OpenSolaris vs Linux

Posted at 5:10pm on Monday September 14th 2009

So you've been playing around with alternative OSes for a while and you reckon you've got this Linux thing mastered. Maybe you're tried Mac OS X and found it a bit too restrictive (or expensive); perhaps you've kicked the Hurd's tyres and thought you'll come back to it when it's something more than just a clever name.

If you're looking for something else to play with, we humbly suggest OpenSolaris. Like Mac OS X, which we looked at recently, OpenSolaris is based on Unix; also like OS X, it's best known for running on a specific processor (in this case Sun's SPARC architecture) but now works on a range of architectures including x86. Unlike OS X though, OpenSolaris is open source, so you can download it for free and start fiddling with it.

We're not interested in a direct, head-to-head comparison, because for many people it's largely a matter of taste which one they choose. But we do want to help people see what makes OpenSolaris a little different from Linux, so read on for our quick-start guide for Linux users wanting to dip their toe into OpenSolaris and see which they prefer...

The source code to Solaris (well, most of it) was released to the community in June 2005, and to make sure that it became a usable home system rather than just a server OS, Sun hired Ian Murdock, founder of the Debian project, to produce OpenSolaris. The first release appeared in May 2008 and the distribution adopted an approximately half-yearly release cycle: after OpenSolaris 2008.05 we got versions 2008.11 and 2009.06.

Sun advertises its operating system as a full-blown distribution, including the Gnome desktop. But is OpenSolaris interesting enough for a Linux user? If you're happy with your favourite Linux distribution, why would you try OpenSolaris? In some aspects it's much like a regular Linux distribution, but in other aspects it's completely different. Do the exciting features of this operating system outweigh the trouble of learning another Unix environment with other tools?

Installing OpenSolaris

Just like most Linux distributions, OpenSolaris comes with a live CD and a graphical installer that asks you for the standard information, including your location, preferred keyboard map, time/date etc. This will be familiar for Linux users, and if you're installing OpenSolaris as the sole OS on a computer you'll hardly notice the difference, but if you want to create a dual-boot system with OpenSolaris and Linux you might run into problems at the disk-partitioning stage.

The OpenSolaris installer considers all logical partitions on the disk as one extended partition, so it can't be installed on a logical partition. If you choose to install OpenSolaris on this extended partition, all enclosed logical partitions get overwritten. Second, OpenSolaris uses ZFS instead of ext3 as its filesystem. Linux has no ZFS support in the kernel because the Free Software Foundation doesn't consider it free enough to be bundled with GPL software, so if you want to get access to your OpenSolaris documents in Linux you have to mount the ZFS filesystem with Fuse as a filesystem in userland.

A third issue is that the standard Grub version that comes with Linux distributions doesn't understand the ZFS filesystem. So when you install OpenSolaris first and then your favourite Linux distribution, you can't boot into OpenSolaris anymore. The solution is to first install Linux and then OpenSolaris, and add the section for your Linux distro to Grub's menu.lst in OpenSolaris.

Some filesystem differences

Linux directory	OpenSolaris directory
/home	/export/home
/var/log	/usr/adm, /var/adm, /var/log
/tmp	/var/tmp
/sys	/devices
/dev	/dev
/lib/modules/foo/*	/kernel/drv/*
/boot/grub	/rpool/boot/grub

Some command line differences

Linux command	OpenSolaris command	Aim
sudo	pfexec	Execute a command as root
apt-cache search foo	pkg search -r foo	Search for a package containing foo
apt-get install foo	pkg install SUNWfoo	Install package foo
apt-get dist-upgrade	pkg image-update	Upgrade all packages that have updates available
lsmod	modinfo	List loaded drivers
insmod	modload	Load a driver
rmmod	modunload	Unload a loaded driver
top	prstat	List the running processes
free	vmstat	List the free memory
cat /proc/cpuinfo	psrinfo -v	List processor info
ifconfig	ifconfig -a	List all network interfaces
parted	format	Format a disk

Hardware support

Linux has a big advantage over OpenSolaris in that it supports a lot more hardware, but OpenSolaris makes up for this by having a fixed device driver interface. Where the Linux kernel developers give priority to adding features even when they break compatibility with hardware drivers (which creates more work for the distro makers) OpenSolaris keeps the driver interface static, so if your printer worked with OpenSolaris 2008.05 it'll work with 2009.6 - users can even run 10-year-old drivers written for the original Solaris platform.

OpenSolaris also gives you a clear overview of what is supported, rather than the suck-it-and-see approach favoured by Linux. The best way to find out whether specific hardware components are supported is by searching the Solaris Hardware Compatibility List online.

Another option to test hardware support on a computer is simply to fire up the live CD. The Device Driver Utility icon should show up on the desktop, which detects all available hardware and lists which driver supports it, even if it is third-party. For example, when I fired up the Device Driver Utility on my Dell laptop, the program said that it didn't have a driver for my WLan chipset (from Broadcom), but referred me to a website where I could download a third-party driver.

There is also a related utility, the Device Detection Tool: this is a Java program giving the same information, which you can run on Windows, Linux and Mac OS X. So with this tool, you get a perfect overview of the hardware support before you even install OpenSolaris.

OpenSolaris's hardware support is a lot more predictable than it is in Linux, though not as extensive.

ZFS: the Zettabyte File System

One of the most important reasons to use OpenSolaris is its filesystem, ZFS. Conceptually, ZFS is simple: disks are assigned to pools, and data sets are made of pools. Filesystems and volumes are two types of data sets. For pools, OpenSolaris has the administration command zpool and for datasets OpenSolaris has the administration command zfs. We'll focus here on pools. This is how you list the available pools:

$ zpool list 
NAME	SIZE	USED	AVAIL	CAP	HEALTH 	ALTROOT
rpool	15.9G	1.28G	14.6G	8%	ONLINE	-

Rpool is the default pool created by the distribution's installer. With the zpool status command, you can display the status of all pools:

$ zpool status
 pool: rpool
 state: ONLINE
 scrub: none requested
config:
	NAME	STATE	READ	WRITE	CKSUM
	rpool	ONLINE	0	0	0
	c7d0s0	ONLINE	0	0	0
errors: No known data errors

One of the outstanding features of OpenSolaris is related to the filesystem: snapshots. A snapshot is a point-in-time copy of a ZFS filesystem or volume, saving the state for later reference or recovery. You can create a snapshot with the zfs snapshot command, but OpenSolaris 2009.06 has integrated this functionality in Nautilus and the Gnome Administration panel Time Slider.

Step by step: Take snapshots with ZFS

Enable automatic snapshots: Go to System > Administration > Time Slider and click on Enable Time Slider. Now OpenSolaris will regularly take snapshots of all available ZFS filesystems. If you would like to fine-tune which mount points will get snapshotted, click on Advanced Options. You can also adapt the maximum proportion of filesystem capacity that should be used. The regular snapshots take a lot of space, so by default Time Slider reduces snapshots when storage space usage exceeds 80% of filesystem capacity.

Restore a snapshot: If you suddenly realise that you've accidentally deleted or overwritten an important file, it's time to use the snapshots. Open Nautilus and navigate to the directory your file is in. If you click on the Restore button, you can navigate the snapshot history of the current location. For example, if you deleted a file you can use the slider to navigate to the time when the file still existed. You can open the file to see if it is the right version, or you can right-click on the file and select Restore To [directory]".

Compare different snapshots of a file: If you want to browse the file history of a given file, right-click on it and select Explore Versions (this option is only visible when there are different versions of the file to choose from). The Time Slider File Version Explorer window now shows you the different versions of the selected file. If it's a text file, such as code or plain text, you can compare the differences: just select an older version and click the compare button. If the file is an image, you'll be able to see the differences immediately.

Take or delete snapshots manually: To take a snapshot of a directory manually, just click on the camera icon on the right of the time slider in the directory. If you've moved the slider to a previous snapshot, you can delete this one by clicking on the Delete button. If after a time you discover you have a lot of space wasted by snapshots you don't need anymore, just open the System > Administration > Time Slider panel again and click on Delete Snapshots, which presents you a list with all available snapshots. Select the ones you want to get rid of and click on Delete.

Virtualisation with OpenSolaris

OpenSolaris supports a variety of virtualisation technologies with different degrees of isolation, flexibility, performance and ease of use. Of course it runs VirtualBox, but it also has a port of Xen, called xVM Hypervisor. A lesser known but equally interesting virtualisation technology in OpenSolaris is Zones, a feature resembling Linux-VServer, but with the advantage that it's not a separate patch set but supported in the official kernel.

Processes running in different Zones are completely isolated from each other. This type of virtualisation is called operating-system level virtualisation. Although each zone appears as a standalone operating system, in reality there's a single instance of the OpenSolaris kernel running behind all of them, which means that Zones are relatively light on processing power. Here's how to set up virtual instances of OpenSolaris with Zones:

Configure a zone

First we create a filesystem for the zones to reside in. Then we create a zone and configure the path where the root directory tree of the zone is placed. We add a virtual network interface to the zone and wire it to the physical interface nge0, and in the last-but-two line of code we configured this network interface with a specific IP address.

$ pfexec zfs create -o mountpoint=/zones rpool/zones
$ pfexec zonecfg -z myzone
myzone: No such zone configured
Use 'create' to begin configuring a new zone.
zonecfg:myzone> create
zonecfg:myzone> set zonepath=/zones/myzone
zonecfg:myzone> add net
zonecfg:myzone:net> set physical=nge0
zonecfg:myzone:net> set address=192.168.1.50
zonecfg:myzone:net> end
zonecfg:myzone> exit

To see all zones, we execute the zoneadm list -cv command, which shows the status of the myzone zone as we've configured it:

$ zoneadm list -cv
  ID	NAME	STATUS	PATH	BRAND	IP
  0	global	running	/	native	shared
	- myzone	configured	/tank/zones/myzone	ipkg	shared

As you can see, there's also a zone called global. This is the OpenSolaris installation itself.

Install the zone

Now that the zone has been configured, we have to install it. Essentially, this creates a second installation of OpenSolaris inside the zone:

$ pfexec zoneadm -z myzone install

This command could take several minutes to finish, after which the status of the zone will have changed from configured to installed.

Boot the zone and log in

Once our zone has been installed, we can boot it with the command pfexec zoneadm -z myzone boot. This takes only a few seconds, after which the status will change from installed to running. Now you can log in with pfexec zlogin -C myzone. During the first login, you have to configure the host name, time zone, root password etc, just like a regular install does.

Now you can execute commands in the zone just like you do on the global OpenSolaris install. You can also halt, reboot and shut down the zone from within it, but you can also halt a zone from within the global zone with the command pfexec zoneadm -z myzone halt.

OpenSolaris on the desktop

Because OpenSolaris is advertised as a desktop distribution, it's fair to compare it with current Linux distributions. However, the first thing you notice is that the operating system is much slower than Ubuntu on the same hardware, so don't think about installing it on older hardware. For the rest it looks like a fairly standard Gnome desktop, although NetworkManager is replaced by an application called Network Auto Magic, which does more or less the same thing but has fewer features.

