Upgrade Laptop from Vista -> Solaris - well worth the trouble - Solaris

This is a discussion on Upgrade Laptop from Vista -> Solaris - well worth the trouble - Solaris ; On 2007-11-24 13:12:40 +0000, andrew@cucumber.demon.co.uk (Andrew Gabriel) said: > In article , > tanhkx writes: >> It would be nice if I can go to a book shop and buy a book on Solaris >> operating system and it come ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 62

Thread: Upgrade Laptop from Vista -> Solaris - well worth the trouble

  1. Re: Upgrade Laptop from Vista -> Solaris - well worth the trouble

    On 2007-11-24 13:12:40 +0000, andrew@cucumber.demon.co.uk (Andrew
    Gabriel) said:

    > In article <47481c38_1@news.tm.net.my>,
    > tanhkx writes:
    >> It would be nice if I can go to a book shop and buy a book on Solaris
    >> operating system and it come with a free DVD which I can install Solaris on
    >> my pc.

    >
    > You can get the free DVD from Sun's website, either download or
    > posted to you. It's updated every few months (the download images
    > even more frequently) with new features and hardware support, so
    > anything attached to a book in a bookshop would not be the latest
    > version, and would likely be a year or more old.


    The other problem with including Solaris DVDs with a book is that Sun
    seem to prevent anyone from redistributing their OS.

    That seems to be changing with the Indiana project, and of course
    Belenix/Nexenta/et al.

    Cheers,

    Chris


  2. Re: Upgrade Laptop from Vista -> Solaris - well worth the trouble


    "Thommy M." wrote in message
    news:nIz1j.713$R_4.485@newsb.telia.net...

    > It's Linux that is incompatible with UNIX.
    >
    > Linux is like Microsoft, trying to invent its own standards.


    Could have fooled me. I routinely write C/C++ and scripting for both and
    have no problems with either of Linux or Solaris. Mostly systems and server
    side but also apps work too.

    I like BOTH Linux and Solaris!!! And use both. No Vista betaware here at
    all. Unless it is a coaster of course. For me I just want the letters u,
    n, i, x in it and I am happy and at home with it.

    While it is true to say Linux does not run a UNIX derived kernel, it is in
    fact POSIX compliant, has for the most part the same APIs and all the same
    utilities as does Solaris. Perl, awk, sed, etc all just work like they
    should. Threads, RPCs, kerberos etc. And Solaris too has evolved quite a
    bit from the old BSD sources and could be said to now be its own lineage.

    If Linux had not come along UNIX would have near dead by now. HP, SGI, DG,
    IBM, Sun and others got greedy, needed C/C++ licenses and almost extorted
    business in pricing. Sun is still in this because they were not as bad, not
    that they were that good. Programs like the X100/V100 and the Intel port
    saved Solaris. It sure wasn't Java.

    HP in Itanic and apathy in development killed HP-UX as a viable OS. DG,
    SGI, do they even sell Irix and DG-UX any more? SCO, we know the story.
    AIX being chip bound and closed is also loosing market share. Why, because
    they wanted at least $2000 and up for a basic compiler, DB etc much more
    extra. OS/HW Vendors put too much faith in companies like BMC and CA with
    their over priced bloated products. It was deathly expensive to run these
    back in the '80's and '90's.

    Microsoft is now buried in their "MS-standards" as each new OS the
    developers, admins must relearn a whole new layer of "Microsoft standards"
    and incompatibilities that we so not see in the xNIX world. Vista has so
    many compatibility layers, even MS engineering no longer understands it.
    This is Microsoft's Achilles heel. Their older software no longer runs on
    their OS!

    So write for both Linux and Solaris and let the user choose. It isn't too
    hard if you script or try to stick to the POSIX APIs and common tools like
    GTK. Don't get too caught up in the next wizbang proprietary API offering,
    most die eventually, while some like GTK make it many do not. SAA or NETBUI
    anyone?

    Open source competition, including Linux is good for this business.

    Now for the flames.



