZFS SMF FMA BootAr IPS IA-Install
>> Incompatible?N N N N N Y Y
>
>I think the many people screaming about quota support when it debuted a
>few years ago, among many other decisions wou
casper@sun.com wrote:
DTrace ZFS SMF FMA BootAr IPS IA-Install
Incompatible? N N N N N Y Y
I think the many people screaming about quota support when it debuted a
few years ago, among many other decisions would beg to
Martin Bochnig wrote:
many other benefits. And you don't need to employ 50 engineers for 2
years to get a written-from-scratch monster like IPS going.
I'm not sure where you got this number from, but I think it's about 10x
greater than the reality :-) I'm sure the pkg(5) team would love to
h
Moinak Ghosh wrote:
On Sun, Apr 5, 2009 at 2:55 AM, Lurie wrote:
...
The user side experience of IPS is no doubt very good but is no different
from a good Linux package manager like Smart/Yum (with the exception
of ZFS features). From a developer point of view these qualities could ha
C. wrote:
Shawn Walker wrote:
C. wrote:
Do you know how many patches Sun maintains for packages that are never
accepted by upstream because they don't agree with the design or
implementation?
I can tell you with certainty that Sun works hard to ensure
contributions go upstream, it's ultima
Hello Krzabr,
The deal is dead. Check this link for further details:
http://www.opensolaris.org/jive/thread.jspa?threadID=99304&tstart=0
My recommendation is go and use OpenSolaris as a Major OS. The only tricky part
is the same difficulty that exists with Linux and *BSD which is deciding which
Hello it's my first answer on this forum .
I'm not a developer or system administrator , but I'm looking on SUN-IBM fusion
and using OpenSolaris for a Major OS .
Unfortunatelly we don't know real IBM's Plan of future of Sun , Mysql ,
Netbeans , ZFS , Dtrace , Sparc , OO and Solaris .
Many people
Lurie writes:
>> If they wanted (because they wanted) some revolutionary python based
>> system like IPS, they could have used rPath's conary, which is in
>> development since 2004.
>
> You've talked enough about Conary with Stephen Hahn before, so I'm not
> going into this again.
Conary? can s
On Sun, Apr 5, 2009 at 12:22 AM, C. wrote:
> Lurie wrote:
>>>
>>> Yes.. writing an entire package manager from the
>>> ground up is *less* work than maintaining the patches.
>>>
>>
>> This is called "moving forward", IPS is based on new novel ideas, a secure
>> package manager without any arbitrar
Lurie wrote:
Yes.. writing an entire package manager from the
ground up is *less* work than maintaining the patches.
This is called "moving forward", IPS is based on new novel ideas, a secure
package manager without any arbitrary post/pre-install scripts, which is fast, doesn't
hog the s
On Sun, Apr 5, 2009 at 4:56 PM, Lurie wrote:
>> *** before you argue with moinak, be sure that you
>> have taken the time to read his blog. ***
>
> As you have probably noticed from my messages, I never try to argue with
> anyone, I'm merely carrying a discussion in which I express my opinion
> The user side experience of IPS is no doubt very good but is no different
> from a good Linux package manager like Smart/Yum (with the exception
> of ZFS features).
I trust you on that one, and Conary, which was pointed out by Martin seems to
be nice as well.
> From a developer point of vie
> 5. Usually the design is not cross-platformant, IPS can even run on Windows.
>
>
> Weak argument.
> conary is also implemented in python with C backend.
> Also runs under everything including Windows.
> Also most other pkg systems run on every UNIX.
Note the use of "usually", and by cross-plat
> *** before you argue with moinak, be sure that you
> have taken the time to read his blog. ***
As you have probably noticed from my messages, I never try to argue with
anyone, I'm merely carrying a discussion in which I express my opinion and I
don't make anyone "clueless", "you must be jo
> Not really, you missed the point. There are places where there is scope
> for innovation and people know they have ideas that go a lot beyond
> the current stuff that is deserves a clean slate implementation. Like
> ZFS. The ideas expressed in ZFS are revolutionary to say the least
> a
On Sun, Apr 5, 2009 at 10:24 AM, Lurie wrote:
>
> While I agree with you about that, I still stand by my point that IPS is a
> good thing, and given Sun's need for paid-support repositories, integration
> with zones, SMF support, ZFS support, they would've ended with a lot of
> patches on their
On Sun, Apr 5, 2009 at 10:24 AM, Lurie wrote:
>
> 5. Usually the design is not cross-platformant, IPS can even run on Windows.
