Rich Teer <rich.teer@rite-group.com> wrote:
>On Tue, 25 Nov 2003, Bo Snyder wrote:
>
>> Also I just downloaded and I am thinking of going with Aurora Linux instead
>> of redhat 6.2, is that a good idea or is there any other OS choices that
>> might be better or worse? Your opinions are valued greatly!!

For years I have run NetBSD and OpenBSD with great success on older
workstations such as the SparcStation 5. From bitter personal experience
I found all Linux derivatives to be misdesigned junk, having all-round
inferior real-world performance and stability. But hey, it's your hardware
and your free time; if you just want to use what you know best, go for
Linux!

Anyway, Gnome or KDE will drag down any hardware with less than a 500 MHz
CPU and 256 MB RAM.

>What's wrong with Solaris 9? That's the OS I'd recommend (after you've
>installed that extra memory).

It costs money (in .nl: USD 20 + bank fees, etc., for a license, or
EUR 95 for a license + media kit), which is perhaps more than is worth
for a hobbyist.

I have one SS 5 left running, and recently installed Sloaris 9, and I find
it to be of very uneven quality. Some parts, such as X and Display
PostScript, are really good and surprisingly fast. Others, such as the disk
layout, the package tools and the startup scripts, are unbelievably archaic
and dumb. Some administration tasks are hidden behind layers of Motif
and/or Java untools, some are bare. It is really strange.

>As a general rule, Sun hardware is happiest running Solaris.

That might be the case, but I think it is more important that I'm happy.

scs