  3. Re: Upgrade Laptop from Vista -> Solaris - well worth the trouble


    "mike" wrote in message
    news:t8N1j.26859$9h.3444@trnddc07...

    > Ok, after a day of downloading and concatenating and burning, I have
    > a solaris dvd.
    > Stuff it into the machine and load up MS VirutalPC.
    > Start the install....................
    > .......................
    > .......................
    > Aborted. This requires 753MB of ram, you have only 453MB.


    Oh, I so much recommend you use VMWare over that MS virtual thing. It even
    comes up 64 bit on my AMD X2. Runs like a charm.

    http://www.vmware.com/




  4. Re: Upgrade Laptop from Vista -> Solaris - well worth the trouble

    > Ok, after a day of downloading and concatenating and burning, I have
    > a solaris dvd.
    > Stuff it into the machine and load up MS VirutalPC.


    Does MS stand for MicroSoft?
    If so, what makes you think that the "game over" is Sun's fault?

    --
    Su www.efunda.com trovi informazioni concise sugli aspetti essenziali
    dell'ingegneria (specialmente meccanica). Brevi tutorials, formule per
    il dimensionamento, proprietÓ dei materiali. Annuncio sponsorizzato
    dalla LIPSISC. Aut. Min. rich.



  5. Re: Upgrade Laptop from Vista -> Solaris - well worth the trouble

    tanhkx wrote:
    > It would be nice if I can go to a book shop and buy a book on Solaris
    > operating system and it come with a free DVD which I can install Solaris on
    > my pc.
    >
    > Few months ago I bought a book on FreeBSD and it come with a DVD and that is
    > how I install my FreeBSD on my PC.
    > Any problem I encounter, I can refer to the text book and immetiatelly get
    > the answer.
    >
    > It is too troublesome and time consuming to search for answer by using
    > google because I only have a slow speed 3g. The 3g in my country is very
    > slow...same like the analog dial-up...sometime even slower.
    >


    The last time requested a copy of Solaris 10 from Sun, they sent a DVD
    at no charge! The manuals are free if you download them. If you want
    printed copies, they are available but you'll have to pay for them and
    pay for shipping. Even a large book cannot explain Solaris in detail!
    It would take a small library to cover: Introduction, System
    Administration, Programming, Installation, etc, etc.

    That library is available. See docs.sun.com. You might find someone
    with a broadband connection who could download copies and burn them to
    CD or DVD for you.


  6. Re: Upgrade Laptop from Vista -> Solaris - well worth the trouble

    Dave wrote:
    >
    >> Ok, after a day of downloading and concatenating and burning, I have
    >> a solaris dvd.
    >> Stuff it into the machine and load up MS VirutalPC.
    >> Start the install....................
    >> .......................
    >> .......................
    >> Aborted. This requires 753MB of ram, you have only 453MB.
    >> GAME OVER! Don't these Sun people remember about virtual memory?
    >> I don't have a machine, that I care to trash, with that much ram.
    >> Ah for the good old days when you could run MSOFFICE, surf the web
    >> and have a wonderful time on 4MB of RAM. Why should it take
    >> 753MB of ram to write a letter?
    >>
    >> Ok, undaunted, I try the express version.
    >> ...................
    >> ......................
    >> ......
    >> Read error, incompatible media installed.
    >> Hmmmmm...
    >> GAME 2 OVER.
    >>
    >> Guess I shoulda read the requirements page...silly me...
    >>
    >> Wonder why XP is so popular????
    >>
    >> mike
    >>

    >
    >
    > Was an error message from Solaris about requiring 753 MB of RAM? I doubt
    > it is, since the requirements are for 256 MB, but 512 are recommended. I
    > suspect that is your Virtual PC screwing thing up myself.


    I have 1GB of real ram. I assigned 443MB to the virtual machine. It
    wouldn't let me do 750mb, so I couldn't try that.
    I inserted the dvd and started the installation. It whirred for a while
    then informed me that it found 443MB of ram and needed a minimum of
    753MB. It refused to go further.