Weak argument.
conary is also implemented in python with C backend. Also runs under
everything including Windows.
Also most other pkg systems run on every UNIX. rpm is n
*** before you argue with moinak, be sure that you have taken the
time to read his blog. ***
On Sun, Apr 5, 2009 at 10:24 AM, Lurie wrote:
>> So modern Linux package managers do not have any of these qualities ?
>
> Some of them ? Of course. All of them ? No.
Examples? Details?
Were you t
> So modern Linux package managers do not have any of these qualities ?
Some of them ? Of course. All of them ? No. Just a few points:
1. They usually upgrade a live system (and while it's possible for some to do a
non-live upgrade, the live upgrade is exactly how pretty much all of them
operat
On Sat, Apr 4, 2009 at 2:17 AM, Anon Y Mous wrote:
> You know... Sun should have used all the "cash" that they had lying around to
> buy themselves instead of buying MySQL and they shouldn't have bought the
> "Cobalt" Linux server appliance business in the 1990's either.
I disagree with
On Sun, Apr 5, 2009 at 2:55 AM, Lurie wrote:
>> Yes.. writing an entire package manager from the
>> ground up is *less* work than maintaining the patches.
>
> This is called "moving forward", IPS is based on new novel ideas, a secure
> package manager without any arbitrary post/pre-install script
Lurie wrote:
Do you have any clue how many patches Sun maintains
for packages in onnv-gate that never go upstream? Anyway.. they say
love is blind so it all seems fitting..
I am quite well aware of the patches in the on-nv gate, and they aren't as many as you
make them sound. Plus you a
> Yes.. writing an entire package manager from the
> ground up is *less* work than maintaining the patches.
This is called "moving forward", IPS is based on new novel ideas, a secure
package manager without any arbitrary post/pre-install scripts, which is fast,
doesn't hog the system upon instal
> Do you have any clue how many patches Sun maintains
> for packages in onnv-gate that never go upstream? Anyway.. they say
> love is blind so it all seems fitting..
I am quite well aware of the patches in the on-nv gate, and they aren't as many
as you make them sound. Plus you are being rude a
On Sat, Apr 4, 2009 at 10:42 PM, C. wrote:
> Shawn Walker wrote:
>>
>> C. wrote:
>>
>> Do you know how many patches Sun maintains for packages that are never
>> accepted by upstream because they don't agree with the design or
>> implementation?
>>
>> I can tell you with certainty that Sun works ha
Shawn Walker wrote:
C. wrote:
Do you know how many patches Sun maintains for packages that are never
accepted by upstream because they don't agree with the design or
implementation?
I can tell you with certainty that Sun works hard to ensure
contributions go upstream, it's ultimately less w
C. wrote:
Lurie wrote:
and in the end, we have yet-another-package-manager.
while I agree with you on some of the points, I have to say that I
love IPS and how it uses ZFS, if the code would have been based off
some Linux package manager then the changes would never go upstream
due to
the original article was written at 1st of april and at the end of it
she, the author , said "April fool". I cannot find the link to the
original article at the moment, but this announcement is nor true.
claudia
On 04/04/09 17:13, Martin Bochnig wrote:
On Sat, Apr 4, 2009 at 4:13 PM, Calum
On Sat, Apr 4, 2009 at 10:09 PM, Lurie wrote:
>> and in the end, we have yet-another-package-manager.
