SEO

Is there differences between Solaris 9 and Linux 2.6 in term of :
- performance w.r.t database, web, and other server related apps
- compatibility with various hardware
- cost
- expandability
- security
- hardware vendor support, e.g disk storage
- dependability - i've seen Solaris on SPARC running for years
without rebooting
- stability
- recoverability when disaster happen
- interopability with other OS

Is it safe to say that outside SPARC platform, Linux win for all the above?
How about if we install Linux on SPARC as well? Many are comfortable with
single platform architecture such as SPARC from Sun Microsystem or they are
already invested in SPARC hardware.

Regards

"Hunn E. Balsiche" <hunnebal@yahoo.com> writes in comp.unix.solaris:
|Is there differences between Solaris 9 and Linux 2.6 in term of :
|- performance w.r.t database, web, and other server related apps
|- compatibility with various hardware
|- cost
|- expandability
|- security
|- hardware vendor support, e.g disk storage
|- dependability - i've seen Solaris on SPARC running for years
| without rebooting
|- stability
|- recoverability when disaster happen
|- interopability with other OS

Yes, there are definitely differences.

|Is it safe to say that outside SPARC platform, Linux win for all the above?

Absolutely not. Linux will win in some areas or for some applications,
Solaris for others, and some will simply be a draw.

Even something as simple seeming as cost, it's hard to declare a winner
for all cases. From what you list as important, it sounds like you want
an enterprise server, in which case I believe Solaris x86 is cheaper
than several of the big enterprise Linux packages.

--
__________________________________________________ ______________________
Alan Coopersmith alanc@alum.calberkeley.org
http://www.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU/~alanc/ aka: Alan.Coopersmith@Sun.COM
Working for, but definitely not speaking for, Sun Microsystems, Inc.

Hunn E. Balsiche wrote:

> Is there differences between Solaris 9 and Linux 2.6 in term of :
> - performance w.r.t database, web, and other server related apps
> - compatibility with various hardware
> - cost
> - expandability
> - security
> - hardware vendor support, e.g disk storage
> - dependability - i've seen Solaris on SPARC running for years
> without rebooting
> - stability
> - recoverability when disaster happen
> - interopability with other OS
>
> Is it safe to say that outside SPARC platform, Linux win for all the above?
> How about if we install Linux on SPARC as well? Many are comfortable with
> single platform architecture such as SPARC from Sun Microsystem or they are
> already invested in SPARC hardware.
>
> Regards
>
>
FWIW, I've found Solaris X86 to be very capable, very robust,
very stable, very well documented, and very economical. Linux
has many applications, particularly for the desktop (many of
these might also run on Solaris, but they are at home on Linux),
and also supports more hardware (although not always necessarily
at high quality).

I think both can be made secure, and that any inquiry into
price/performance is fact-intensive.

--
The e-mail address in our reply-to line is reversed in an attempt to
minimize spam. Our true address is of the form che...@prodigy.net.

On Thu, 13 May 2004, Hunn E. Balsiche wrote:

> Is there differences between Solaris 9 and Linux 2.6 in term of :
> - performance w.r.t database, web, and other server related apps
> - compatibility with various hardware
> - cost
> - expandability
> - security
> - hardware vendor support, e.g disk storage
> - dependability - i've seen Solaris on SPARC running for years
> without rebooting
> - stability
> - recoverability when disaster happen
> - interopability with other OS
>
> Is it safe to say that outside SPARC platform, Linux win for all the above?

Not in the least. Linux might win a few (e.g., it works on more
HW), but loses on others (RHES is more expensive than Solaris x86,
for example).

> How about if we install Linux on SPARC as well? Many are comfortable with

Linux on SPARC is just not an option, IMHO.

Depending on your needs (which you haven't articluated in detail
here), Linux might be an OK choice for you. But I strongly
expect that Solaris x86 would be a better one.

--
Rich Teer, SCNA, SCSA

President,
Rite Online Inc.

Voice: +1 (250) 979-1638
URL: http://www.rite-online.net

On Thursday 13 May 2004 14:28, Rich Teer (rich.teer@rite-group.com) held
forth in comp.os.linux.misc
(<Pine.SOL.4.58.0405131125170.8276@rite-group.com>):


>> Is it safe to say that outside SPARC platform, Linux win for all the
>> above?
>
> Not in the least. Linux might win a few (e.g., it works on more
> HW), but loses on others (RHES is more expensive than Solaris x86,
> for example).

Why would he want to install RHES ? A properly configured Linux system can
do all of that.

>
>> How about if we install Linux on SPARC as well? Many are comfortable
>> with
>
> Linux on SPARC is just not an option, IMHO.
>

IIRC, Debian has a SPARC port.

On Thu, 13 May 2004 13:29:17 -0400, Hunn E. Balsiche <hunnebal@yahoo.com> wrote:
>Is there differences between Solaris 9 and Linux 2.6 in term of :
>- performance w.r.t database, web, and other server related apps
>- compatibility with various hardware
>- cost
>- expandability
>- security
>- hardware vendor support, e.g disk storage
>- dependability - i've seen Solaris on SPARC running for years
> without rebooting
>- stability
>- recoverability when disaster happen
>- interopability with other OS
>
>Is it safe to say that outside SPARC platform, Linux win for all the above?
>How about if we install Linux on SPARC as well? Many are comfortable with
>single platform architecture such as SPARC from Sun Microsystem or they are
>already invested in SPARC hardware.

