A Sun engineer on Linux [LWN.net]

A Sun engineer on Linux

Posted Sep 23, 2004 21:41 UTC (Thu) by mmarq (guest, #2332) [Link]

Perhaps because the main business at I.B.M. are already Global Services,..., in SUN it still is Server Iron...
Anyway i dont belive they will dump AIX interely.

A Sun engineer on Linux

Posted Sep 23, 2004 23:42 UTC (Thu) by cajal (guest, #4167) [Link]

IBM is not "all but ditching AIX for Linux." They still sell quite a lot pSeries machines to run AIX.
They have said that in the big picture (i.e. 10 years) they will try to migrate users to Linux, but
IBM has been known to change their position in the past. And, frankly, given IBM's history, they'll
sell the customer whatever he wants, so their commitment to Linux could change.

Sun has made the decision that they want control over their primary OS. Frankly, I think that's a
very good decision for them to make. Why worry about having to constantly patch the Linux
kernel (as RedHat, SuSE/Novell, Mandrake, etc all do), when they can just use their existing
enterprise-capable kernel? Why should they throw out their decades-long investment in Solaris
just to push another OS (which doesn't do everything that Solaris does)?

Frankly, it sickens me to see so much Sun-bashing on this site - it almost reads like Slashdot.
Why is there so much fuss over one blog post by one person?. This wasn't an official statement
from Sun. Why don't you all take Sun's actions for that it really it - another triumph for open
source development, rather than bitching about one person's opinion?

A Sun engineer on Linux

Posted Sep 24, 2004 1:25 UTC (Fri) by hppnq (subscriber, #14462) [Link]

Frankly, it sickens me to see so much Sun-bashing on this site - it almost reads like Slashdot.

You one of the regulars over there?

You've got to be kidding, by far most of the comments I read here are well informed and quite reasonable. Either you don't really know what you're talking about (I'm sorry I have to say it seems so from the rest of your post), or you are deliberately ranting. In both cases, yes, you would fit in better on other sites.

A Sun engineer on Linux

Posted Sep 24, 2004 1:48 UTC (Fri) by cajal (guest, #4167) [Link]

Actually, I'm not a regular on Slashdot. I agree that most of the comments on LWN are pretty good; except when the topic of Sun and/or Solaris comes up. Then the rapid Sun bashers come out. And what exactly was so unreasonable about the rest of my post?

A Sun engineer on Linux

Posted Sep 24, 2004 2:28 UTC (Fri) by hppnq (subscriber, #14462) [Link]

Still, I have to strongly disagree with your take on Sun bashing at lwn.net. Perhaps you have noticed that Sun has been campaigning quite actively lately? That might account for the increased attention over here. Disagreement with points of view does not add up to bashing. Read the comments again.

I think you don't know what you are talking about, when you say -- for instance -- that IBM sells pSeries to run AIX. IBM needs an OS to sell their expensive hardware, it's not the other way around. Even worse is your statement that it would not be very wise for Sun to ditch Solaris and start patching the Linux kernel continuously. (What do you think they are doing right now? Yes, they are frantically patching Solaris, continuously.) That statement shows that you have not completely grasped the way Open Source software development works.

I agree with you on the importance of this weblog entry: in itself, it is very insignificant indeed. For the very poor reasoning alone, it does not deserve the attention it gets here.

(Another thing: don't get me wrong, I've got nothing against you -- I haven't even got much against Solaris, except that I personally do not like it -- and you of course have every right to criticize whatever you like, but let's keep it fair. ;-)

A Sun engineer on Linux

Posted Sep 24, 2004 4:07 UTC (Fri) by cajal (guest, #4167) [Link]

I'm not saying that disagreement constitunes bashing. But I think the "oh look, they got money
from Microsoft, now they're evil" and the "SPARC sucks, Sun is dying" type comments do
constitute bashing, and I'm seeing more of them on LWN over time.