>
> while I agree with you on some of the points, I have to say that I love IPS
> and how it uses ZFS, if the code would have been based off some Linux package
> manager then the changes would n
Lurie wrote:
and in the end, we have yet-another-package-manager.
while I agree with you on some of the points, I have to say that I love IPS and
how it uses ZFS, if the code would have been based off some Linux package
manager then the changes would never go upstream due to the lack of
> and in the end, we have yet-another-package-manager.
while I agree with you on some of the points, I have to say that I love IPS and
how it uses ZFS, if the code would have been based off some Linux package
manager then the changes would never go upstream due to the lack of bootable
clones/sn
system5,
we discussed this elsewhere. Now it gets to the point that most considered
'pure speculation' then.
If I were a SUN shareholder, I'd have sued the hell out of the incompetent
management. If I were a SUN employee, I clubbed Ponytail into the next best
ocean. Yes, SUN was and is partiall
On Sat, Apr 4, 2009 at 4:13 PM, Calum Benson wrote:
>
> On 4 Apr 2009, at 14:09, Joerg Schilling wrote:
>
>> Anon Y Mous wrote:
>>
>>> Does anybody who knows McNealy know if this is true:
>>>
>>> http://www.i-newswire.com/pr269855.html
>>
>> This looks like good news.
>
> I'm afraid the source o
On Sat, Apr 4, 2009 at 3:09 PM, Joerg Schilling
wrote:
> Anon Y Mous wrote:
>
>> Does anybody who knows McNealy know if this is true:
>>
>> http://www.i-newswire.com/pr269855.html
>
> This looks like good news.
>
> I did see Scott again last year at Technical University in Berlin. Since
> then,
On 4 Apr 2009, at 14:09, Joerg Schilling wrote:
Anon Y Mous wrote:
Does anybody who knows McNealy know if this is true:
http://www.i-newswire.com/pr269855.html
This looks like good news.
I'm afraid the source of that supposed "story" is BSNesswire, and no
prizes for guessing what the
Anon Y Mous wrote:
> Does anybody who knows McNealy know if this is true:
>
> http://www.i-newswire.com/pr269855.html
This looks like good news.
I did see Scott again last year at Technical University in Berlin. Since
then, I understand why Scott tried to find a successor for his position (f
On Sat, Apr 4, 2009 at 9:17 AM, Anon Y Mous wrote:
> You know... Sun should have used all the "cash" that they had lying around to
> buy themselves instead of buying MySQL and they shouldn't have bought the
> "Cobalt" Linux server appliance business in the 1990's either.
>
> AND, most im
Another great McNealy quote from my article:
"McNealy also commented that the vision and product strategy of Sun has been
building towards just this moment for decades and he’s not surprised that IBM
wants to snatch it just before their strategy is fully vindicated by the
massive adoption of cl
You know... Sun should have used all the "cash" that they had lying around to
buy themselves instead of buying MySQL and they shouldn't have bought the
"Cobalt" Linux server appliance business in the 1990's either.
AND, most importantly, Sun should have bought a company like Juniper duri
McNealy commented: “The terms IBM is offering are far below the intrinsic value
of the company. IBM is trying to swoop in during a bad economic time and buy
Sun assets and revenues with no regard to developing real value for Sun
shareholders.”
:-)
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
Does anybody who knows McNealy know if this is true:
http://www.i-newswire.com/pr269855.html
Here comes the cavalry charge riding in on a white horse with his bag of
golf clubs
:-)
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolar
: opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Sent: Saturday, April 4, 2009 12:29:28 AM
Subject: Re: [osol-discuss] Possible IBM aquisition of Sun
The part that bothers me the most was where he said:
"I think the stuff on Solaris and SPARC is likely to see EOLs over time through
the IBM acquisition.
Why does SUN even need to be purchased by another company when they supposedly
"have so much cash laying around" (which is what everyone says anyway)?
Why would Sun buy MySQL for $2 billion only to have IBM buy all of SUN for $6
billion? It makes no sense I would have rather had SUN not buy
The part that bothers me the most was where he said:
"I think the stuff on Solaris and SPARC is likely to see EOLs over time
through the IBM acquisition. "
WE CAN'T ALLOW THIS TO HAPPEN!!!