    So, yes, I do blame Sun for THEIR error message. If lack of RAM is not
    the problem, they shouldn't be giving me that error message.

    It's certainly possible that Solaris is incompatible with MSVirtualPC.
    But I have succcessfully installed about a dozen linux variants on it.
    I never found one distribution that supported all my virtualized
    hardware at once,
    but that's the same problem I have with real hardware.
    You'd think that anybody wanting to penetrate MS territory would include
    drivers for the virtualized hardware in the MS VirtualPC...but that's
    just me.
    >
    > But if you give up that easy, you will never learn enough to make
    > Solaris useful to you, so I would go back to XP if I were you.


    The amount of effort you put into something is directly related to the
    gain you expect to achieve. When you hang out with unix/linux people,
    you are hanging out with people who love to bang their head against the
    wall to make stuff work. They're blind to the fact that for the other
    99% of us...we'd just like it to work. There's no joy in recompiling
    stuff. There's no joy in scouring the web for a driver.
    I've never talked with a linux zealot who understood that. It's all
    my fault that I'm too dumb or lazy to make it work.

    So, you're right. Solaris didn't work for me out of the box.
    I'm too lazy to move the dvd drive to the scratch machine to try
    on real hardware. If I can't make it work on a virtual machine, I won't
    use it anyway.
    I don't expect any benefit beyond learning about Solaris. I give up.

    Is that the fault of Solaris? Only if they want market penetration.

    Look at it this way. I try to teach you something. You don't get it.
    Have you failed as a student? Have I failed as a teacher?
    I submit that blaming the student is FAR less likely to achieve education.

  7. Re: Upgrade Laptop from Vista -> Solaris - well worth the trouble

    mike wrote:
    >
    > I have 1GB of real ram. I assigned 443MB to the virtual machine. It
    > wouldn't let me do 750mb, so I couldn't try that.
    > I inserted the dvd and started the installation. It whirred for a while
    > then informed me that it found 443MB of ram and needed a minimum of
    > 753MB. It refused to go further.
    >

    If you are short of RAM, choose the community edition, not the developer
    one (which requires Java for the tools) and select text console install.
    The installer requires more RAM than the running OS. The installer is
    being updated to drastically reduce its memory footprint.

    >
    > It's certainly possible that Solaris is incompatible with MSVirtualPC.
    > But I have succcessfully installed about a dozen linux variants on it.


    Do what everyone else does and use VMWare. There are VMWare drivers for
    Solaris, I don't know of anyone using MS VirtualPC.

    --
    Ian Collins.

  8. Re: Upgrade Laptop from Vista -> Solaris - well worth the trouble

    mike wrote:
    > Ian Collins wrote:
    >> mike wrote:
    >>> Ok, after a day of downloading and concatenating and burning, I have
    >>> a solaris dvd.
    >>> Stuff it into the machine and load up MS VirutalPC.
    >>> Start the install....................
    >>> ........................
    >>> ........................
    >>> Aborted. This requires 753MB of ram, you have only 453MB.
    >>> GAME OVER! Don't these Sun people remember about virtual memory?

    >>
    >> How can you have virtual memory without backing store?
    >>
    >> Select text install.
    >>

    > Don't know about yours, but mine has a hard drive for backing store
    >

    Which the installer doesn't know about until you assign and partition
    the drive(s).

    --
    Ian Collins.

  9. Re: Upgrade Laptop from Vista -> Solaris - well worth the trouble

    Ian Collins wrote:
    > mike wrote:
    >> I have 1GB of real ram. I assigned 443MB to the virtual machine. It
    >> wouldn't let me do 750mb, so I couldn't try that.
    >> I inserted the dvd and started the installation. It whirred for a while
    >> then informed me that it found 443MB of ram and needed a minimum of
    >> 753MB. It refused to go further.
    >>

    > If you are short of RAM, choose the community edition, not the developer
    > one (which requires Java for the tools) and select text console install.


    Would have been nice to have figgered that out prior to the 10-hour
    download.

    > The installer requires more RAM than the running OS.


