Thursday, September 25th, 2008
NY Times: “Is Sun Solaris on its deathbed?”
Interesting article on the last ditch efforts of Sun to keep Solaris from dying. Personally, I think Solaris will die a similar death as IBM’s OS/2 did – slowly, with stalwarts hanging on as long as they can.
http://www.nytimes.com/idg/IDG_852573C400693880002574CE00371FE1.html
I’m not sure UNIX in general is dead as AIX and I think even HP-UX have seen fairly strong growth recently, but Linux is certainly tearing up the industry like the good disruptor it is. I think another angle that was missed is the outstanding growth of Linux on Power and mainframe platforms – heck, even Sun has tried to put Solaris on an IBM mainframe.
Another point that is often overlooked is that a lot of Solaris migrations also go to Windows. It’s the drive to high volume platforms that triggers the shift.
However, aside from those minor conflicts in views, Jim Zemlin is right on. I think this quote says it all. It amazes me that any company would try to compete with that level of momentum head on and not try to join in on the growth opportunity. Just look at Red Hat’s earnings yesterday if you’re still skeptical.
By contrast, Linux is the overwhelming choice for new deployments on x86 systems, Zemlin says. Sun has had its strength in applications such as ERP systems with a seven- to 20-year life cycle, he adds. “What’s starting to happen is those life cycles are starting to be completed,” and those customers are moving to Linux.
That move to Linux is accelerated by Linux’s strength in Web applications, where developers today are focused, Zemlin adds. “You can’t really talk to any Web-based application company these days that’s not using Linux,” he says.
Subscribe to RSS/Atom Feed
September 26th, 2008 at 6:58 am
Peter said:
Michael,
I don’ t know, if articles like these really help Linux. Not only they are plain wrong, they also undermine all efforts for open source in general. This article has been spread throughout the net and almost all reactions to it is negative, even in the pro linux forums.
September 26th, 2008 at 11:36 am
md said:
I think the challenge is these discussions matter to those setting IT strategy but matter less so to individual users/admins that dominate forums. It’s always interesting to me to step back from the daily views and consider the mega trends or shifts in adoption that are happening. You can argue KVM on Linux is better than hyper-v on windows or Zfs vs ntfs but those debates or features do not alter the IT landscape.
September 27th, 2008 at 3:48 pm
David Comay said:
Michael, as usual we’re going to have to agree to disagree. I found the article inaccurate and mostly a dressed-up editorial by Jim Zemlin than a serious look at Solaris.
The cost savings of Linux over Solaris are of the past, when Linux was available on fast, x86 hardware and Solaris was thought to be limited to slower, SPARC hardware. Nowadays, Solaris is free to use, has competitive service plans to RHEL and other vendors and of course, runs just fine on lots of x86 hardware including IBM’s own x86 servers and blades.
I also find it ironic that in one thought Zemlin dismisses OpenSolaris innovations such as ZFS and DTrace but in another, bemoans the fact that Sun doesn’t relicense those innovations under the GPL so that they can be included in the Linux kernel.
September 28th, 2008 at 10:24 am
Jim Grisanzio said:
I didn’t find the InfoWorld article credible at all, and most people commenting on it are pointing out the obvious flaws. The guys on the OpenSolaris project are working hard to build a new community around this technology, and we are making progress on a variety of fronts now. We are always open to constructive criticism and genuine offers to help, but some of these attacks are so over the top that they say more about the attackers than they do about us. No matter. We are not going to die, Michael. We’ll be around for quite some time, I’m afraid. :) And as we grow, that takes nothing away from the wonderful things the Linux community has done over the years, and all the cool things they’ll do in the future. There’s room for all of us.
September 28th, 2008 at 1:40 pm
Simon Phipps said:
Seeing you defend AIX in the context of Zemlin’s anti-Sun smear piece surprises me, Michael. I thought you were a Linux zealot, not a suit.
September 28th, 2008 at 5:06 pm
md said:
First, I don’t think any of you three are exactly unbiased so no matter what I write here, it’s not as if you’re going to change your position.
However, let’s think about a couple points. First, where are the New Solaris users that should be exemplifying and saying what you’re stating? You all work for Sun… I’m sorry, but it just isn’t there. No one, anywhere is reporting about a flood of new Solaris installs and I don’t see Linux users flocking to Solaris – anywhere.
Second, no one is stating OpenSolaris is bad – the problem is that it’s a massive shortcoming when you consider a strategy and execution team aligned to what enterprise users want (Linux) could have been a huge move forward for the industry.
David, the reason Zemlin can call out ZFS and other technologies as irrelevant b/c they can’t be combined with Linux is b/c there is volume and mass adoption with Linux. What one niche, vendor controlled open source project is doing doesn’t matter unless it can align with the volumes around Linux. Think of Darwin – the open source implementation of Mac OS X… what does it matter if Apple adds a technology that’s cool?
And Simon, my point was not to promote AIX – my point is to distinguish that UNIX in general is not declining when at least 1 or 2 of the top 3 platforms are growing very well. UNIX (including Solaris) will linger around forever. No, I don’t particularly like any UNIX and I prefer Linux, but that’s my POV. Back in the day, I migrated I don’t know how many servers from UNIX to Linux and Windows – and never saw a customer regret it. The economics are not just hardware David. So yes, x86 is x86 but add in the costs of administration and Solaris doesn’t compare.
Jim, you are right – there is room for every open source licensed OS project just as there’s been room for *BSDs, Minix, Darwin, and other OSs that will always be around. But there’s only one that has volume, a truly open community process based on merit and broad customer adoption.
That’s my point of view. I can appreciate you all and the company you work for have a differing opinion and that’s fine. I don’t mean to criticize, but you have to admit there’s an alternative view out there. Just as in elections, open debate is perfectly valid.
December 24th, 2008 at 8:40 pm
Linux User said:
But you can understand why they come and argue Michael, I was googling for “solaris is dead” because I am thinking of trying out Solaris but don’t want a lame duck OS that won’t do what I need when Linux almost will (Windows would, if only the black hats didn’t spend so much time on it).
Your article and comment about lack of comments from anyone except Sun convinced me not to try Solaris.