Where's Scott McNealy and his golf clubs when you need him? Maybe he can pummel
some sense into the rest
This is an interview with the CEO of Intel:
http://idea.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/50863/95013409005968/f51917a3exv99w2.htm
If you scroll down to the bottom of page 17 and beginning of page 18, he says:
"I can tell you that Sun was shopped around the valley and around the world in
the la
On Fri, Apr 3, 2009 at 3:06 PM, Lurie wrote:
> "IBM Near Deal to Buy Sun for Lower Price"
> http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123869375752683145.html
>
> Sun Microsystems shares again on the rise..
That news was already 15 hours old.
But here is something new, now with the exact day (next Monday)
"IBM Near Deal to Buy Sun for Lower Price"
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123869375752683145.html
Sun Microsystems shares again on the rise..
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensola
I can't find that paper anymore..., The white-paper was about scaling on smp
systems, and was showing that above 4 cores/cpus the Linux kernel(at the time)
did not scale well, and the paper was showing AIX scale linearly above 4
core/cpu. (I read this paper about 3 years ago). At the time the fa
> Granted, versus following reason why it's NOT tier 1:
> What can be done
> with such a box besides booting it and
>
> - display a nice screensaver
>
> - maybe show some content (streamed movie, blueray,
> whatever)
What can be done?
For starters, a PS3 can house a 3.5" drive interally, and h
To show how far behind technologically IBM's AIX is in comparison to
OpenSolaris, check out these links:
http://itknowledgeexchange.techtarget.com/system-i/usb-flash-support-for-aix/
http://www-01.ibm.com/support/docview.wss?uid=isg1IZ2
Looks like AIX finally got USB flash drive suppor
>Frankly I know about Linux scaling issues from a IBM white paper... So I am
>not that convinced about their Linux love
Can you post the link to the IBM white paper about Linux scalability issues? I
work as a Linux admin for a living because that's where all the hype and
developer mindshare is,
This is why Oracle kicks their ass. All oracle products are free to download
and develop for...
Frankly I know about Linux scaling issues from a IBM white paper... So I am not
that convinced about their Linux love, Linux is also something their biggest
competitors (not Sun) are embracing... th
On Tue, Mar 31, 2009 at 7:28 PM, Fredrich Maney wrote:
> I don't believe the issue is that he is using a Mac laptop, but that
> he is using OSX instead of Solaris/OpenSolaris. Sun (sadly) doesn't
> make laptops, so he is obviously going to use another vendor's product
> for that. However Sun does
I don't believe the issue is that he is using a Mac laptop, but that
he is using OSX instead of Solaris/OpenSolaris. Sun (sadly) doesn't
make laptops, so he is obviously going to use another vendor's product
for that. However Sun does make operating systems that can run on
other vendor's laptops, s
On Tue, Mar 31, 2009 at 8:38 PM, Zoltan Farkas wrote:
> Look at his blog, and you will notice the macOS screen shots,
> I attempted to post a comment about how I think as a Sun CEO he should use
> every opportunity to promote Sun products... my post was censored and did not
> go through... I am
On 03/31/09 16:08, Zoltan Farkas wrote:
Look at his blog, and you will notice the macOS screen shots,
I attempted to post a comment about how I think as a Sun CEO he should use
every opportunity to promote Sun products... my post was censored and did not
go through... I am wondering why...
he
Look at his blog, and you will notice the macOS screen shots,
I attempted to post a comment about how I think as a Sun CEO he should use
every opportunity to promote Sun products... my post was censored and did not
go through... I am wondering why...
he should install opensolaris on his macbook
> I'm hearing rumors of piles of layoffs to go with
> some announcement tomorrow.
>
> What I wish was that someone would take My Little
> Pony out into a field, shoot him, and make glue out
> of his stupid ass. This is the same crap he did with
> LightHouse Design, and when Sun picked him to lead
Although many consider IBM to be a leader in Open Source, I find quite the
opposite to be true.
Yes, IBM has been good to Linux. They have been good for Apache. To some
degree, they have been good with Java. But that is where it ends.
None of the IBM products outside Eclipse are open source or
I'm hearing rumors of piles of layoffs to go with some announcement tomorrow.