I disagree with just about everything else you said. The majority of IBM's pSeries machines run
AIX, if for no other reason than Linux hardware support for high-end pSeries has been pretty
incomplete, and it's only recently that IBM has started filling in those holes: It was only a few
months ago that Linux got hipersockets support on pSeries; and most of the p630's failover and
clustering abilities are only available under AIX (just to pull two examples off the top of my
head). Despite many press articles about IBM's love affair with the penguin, IBM is still pushing
their suite of proprietary software: AIX, DB2, WebSphere, z/OS and i5/OS (OS/400); trust me, we
run all of them (except i5/OS) at my University (I work in the central IT dept. there and walk by
the mainframe and racks of pSeries machines daily). While their long-term plan might be to
migrate customers to AIX, it is just that: a *long-term* plan, i.e. on the order of a decade. This
isn't to say that Linux sucks, just that not everyone wants to use it and that there are some
things it just can't do (yet). But I'm getting off-topic....

Re: Sun, I stand by my statement. Sun has decades of experience with Solaris. Why should they
abandon that? Yes, they have to patch Solaris (although I wouldn't use inflammatory words like
"frantically" to describe Sun's patching schedule). Every OS needs regular patches. But Sun has
expertise with Solaris. It makes no sense for them to throw that away and start all over with
Linux. FYI, the patching I was referring to was adding new abilities to Linux to bring it up to par
with Solaris; I didn't mean routine bugfixes and security updates.

As for not grasping the way open source development works, I'm afraid you're mistaken. In fact,
I'm currently being funded by a grant from the Mellon Foundation to develop open source p2p
and security software. Our web site is http://lionshare.its.psu.edu/. We're releasing parts of it
under the GPL and other parts under a modified Apache 1.1 License. I was just in the final
meeting with the University lawyers about the licensing this morning. In fact, we'll be making our
first public release of the source at the Internet2 Fall Members Meeting in Austin next week.

A Sun engineer on Linux

Posted Sep 24, 2004 4:50 UTC (Fri) by einstein (subscriber, #2052) [Link]

The guys said:
But I think the "oh look, they got money from Microsoft, now they're evil" and the "SPARC sucks, Sun is dying" type comments do constitute bashing,

Are you being deliberately obtuse? you severely distorted what was said, and one can only wonder what your motivation is. Contrast your rant to the actual comment, a simple observation:

Sun takes a wad of cash from microsoft, and lo and behold, they turn up the volume on their anti-linux FUD.

I'm no stranger to sun, my first real unix experience was on sunos back in the early 90s, and I have been a sun advocate on the job for years. But that doesn't give them a pass for all the ridiculous anti-linux FUD they are throwing around now.

I was just talking to a sun engineer the other day about linux and solaris in the data center, and he started right in with the party line, laying it on thick about how linux is cheap and ok for the low end, but crashes all the time unlike the rock solid solaris (har har). The fact is, we run linux and solaris boxes, and both OSes normally have uptimes in the hundreds of days - I see absolutely no difference. The trash talk sounds like they are reading from a script. blech, I won't waste any more time or energy defending sun, whatever happens, happens.

A Sun engineer on Linux

Posted Sep 24, 2004 5:06 UTC (Fri) by cajal (guest, #4167) [Link]

*Sigh*

First, my comment wasn't a rant. But I guess that distinction is lost here.

Secondly, what does this have to do with "anti-Linux FUD" from Sun? This article is about someone's personal opinion, not an official statement from Sun. It was in some guy's blog. Seriously.

No, I was not trying to be obtuse. I was paraphrasing. Comments like the two you quoted, as well as:

Just a window into the unbelievable arrogance of Sun (or at least some at Sun). If they don't wise up soon, they will be gone.

and

Oh I see now how Sun is going to trash Linux.

are pretty much just mindless Sun-bashing, most likely by people who didn't bother reading the blog entry. neoprene's comment is also an example of this, although slightly less so -- it reeks with open-source, Linux arrogance, insuinating that Solaris' codebase is of no use. I'm just tired of the GPL elitism on what is supposed to be a technical news site.

A Sun engineer on Linux

Posted Sep 24, 2004 5:48 UTC (Fri) by hppnq (subscriber, #14462) [Link]

Okay, I'm not really sensitive to trolling, and I hate to depict people as trolls, but this leaves me no other conclusion: you are a troll.

Pity.