While most high-profile applications (including OpenOffice.org, Firefox, Thunderbird and Rhythmbox) are installed or available via the package manager, you have less luck if your favourite application is less known. For many Linux users this will be a showstopper, although packages can be ported.

And finally... YouTube!

We told you OpenSolaris is a proper desktop OS, so naturally you'll want to get Flash installed and stimulate your left brain. To get Adobe Flash Player, go to http://get.adobe.com/flashplayer and click the Agree And Install Now button (the website will automatically detect that you're using Solaris). Select Save File in the window that pops up, then click OK, which saves it to your Downloads directory. Then open a terminal window and execute the following commands:

cd ~/Downloads
mkdir ~/.mozilla/plugins
bunzip2 flash_player_10_solaris_x86.tar.bz2
tar -xvf flash_player_10_solaris_x86.tar
mv flash_player_10_solaris_r22_87_x86/* ~/.mozilla/plugins/

When you next restart Firefox, Flash 10 should be working. There - an advanced filesystem, easy virtualisation, Firefox, OOo and more. Could OpenSolaris be the new Linux? Give it a try and let us know in the comments below!

Some differences under the hood

Under the hood OpenSolaris is very different from a Linux distribution. You can see this in a different filesystem layout and different base commands. For many tools, OpenSolaris has two versions: the Solaris ones are in /usr/bin and the GNU ones are in /usr/gnu/bin. Because OpenSolaris wants to ease the transition for Linux users, /usr/gnu/bin comes first in the PATH environment variable.

Other tools are available only in a Solaris variant, which can be confusing. Ifconfig is such an example: as a Linux user, you'll soon find out that the syntax is different from what you expect. Even the network interfaces are called differently: the standard interface is not called eth0, but for example nge0 or bge0, reflecting the driver used. All in all, you have to relearn a lot of commands, which requires some effort.

First published in Linux Format magazine

You should follow us on Identi.ca or Twitter

Your comments

Huge thanks!

murrayy (not verified) - September 14, 2009 @ 6:58pm

This is exactly what I always wanted to know when OpenSolaris was mentioned. I think I'll try it.

OpenSolaris is interesting but not very compelling

Anonymous Penguin - September 14, 2009 @ 8:26pm

OpenSolaris is an interesting OS but until they get more packages ported I don't expect it to become successful outside of the server market, where the kernel's technical differences can come to light.

I would consider using it on my laptop (having hardware completely work and work forever would be very nice) but just having the most popular programs available isn't enough for me. Once their repos are comparable to at least Fedora or openSuse it could be compelling, but then, a more robust Fedora or openSuse would satisfy me just fine.

Once BTRFS arrives and brings most of the features of ZFS I don't think there will be any compelling reason for most users to try OpenSolaris.

Yes, I did try Mac OS X out!

Anonymous Plastic Button (not verified) - September 15, 2009 @ 12:23am

And I can not see how it would be too restrictive. In fact, it was the complete opposite.

Great OS production and commercial-grade systems, not home

Anonymous Penguin (not verified) - September 15, 2009 @ 12:29am

I've used Solaris for production systems which cannot go down, and must remain reliable. Great for such systems when you rely on it. However, individuals are less likely to use it, as the support for the latest and greatest gadgets is far from the support by Linux distros. Yes, there are issues for compatibility, and interface standards, but the bottom line is tha Linux will support more of my little gadgets I have around that Solaris. However, as a file server of other server, like my headless one, this is perhaps the best choice, especially now that it is open-source. Let's hope that Oracle will keep Solaris alive.

Oh the stupidity

Anonymous Penguin (not verified) - September 15, 2009 @ 12:43am

After working for a large oil & gas company with an equally large Jonathan Schwartz fan club, I'm convinced there is no good reason to use Solaris, open or otherwise.

I started my IT career looking after VAX/VMS, Ultrix and Dynix in 1990. Since then I've worked with AIX, Solaris, OSF/Tru64 and Linux (and Windows but that doesn't really count).

The Jonathan Schwartz fan club spent a couple of days attempting to recover from a failed ZFS pool containing many TB of exploration and production data. SEV1 calls were logged with Sun. Did they get the data back? No.

ZFS may have some cool features but after that ZFS failure, beware. I'm aware of a similar failure with ZFS but on FreeBSD.

Also, ZFS may be conceptually simple but the practical realities are very different.

My only kind comment about Solaris is that it is a great advertisment for Linux.

@Jimmy oh come on dude.. ok,

Anonymous Penguin (not verified) - September 15, 2009 @ 1:19am

@Jimmy
oh come on dude.. ok, we get it.. you love ZFS.. long live ZFS! etc etc.. but you know.. BTRFS is moving WAY faster than ZFS.. like it or not, linux gets support from huge players in the enterprise zone (be it IBM, oracle, redhat, novell, intel HP, and the list goes on). That means more developers, more support, more tools, etc. I agree that at the current state ZFS is far more stable and all.. but that doesnt mean that btrfs wont catch up and/or even surpass it sooner than you believe/hope.

PS: btrfs is "sponsored" by oracle.. and guess what! oracle owns solaris now with ZFS! you get the point i hope..
PS2: i really like zfs.. (not in love with its license.. but still..)

Printers was really the worst example

Anonymous Penguin (not verified) - September 15, 2009 @ 1:43am

Seeing as how printers are supported by CUPS on Linux, Solaris, and OSX, and practically every other 'nix system, it really was the worst example to pick for hardware support, as CUPS is the same and supports the same printers regardless of platform (excluding some kinky nonstandard USB interface, which is unlikely to be supported on Solaris). Also last time I checked OpenSolaris wasn't available for sparc platforms and sparc drivers almost certainly aren't going to work on a PC, at least without recompiling.

BTRFS

@Penguin@Jimmy (not verified) - September 15, 2009 @ 1:58am

@Anonymous Penguin and maybe btrfs won't be as great as you think.

Some filesystem differences Comment

Anonymous Penguin (not verified) - September 15, 2009 @ 2:00am

In the "Some filesystem differences" section, I notice that you listed:

Linux directory OpenSolaris directory
/tmp /var/tmp

I may be wrong here, as I have more experience with Solaris, but, /tmp is actually mounted in swap so it is truly volatile memory. /var/tmp is usually a part of /var or / filesystem and is not volatile. And I've never seen a tmpwatch on Solaris that deletes stuff from /var/tmp.

Toy Solaris

Anonymous Penguin (not verified) - September 15, 2009 @ 2:02am

Until Solaris is as fast as Linux or have as much supported hardware it will remain a toy for anything other than on the server. I find this sad because the features of ZFS sound pretty intriguing, to say the least! It is the lack of hardware support that is the show stopper, not the lack of packages. It is nothing to recompile a software package, but if you can't get the hardware to work then why bother recompiling said software package in the first place? This has been a long time issue for Solaris, lack of hardware support manifests itself in the form of few software packages in its repositories. Until then I shall continue to use Linux!

LVM vs ZFS?

Anonymous Penguin (not verified) - September 15, 2009 @ 2:57am

It seems to me that the features that ZFS sports are very similar to those achieved with LVM. LVM can have volumes that span multiple drives, and can take O(1) cost snapshots. Coupling it with software raid (which is a pretty straightforward process in the Ubuntu Server install) even yields redundancy. The only real benefit I can see with OpenSolaris is guaranteed backwards compatible drivers. Even that is not usually an issue considering you can always backport security patches to a compatible kernel.

You are wrong

Anonymous Penguin (not verified) - September 15, 2009 @ 2:59am

OpenSolaris IS indeed available for SPARC. Check again...

Linux is for bitches and dumb ones at that

Anonymous NetBSD user (not verified) - September 15, 2009 @ 3:01am

"Great OS production and commercial-grade systems, not home
Anonymous Penguin (not verified) - September 15, 2009 @ 12:29am

The slapdash Linux movement creates buggy, choatic, and bloated (except for distros like slackware and ones like it for the bloated part) piece of crap operating systems or distributions that is a hackers playground (hackers can easily break into it compared to the BSDs ). Linux is for bitches and dumb ones at that. If you want to use a gadget that is not supported by Solaris or BSD you can do basically two things more or less :

1.) write a device driver for it and/or software to interact with it or port the software from linux to BSD or solaris.

2.) Dual boot Solaris and Windows. Windows will support the gadget. I have NetBSD on one hard disk and Windows on another hard disk and I dual boot. But use windows you say ? Oh, Linux is for people who hate Microsoft where the BSDs are for people who love Unix. Which is supremely ironic since what the Linux movement is putting out nowadays is starting to look more and more like what Microsoft puts out. Linux has never been about code quality or quality. That is why Linux supports more devices and bleeding edge features than NetBSD and OpenBSD. These devices and features are often implemented as cheap fast hacks that are ostensibly made at first with the intention to implement a better solution or driver later but that never happens more often than not. NetBSD might take a while to implement a feature but once it is implemented it is done correctly. It is about quality over quantity.

It's actually pretty good

FatButtLarry (not verified) - September 15, 2009 @ 3:15am

I've run the live cd of both OpenSolaris and Nexenta. What's not illustrated in the comments or the article is that its very stable and polished.

Message dialogs, such as the one pictured "Warning mpool..." above are descriptive and don't over simplify.

Ubuntu is popular for good reason because it's availability and ease of use, but OpenSolaris was more consistent on first run.

Firefox and Pidgin are all I need to talk to the outside world. The desktop icons and Look & Feel seems more professional, and the theme is a good transition from Mac, Windows, and Linux (likely a new theme for Java).

Kudos to the author for writing this up. Criticism aside, it was a good read.

-Tres

Who cares ?

Anonymous NetBSD (not verified) - September 15, 2009 @ 3:43am

"Ubuntu is popular for good reason because it's availability and ease of use, but OpenSolaris was more consistent on first run." -- Fattbuttlarry

Who cares how popular Ubuntu is ? Appealing or alluding to that is the logical fallacy Argumentum ad populum. It is not valid reasoning. Ubuntu is popular because most people on the planet do not have much intellectual capacity to work with and they are lazy when it comes to configuring and interacting with their computer. They just want everything to work automagically no matter how much bugs, spaghetti code and overhead that brings to the table. People are stupid. Solaris and the BSDs are more stable than Linux because Linux is a nothing more than a second rate knockoff clone of Unix unlike Solaris and the BSDs. Linux is inferior.

what about dtrace?

Anonymous Penguin (not verified) - September 15, 2009 @ 4:07am

what about dtrace?

Lazy People...

Anonymous M$ (not verified) - September 15, 2009 @ 4:17am

"Who cares how popular Ubuntu is ? Appealing or alluding to that is the logical fallacy Argumentum ad populum. It is not valid reasoning. Ubuntu is popular because most people on the planet do not have much intellectual capacity to work with and they are lazy when it comes to configuring and interacting with their computer. They just want everything to work automagically no matter how much bugs, spaghetti code and overhead that brings to the table. People are stupid. Solaris and the BSDs are more stable than Linux because Linux is a nothing more than a second rate knockoff clone of Unix unlike Solaris and the BSDs. Linux is inferior."

