On Tue, 27 Oct 2009 18:42:08 +0100, Bruno Sousa
bso...@epinfante.com wrote:
I often find alot of customers that say that it's
far more easy to convince the Board of Directors
to buy software rather than hardware or a appliance.
My observation is a trend towards (fully supported)
appliances /
On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 01:40:12PM +0800, C. Bergström wrote:
So use Nexenta?
Got data you care about?
Verify extensively before you jump to that ship.. :)
So you're saying Nexenta have been known to drop bits on
the floor, unprovoked? Inquiring minds...
--
Eugen* Leitl a
Eugen Leitl wrote:
On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 01:40:12PM +0800, C. Bergström wrote:
So use Nexenta?
Got data you care about?
Verify extensively before you jump to that ship.. :)
So you're saying Nexenta have been known to drop bits on
the floor, unprovoked? Inquiring minds...
On Wed, Oct 28 at 13:40, C. Bergström wrote:
Tim Cook wrote:
PS: Not having enough engineers to support a growing and paying
customer base is a *good* problem to have. The opposite is much, much
worse.
So use Nexenta?
Got data you care about?
Verify extensively before you jump
2009/10/28 Eric D. Mudama edmud...@bounceswoosh.org
On Wed, Oct 28 at 13:40, C. Bergström wrote:
Tim Cook wrote:
PS: Not having enough engineers to support a growing and paying
customer base is a *good* problem to have. The opposite is much, much
worse.
So use Nexenta?
Got
On Tue, 27 Oct 2009, Eric D. Mudama wrote:
Yes, this may not make business sense for Sun-as-structured, but
someone will figure out how to scratch that itch because it's real for
a LOT of small businesses. They want that low cost entry into a
business-grade NAS without having to build it
On 10/28/09 10:18 AM, Tim Cook wrote:
If Nexenta was too expensive, there's nothing Sun will ever offer that
will fit your price profile. Home electronics is not their business
model and never will be.
True, but this was discussed that on a different thread some time
ago. Sun's prices on X86s
On Wed, October 28, 2009 11:24, Frank Middleton wrote:
However, you are certainly correct that Sun's business model isn't
aimed at retail, although one wonders about the size of the market
for robust SOHO/Home file/media servers that no one seems to be
addressing right now (well, Apple,
C. Bergström wrote:
Eugen Leitl wrote:
On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 01:40:12PM +0800, C. Bergström wrote:
So use Nexenta?
Got data you care about?
Verify extensively before you jump to that ship.. :)
So you're saying Nexenta have been known to drop bits on
the floor,
On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 12:27:50PM -0400, David Magda wrote:
The problem is that many of these units use 'embedded' processors, and
(Open)Solaris does not readily run on many of them (e.g., PowerPC- and
ARM-based SoCs). Though AFAIK, ReadyNAS actually runs (ran?) on SPARC
(Leon), but used
David Magda wrote:
On Wed, October 28, 2009 11:24, Frank Middleton wrote:
However, you are certainly correct that Sun's business model isn't
aimed at retail, although one wonders about the size of the market
for robust SOHO/Home file/media servers that no one seems to be
addressing right now
On Wed, 28 Oct 2009, David Magda wrote:
Perhaps as Intel and AMD build processors more suited to embedded /
light-weight systems, Solaris and ZFS may be used in more situations.
There's also FreeBSD, which also has ZFS and has been scaling up its
support for embedded platforms (MIPS, ARM,
Eric D. Mudama wrote:
On Wed, Oct 28 at 13:40, C. Bergström wrote:
Tim Cook wrote:
PS: Not having enough engineers to support a growing and paying
customer base is a *good* problem to have. The opposite is much,
much
worse.
So use Nexenta?
Got data you care about?
Verify
Hi all,
I fully understand that within a cost effective point of view,
developing the fishworks for a reduced set of hardware makes , alot, of
sense.
However, i think that Sun/Oracle would increase their user base if they
make availabe a Fishwork framework certified only for a reduced set of
On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 2:35 AM, Bruno Sousa bso...@epinfante.com wrote:
Hi all,
I fully understand that within a cost effective point of view, developing
the fishworks for a reduced set of hardware makes , alot, of sense.
However, i think that Sun/Oracle would increase their user base if
Hi,
I can agree that the software is the one that really has the added
value, but to my opinion allowing a stack like Fishworks to run outside
the Sun Unified Storage would lead to lower price per unit(Fishwork
license) but maybe increase revenue. Why an increase in revenues? Well,
i assume
On Oct 27, 2009, at 12:35 AM, Bruno Sousa wrote:
Hi all,
I fully understand that within a cost effective point of view,
developing the fishworks for a reduced set of hardware makes , alot,
of sense.
However, i think that Sun/Oracle would increase their user base if
they make availabe a
I can agree that the software is the one that really has the added
value, but to my opinion allowing a stack like Fishworks to run outside
the Sun Unified Storage would lead to lower price per unit(Fishwork
license) but maybe increase revenue.