Interesting discovery, I should enable my FULL HEADER more often.
It could be just coincident, but the same type of questions keep
coming up, and lack of reading on materials responded by posters.

From: "Hunn E. Balsiche" <hunnebal@yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <2gkc5fF3lve0U1@uni-berlin.de>
X-Trace: news.uni-berlin.de
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.3790.0
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.3790.132

From: "Sarah Tanembaum" <sarah.tanembaum@yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <2ggglsF2j71bU1@uni-berlin.de>
X-Trace: news.uni-berlin.de
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.3790.0
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.3790.132

--
slrn is a command line newsreader.
please reply, to the newsgroup(s).

slrn@rr.com (slrn) wrote in message news:<slrncaa32t.j7h.slrn@starfire.rr.com>...
> On Thu, 13 May 2004 13:29:17 -0400, Hunn E. Balsiche <hunnebal@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >Is there differences between Solaris 9 and Linux 2.6 in term of :
> >- performance w.r.t database, web, and other server related apps
> >- compatibility with various hardware
> >- cost
> >- expandability
> >- security
> >- hardware vendor support, e.g disk storage
> >- dependability - i've seen Solaris on SPARC running for years
> > without rebooting
> >- stability
> >- recoverability when disaster happen
> >- interopability with other OS
> >
> >Is it safe to say that outside SPARC platform, Linux win for all the above?
> >How about if we install Linux on SPARC as well? Many are comfortable with
> >single platform architecture such as SPARC from Sun Microsystem or they are
> >already invested in SPARC hardware.
>
> Interesting discovery, I should enable my FULL HEADER more often.
> It could be just coincident, but the same type of questions keep
> coming up, and lack of reading on materials responded by posters.
>
> From: "Hunn E. Balsiche" <hunnebal@yahoo.com>
> Message-ID: <2gkc5fF3lve0U1@uni-berlin.de>
> X-Trace: news.uni-berlin.de
> X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.3790.0
> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.3790.132
>
> From: "Sarah Tanembaum" <sarah.tanembaum@yahoo.com>
> Message-ID: <2ggglsF2j71bU1@uni-berlin.de>
> X-Trace: news.uni-berlin.de
> X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.3790.0
> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.3790.132


Well, we have gone thru this path a few month ago after the huge linux
buzz in the company, then upper mgnt realized that linux is very
expensive and not much to offer (we were telling them all along). Now,
we are testing apps on Solaris x86.
Sun is very aggresive about rolling out x86 and will give a very good
price on AMD H/W and Solaris x86 for free depending on your current
contract.

>
>
> Well, we have gone thru this path a few month ago after the huge linux
> buzz in the company, then upper mgnt realized that linux is very
> expensive and not much to offer (we were telling them all along). Now,
> we are testing apps on Solaris x86.
> Sun is very aggresive about rolling out x86 and will give a very good
> price on AMD H/W and Solaris x86 for free depending on your current
> contract.

From a developers standpoint, I wouldn't bother with Solaris X86. Sun's on
again off again approach to supporting it's development doesn't make one
feel cozy about spending money developing applications for it. Linux has a
huge installer base and it isn't extremely expensive. Yes, Redhat is now
earning money on the software but there are other freeware versions out
there that are growing in installed base as well. I would jump to BSD
before Solaris X86.

On Sun, 16 May 2004 23:04:27 -0600, Judd wrote:

> From a developers standpoint, I wouldn't bother with Solaris X86. Sun's on
> again off again approach to supporting it's development doesn't make one
> feel cozy about spending money developing applications for it.

Wholly specious. Applications developed on Solaris will compile without
error or rewrite on Linux. Do you really wish to exclude a potential
market by using Linux specific API?

> Linux has a
> huge installer (sic) base and it isn't extremely expensive.

Free is not expensive at all. Software support contracts *are* possibly
expensive regardless of which OS the customer chooses.

> Yes, Redhat is now
> earning money on the software but there are other freeware versions out
> there that are growing in installed base as well.

Good for them and their customers who had previously been using Microsfot
products.

> I would jump to BSD
> before Solaris X86.

Which one? None of the presently available BSDs have scalable SMP
capability. FreeBSD claims that but I can crash its kernel by running
xine under a user account. Same thing with NetBSD.

Judd wrote:
>>
>>Well, we have gone thru this path a few month ago after the huge linux
>>buzz in the company, then upper mgnt realized that linux is very
>>expensive and not much to offer (we were telling them all along). Now,
>>we are testing apps on Solaris x86.
>>Sun is very aggresive about rolling out x86 and will give a very good
>>price on AMD H/W and Solaris x86 for free depending on your current
>>contract.
>
>
> From a developers standpoint, I wouldn't bother with Solaris X86. Sun's on
> again off again approach to supporting it's development doesn't make one
> feel cozy about spending money developing applications for it. Linux has a
> huge installer base and it isn't extremely expensive. Yes, Redhat is now
> earning money on the software but there are other freeware versions out
> there that are growing in installed base as well. I would jump to BSD
> before Solaris X86.
>
I don't think anyone does develop applications specifically (except
drivers) for Solaris x86, we develop for Solaris and compile for x86 or
Sparc. Or Linux for that matter.

Ian