Wow. This is the kind of snotty talk from geeks that turns people off. Let's get real. Not everybody's business is computer science. There's much that makes this world go 'round, and 99% of the time the computer is just a tool in the process. For someone who must administer a system that supports thousands of connections for an n-tiered application without crashes, BSD, UNIX & Linux based OSes can all be reliably implemented (as well as Windows Server, whether we care to admit it or not). For the average user that needs their OS to allow them to connect to the internet, send email, conduct their specific business, it seems that Windows wins with Linux trailing far behind, while UNIX based OSes seem to be stuck in planet server. It's apples to oranges. This OS war has to end. There's a place for everything, and I'm sure Open Solaris will find its own.

RE: Linux is for bitches and dumb ones at that

Anonymous NetBSD's Mother Humper (not verified) - September 15, 2009 @ 4:22am

LOL @

"2.) Dual boot Solaris and Windows. Windows will support the gadget. I have NetBSD on one hard disk and Windows on another hard disk and I dual boot. But use windows you say ? Oh, Linux is for people who hate Microsoft where the BSDs are for people who love Unix. Which is supremely ironic since what the Linux movement is putting out nowadays is starting to look more and more like what Microsoft puts out. Linux has never been about code quality or quality. That is why Linux supports more devices and bleeding edge features than NetBSD and OpenBSD. These devices and features are often implemented as cheap fast hacks that are ostensibly made at first with the intention to implement a better solution or driver later but that never happens more often than not. NetBSD might take a while to implement a feature but once it is implemented it is done correctly. It is about quality over quantity."

Really? So if I wanted to run the newest gadget I'd have to boot up windows to use it? Here I thought the idea behind open source OSes like OpenSolaris and Linux was to prove that MS wasn't needed.

BTW as for your security comment...all platforms are hackable. The only computer that is 100% secure is the one without power being supplied to it or its components.

Open Solaris

Anonymous Penguin (not verified) - September 15, 2009 @ 4:27am

I really like Open Solaris and have considered it as a full fledged replacement for my usual Linux fare. Nothing wrong with Linux, but if I had a server choice, it would usually be for Solaris. Why, yoy ask?

Solaris has been running Enterprises for years. It is stable, mature, and scalable. No, it is not as bleeding edge as Linux and does not support as much hardware. There is a reason for this and I hope it does not change. Solaris has to be and must be Enterprise ready. Many Linux distros are not nor do they have to be.

Of course there are exceptions. RedHat EL and Novell Enterprise editions should be like Open Solaris: stability first, bleeding edge second. You do not want your server bleeding edge and unstable. You want it stable, reliable, scalable, and as secure as humanly possible.

Both Linux and Solaris are very good and either should serve you well. I run a Notebook most of the time, and it is Ubuntu based. My servers are primarily Solaris and Linux. VMs make a great deal of my server farm.

apt-get is not a linux command

Anonymous Penguin (not verified) - September 15, 2009 @ 4:49am

apt-get is a debian command, it doesn't exist on non-debian distros.

Yet another real unix user

yourmommycalled (not verified) - September 15, 2009 @ 4:57am

To the poor fool running linsucks and thinks it's fast. Apples to Apples comparison 48 Sun Core/2 quad core desktops in a cluster. 24 running OpenSolaris b118 24 running OpenSuse/10. Both clusters have the Sunstudio compilers as well as Portland Group and gcc compilers. A real comparison between the linux cluster and the Solaris Cluster isn't really possible because the one of linux cluster nodes kernel panic every other day so. If I make a limited WRF run on both clusters with a 200x200 km domain with 1km grid spacing using the gcc compiler suite I get 0.79 seconds per time step under linux and 0.54 seconds with Solaris. If I use the Sunstudio compilers then linux improves slightly (0.73 seconds per timestep) while the Solaris times drop to 0.43 seconds per timestep. Linux is not faster and it does have the stability needed to make it worth running. If it wasn't for software written by a million retarded monkeys using gcc (read not a C compiler) that isn't worth fixing there would be no need to run linux.

As far as use at home my wife would rather run Mac-OS, but prefers OpenSolaris to windows and she won't even look at linux. My son an electrical engineering major sees nothing in the engineering school but OpenSolaris. He works as a IT dept senior tech intern in the B-school. They are also shifting back to Solaris after, to quote the B-school Dean, they made the mistake of switching to linux.

Support for the last gadget: Why do I give a shit about a printer that has no brains or the "modem" that has to have a sound card whistling into it to make it work? Too many of the so-called devices you are touting are windows only and designed to suck up a CPU to make it work. Why do I want it?

re: LVM, "Toy" Solaris, BTRFS

Jimmy (not verified) - September 15, 2009 @ 6:08am

@Anonymous Penguin;
re: LVM vs ZFS?
LVM is not a filesystem, it's a layer under a filesystem; ext3 or whatever you put on top of it, is not copy-on-write.
LVM snapshots require space to be set aside for the snapshot delta in advance. LVM does not let you reclaim space from deleted snaps and give it back to the FS.

Also, LVM snapshots have a severe I/O penalty.
If you snap a volume with an active database, there's a severe performance hit.

You can take lots of ZFS snapshots of a fs with no performance hit.

re: Toy Solaris
There is a lot of hardware Linux is able to use that Solaris can't, that's true. With Solaris, you have a smaller selection of devices to run on.

As far as speed and stability are concerned, Solaris is basically just as fast as Linux. There are many benchmarks to show you various ways in which OpenSolaris outperforms Linux in certain tasks.

OpenSolaris handles threading and multiprocessing a lot better than Linux in many scenarios. There are benchmarks to show, for example, that when running Asterisk, OpenSolaris can handle 10 TIMES the number of concurrent calls as Linux on the same hardware.

And degrades somewhat gracefully, whereas Linux starts segfaulting processes, and crashing...

Solaris has DTRACE to assist in instrumenting production systems. Don't even THINK about using Linux STRACE on a database or Asterisk process (the process will commonly crash or deadlock).

re: BTRFS

BTRFs is not moving all that fast.
It was announced over two years ago and is still not remotely usable in any kernel release.
ZFS was first announced in Sep 04, and released in OpenSolaris Nov 16, and in Solaris 10 6/06 update, in June 2006, in a usable form.

ZFS development moved with blinding speed. Of course it doesn't change much now, and most updates are minor bugfixes.

But this is to be expected, this is what it means for it to be mature, it performs excellently, and does so well that it is hard to improve. Major new features mean new bugs, so a lot more time is taken before adding them.

BTRFS development will similarly slow down to a crawl, after it reaches a usable state, and the on-disk format becomes stable, or people won't really consider using it until it does...

Now try playing some media

Anonymous Penguin (not verified) - September 15, 2009 @ 6:35am

There are few, if any, media codecs freely available for OpenSolaris. So if you want to use it as a desktop distribution you'll be greatly restricted. There are some paid available Fluendo codecs, but they cost money.

Ease of use

Steve Szmidt (not verified) - September 15, 2009 @ 6:38am

Obviously Solaris is a mature product, has its pro's and con's.

Reading these comments I can't but look back at where Unices were going before 1990, which were primarily used by people in the know, who also lived and breathed computers.

Windows was catching on because of an interesting interface that was cheaper than Unix*. It also did not require an editor to make changes, the GUI promised the non geek that he too could be a "geek". Many IT "desk managers" figured that maybe they could do the IT job now when it was just a matter of point and click.

Unices were not growing but actually in a steady decline.

Then Linux came about and eventually caught on and a lot of people heard about it as an alternative to Windows and MAC. As Linux popularity grew, slowly the other Unices started to grow as well.

We hear from the hard core coders who thinks that if your O/S don't have a driver that you just whip it up. Entirely missing the fact that to most people that's only a dream.

They proclaim the superiority of their Unix and spit at Linux. Which may or may not be an accurate comparison. But Unices would still be going the way of the dinosaur, which regardless of what you think of it, makes Linux valuable. It breathed life into Unices as never before.

It created a bridge where Windows and MAC people, who's grown tired of things they have to deal with, are now looking at this curious animal called Linux.

Once they have been amazed over the flexibility and realized there is a whole other choice, some also discover the BSD's etc.

So you got to ask yourself, what do you want? Do you want to be a dying breed where the only new thing being developed is by a diminishing group of people who's running out of work? Where you are likely to be the next one to loose your job. Or maybe be the Grand Master of something that no longer matters to anyone but a tiny group? I suppose that might have some advantage to some, but most will be hard pressed to find it.

Or would it be overall better for you, and everyone else, if there is a growing interest, with more dollars being thrown at Linux than ever before? Some of those dollars, or lines of code, end up in your Unix as well.

It's kind of like the Republicans doing everything possible to scare voters. Regardless of what you think of either party, this is not winning people to the party. People are embarrassed and voting for Democrats.

The same thing happens with these "Oh, just write your own drivers and stop bitching" comments. People are being turned away as it is not what they are interested in, especially since few of them can write a single line of code to save their lives.

Talk about positive things like solutions and how you, or a specific product, can solve something. That is of interest to many, many more. It is what politicians should do, stop talking about what's wrong with the other guy and promote what you will do. That attracts positive attention.

Shady

Anonymous Penguin (not verified) - September 15, 2009 @ 7:17am

re: BTRFS, that last comment is just shady. I mean if you really believe what you've put there, I kindly suggest that you find some hard facts to back that kind of absurd prediction up. I'm going with false for that one and pretty much your entire comment.

The comment section of this article is quite a disgrace.
I mean, come on. Just read through the whole set of comments properly and it quickly becomes clear that not one of you have added anything of any value or any points of interest to this topic. It reads like a garbage pile.

The "Try Solaris, you might like it" carrot may be dangling for some after reading this article.
Instead now; I put it like this to you :
If you want to learn how to use the command line again, want to use a file system that you probably don't understand, which has features that you probably don't need/want/understand, can live without a Linux install to dual boot into and don't mind if some of your hardware "Doesn't quite work," Try Opensolaris.

It was a nice idea of Sun Microsystems to write an operating system. But if ever there needed to be a reason to have, instead employed developers to contribute at kernel.org; Opensolaris would be it.

Ctrl-Alt-Fn disabled

Anonymous Penguin (not verified) - September 15, 2009 @ 8:43am

First, OpenSolaris is not Solaris.

Second, you are on OpenSolaris desktop and need to go to the text console, say /dev/tty2. You press Ctrl-Alt-F2 and
nothing happens. Same with any Ctrl-Alt-Fn.

They have disabled text mode!!!!!!!!

what a joke

Anonymous Penguin (not verified) - September 15, 2009 @ 9:01am

"Then open a terminal window and execute the following commands:

cd ~/Downloads
mkdir ~/.mozilla/plugins
bunzip2 flash_player_10_solaris_x86.tar.bz2
tar -xvf flash_player_10_solaris_x86.tar
mv flash_player_10_solaris_r22_87_x86/* ~/.mozilla/plugins/
"

HA HA !
what a frickin' joke

couldn't be any easier !
lol !