I'm afraid I don't see that
On Tue, 27 Oct 2009, Bruno Sousa wrote:
I can agree that the software is the one that really has the added
value, but to my opinion allowing a stack like Fishworks to run
outside the Sun Unified Storage would lead to lower price per
unit(Fishwork license) but maybe increase revenue. Why an
Hi Adam,
thank you for your precise statement. Be it only from an engineering
standpoint, this is the kind of argumentation which I was expecting (and hoping
for).
I'm not sure what would lead you to believe that there is fork between
the open source / OpenSolaris ZFS and what we have in
On Oct 27, 2009, at 2:00 PM, Bryan Cantrill wrote:
I can agree that the software is the one that really has the added
value, but to my opinion allowing a stack like Fishworks to run
outside
the Sun Unified Storage would lead to lower price per unit(Fishwork
license) but maybe
On Oct 27, 2009, at 2:58 PM, Bryan Cantrill wrote:
I can agree that the software is the one that really has the added
value, but to my opinion allowing a stack like Fishworks to run
outside
the Sun Unified Storage would lead to lower price per unit(Fishwork
license) but maybe increase
I can agree that the software is the one that really has the added
value, but to my opinion allowing a stack like Fishworks to run
outside
the Sun Unified Storage would lead to lower price per unit(Fishwork
license) but maybe increase revenue.
I'm afraid I don't see that
On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 2:13 PM, Dale Ghent da...@elemental.org wrote:
On Oct 27, 2009, at 2:58 PM, Bryan Cantrill wrote:
I can agree that the software is the one that really has the added
value, but to my opinion allowing a stack like Fishworks to run
outside
the Sun Unified Storage
are you going to ask NetApp to support ONTAP on Dell systems,
well, ONTAP 5.0 is built on freebsd, so it wouldn't be too
hard to boot on dell hardware. Hay, at least it can do
aggregates larger than 16T now...
http://www.netapp.com/us/library/technical-reports/tr-3786.html
Bruno Sousa wrote:
Hi,
I can agree that the software is the one that really has the added
value, but to my opinion allowing a stack like Fishworks to run outside
the Sun Unified Storage would lead to lower price per unit(Fishwork
license) but maybe increase revenue. Why an increase
Trevor,
Could not agree more, but not every costumer likes to have
only a fancy GUI, even that this GUI is very well designed.
However my
point of view is based on the fact that the part of the software behind the
Fishworks could be possible to install in other Sun servers, besides the
7xxx
I just curious to see how much effort would it take to put the software of
FISH running within a Sun X4275...
Anyway..lets wait and see.
Bruno
On Tue, 27 Oct 2009 13:29:24 -0500 (CDT), Bob Friesenhahn
bfrie...@simple.dallas.tx.us wrote:
On Tue, 27 Oct 2009, Bruno Sousa wrote:
I can agree
Hi,
Given the fact that i worked in the Healthcare industry and alot of my
former customers wished to be able to run the former Sun NAS 5310 software
in other hardware, i can see a interesting possible business case.
In my former job, my customers liked the software used in the Sun
StorageTek NAS
Hi,
Maybe during this emails you have missed the point that no one is
requesting anything..we are just discussing a possible usage of FISHworks
outside of the 7xxx series..more specific in other Sun Server.
If i
choose the personal point of view, my biggest wish is that i would love to
run
As far as I know, its an effort! Not just for x4275 specifically, but in
general with any other x86 hardware and storage oriented software. A lot
of work required to support a final solution as well. What Nexenta does
with its version of NexentaStor is enabling third-party Partners to
On Tue, Oct 27 at 18:58, Bryan Cantrill wrote:
Why would we do this? I'm all for zero-cost endeavors, but this isn't
zero-cost -- and I'm having a hard time seeing the business case here,
especially when we have so many paying customers for whom the business
case for our time and energy is
On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 12:15 AM, Eric D. Mudama
edmud...@bounceswoosh.orgwrote:
On Tue, Oct 27 at 18:58, Bryan Cantrill wrote:
Why would we do this? I'm all for zero-cost endeavors, but this isn't
zero-cost -- and I'm having a hard time seeing the business case here,
especially when we
Tim Cook wrote:
PS: Not having enough engineers to support a growing and paying
customer base is a *good* problem to have. The opposite is much, much
worse.
So use Nexenta?
Got data you care about?
Verify extensively before you jump to that ship.. :)
With that said I'm concerned that there appears to be a fork between
the opensource version of ZFS and ZFS that is part of the Sun/Oracle
FishWorks 7nnn series appliances. I understand (implicitly) that
Sun (/Oracle) as a commercial concern, is free to choose their own
priorities in terms
First up, anyone that knows me, will know I'm a huge ZFS advocate.
With that said I'm concerned that there appears to be a fork between the
opensource version of ZFS and ZFS that is part of the Sun/Oracle FishWorks
7nnn series appliances. I understand (implicitly) that Sun (/Oracle) as a
36 matches
Mail list logo
