This is a discussion on Disgusting - Solaris Rss ; The IT media must be in a pitiful state when an article like "Is Sticking With Solaris a Wise Choice?" one found its way into the web. In the times of waning editorial budgets it seems it just to easy ...
The IT media must be in a pitiful state when an article like "Is Sticking With Solaris a Wise Choice?" one found its way into the web. In the times of waning editorial budgets it seems it just to easy to place
The points of critic are multitude about this article:
When you really want to read it, you may have a look at the page of enterprise networking planet. However i'm really disgusted how easy it is to place such articles into the media.
- It's not obvious at first, but when you read this article to the end, you will find the biggest point. The guy writing this article is working at Canonical. Just in case you don't know what Canonical is doing: Selling support for Linux.
- It's interesting, that Canonical is launching an new support offering at the moment, calles Ubuntu Advantage. Is it just coincidence that this article was published now?
- The author of this article wants to tell you thats expensive to afford Solaris. But i want just to make a simple calculation: A year enterprise support costs you $1200, to get support for as many VMs with Ubuntu's as your server can eat, you have to purchase the Advances Cloud Add-on Support you have shell out $599 (it's the way i'm understanding this page, corrections are welcome). Let's to an calculation: Software-only support for as many Oracle Operating Environments (Solaris, OpenSolaris, Oracle Enterprise Linux) and Oracle VM as your server can eat costs you 8 percent of the net hardware price (after your rebates). So as long as the net price of your hardware isn't higher then $22487, Solaris support is actually cheaper.
- Sorry, i don't get it ... but why is "You can't get hardware only support" a problem of Solaris?
- I know that everyone wants to see btrfs as the ZFS alternative in the next few month. Forget about that. File systems need a long time to get ready for prime time, they need even longer to get wide adoption and trust. I really don't get it why many Linux people think that brtfs is different about that. You can savely add four to five years from first 1.0 release to the a significant speed up of the adoption of an filesystem. And brtfs isn't even at the 1.0 level now. Perhaps the Linux community is blinded by the speed of the ext2/ext3/ext4 adoption ... those filesystem were just incremental developments, nothing completly new. Bye the way: The Linux community must be cautious, you can crash a system by a problematic new features, but you aren't allowed to lose data. Customers experiencing data loss are burned customers and will return vastly later, if they return. The Linux community will endanger brtfs by touting it as production ready or ZFS equivalent to early.
- The author writes that dtrace is one of the interesting features of Solaris, just to forget about it later.
- The article is full of FUD. It just trying to spread fear to the customers.Full of speculations.I wont comment on all of that
Read More about [Disgusting...