I commend the author for

Anonymous Penguin (not verified) - September 15, 2009 @ 9:07am

I commend the author for this article, but I'm working for some years now on Solaris, and I must say that D-Trace is by far the biggest asset Solaris can provide.
Plus now with the Oracle acquisition of Sun, we may get D-Trace probes for Oracle, and that will put Solaris as #1 for Oracle DB hosting server...

I've been playing with

Adam Jorgensen (not verified) - September 15, 2009 @ 9:40am

I've been playing with OpenSolaris on and off since 2008.05
and I've also dipped my fingers into the Nexenta jar here and there,

OpenSolaris has a lot of great features which I'm sure would be useful, but as a desktop distribution it still has a very long way to go. Things are coming along on it, for sure, but the pace of development is pretty slow in comparison to that of the linux world.

This is, no doubt, good for enterprise users. For desktop users, though, it's not so cool.

Anyway, personally I'm hoping Oracle will GPL ZFS and any other nice things in OpenSolaris so they they can be brought in at the kernel level for linux. This, in my opinion, would be best.

Enterprise IT Architect

Anonymous Solar person (not verified) - September 15, 2009 @ 10:24am

BTRFS vs. ZFS:

Try this in BTRFS - try and flip a snapshot above it's parent and delete the parent (which is now a snapshot of the child). Oh wait you can't.

Now combine the strength of VirtualBox with ZFS - beautiful - your VMs get snapshotted automatically every 15 minutes.

and add liveupgrade (pkg image-update), and you'll see how good ZFS.

Linux has nothing to compete with this

ZFS - almost there

Anonymous Penguin (not verified) - September 15, 2009 @ 10:46am

And I might consider ZFS when Sun allow you to add another new disk to a pool and expand the underlying block structure to include the disk.

My crappy old 3ware raid5 contoller allows it, linux aid5/lvmallows it, ZFS does not

how to minimal install?

thinkc (not verified) - September 15, 2009 @ 11:13am

Solaris is too 'big' after installation... :(

RE: what a joke

Anonymous Penguin (not verified) - September 15, 2009 @ 12:25pm

"Then open a terminal window and execute the following commands:

cd ~/Downloads
mkdir ~/.mozilla/plugins
bunzip2 flash_player_10_solaris_x86.tar.bz2
tar -xvf flash_player_10_solaris_x86.tar
mv flash_player_10_solaris_r22_87_x86/* ~/.mozilla/plugins/

HA HA !
what a frickin' joke

couldn't be any easier !
lol !"

I remember when all linux browser plugins installed this way, netscape 4, then mozilla. You sound spoiled, you've got no idea where linux came from, opensolaris will become polished and easy to use over time as more people get involved, as with linux.

Anyway, I've been through a lot of different OSes and each has its place. I started my linux journey with Redhat and Mandrake (now mandriva) and then moved onto Debian (and ubuntu for the desktop). Since OSX I've moved my laptop to a mac (its easier for day to day use, and has the familiar unix tools underneath). I use windows, linux, and solaris (8,9,10) at work and love the power and reliability of solaris.

I've recently moved my home file server from debian to opensolaris. ZFS is fast, easy to manage, has built in compression, the kernel CIFS is great too. I've got the machine running:
- zfs raid for storage
- rsync to backup windows machines (they run deltacopy as an rsync client)
- CIFS for windows access (and for my beyonwiz device to stream vids over the network)
- An afp server for my time machine backups and storage access (netatalk)
- Vuze in a daemon mode with webui and azsmrc for torrents
- screen and wget for other downloads :)
- coherence for a upnp media server (mainly for the ps3)
- cacti to keep an eye on other machines on the network
What else would you want a home server to do?
I'm sure if you wanted centralised auth its NIS or samba implementations could do that just as easy as linux.
My only gripe is no support for DTV tuners, I would love a myth backend for scheduled recordings, but that will come eventually.

Some of this was a little tricky to set up, but coming from something like debian potato it was no harder than that. Of course ubuntu makes all this a lot easier because people have put time into automating a lot of the tasks for you, but ubuntu just somehow doesnt seem as clean or reliable. Having said that there'll be applications where linux is better, for now I wouldn't set up an opensolaris desktop to give to someone, I'd choose the latest kubuntu, but if they wanted a backup file server to store important data, I'd give them opensolaris.

As for performance, I dont have any benchmarks other than my perception of whats going on, but I'll say that the solaris kernel does things a lot faster than the linux kernel.

Being a software engineer myself, I'd say the difference between opensolaris and linux is the engineering that went into it. Linux started out as 1 man's project and grew with community support, as with a lot of open source software you'll find a lot of horrible designs and code in there. A lot of linux was designed and written by amateurs, and in a lot of cases it shows. Opensolaris was developed by sun as solaris, I'd bet a lot more design, thought, and engineering went into it, it was done by professionals to be an enterprise level system from the start.

Re: Ctrl-Alt-Fn disabled

scorp123 (not verified) - September 15, 2009 @ 12:26pm

> You press Ctrl-Alt-F2 and
> nothing happens. Same with any Ctrl-Alt-Fn.
> They have disabled text mode!!!!!!!!

That statement of your's just proves you don't know that much, be that Linux or anything else. The functionality of switching between text consoles is achieved in Linux via this little program: "getty". There are various variants. Ubuntu uses "getty", but there is also "mgetty", "mingetty" and what not. It's this little background task that provides the functionality of switching consoles.

This has nothing to do with Linux or Solaris or text mode or "disabling" the latter.

Remove "getty" from Linux and it will just behave as (Open)Solaris and do nothing when you hit e.g. Ctrl+Alt+F2 .... Or install "getty" or properly configure Solaris' variant "ttymon" on Solaris and you get the same functionality as in Linux. Voila, done.

Maybe next time you cold do some Googling before you post silly comments such as "They have disabled text mode!!!!!!!!", yes? :-)

apt-get in a linux command

Anonymous Penguin (not verified) - September 15, 2009 @ 12:27pm

works on my fedora 10 box just fine

Clueless troll

Anonymous Penguin (not verified) - September 15, 2009 @ 12:41pm

To quote the author: "Linux has no ZFS support in the kernel because the Free Software Foundation doesn't consider it free enough to be bundled with GPL software".

In this careless statement, he ignores two important facts.

First, it was Torvalds who picked the license for Linux and not the FSF. If he had wanted to, he could have come up with any other license for his own code. Just because he picked FSF's license doesn't make them in any way entitled to make decisions about code derived from Torvalds' Linux or responsible for what happens to it. It is completely immaterial in this case what the FSF "thinks". It is not a question of judgement but one of legal reality. And presently even Torvalds cannot change the license of Linux, as the code is no longer exclusively his, but jointly owned by hundreds (thousands?) of contributors.

Second, if anyone is to be assigned responsibility for the license incompatibility between ZFS and Linux, it is Sun. If Sun had released ZFS under a GPL2-compatible license, it would probably have made it into Linux, making SunOS irrelevant. There were no legal obstacles preventing them from doing so. If anything it was an conscious decision on Sun's behalf to make their ZFS legally incompatible when they released the code behind Solaris.

Clearly the author seems to bear some sort of grudge against the FSF for whatever reasons, which he is entitled to. But making use of an otherwise informative article to spread such FUD and vent personal feelings makes him nothing but a clueless troll.

Re: 3rd issue ... Grub ... doesn't understand the ZFS filesystem

thomas.b.edgar@gmail.com (not verified) - September 15, 2009 @ 2:25pm

"A third issue is that the standard Grub version that comes with Linux distributions doesn't understand the ZFS filesystem. So when you install OpenSolaris first and then your favourite Linux distribution, you can't boot into OpenSolaris anymore. The solution is to first install Linux and then OpenSolaris, and add the section for your Linux distro to Grub's menu.lst in OpenSolaris."

Actually, you can setup the grub on your Linux Partition to boot your OpenSolaris Partition (mine is on the 2nd Primary Partition):

Title Opensolaris 5.11
root (hd0,1)
makeactive
chainloader +1
boot

This is similar to the way we boot Windows partitions

I set up the disk with:

sda1 HPFS/NTFS (Windows XP)
sda2 Solaris (Solaris 5.11)
sda3 Extended
sda5 Linux (Ubuntu 9.04)
sda6 Swap
.
. (etc, so forth, ad nauseam)
.

The real thing

Paul Johnston (not verified) - September 15, 2009 @ 3:12pm

The real difference is dtrace, also have a look at Fishworks, interesting stuff

OpenSolaris Evangelist

Brian Leonard (not verified) - September 15, 2009 @ 3:43pm

A fair review. One minor note, as of the 2009.06 release, the pkg search command no longer needs to -r (remote) option - it has been made the default. So now it's simply 'pkg search foo'

Regards,
Brian

Thank you, Great Summary!

Anonymous Penguin (not verified) - September 15, 2009 @ 4:25pm

This is one of the best articles of this type I've read.

Thank you!

Appreciate the summaries

OS User / Tinker-er (not verified) - September 15, 2009 @ 4:39pm

Appreciate the summaries that the author used to do just like the title said, "Discuss OpenSolaris from a Linux user's point of view".

As usual, sadly, with *nix comments/discussion - it's obvious that we'd eat our own young before applauding the freedom we have to use (and not use) the various works put out by others.

Thanks for the article.

ZFS main compelling feature

Anonymous Pidgeon (not verified) - September 15, 2009 @ 5:12pm

I run RAID-1 for my important data storage, and the most interesting compelling feature from OpenSolaris is ZFS RAID-Z. It really is the next generation of RAID-1,RAID-5... All those are old hat and can't use space very efficiently, can't self heal and have restrictions (same size volumes, you lose two drives on RAID-5 you are toast). Not saying ZFS is perfect, but it is the next stage in evolution of redundant file systems.

BTRFS has some of the features of ZFS but none of the RAID-Z type features. To me it is really just a clean up and consolidation of features that are piece-meal in all the other modern file systems supported on linux (eg. JFS, reiserfs, ext3 and XFS). Does it really add anything new? No, it is an incremental step beyond but nothing ground shaking. RAID-Z on the other hand is new, different and powerful.

@AnonymousassNetBSD

Anonymous osx (not verified) - September 15, 2009 @ 5:33pm

I'm not real clear as to what you are saying there, as I am a human being, and apparently lazy, stupid and lack intellectual capacity...
You obviously are intelligent and very well-spoken for a crustacean, but I am having difficulty understanding the Linux is for Bitches comment. Could you clarify exactly what you mean, in layman's terms. Thank you so much.

ps. I found this write-up informative and the opinions expressed I found to be relevant, well-presented, or otherwise humorous. Thanks.

IBM vs. the Penguins

Anonymous Penguin (not verified) - September 15, 2009 @ 7:18pm

Many moons ago, DOS attempted a takeover of the IBM mainframe. IBM almost drowned like a skater on thin ice. It went into hibernation and rearchitected its mainframes and bit slice OS's to support multiOS architectures and virtualization.
Now after years of hibernation IBM has emerged with Linux as its future and its mainframes capable of running more than 32000 virtual servers.
The server farms are where the future of WebServices 2.0 is.
Can OpenSolaris run on IBM mainframes in a virtualized world? Both Linux and Solaris are leaders in the Unix world - may the best man win and take IBM.