    I understand market pressures that make it profitable to spend the
    customer's
    $$$ on more RAM than on writing efficient code.
    But requiring 750MB of RAM just to copy some files from a DVD to
    a HD is INSANE! And the installer taking more ram to run than the OS is
    ....what's the next step beyond insane????
    That should never have made it past the first product concept review.


    The installer is
    > being updated to drastically reduce its memory footprint.


    Post an announcement when that happens.
    >
    >> It's certainly possible that Solaris is incompatible with MSVirtualPC.
    >> But I have succcessfully installed about a dozen linux variants on it.

    >
    > Do what everyone else does and use VMWare. There are VMWare drivers for
    > Solaris, I don't know of anyone using MS VirtualPC.


    Sure you do...pleased to meet you. I run several windows variants and
    several linux variants.

    I did go visit the vmware site. First impression is that I have to
    click a button labeled "buy" to make it work. That ain't gonna happen.
    There's a free player, but that doesn't look like it works on anything
    except precompiled images???

    Solaris has configured itself out of my market segment. And that's ok...
    >



    --
    Return address is VALID!

  10. Re: Upgrade Laptop from Vista -> Solaris - well worth the trouble

    Ian Collins wrote:
    > mike wrote:
    >> Ian Collins wrote:
    >>> mike wrote:
    >>>> Ok, after a day of downloading and concatenating and burning, I have
    >>>> a solaris dvd.
    >>>> Stuff it into the machine and load up MS VirutalPC.
    >>>> Start the install....................
    >>>> ........................
    >>>> ........................
    >>>> Aborted. This requires 753MB of ram, you have only 453MB.
    >>>> GAME OVER! Don't these Sun people remember about virtual memory?
    >>> How can you have virtual memory without backing store?
    >>>
    >>> Select text install.
    >>>

    >> Don't know about yours, but mine has a hard drive for backing store
    >>

    > Which the installer doesn't know about until you assign and partition
    > the drive(s).
    >

    Somehow, linux and windows can figger it out and install just fine.

    --
    Return address is VALID!

  11. Re: Upgrade Laptop from Vista -> Solaris - well worth the trouble

    mike wrote:
    > Ian Collins wrote:
    >> mike wrote:
    >>> I have 1GB of real ram. I assigned 443MB to the virtual machine. It
    >>> wouldn't let me do 750mb, so I couldn't try that.
    >>> I inserted the dvd and started the installation. It whirred for a while
    >>> then informed me that it found 443MB of ram and needed a minimum of
    >>> 753MB. It refused to go further.
    >>>

    >> If you are short of RAM, choose the community edition, not the developer
    >> one (which requires Java for the tools) and select text console install.

    >
    > Would have been nice to have figgered that out prior to the 10-hour
    > download.
    >

    They are all on the same ISO, the only difference is which components
    get installed.

    >> The installer requires more RAM than the running OS.

    >
    > That should never have made it past the first product concept review.
    >

    If you have an issue and a suggested fix, join the OpenSolaris install
    community. You appear to be suffering from a closed source mindset,
    OpenSolaris is opensource, so if you have an issue, join the appropriate
    community and contribute. Whinging on Usenet will get you nowhere.

    >
    > The installer is
    >> being updated to drastically reduce its memory footprint.

    >
    > Post an announcement when that happens.


    Follow the progress yourself.

    >
    > I did go visit the vmware site. First impression is that I have to
    > click a button labeled "buy" to make it work. That ain't gonna happen.
    > There's a free player, but that doesn't look like it works on anything
    > except precompiled images???
    >

    I suggest you look again.

    --
    Ian Collins.