What I wish was that someone would take My Little Pony out into a field, shoot
him, and make glue out of his stupid ass. This is the same crap he did with
LightHouse Design, and when Sun picked him to lead I was very a
The deal could still get ugly for regular legitimate business vs open exchange
client / management vs CEO . I would have atleast picked a different vegetable.
He's not small anything.
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-disc
> BTW - is Sun shareholders in US is capable to have
> influence on Sun acquisition/non-acquisition by third
> party? I have a legal higher
> education also, but I don`t have a clue re US
> legislation.
>
>
> I mean, here in Ukraine, if shareholders haven`t gave
> their approval, such
> acquisiti
Competition is good for the marketplace and brings innovation, I believe Ben
Franklin coined the orig quote.
The other hidden issue that no one talks about in these deals is how much they
would save in royalties in buying a target company.
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
>More bad news Oracle and HP are bidding on a joint "Sun Dismemberment
>Deal"
http://www.channelregister.co.uk/2009/03/26/oracle_hp_joint_sun_deal/
>I'm still hoping that this going to fall through and end up doing nothing but
>raising Sun's stock price >over the short term.
I'm guess
More bad news Oracle and HP are bidding on a joint "Sun Dismemberment
Deal"
http://www.channelregister.co.uk/2009/03/26/oracle_hp_joint_sun_deal/
I'm still hoping that this going to fall through and end up doing nothing but
raising Sun's stock price over the short term.
--
This messa
system5 said:
"CISCO buying SUN makes more sense from a purely business perspective because
CISCO values engineering and Sun's engineers are the best. CISCO also seems to
be interested in getting in to the server market (although the results would
probably still be negative for the OpenSolaris
I think it's a horrible, horrible mistake. I have worked for IBM, I have had to work with them as a vendor, and doing either has become something that I seek to avoid. I would not recommend them to anyone as a vendor, and I sincerely hope that this deal does not go through.
I do not think the de
Thought you all might find this breaking news interesting:
http://www.eweek.com/c/a/IT-Infrastructure/More-IBM-Layoffs-Coming-608504/
...the nightmare continues...
Now I'm not an IBM hater. I actually think certain things such as the REXX
scripting language, Parallel Sysplex, and System Z main
I think it's a horrible, horrible mistake. I have worked for IBM, I have had to
work with them as a vendor, and doing either has become something that I seek
to avoid. I would not recommend them to anyone as a vendor, and I sincerely
hope that this deal does not go through.
I do not think the
Zoltan Farkas wrote:
Hmm, I will disagree here, IBM is a business, and as such they will always look
to maximize revenue.
Currently they resell Redhat Linux, If they buy Sun, they will pretty much own
Solaris.
Do the math... what brigs them more money? Selling Solaris or reselling Linux?
I a
If solaris dev costs < solaris revenue then IBM will be fine.
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
> Do the math... what brigs them more money? Selling
> Solaris or reselling Linux?
In order to sell Solaris, they have to develop it, which costs a lot of money.
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolari
Hmm, I will disagree here, IBM is a business, and as such they will always look
to maximize revenue.
Currently they resell Redhat Linux, If they buy Sun, they will pretty much own
Solaris.
Do the math... what brigs them more money? Selling Solaris or reselling Linux?
I am not saying that they
On Mon, Mar 23, 2009 at 3:05 PM, Alexander Eremin wrote:
> May be this not so terrible. I think that opensolaris community will
> survive even in an underground ;)
>
> Regards,
> Alexander Eremin
Hi Alex, yes, we all will.
:)
rgds. %martin
___
On Mon, 2009-03-23 at 14:51 +0100, Martin Bochnig wrote:
> 2009/3/23 олÑга кÑÑжановÑÐºÐ°Ñ :
> > On 3/23/09, Malte Hahlbeck wrote:
> >> What would happen to Opensolaris and other open sourced software like
> >> Glassfish, Netbeans etc.?
> >
> > Solaris customers are migrated to Lin
2009/3/23 ольга крыжановская :
> On 3/23/09, Malte Hahlbeck wrote:
>> What would happen to Opensolaris and other open sourced software like
>> Glassfish, Netbeans etc.?