Ahhh, flamewars...

Anonymous Penguin (not verified) - September 15, 2009 @ 7:26pm

Ahhh, flamewars...

What is it with Linux people?

Anonymous Penguin (not verified) - September 15, 2009 @ 7:57pm

In run it. Like I run Linux, and many other operating systems.

A good solid system. Always worth a praise or two -- no matter how much of a Linux devotee you might be.

(But I learned long ago that hostility, ill-will, and antagonism have always been essential parts of the Linux culture, and thus expect many more flames, trolls, and fanboys to this thread.)

And BSD people

Anonymous Penguin (not verified) - September 15, 2009 @ 8:19pm

But apparently also some BSD people have forgotten their usual politeness, academic style, and dry humor at most. Shame on you.

Very nice article

Anon Geek (not verified) - September 15, 2009 @ 8:44pm

I am a Linux user, but I am interested in trying OpenSolaris. This article provided food fort thought and a few topics to Google, thanks.
As for some of the comments regarding Ubuntu vs OpenSolaris speed, origins, Linux vs Unix, nitpicking, who cares!?
Cutting edge apps, toys and gadgets like Compiz are old hat now, we just want a stable Linux with a Flash enabled Firefox browser which doesn't crash every other page.
I too agree that trying to provide a Windows clone for muppets has made Linux unstable and bloated.
Maybe xBSD's or OpenSolaris are a viable option for those who haven't been brainwashed by their distro's community?

I don't use Linux because of

Muzer_cbatli (not verified) - September 15, 2009 @ 9:14pm

I don't use Linux because of speed. I don't use Linux because of stability, or security. I use it for three reasons:

1) It is much easier to develop on than Windows, and in general, I prefer the developer tools, from the IDEs, to the small things like file managers that have terminals that follow you around.
2) The default applications have many more features than the ones on Windows, and I'm not prepared to trawl through pages and pages of dodgy shareware to find a gem. If there's an app Linux doesn't have, I grab it from the repo. Simple.
3) I don't have to bother setting everything up. I currently have the confidence to just go out to a shop and buy and piece of hardware I like, and know that in some way or another, it will be supported. Does it have a broadcom wifi chip? No problem, use b43, wl or ndiswrapper. Does the printer not have a driver in the default installation? No problem, I'll simply find a PPD for it. Call me lucky, but so far, I haven't had any problems with a single piece of hardware in Linux. In OpenSolaris, I highly doubt this will be the case.

Enough with the fighting an non-info

A. Nony Mouse (not verified) - September 16, 2009 @ 12:00am

This is in response to many of the trolls, rants, and postings with inaccurate info.

OpenSolaris is not Solaris.
The difference between them is much greater than the difference between Fedora and Red Hat EL.

Solaris started on SPARC, then was ported to x86 (yes, multiple times, but that's another story).

OpenSolaris started on x86, and was only recently ported to SPARC. The SPARC version does not even have a bootable CD yet, and you must use an x86 OpenSolaris system to install the SPARC version over the network.

OpenSolaris is much newer and although it shares the kernel with Solaris, the package management system is all new (and a huge improvement).
The OpenSolaris user experience is very much like Ubuntu, as most of what the user interacts with consists of the same GPLed environment.
I've been using Solaris/SunOS and Linux since '92, and was astounded at the polish when I first loaded OpenSolaris.
While there are a few pieces of hardware that aren't "supported out of the box", like the WLAN driver on a Dell D800, a quick trip to the HCL will give you instructions on where to get the driver and how to get it working.
OpenSolaris is distributed on one CD-ROM... if you want a small installation, you can easily have one.

OpenSolaris uses the concept of network repositories, just like a yum repo, or an apt-get repo. This is an enormous improvement (for the end user) over Solaris as it allows you to point your machine at multiple repos, just like in most modern Linux distros.
They hired Ian Murdock for a reason, and he's done a fantastic job to this end.

Solaris (the AT&T Unix derived one) is actually the same age as Linux (SunOS (4.x, the BSD based one) is much older, and no longer exists).
OpenSolaris is just over 1 (one) year old.

Considering the very young age of OpenSolaris and how far it has come already, I can't see how anyone who actually has used Linux for more than a couple years can sneer at it.
It is clearly ahead of distros from only a few years ago, even though Linux has been around since '91!
Check out the reviews on Phoronix.com (a great resource for Linux and Solaris users) for details.
For one, I would love it if Ubuntu had OpenSolaris's network manager.

The discussions and article have barely scratched the surface of ZFS... you really have to use it to understand how revolutionary it is. It is not just another filesystem... it utterly destroys the concepts that you think you know. RAID - gone. Partitioning - gone. LVM - gone. FSCKing - gone. Waiting for filesystems to be created - gone.
Sun actually did ZFS a disservice by naming it Z"FS" as it diminishes what it really is - storage virtualization.
I haven't seen it written anywhere quite this way, but the way I usually explain it to people is: Everything happens at the filesystem layer. In RAID, if you need to resync, you need to resync every byte on the disk... a very time consuming process if you have 1TB disks. In RAIDZ, you only sync the data and metadata. If your disk is 50% used, you're only syncing that 50%!.
If you need to create a new filesystem, just zfs create rpool/filesystem and it's done... as easy as mkdir! Where does the space come from if you didn't partition? The pool! All space is dynamically allocated from the pool, although if you want to put quotas or reservations on some, you can and it's trivial to do. You don't have to think about designing your filesystem layout... "How much do I need for /, /var, /home, /opt... and what if one gets low on space?!?"
Making a huge upgrade to your system? Use LiveUpgrade to create an "alternate boot environment" which is essentially a bootable snapshot of the root filesystem. Why? So if everything goes sideways, recovery is as simple as a reboot (chosing the previous BE). It is actually as simple as I describe it... in Solaris. In OpenSolaris it is flat out automatic!

BTRFS is still a fetus.
ZFS was born 5 years ago (only Sun knows how long its gestation period was), and has many features that BTRFS can't/doesn't/won't. I hear the "but Linux has BTRFS!" argument all the time and the people who bring it up do not understand what ZFS is at all.

DTrace is flat out amazing, I've only scratched the surface of it myself and I've already blown the minds of others by doing analysis in seconds or minutes that would have taken them hours or days (speaking specifically of WebSphere App Server in this example).
Strace and Ltrace are not even remotely related... they are closer to the ancient Solaris truss command. Those all work in userland at the system call layer.

Another thing Solaris and OpenSolaris have going for them is the near elimination of the old run-control (init) scripts. I say "near", as they are still supported if you need 'em. The replacement seems odd at first, but is phenomenal. It is configured via XML and allows for dependency based startup of the entire system. The Linux distros are struggling with modified versions of init trying to get them to do something that approaches the bare minimum of what Sun's implementation (SMF) does. Imagine that apache is not running and you want to know why... simply run svcs -xv apache and it will tell you exactly what dependencies are not running so you can fix them. If it is not a dependency, but the app has failed, it will tell you where the log is so you can view it. Yes, every single service (equivalent to an rc script) has its own startup log file!

Zones should be expanded on, as they are an amazingly light weight virtualization method. Oversimplifying it drastically, all zones run under the same kernel, so you are not loading 27 kernels for 27 VMs. Each zone has its own scheduler, so it is unaware of processes, devices, filesystems, etc. outside of its own. The global zone can see all processes within them (distinguishing zones from other virtual machine concepts here).
Branded zones are some impressive magic... they allow you to run different environments (Solaris 8, Linux, etc.) inside a zone. Zones can be brought up and down easily, and moved from one machine to another as well.

All of these technologies are very tightly integrated together. For example, if your zone is on ZFS, you can clone your zone and it automatically uses the system's zfs clone functionality. This means it takes seconds to duplicate an entire virtualized machine!

Google "time slider" and watch the video if you want to see something slick and GUI that Linux won't have in the forseeable future... and yes, this is a desktop user interface thing. I know it was mentioned in the article, but you really need to see it in action to appreciate how elegantly it was done.

Finally...
To the BSD-bigots:
YOU are the reason I started using Linux back in '92.
You are your own worst enemy.
I asked a coworker about reasonably priced Unixes for the PC back then, and he pointed me to 2 newsgroup heirarchies... comp.os.linux and comp.os.*bsd (I think it was 386bsd back then, before they renamed it freebsd). When I saw the nasty, rude, elitist attitudes of the BSD-ers contrasted with the "here's how you do it, and by the way - here's a link to the HOWTO" attitude of the Linux crowd, it wasn't a tough decision to make.
Oh, and Mac OSX is derived from NeXTOS (Jobs's other company that failed), which has BSD roots. Common roots with FreeBSD and NetBSD, but it did not come *from* either one of those.

To everyone: I love Linux as a desktop, and have actually been exclusive to Linux since '92 when I got fed up with windows 3.1 and switched to MCC, then SLS, then Slackware, then RedHat, then Fedora, then Ubuntu (when Fedora started going in a direction I didn't like and I was sick of having to build my own kernels to fix bugs).
In my opinion, OpenSolaris is quite ready for the typical windows end-user, but it's close. Those who like to develop or are used to having to manually tweak things (like in Fedora) really should check it out, as it is absolutely fantastic for someone who wants something nice that does take a bit of brains to tweak. If you want to watch or rip DVDs, forget it... at least for now.
With that in mind, don't count it out either. I'm excited about the next release as each one has been a huge leap over the previous.

-Kevin

Solaris and laptops.

Anonymous Penguin (not verified) - September 16, 2009 @ 12:31am

The only thing that I know about Solaris is that it exists.
What I don't know is if it would be wireless friendly for laptop computers. Thus far, I only found two Linux OS's that are 100% laptop friendly. They have all the codecs needed to effortlessly install and run secure wireless communications. Those two Linux's are: Freespire, and PCLinuxOS. Now, is Solaris designed to be just for desktops? Is it designed to be tethered by wire to the Ethernet router port? Or can it also support a wireless laptop?

academic style ?

Anonymous NetBSD (not verified) - September 16, 2009 @ 12:59am

"Anonymous Penguin (not verified) - September 15, 2009 @ 8:19pm

But apparently also some BSD people have forgotten their usual politeness, academic style, and dry humor at most. Shame on you."

Pointing out a logical fallacy by it's Latin name in response to Fatbuttlarry's post was pretty academic if you ask me (that was me a NetBSD user). Also this is not a formal place as far as I can tell. Apparently you like most Linux users don't know what they are talking about. Linux used to have a relatively knowledgeable userbase in the 90s when it was still exclusively for Geeks ( I remember because I was a Linux user back then). Those days are long gone now. Now Linux is for bitches and dumb ones at that. An ease of use bloated pig of distro with spaghetti code based on Debian unstable otherwise known as Ubuntu being the #1 Linux distro in 2009 bespeaks the beknighted retards who now dominate the Linux scene. Here is something for stark contrast: compare NetBSD to Ubuntu and if you still don't think it is a bloated pig you are stupid. I'll take flexibility, customizability, security, less bugs and low overhead anyday over the gay faggotry known as userfriendliness. The only people in the Linux community who still exhibit this attitude are Slackware users and that is why Linux is for bitches and dumb ones at that.

rebuttal

Anonymous NetBSD user (not verified) - September 16, 2009 @ 2:05am

A quote originally posted from M$

"Wow. This is the kind of snotty talk from geeks that turns people off. Let's get real. Not everybody's business is computer science. There's much that makes this world go 'round, and 99% of the time the computer is just a tool in the process. For someone who must administer a system that supports thousands of connections for an n-tiered application without crashes, BSD, UNIX & Linux based OSes can all be reliably implemented (as well as Windows Server, whether we care to admit it or not). For the average user that needs their OS to allow them to connect to the internet, send email, conduct their specific business, it seems that Windows wins with Linux trailing far behind, while UNIX based OSes seem to be stuck in planet server. It's apples to oranges. This OS war has to end. There's a place for everything, and I'm sure Open Solaris will find its own."