A Sun engineer on Linux

Posted Sep 24, 2004 12:46 UTC (Fri) by cajal (guest, #4167) [Link]

Thanks for proving my point - that on LWN (just like on Slashdot or OSNews) anyone who doesn't
buy the party line that "Linux rules and Solaris sucks" is branded as a troll.

A Sun engineer on Linux

Posted Sep 24, 2004 21:47 UTC (Fri) by mdekkers (guest, #85) [Link]

dude, Sun got money from Microsoft, now they're evil! Oh, and SPARC sucks, Sun is dying.... Just so you know....

;-)

A Sun engineer on Linux

Posted Sep 25, 2004 16:14 UTC (Sat) by Tao (guest, #24985) [Link]

Cajal,

You should be proud of being called a troll by the real troll (the worse kind) :)

Tao

A Sun engineer on Linux

Posted Sep 24, 2004 5:40 UTC (Fri) by hppnq (subscriber, #14462) [Link]

Okay, please show me the comments then, if you insist. The only "SPARC sucks" type of comment I have seen so far here seemed to defend Eric's stance rather clumsily.

You cannot seriously mean what you say about IBM's deployment of AIX. IBM ships high-end pSeries with AIX because Linux isn't ready for it yet?! That's a nice one, hadn't heard that before! (Since that is the only reason you mention, please don't catch me on that one, I know a few more reasons why IBM would want their own OS for their hardware.)

Here is the current recommended patch set for Solaris 8. Note the revisions. That's what I call frantic. If you want to talk features with me, not bugfixes, please take a good hard look at the features that Solaris 10 offers, they're hilarious. Also, note the remarkable similarity to Eric's piece. And, of course, the punchline: Linux binaries run natively on Solaris 10. Claiming that Linux has a binary compatibility problem itself is sheer stupidity. If you want to call that bashing, please, go ahead, but pick another platform.

I applaud your apparent commitment to Open Source, but I still think you do not fully get it.

A Sun engineer on Linux

Posted Sep 24, 2004 13:09 UTC (Fri) by cajal (guest, #4167) [Link]

Ok, one last time, because I just don't care enough to continue this thread anymore....

Yes, AIX has features and hardware support for pSeries hardware that Linux lacks. Yes, this is one reason why IBM still ships AIX. There's also the issue of application support. And some environments have been running AIX for years and don't want to retrain their staff on Linux. I'm not saying that no one is migrating from AIX to Linux, just that I don't see it happening en masse. In the long run, I do think IBM's hardware strategy is interesting -- in a few years' time it should be possible to run AIX, Linux, i5/OS and z/OS on the same machine in different LPARs.

It's also interesting that you don't bother listing what any of these "few other reasons" are, but I'll leave that alone for now.

All your link to the Solaris 8 patchcluster proves is that Solaris, like Linux, AIX, Windows and everything else, requires patches. Solaris 8 is four years old, after all. As for Solaris 10, I'm very much impressed. Have you read the DTrace Guide? Predictive Self- healing also looks to be quite useful; I'm looking forward to testing it out on my test machine. I'm not crazy about Sun's use of so much XML for it, but I can live. As for the rest, I don't see how they're "hilarious" -- a faster TCP stack, a new filesystem, improved process rights management, etc. They all look useful. Maybe if you looked into them further, rather than just linking to a marketing page by Sun you'd realize that. Frankly, I'm still waiting for Linux to be able to properly handle large pages. (yes, ok, that last line was a troll, I was in a jovial mood).

Now, as concerns your allegations of trolling, I have to say it sounds to me like you're being the troll. This is the second time you've told me that I "just don't get it" when it comes to open source development, and now you claim that I only have "apparent" commitment to open source, but you haven't offered any reasons at all for that statement. Sounds like more baseless namecalling to me.

A Sun engineer on Linux

Posted Sep 24, 2004 2:37 UTC (Fri) by marduk (subscriber, #3831) [Link]

Dude, relax...

I was merely asking a question, mainly that why does Sun consider Solaris so significant from a business POV whereas many other Unix companies seem to be jumping on the Linux bandwagon.

You did provide some insight into my query, though not entirely to my satisfaction.

Basically I was not "bashing" Sun. I agree that LWN may have overreacted to the blog posting, but I feel like you're overreacting a bit yourself. Relax.