Return to BSD News archive
Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.carno.net.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!news.mira.net.au!news.vbc.net!vbcnet-west!garlic.com!uunet!in2.uu.net!206.109.2.48!bonkers!web.nmti.com!peter From: peter@nmti.com (Peter da Silva) Newsgroups: comp.unix.solaris,comp.unix.bsd.misc,comp.unix.internals,comp.unix.osf.osf1 Subject: Re: Solaris 2.6 Date: 11 Dec 1996 16:37:18 GMT Organization: Network/development platform support, NMTI Lines: 58 Distribution: inet Message-ID: <58mnvu$h27@web.nmti.com> References: <32986299.AC7@mail.esrin.esa.it> <58invm$s4b@abyss.west.sun.com> <58k7hn$nur@web.nmti.com> <58ma5l$kb2@abyss.west.sun.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: sonic.nmti.com Xref: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au comp.unix.solaris:92186 comp.unix.bsd.misc:1766 comp.unix.internals:11562 comp.unix.osf.osf1:16989 In article <58ma5l$kb2@abyss.west.sun.com>, Bruce Adler [Contractor] <adler@West.Sun.COM> wrote: > In article <58k7hn$nur@web.nmti.com>, Peter da Silva <peter@nmti.com> wrote: > >I see. You're so heavily biased against me that you don't consider that > >maybe I'm telling the truth? That's whatyacall ironic, isn't it? > I have absolutely nothing against you regardless of how strongly you > dislike Solaris. I would never consider disputing your right to your > own opinion. But can't you just simply say "I dislike Solaris" without > fabricating reasons to justify why you dislike Solaris? What, I should claim that I don't like Solaris without having any reasons for disliking Solaris at all? I've got a bunch of reasons for disliking Solaris. That it's based on System V isn't one of them. I've got far more experience with System V than BSD. > You asserted that Sun "pretty much forced all the Interactive users to > switch to Solaris." Last time I checked Interactive Unix was still on > the SunSoft price list. That's not the issue. The fact that there are System V users who *don't* want to run Solaris, other than myself, supports my contention that Solaris isn't enough of a System V to serve that purpose. But Sun certainly entered a mode after they started pushing Solaris x86 where they made life pretty unpleasant for Interactive users. I don't know whether they changed that mode later or not, but they sure delivered the message that we should switch. Luckily we'd already switched to SVR4 (UHC and UnixWare) for all practical purposes so it wasn't a big impact on us. > It seems rather ironic to me that you seem to be bashing Sun because > you feel they're preventing customers from buying Interactive Unix. No, I'm bashing *Solaris* because it has made my job harder, coming from a BSD *and* System V background. I don't care if Interactive's currently on the price list or not. I only brought it up as evidence that Solaris and System V are different beasts. I *would* buy SunOS if it was being actively maintained, and if they were selling a real SVR4 I'd probably be interested in that as well, since UHC is dead and UnixWare looks to be about to pick up a lot of crap from SCO Open Deathtrap. All on the x86 platform. I don't feel the Sparc offers enough bang for the buck compared to Intel at the low end and Alpha at the high end. > I'm pretty certain that what you're really trying to say is that you > personally wouldn't buy either Solaris or Interactive Unix or any > product sold by Sun. Like I said, you've made *your* decision that I'm just a BSD bigot and nothing I can say will change your bias. If anything, what I am is a simplicity bigot. -- </peter>