Ah, but there is a distinction to be made here that makes your reply to my comment irrelevant. As a NetBSD user I'm not trying to proselytize NetBSD to those people. I'm not trying to convert Windows and MacOSX users to the BSD world. Linux and Linux users on the otherhand do try to do this. That is why most Linux (the popular ones) are destroying themselves in order to convert 5 more windows users. I'm perfectly content to have NetBSD remain a non-mainstream OS because I understand this maxim :

"Everything great and intelligent is in the minority." -- Wolfgang Von Goethe

Why the hell would I want the majority of the people using NetBSD ? It doesn't make any sense.

oops, mistake

Anonymous NetBSD user (not verified) - September 16, 2009 @ 2:10am

This comment :

"That is why most Linux (the popular ones) are destroying themselves in order to convert 5 more windows users. "

Should have been :

That is why most Linux distros (the popular ones) are destroying themselves in order to convert 5 more windows users.

Somehow I omitted the 'distro' by accident.

Cease to value opinions

Anonymous Penguin (not verified) - September 16, 2009 @ 2:17am

Comments like "if you still don't think it is a bloated pig you are stupid" makes you into everything you hate.

We react most strongly to (what you think is in) others when it is also in us. This tirade makes me feel very sorry for you. I'd say that most of us feel sorry for the small minded critic.

"beknighted retards"? "gay faggotry"? Really, you don't even write correct English, and your venomous tone opens you up to criticism, and makes you seem uneducated.
You live in a glass house, so prepare for the glass to be rained upon you. I only responded because this type of thing is depressing to read from a fellow human. Please stop.

OpenSolaris vs Windows

Anonymous windows (not verified) - September 16, 2009 @ 2:23am

I think OpenSolaris is an option for small companies which will save money and forget expensive Windows and MSoffice.

If OpenSolaris is stable, that means low running costs in addition to no initial costs. Drivers for cheap printers will be an issue to setup a small company.

Ten years ago, I had tried to install linux with the guide of a big linux book with installation CD, but failed. Then I turned to Solaris 2.4 (student edition), no headache but you had to choose hardware in the market before installation. Now HCL helps a lot.

Even now, I don't like Linux which has too many versions to be tried. Why waste time to play around the versions. Windows is OK but expensive.

OpenSolaris will be my choose for home use. I'll try to use container to run foldings which are running under linux and windows only at the moments.

rebuttal to A. Nony Mouse

Anonymous NetBSD user (not verified) - September 16, 2009 @ 2:35am

originally posted by A. Nony Mouse :

"Finally...
To the BSD-bigots:
YOU are the reason I started using Linux back in '92.
You are your own worst enemy.
I asked a coworker about reasonably priced Unixes for the PC back then, and he pointed me to 2 newsgroup heirarchies... comp.os.linux and comp.os.*bsd (I think it was 386bsd back then, before they renamed it freebsd). When I saw the nasty, rude, elitist attitudes of the BSD-ers contrasted with the "here's how you do it, and by the way - here's a link to the HOWTO" attitude of the Linux crowd, it wasn't a tough decision to make."

"The differences between FreeBSD and Linux used to be much more obvious than they are now. Now it comes down to theology. The BSD world is still the 'high church' or Druid Unix. Blood will be spilled on a stone altar at midnite when star systems are in a certain alignment to learn the ways of this tribe. Linux is a happier world. The spirits of Captain Kirk, Peter Pan and good beer come to mind." --Keith Rankin

Notice the word 'happier' above ?

"There is only one inborn erroneous notion: that we exist in order to be happy. So long as we persist in this inborn error... the world seems to us full of contradictions. For at every step, in great things and small, we are bound to experience that the world and life are certainly not arranged for the purpose of maintaining a happy existence, hence the countenances of almost all elderly persons wear the expression of ... disappointment. " -- Arthur Schopenhauer

So the reason why you picked Linux instead of BSD is because you are stupid. Since We BSD people do not want stupid people in our community I'm glad you picked Linux instead of BSD.

"Oh, and Mac OSX is derived from NeXTOS (Jobs's other company that failed), which has BSD roots. Common roots with FreeBSD and NetBSD, but it did not come *from* either one of those."

Funny thing the FreeBSD hacker Jordan K. Hubbard was hired as head engineer or one of the head engineers for apple to work on core of MacOSX then eh ? BSD powers two of the best operating systems in the world--Solaris from Sun Microsystems (OpenSolaris is based on Solaris) and OS X from Apple Computer (nasdaq: AAPL - news - people ).

Rebuttal Anonymous

Anonymous Penguin (not verified) - September 16, 2009 @ 2:37am

"beknighted retards"? "gay faggotry"? Really, you don't even write correct English, and your venomous tone opens you up to criticism, and makes you seem uneducated. "

I see nothing wrong with that English especially since you did not point out any specific technical errors. We all know uneducated people quote Arthur Schopenhauer like I just did above right ? You are nothing but a dumb Linux user. Linux is for bitches and dumb ones at that. I could care less if you think I am uneducated or not. Now go back to using your piece of crap punk ass bitch faggot OS.

If a new nix user wants to use solaris why not, good article

Anonymous Penguin (not verified) - September 16, 2009 @ 3:00am

One other great feature you did not mention in the article is that opensolaris/solaris has been trying to do away with the /etc/init.d startup scripts used in linus and solaris up until solaris9, replacing them with xml manifests that control script startup/shutdown order and dependencies; so for example an accidental kill -9 on mysql would indeed stop it, bit the system would restart it again without intervention (plus recycle any components dependant upon mysql). You'd have to use svcadm to stop it if you really wanted to, and all dependent apps would be stopped in the correct order first.

Coverage of commands svcadm, svcs and use of manifests should be another follow up article as that is probably going to be a more immediate need for a new user that creating zones. And will also throw experienced solaris administrators if they haven't played with solaris 10 before, but the inclusion of 'self-healing' into opensolaris is another plus for it.

Lots of comments dumping on opensolaris, wonder how many peope making some of the comments have even used it.

ZFS I really loved, it's use of effectively hard quotas on a file system to allow dynamic resizing of filesystems in a ZFS pool, as noted in one of the comments above, was really great. Much easier than LVM for shrinking filesystems as needed, although apart from that the only other, but transparent, benefit to most *nix users would be the built in data checking in ZFS that most home users would never know was there.

While grub not booting ZFS was mentioned earlier thats no more an issue than grub not being able to boot ext4, FC11 has a seperate boot partition and data filesystem rather than a single filesystem for that reason. And while grub2 is on the way origionally opensolaris couldn't boot from a ZFS root, it can now; so just a case of both opensolaris and linux being improved all the time which is what we all want anyway.

I stopped using opensolaris when they dropped the 'failsafe boot' option from the installation. I think that gets back to the comment above about no command line. For me no single user boot option meant a re-install every time I broke something. Has it been brought back ?, don't know, gave up.

The only other issue I really had with opensolaris and solaris was it doesn't really play well with virtual machines. It may play nicely with VirtualBox now SUN (well now Oracle I suppose) own that, it certainly didn't origionally.
And network drivers for opensolaris/solaris took a lot of hunting down (not just for VM images but even physical bare metal installs), and manual installation. It may be better now, about two years since I last tried an install of that.

However at sunfreeware.com you can find many of the packages found in linux distributions so there is no real reason why any new user looking for a *nix solution shouldn't choose opensolaris over a linux distribution.

For myself, I prefer linux for home use simply because I am more familiar with it.
For a completely new user why shouldn't they learn to use pkg rather than apt-get or yum. They have a new learning curve either way.

The purpose of the article was to say there is another option to linux and while covering only opensolaris rather than the many other options also out there (and there are many more other than just FreeBSD someone was championing above) it covered opensolaris extremely well.
When I was playing with Solaris10 and OpenSolaris it took me many months of searching the SUN site for information on ZFS and Solaris zones and this article has the seeds of all that information summarised in one place. Pherhaps more information than a home user really wants, will they use zones from day 1 :-); but when they need it it's in the article that started down the opensolaris path here.

And for commercial use, well a lot of the opensolaris features are rolled into Solaris10 which you can get a support license from SUN for if you want; no different than fedora features being rolled into redhat and supported for a support cost.

Well, it's "benighted", for

Anonymous Penguin (not verified) - September 16, 2009 @ 3:05am

Well, it's "benighted", for one.

Also, I think you might be high on amphetamines.

another mistake

Anonymous NetBSD user (not verified) - September 16, 2009 @ 3:11am

See I just replied so fast in that last post that I said 'How' instead of 'Who' by mistake ? All Grammarians should hung, shot and quartered.

It must be that everyone's

Anonymous Penguin (not verified) - September 16, 2009 @ 3:20am

It must be that everyone's just so befuddled about how to respond to your charges of "gay faggotry" to come up with any cogent responses to such well-reasoned arguments as "Linux is for bitches and dumb ones at that" and "go back to using your piece of crap punk ass bitch faggot OS."

In retrospect, it's clear now that NetBSD is indeed the superior operating system. Verily, we should all genuflect before your rhetorical brilliance.

stuff this in your beak faggot penquin

Anonymous NetBSD user (not verified) - September 16, 2009 @ 3:27am

"Well, it's "benighted", for one.

Also, I think you might be high on amphetamines." -- Anonynmous penquin

Stuff this in your pipe and smoke it you faggot penquin :

Literary usage of Beknighted

Below you will find example usage of this term as found in modern and/or classical literature:

1. The Overland Monthly by Bret Harte (1875)
"I hcv heerd as how he's been beknighted for building a railroad there, but I don't allow much upon it. There ain't no one but me and Silas left now, ..."

2. A Complete Collection of State Trials and Proceedings for High Treason and ...by Thomas Bayly Howell, William Cobbett by Thomas Bayly Howell, William Cobbett (1816)
"... if the Papists rise and ! cut our throats, you'll beknighted; it nut, you'll be hanged. Here's first what you said to Mr. Atkins, and then this ..."

3. Sketches of the Irish Bar by Richard Lalor Sheil, Robert Shelton Mackenzie (1854)
"Carefully pocketing the gold, the beknighted landlord made his best bow, and said, “As to that, your Excellency, ‘tis all one to me—but ..."

4. Efficiency and Empire by Arnold White (1901)
"Almost everyone is beknighted, and no one can eventually avoid knighthood. Even the senior clerks in the Foreign Office obtain ..."

