Comments on: IBM takes potshots at OpenSolaris

Big Blue, a major Linux fan, bashes top rival Sun's effort to make its Unix an open-source operating system.

[u1mpg]

Worth a look if IBM is bagging it...

...if it wasn't a threat - they wouldn't even mention it

a-yep

you hit it right on the nose

[zolyfarkas]

I heard the same when Linux started, and look where we are today.

I would say OpenSolaris is a good alternative vs Linux on the server side.

OpenSolaris has a few things going for it:

1. A bussiness friendly license. (no GPL restrictions). Coexists well with proprietary code.
2. ZFS,ZFS,ZFS (it got the attention of Apple and Google)
3. DTRACE
4. No Linus Torvalds (worth using solaris only for this reason :-)
5. No SCO lawsuit

IBM instead of bashing OpenSolaris should embrace it, they might make more money with it than Sun.

[WJeansonne]

Once Again the Open Source Movement is Bifurcating

By the end of it all there will be a million forks and support issues in the billions. I just have to laugh at it all.

[qwerty75]

Laugh at yourself

Let me guess by fork you are referring to the different distros, which for the most part all use the same kernal.

There are very few forking issues in Linux and most distros support their products very well, unlike a certain unnamed company from Redmond, Wa.

[nottlv]

Linux comparison flawed

OpenSolaris was a much more mature project when it was started due to Sun contributing a lot of Solaris code. I don't doubt there were 10x more committers to Linux in it's first year; it needed them to plug the gaping holes in it's functionality.

[scdecade]

IBM wants Linux to remain inferior to AIX indefinitely

A couple of weeks ago CNET interviewed the new head of IBM's P-series unix servers, Ross Mauri. Here's what he had to say about operating systems in general:

"AIX is our [IBM's] flagship on System p. We've invested a lot in it. Nothing scales as well as AIX. Nothing is robust as AIX. It leverages all of our virtualization technologies..."

So AIX scales better than linux and AIX is more robust than linux...

Here's what he had to say about linux specifically:

"We're also seeing Linux very healthy and happy running on Power in some standalone applications where the customers decided that Linux was good enough--"

So in other words linux is dumbed down just good enough software. And that's the way IBM likes it.

IBM is taking pot shots at OpenSolaris because they don't like the fact there's an OS that's superior to both linux AND AIX. It's open source enough for anyone that cares more about their use of the software than who ultimately benefits from its openness.

Typical IBM FUD. They use Linux as a bait and switch ploy to sell more AIX. At least Sun is honest.

[zolyfarkas]

I've heard this before

I would say OpenSolaris is a good alternative vs Linux on the server side.

OpenSolaris has a few things going for it:

1. A bussiness friendly license. (no GPL restrictions). Coexists well with proprietary code.
2. ZFS,ZFS,ZFS (it got the attention of Apple and Google)
3. DTRACE
4. No Linus Torvalds (worth using solaris only for this reason :)
5. No SCO lawsuit

IBM instead of bashing OpenSolaris should embrace it, they might make more money with it than Sun.
They could get rid of the overhead on supporting 2
OS's (Linux and AIX). HP should do the same.

[danxy]

There was Internet in 1991, and before

". . . in 1991--and that was with no Internet and no advertisements, Frye said."

There was Internet in 1991, even if you weren't aware of it. Heck, I was using Internet in 1983. There was no web to speak of in 1991, but there was Internet, including email, file transfer, and news groups. Heck, you could even dial up to a ISP in 1991 (although it was text only).

[t8]

Teh big difference is...

Working on Linux means you can contribute to a project that you and everyone else owns and has a right to use.

Working on Open Solaris is the equivalent of working for Sun, but with no pay.

It's either open and free or it isn't.

If you try to mix and match, you end up with people working for a proprietry company for nothing. What a rip off.

[t8]

The big difference is...

Working on Linux means you can contribute to a project that you and everyone else owns and has a right to use.

Working on Open Solaris is the equivalent of working for Sun, but with no pay.

It's either open and free or it isn't.

If you try to mix and match, you end up with people working for a proprietry company for nothing. What a rip off.

[Eric Draven]

yep

touche...

[jasred]

What about all the folk...

who have worked free for IBM by contibuting to Linux :-)? My prediction is that like the Hippy movement in the 70's (for those that remember it) Linux will gradually fade to an historical sideline. I agree with the bifurcation argument and it does not just apply to distros. But more importantly is the complexity argument. Part time volunteers can't sustain the prodigious effort of backwards compatibility with increased integration that Microsoft has sustained and managed successfully (not perfectly I agree, but I would argue that is enough). I wonder how many Windows servers IBM sells? I bet the revenue from this is increasing much faster than AIX or Linux!!!

[meh130]

Absurd and Pathetic

IBM's comments are absurd, pathetic, and simply sad. Define a "real community", IBM. The OpenSolaris community is as much a community as Eclipse and JFS.

I am reminded of Mohandas Gandhi's quote:

"First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win."

IBM is not officially in stage two.

[IBMSoftwareGuy]

IBM is not a monolith

you need to get your head around the fact that IBM is not one thing. Many times you will find that different business groups have different points of emphasis. This does not mean it's a big conspiracy or a bait-and-switch. Linux in IBM is real, believe me.

[espressomobile]

Pot shots?

You are right. IBM is not a monolith. It is an "Evil Blue Empire". Apologies to Ronald Wilson Reagan...