>
> Solaris customers are migrated to Linux. There's no point to allow
> competition to own products. IBM will be committed to e
On 3/23/09, Malte Hahlbeck wrote:
> What would happen to Opensolaris and other open sourced software like
> Glassfish, Netbeans etc.?
Solaris customers are migrated to Linux. There's no point to allow
competition to own products. IBM will be committed to existing
contracts but no new contracts w
On Mon, Mar 23, 2009 at 2:27 PM, Malte Hahlbeck
wrote:
> What would happen to Opensolaris and other open sourced software like
> Glassfish, Netbeans etc.?
I think any code that has been published under a FSF-approved license
simply cannot be withdrawn / taken back. And this includes the CDDL
be
What would happen to Opensolaris and other open sourced software like
Glassfish, Netbeans etc.?
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
FYI, in their own words, this is what IBM's opinion of Solaris is:
"Migrate from Sun Solaris: Don't get burned"
http://www-03.ibm.com/systems/migratetoibm/sun.html?&ca=qapromo-s0stg-b0stg-l0mig-d0stgsmb-n033-o0fromsun-g0usen
Guide to porting from Solaris to Linux on x86
http://www-128.ibm.com/dev
On Mon, Mar 23, 2009 at 12:52 PM, Anon Y Mous wrote:
> If it doesn't actually go through, then it was a brilliant move by Sun
> executive management to boost the value of Sun's stock price in tough
> economic times.
That's exactly my hope which I expressed as early as last week, in
that messa
Forget about the rumors!!! This URL link describes the true story of what is
going on behind the scenes in the IBM / SUN acquisition negotiations:
http://www.businessreviewonline.com/os/archives/2009/03/ibm_near_to_jon.html
;-)
If it doesn't actually go through, then it was a brilliant move
Maybe this is talk to get the price down further on IBM's part? Maybe pot shots
at Sun is sourer grapes by IBM employees sensing their jobs are threatened.Sun
needs to gain things it does not have to survive.International management
experise,good marketing and expertise,cash for development and
If IBM will own Solaris it will have no incentive to send more money the RedHat
Way Solaris will become a revenue source for them, Linux is not.
They will probably port Solaris for Power, and migrate AIX custommers via AIX
Brandz... this way they can consolidate on one OS across all their pl
I don't see why one should see PS3 as tier 1 target;
For a very simple reason: they are cheap and abundant, and can be had
new, instead of being forced to scavenge off of ebay (and I should
know, about 50% of my private server park is hardware scavanged
"boots to some kind of a prompt" off of eb
> I don't see why one should see PS3 as tier 1 target;
For a very simple reason: they are cheap and abundant, and can be had new,
instead of being forced to scavenge off of ebay (and I should know, about 50%
of my private server park is hardware scavanged "boots to some kind of a
prompt" off of
I'd prefer they not be bought out. I don't think it's a good idea, and won't
create customer value.
I do think the talk about a possible purchase has flushed out the persistent
short sellers. I seriously hope those people lose their shirts, they deserve
every nickel of loss they suck down.
If
thus UNIX admin spake:
I don't know. Why not? Furthermore, there's already the Polaris
project...
...Which hasn't gone anywhere after Genesi killed the ODW ("open
desktop workstation"),
I know; on the other hand, this was a typical straw fire like all the
others in the Amiga universe and sur
> I don't know. Why not? Furthermore, there's already
> the Polaris project...
...Which hasn't gone anywhere after Genesi killed the ODW ("open desktop
workstation"), the PS3 as the target wasn't accepted, and finally it was
determined that the POWER hardware, the next logical target, was way to
On Thu, Mar 19, 2009 at 11:21 AM, UNIX admin wrote:
>> Yes, of course. Luckily!!
>> And I _know_, that most people on this list will
>> jointly do this,
>> together with you, or you together with them :))
>
> Gladly!
>
>> We talked about this before. But it doesn't make any
>> sense to make a
>>
1 - 100 of 128 matches
Mail list logo