5. President Garfield and Education: Hiram College Memorial by Burke Aaron Hinsdale, Hiram college, Hiram, O. (1881)
"... commenced to teach in that part of Ohio which has been called " benighted Ashta- bula" (I suggest " beknighted" as the proper spelling of the word). ..."

I say beknighted is the proper spelling and that you asserting that 'benighted' is the proper spelling is nothing more than peddling a corrupted newfangled version of the English language.

To: NetBSD user

A. Nony Mouse (not verified) - September 16, 2009 @ 3:29am

Thanks for proving my point about the unbelievably hostile, rude, and childish attitude BSDers had and still have.

I don't see how Apple hiring "FreeBSD hacker" retroactively makes NeXTOS into FreeBSD... You have temporal issues.
Get over yourself, get a clue, get a life, and get some sleep - you've got to go back to junior-high school in the morning (or did you drop out because you're so much "smarter" than your teachers?).

For what it's worth, I've used FreeBSD... I found it interesting but quite behind in what I was looking for.
The BSD version of run control scripts could not be more primitive, for example. Nothing like emulating SunOS 4.1.1, eh?

I could never imagine trying to use any of the BSDs on my DNS-323, any of my modified WRT54G routers, my Nokia Internet Tablet, etc. Linux works perfectly fine for them all.

If I want a server that is rock-solid-secure, I'd run OpenBSD before any of the other BSDs. FreeBSD doesn't interest me and NetBSD is a toy for people with hardware older than my SPARCstation 10s. I have no use for something that takes more of my time than my career to get basic functionality out of. I have something called "a life".
Seriously, why are you even HERE?

Oh and Solaris (as opposed to the old SunOS 4.x.x) is AT&T based, not BSD based. They only kept a small amount of BSD-ish cruft to make it backward compatible until Solaris 2.5.1 or so, then even that was abandoned.

So as I am not stooping to your level and posting flame-bait on a BSD forum (what a tool)... I will post something actually contributing to the above article (boy does this site need a moderator).

My above comment "In my opinion, OpenSolaris is quite ready for the typical windows end-user, but it's close. " should actually read "In my opinion, OpenSolaris isN'T quite ready for the typical windows end-user, but it's close. "

To the author and to Anonymous

A. Nony Mouse (not verified) - September 16, 2009 @ 3:44am

Thank you for the nice article. Even though I have used OpenSolaris for a bit, I appreciate articles like this as it provides another perspective to some of my friends who are either new to OpenSolaris, or merely considering it.

Also, thanks to anonymous poster who mentioned coherence, that's one DLNA server I wasn't familiar with and I've been looking for one to set up on my Solaris server so I can shut down my Linux media server when it's not needed. I'm currently using MediaTomb and have tried ps3mediaserver, but both are a pain to get running on *Solaris.

It's too bad there are people as immature and insecure as "NetBSD user" trolling here (there is obviously no reason whatsoever for him/her to be here other than to troll).
I would apologize for his/her behavior, but I'm proud to say I'm not a member of his/her elitist/bigoted crowd (I really don't see how some people take that as a complement).

Some good posts here... but BSD user... honestly... wtf.

Anonymous Penguin (not verified) - September 16, 2009 @ 3:52am

@Kevin

Kevin, thank you very much for a very informative post on OpenSolaris and specifically ZFS, those are excellent features and I will very seriously consider testing out OpenSolaris. I wish more people contributed actually relevant material on threads like this.

@Anonymous NetBSD user

Wow, you give little comfort, or help to an OS you like, I have a few FreeBSD boxes out there, and recommend it as a stable unix OS for some needs Linux is unfortunately not up to speed on. It has many great features I like.

However, your venom directed to Linux users is, quite frankly bizarre, and not really the kind of behavior i'd expect from any geek, or any human in general, if you dont like linux, dont use it, why spout your hatred. You only make *BSD users appear to be hate filled know-it-alls.

It is clear to me you are deeply, socially inept, and your lack of common sense simply baffles me, are all BSD users like you ? Thankfully not, I know many unix admins who are not such pompous imbeciles as yourself. The uber-geek mentality is really counter productive. It seems the more I learn, the less I know.

I really appreciate the time and effort anyone puts into creating a great OS especially a free OS. Nothing is perfect, but your obnoxious post are quite irrelevant to progress IMHO.

I agree, you are either on amphetamines as someone suggested above... or perhaps, just a basic moron, in any case, I feel sorry for any co-workers you have.

In closing, I hope you learn to get along with your fellow human beings one day, and maybe you will contribute something positive to the world.

Right now, you just sound sad and pathetic, poor you.

Soooo slooooow!!!

Giorgos (not verified) - September 16, 2009 @ 4:00am

Open Solaris, remembers me the good old DOS days, when Solaris (the original, not the open version), was known as...Slowaris! :-)
I still can't see what advantage brings to the desktop user (not the server admin), the extra delays.

more stupidity from linux users

Anonymous NetBSD (not verified) - September 16, 2009 @ 4:12am

Anonynmous penquin writes to me "
"However, your venom directed to Linux users is, quite frankly bizarre, and not really the kind of behavior i'd expect from any geek, or any human in general, if you dont like linux, dont use it, why spout your hatred. You only make *BSD users appear to be hate filled know-it-alls."

If I appear to make all BSD users look that way that is because most people on the planet do not have much intellectual capacity to work with hence they think linearly while not taking into account the philosophical concept of emergent properties. The fact that the group may exhibit properties which are not manifest in individuals.
The classic example of emergent properties is salt, which is composed of sodium and chlorine: While both of these substances are poisonous separately, their combination as sodium chloride is essential to life; hence the life-giving properties of salt are 'emergent'. The Emergent properties concept can work both ways though with positive attributes given to the group as a whole when taken into consideration and while negative attributes might be seen in an individual or a few isolated individuals of a group. So that you think that I am a moron when it is clear that you are the idiot/moron here for saying I make all BSD users look bad. That doesn't work logically. So you are a stupid Linux user. Is t his surprising ? No ! Like I already stated Linux is for bitches and dumb ones at that. Your comment above shows that you are stupid. I don't care if most people (who are too stupid to think past linear thinking) think about me. So your reply is an exercise in futile idiocy.

NetBSD users making Linux users look stupid since around 1993

Anonymous Penguin (not verified) - September 16, 2009 @ 4:24am

Here is a new slogan NetBSD users making Linux users look stupid since around 1991-1993 ! Actually I'll repost my comment since I noticed a grammar mistake (grammar Nazis here !) and I'll edit it comment to make it more lucid (It was less coherent the first time around because I'm trying to reply to fast to people attacking me etc.. ):

Anonynmous penquin writes to me :
"
"However, your venom directed to Linux users is, quite frankly bizarre, and not really the kind of behavior i'd expect from any geek, or any human in general, if you dont like linux, dont use it, why spout your hatred. You only make *BSD users appear to be hate filled know-it-alls."

If I appear to make all BSD users look that way that is because most people on the planet do not have much intellectual capacity to work with hence they think linearly while not taking into account the philosophical concept of emergent properties. The fact that the group may exhibit properties which are not manifest in individuals.
The classic example of emergent properties is salt, which is composed of sodium and chlorine: While both of these substances are poisonous separately, their combination as sodium chloride is essential to life; hence the life-giving properties of salt are 'emergent'. The concept is obvious here with positive attributes given to the group as a whole when taken into consideration and while negative attributes might be seen in an individual or a few isolated individuals of a group. So that you think that I am a moron when it is clear that you are the idiot/moron here for saying I make all BSD users look bad. That doesn't work logically. So you are a stupid Linux user. Is t his surprising ? No ! Like I already stated Linux is for bitches and dumb ones at that. Your comment above shows that you are stupid. I don't care what most people (who are too stupid to think past linear thinking) think about me. So your reply is an exercise in futile idiocy.

Ok, now that is more lucid and grammatically correct etc..

last post was under the wrong nickname

Anonymous NetBSD user (not verified) - September 16, 2009 @ 4:31am

Last post I posted so fast that It was under 'anonymous penquin' the default setting instead of 'Anonymous NetBSD user' in my last reply by sheer oversight. Anyway, anymore of you idiotic linux users want a piece of this NetBSD user ? I enjoy making Linux users look stupid on the internet.

"NetBSD users making Linux users look stupid since around 1991-1993 !" -- Anonymous NetBSD user

@anonymous penquin

Anonymous NetBSD user (not verified) - September 16, 2009 @ 5:00am

" You only make *BSD users appear to be hate filled know-it-alls." --anonymous penquin

There is nothing wrong with hate as long as it is targeted at hateful things. I find Linux to be a worthy target of scorn/hatred.

BSD does the job for us

Brian Savage (not verified) - September 16, 2009 @ 5:39am

We use FreeBSD on several servers and it just keeps going. It's a little simpler than Solaris but that translates into cheaper as well - less staff, less resources, less fix-ups. When we considered Solaris we had a Sun rep out to brag about fortune 500 this and superior that, but at the end of the day, we would also be out many tens of thousands of dollars for hardware and services. I just don't see any room for Solaris in our server room at this time. BSD on the servers and Linux on the desktops - everyone's happy.

@ Anonymous NetBSD user

Anonymous Penguin (not verified) - September 16, 2009 @ 5:47am

You are right, you only make *yourself* look like a hate filled know-it-all. That you promote an OS you think is superior, in a manner befitting an imbecile is your choice.

So far most BSD users i've met were not socially retarded.

repost of a comment

Anonymous NetBSD user (not verified) - September 16, 2009 @ 6:19am

I said '200' instead of 2000 by accident in my last post so I'll repost this comment :

"For what it's worth, I've used FreeBSD... I found it interesting but quite behind in what I was looking for.
The BSD version of run control scripts could not be more primitive, for example. Nothing like emulating SunOS 4.1.1, eh? " A Nony Mouse

"I haven't used FreeBSD since around the year 2000 or so I'm not going to talk about FreeBSD. FreeBSD reminds me the most of Linux out of the three main BSDs so I don't use it because being reminded of Linux is psychologically painful." Anonymous NetBSD user

Senior Consultant

Jalal Hajigholamali (not verified) - September 16, 2009 @ 6:29am

Hi,

Open Solaris has not enough commands for administrator and

has poor community

Linux is for bitches and dumb ones at that...???