  12. Re: Upgrade Laptop from Vista -> Solaris - well worth the trouble

    mike wrote:
    > Ian Collins wrote:
    >> mike wrote:
    >>> Ian Collins wrote:
    >>>> mike wrote:
    >>>>> Ok, after a day of downloading and concatenating and burning, I have
    >>>>> a solaris dvd.
    >>>>> Stuff it into the machine and load up MS VirutalPC.
    >>>>> Start the install....................
    >>>>> ........................
    >>>>> ........................
    >>>>> Aborted. This requires 753MB of ram, you have only 453MB.
    >>>>> GAME OVER! Don't these Sun people remember about virtual memory?
    >>>> How can you have virtual memory without backing store?
    >>>>
    >>>> Select text install.
    >>>>
    >>> Don't know about yours, but mine has a hard drive for backing store
    >>>

    >> Which the installer doesn't know about until you assign and partition
    >> the drive(s).
    >>

    > Somehow, linux and windows can figger it out and install just fine.
    >

    How can they tell which partition is free, or if the drive isn't
    labeled, where do they write the data?

    --
    Ian Collins.

  13. Re: Upgrade Laptop from Vista -> Solaris - well worth the trouble

    Ian Collins wrote:
    > mike wrote:
    >
    >>Ian Collins wrote:
    >>
    >>>mike wrote:
    >>>
    >>>>Ian Collins wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>>mike wrote:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>>Ok, after a day of downloading and concatenating and burning, I have
    >>>>>>a solaris dvd.
    >>>>>>Stuff it into the machine and load up MS VirutalPC.
    >>>>>>Start the install....................
    >>>>>>........................
    >>>>>>........................
    >>>>>>Aborted. This requires 753MB of ram, you have only 453MB.
    >>>>>>GAME OVER! Don't these Sun people remember about virtual memory?
    >>>>>
    >>>>>How can you have virtual memory without backing store?
    >>>>>
    >>>>>Select text install.
    >>>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>Don't know about yours, but mine has a hard drive for backing store
    >>>>
    >>>
    >>>Which the installer doesn't know about until you assign and partition
    >>>the drive(s).
    >>>

    >>
    >>Somehow, linux and windows can figger it out and install just fine.
    >>

    >
    > How can they tell which partition is free, or if the drive isn't
    > labeled, where do they write the data?
    >

    In the case of Windows, it probably just assumes ownership as it pleases.

    --
    The e-mail address in our reply-to line is reversed in an attempt to
    minimize spam. Our true address is of the form che...@prodigy.net.

  14. Re: Upgrade Laptop from Vista -> Solaris - well worth the trouble

    quoting mike (Sat, 24 Nov 2007 22:48:57 GMT):
    > Ian Collins wrote:
    >> Which the installer doesn't know about until you assign and partition
    >> the drive(s).
    >>

    > Somehow, linux and windows can figger it out and install just fine.


    Sure ;-(
    But what gives you the impression that you are so valuable to have on
    board the solaris ship? If you don't like waht you see, than that's
    fine. Who cares? Just use what you want. Don't keep on whining on
    usenet. It's almost troll-like behaviour.

    And ONE more other thing: learn to use the right newsgroup. Posting to
    as many as you do is bad behaviour. I'm even surprised folks in this
    solaris newsgroup actually answered to your posts.

    --
    Dick Hoogendijk -- PGP/GnuPG key: 01D2433D
    ++ http://nagual.nl/ | Solaris 10 / XDE ++

  15. Re: Upgrade Laptop from Vista -> Solaris - well worth the trouble

    Ian Collins wrote:
    > mike wrote:
    >> Ian Collins wrote:
    >>> mike wrote:
    >>>> Ian Collins wrote:
    >>>>> mike wrote:
    >>>>>> Ok, after a day of downloading and concatenating and burning, I have
    >>>>>> a solaris dvd.
    >>>>>> Stuff it into the machine and load up MS VirutalPC.
    >>>>>> Start the install....................
    >>>>>> ........................
    >>>>>> ........................
    >>>>>> Aborted. This requires 753MB of ram, you have only 453MB.
    >>>>>> GAME OVER! Don't these Sun people remember about virtual memory?
    >>>>> How can you have virtual memory without backing store?
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Select text install.
    >>>>>
    >>>> Don't know about yours, but mine has a hard drive for backing store
    >>>>
    >>> Which the installer doesn't know about until you assign and partition
    >>> the drive(s).
    >>>