Anonymous Penguin (not verified) - September 16, 2009 @ 6:29am

I thought the title of the article is "OpenSolaris vs Linux".... I haven't tried OpenSolaris (or Solaris) yet, but I use FreeBSD (testing and development), NetBSD (on my notebook) and OpenBSD (publically accessible server). At home, alas, I'm stuck with Ubuntu because my family members want the latest/greatest toys and the availability of the huge software repositories. Yet that's the position that distro's such as Ubuntu serve... to serve the needs and wants of the end-user without the headaches associated almost exclusively with Microsoft products. Mac is great, but unfortunately so expensive that it's cost-prohibitive to many end-users.
My understanding is that proprietary Solaris is a good comparison to BSD when considering the server market, while OpenSolaris is more pointed to the end-user market. It's worth taking a look at what could be another solution/option for the end-user, and in that respect I would garner that it's a step in the right direction; and even a leap in the right direction if the raves about the filesystem protocol that's been outlined here contain even a smidgen of truth. If I like it, I may just join the OS community that builds it. OS is about innovation and adaptation in a community atmosphere in order to over-come obstacles in a way that works according to the community's wants/needs rather than those of the licensing holder. Right now Linux is the OS environment that does this the best, and if OpenSolaris is a portal to those huge resources, then all the better for them, no?
That said, in response to the genius who thinks that he believes that "Linux is for bitches and dumb ones at that"... you may think that you're superior (and I would hope that you are in at least 1 little tiny way, just to make your existence tenable) but remember that being superior will do you diddly when you meet your maker. On that day, sir, you will fall with your tail between your legs in a display of the underlying cowardice that your words of hostility belie. It's easy to talk tough but unless you can act tough all you're doing is make people embarrassed to listen to you rant. It deprecates anything of value that you may have had to say. It's boring. Give it up and join the rest of us "dumb bitches" and enjoy life a little, okay? *_sheesh_*

rebuttal

Anonymous NetBSD user (not verified) - September 16, 2009 @ 6:48am

"You are right, you only make *yourself* look like a hate filled know-it-all. That you promote an OS you think is superior, in a manner befitting an imbecile is your choice." --Anonymous Penquin

This is just so superficial, vacuous and empty sounding in regards to my specific post that I am not going to expound upon it.

"So far most BSD users i've met were not socially retarded." -- Anoynmous Penquin

Actually, Most humans in the modern geopolitical north have not changed much since the neolithic age. So I will call this group neolithic humans (average IQ 90-130). Neolithic humans have a strong social consciousness and pay a lot of attention to social structures and relationships. Now the cognitive elite IQ (average IQ range 130-150) puts much emphasis and energy towards pursuing knowledge and often have less of a work ethic and poor social skills as a result. So you calling me 'socially retarded' is actually paying me a compliment by saying that I am the cognitive elite or share traits in common with this elite group. If this place had an edit button I could polish up the grammar on my posts (which I am used to doing without a word processor on internet forums). However, since this place doesn't have an edit function you will just have to suffer through it.

Ludwig Wittgenstein comments on your stupidity :

Anonymous NetBSD user (not verified) - September 16, 2009 @ 8:32am

"I don't know why we are here, but I'm pretty sure that it is not in order to enjoy ourselves." -- Ludwig Wittgenstein

This should be obvious but :

Anonymous NetBSD user (not verified) - September 16, 2009 @ 10:10am

This should be obvious but since it would not be wise of me to overestimate the intelligence of Linux users as a group I should clarify (this was obviously a brilliant retorsio argumenti dialectical response on my part). It is not just the 'socially retarded' part in and of itself but also the fact that you called me a 'know-it-all' which requires more knowledge than the average human has that makes this so cogent and brilliant :

Anonymous NetBSD user (not verified) - September 16, 2009 @ 6:48am

"You are right, you only make *yourself* look like a hate filled know-it-all. That you promote an OS you think is superior, in a manner befitting an imbecile is your choice." --Anonymous Penquin

This is just so superficial, vacuous and empty sounding in regards to my specific post that I am not going to expound upon it.

"So far most BSD users i've met were not socially retarded." -- Anoynmous Penquin

in other words

Anonymous NetBSD user (not verified) - September 16, 2009 @ 10:25am

In otherwords for people who are slow on the uptake I used a philosophical dialectical tactic called retorsio argumenti e.g. I turned the tables around from being an 'imbecile' as he called me into being the cognitive elite or like the cognitive elite to such a degree mean that I am not an imbecile.

How many Penguin Linux philosophers do we have here ? Probably none being that Linux is full of ignorant, dumb stupid bitches.

@Anonymous NetBSD

Anonymous *BSD (not verified) - September 16, 2009 @ 10:34am

While you're right at some point, please stop the insults and stop making the BSD community look like a bunch of 17 year-olds with hormone problems, throwing insults at people having different taste. Some (many?) will think that this is the way all BSD users talk/feel/think , and it ain't fair. And btw, quoting Schopenhauer won't make you look any wiser.

more elucidation :

Anonymous NetBSD user (not verified) - September 16, 2009 @ 11:39am

"That said, in response to the genius who thinks that he believes that "Linux is for bitches and dumb ones at that"... you may think that you're superior (and I would hope that you are in at least 1 little tiny way, just to make your existence tenable) but remember that being superior will do you diddly when you meet your maker. " --- anonymous penquin

Now I already showed why that statement is incoherent from a Scientific point of view. The two expository subjects that deal with truth are philosophy and science. Everything else is bullshit. So I already quoted Ludwig Wittgenstein but not in regards to this specific point. However, it should go without saying that Ludwig Wittgenstein considered metaphysical propositions to be nonsensical. So you are incoherent from both a scientific point of view and a philosophical point of view. But what of this truth ? :

"Truth has no manners. It is no respecter of persons. It wounds kings as deeply as commoners. It cuts down the high, and confirms the lowness of the low. It may dress up for formal occasions, but it does so only in order that it may more shockingly expose itself in front of the assembled company. And just as it respects no one, likewise there are few who respect it. But those who do are granted many favors -- power, understanding, dominion, and of course the honor of the unswerving hatred of the ignorant millions." -- John Bryant

oops big mistake

Anonymous *BSD (not verified) - September 16, 2009 @ 12:27pm

Ooops, big mistake here ( I probably made it because I didn't sleep last night)

"Also, quoting Schopenhauer is very apropos since the GPL is socialist or Communist in an Anarcho-Capitalist".

I meant anarhco-syndicalist. Anarcho-Capitalism would be more like Libertarianism hence the polar opposite of Socialism and Communism which are in effect totalitarian and statist.

my last two posts

Anonymous NetBSD user (not verified) - September 16, 2009 @ 12:42pm

My last two posts were under the moniker 'anonymous penquin' and anonymous *BSD. I presume more oversights and mistakes due to lack of sleep. However, making that clear gives me an opportunity to fix a typo before I go to sleep :

I meant anarcho-syndicalist and not 'anarhco-syndicalist' or 'anarcho-capitalist.' Missing sleep really does make one dumber temporarily. I read it from various reputable sources.

@Anonymous NetBSD or whatever

Anonymous *BSD (not verified) - September 16, 2009 @ 1:02pm

Philosohpy has nothing to do with manners and courtesy and especially basic common sense. And like I said, please think about the community you (in some readers' view) represent. I reckon those philosophical quotes and sociological terms come only from the need (urge) to impress. Howdy, you impress none. The fact that your IQ is above average or that you're using NetBSD doesn't make you superior. The comments and the foul words make you inferior. Have a nice day.

@NetBSD user

scorp123 (not verified) - September 16, 2009 @ 1:06pm

With all due respect and apologies towards disabled people, but this silly troll deserves this:

"Arguing on the Internet is like Special Olympics. Even if you win you're still retarded."

Seriously. WTF? Would you please stop make BSD users look so bad?

Even if what you say is partially true (e.g. Ubuntu and many other Linux distros being quite bloated; catering to dummy users who probably should not even be using a computer in the first place, and what not ...) your lack of style totally ruins it all and in fact just makes you look like a total moron. No quoting of Schopenhauer and what not can remedy that. It just shows that you're good at Googling quotes, it doesn't make you look "intelligent" one little bit, and it certainly doesn't help your argument and your flaming. And the latter makes you look totally imbecile.

So you hate Linux ... fine. We got it. Now could you drop off your mental manure somewhere else please? I am sure there are BSD forums where an imbecile like you can ridicule BSD newbies and vent off there?

BTW: Solaris is not based on BSD ("SunOS" was). Maybe you're not that good at Googling after all?

Re: Ctrl-Alt-Fn disabled and Wireless

Anonymous Penguin (not verified) - September 16, 2009 @ 2:20pm

Virtual Consoles are implemented although not enabled by default (due to some minor issues) in Build 122. Should be enabled by default in build 123 or later.

I'm using Build 122 on a new Acer Aspire 1 and it work great.
I'm using ZFS mirror and compression, so I get data security/checksumming and some of the capacity back with compression. I have tried Ubuntu before; I had a catastrophic filesystem failure after and x windows crash.

OSOL runs great on the aspire. Wireless works out of the box and even the webcam works out of the box on this build. I've got the new KDE4.3 packages installed as well as gnome. I've got eclipse 3.4 and 3.5 as well as netbeans and sun studio. Can run chrome under XP in virtual box. USB device passthru now works to the virtual XP instance e.g. for scanners that have better XP drivers than under any unix/linux.

Build 122 also has GNU parted so you can resize partitions etc from the OSOL live cd. The virtual consoles and parted are examples of the progress since 2009.06.

There are some really good zfs, OSOL and sun interviews on FLOSS weekly eps 75 58 and esp 39 (awesome Simon Phipps interview).

The offensive dude has a point...

Average Geek (not verified) - September 16, 2009 @ 3:18pm

While I shake my head at much of the childish ranting here, the offensive one has a point -- the Linux community has changed dramatically over the years. It used to be the case that any arbitrary distro would, firstly, consider the general geek user, i.e., the distros were geared towards a proper development environment, and anything else was an extra. This pleased me. Nowadays, Linux (destop variety, that is) seems to be aimed at trivialities -- more interested in skins for your multimedia apps than your standard include directories. I hate the direction Linux is going in. I may need to abandon it for something that caters for old school *nix needs first, and bloated crapware second.

@ Average Geek

scorp123 (not verified) - September 16, 2009 @ 3:50pm

Average Geek wrote:
> the offensive one has a point ...
... But he's ruining it all with his utter rudeness and "ad hominem" attacks.

> the Linux community has changed dramatically
> over the years.
True. Nonetheless that's no reason to call other people "bitches" and what not like that imbecile did.

> I hate the direction Linux is going in.
I guess by "Linux" you certainly mean certain distributions of Linux? And not "Linux" == kernel?

So if we are talking about the direction certain Linux distributions are going or already have gone (Novell SUSE! ... yuck ... ) then yes, you are right. It's also problematic how some distros seem to attract a certain type of newbie who is totally unwilling to learn anything new but instead expects and demands to find a "2nd Windows". And even better: if you try and help them they treat you like you owe them something. I find that problematic and even disgusting.

> I may need to abandon it for something
> that caters for old school *nix needs first

Exactly. Some of my systems at home now run Solaris 10. It's what I use professionally all the time as well and the chances of newbie users perverting the OS (like what happens in many Linux distros right now) are rather small. Some of my hardware is not fully supported yet but as soon as that happens I might permanently abandon Linux. It will be interesting to see what the next Solaris release ("Solaris 11"? "Solaris Next"? ...) will offer.

Great article!

Thiago (not verified) - September 16, 2009 @ 3:55pm

Nice work, this article is filled with nothing but useful information!

Nevertheless, I disagree when you say that OpenSolaris performance is much slower than Ubuntu on the same hardware. I have both OSs installed on my laptop and exprience the exact opposite.