    >> Somehow, linux and windows can figger it out and install just fine.
    >>

    > How can they tell which partition is free, or if the drive isn't
    > labeled, where do they write the data?
    >

    I don't know why this is so hard for you to understand.
    In the case of an emulator, there's is only one (virtual) hard drive.
    It's blank, empty, unused. When you stick in an installation CD, the
    installation process has to figure out where to put it. If it can't,
    it can surely ask you for guidance. I've got maybe a dozen linux
    install cd's that manage to figure out what to do. You'd think
    Sun could...I'm not even sure they can't...I can't try it 'cause
    I don't have a gazzigabyte of ram.

    I guess when you've struggled to manually configure unix/linux
    all your life,
    something that just plugs in and works is a foreign concept.
    And yes, that's the major stumbling block to widespread adoption
    of linux...the builders have no concept of what the general public
    needs...or are just unwilling to meet that need.

    --
    Return address is VALID!

  16. Re: Upgrade Laptop from Vista -> Solaris - well worth the trouble

    In article <4747ef4e$0$515$5a6aecb4@news.aaisp.net.uk>,
    Andrew Gabriel wrote:
    >In article ,
    > ferric@xanthia.com (Thomas H Jones II) writes:
    >>
    >> This is kind of muddy. "x86" is a *very* generic term that refers to any
    >> CPU that is generally compatible with the old 32-bit Intel produced CPUs.
    >> SUN currently sells hardware based on AMD64 chipsets.

    >
    >and Intel CPUs, but they're both "x86" by your definition.


    Hmm... Our sales weenies have only been pushing USPARC and Opteron systems
    at us of late. Just looked at the SUN web site and see that SUN's also
    selling IA64 Xeons. So, I'll modify: it would probably be better to say
    "x64" rather than "x86" as the SUN hardware is exclusively 64-bit rather
    than the 32-bit that is included in the more general "x86" category.
    --

    "You can only be -so- accurate with a claw-hammer." --me

  17. Re: Upgrade Laptop from Vista -> Solaris - well worth the trouble

    In article ,
    Thomas H Jones II wrote:
    >at us of late. Just looked at the SUN web site and see that SUN's also
    >selling IA64 Xeons. So, I'll modify: it would probably be better to say
    >"x64" rather than "x86" as the SUN hardware is exclusively 64-bit rather
    >than the 32-bit that is included in the more general "x86" category.


    IA64 refers to Intel's Itanium.


    Intel's marketing wonks now refer to their x86-64 Xeons as
    Intel64.


    John
    groenveld@acm.org

  18. Re: Upgrade Laptop from Vista -> Solaris - well worth the trouble

    In article ,
    Canuck57 wrote:
    >HP in Itanic and apathy in development killed HP-UX as a viable OS. DG,
    >SGI, do they even sell Irix and DG-UX any more? SCO, we know the story.
    >AIX being chip bound and closed is also loosing market share. Why, because
    >they wanted at least $2000 and up for a basic compiler, DB etc much more
    >extra.


    Well, before you summarily toss IBM and AIX over the side and into
    history's dustbin, let's not forget they embraced the Linux/open source
    community *well* before SUN did. IBM was also the "we know the story" to
    your "SCO", above...

    I'm pretty sure that "market share" depends on what your metric is based on
    and which quarter you look at. Anecdotally, over the past few years, I've
    worked with quite a few large financial services companies. Most have
    either been running either a mix or Solaris and AIX, exclusively AIX or
    converting to exclusively AIX (but very few have been exclusively Solaris
    and, of those that were, *none* planned to stay that way). Granted, that's
    not necessarily reflective of the entire computer industry, but it's an
    area that's really been chewing into SUN's bottom-line the last few years.

    Not trying to pee on the SUN love-fest (just tempering with a bit of the
    reality I see, day-to-day). At any rate, it's hard not to like Solaris:
    it's been helping to pay my salary since the mid-90's.
    --

    "You can only be -so- accurate with a claw-hammer." --me

  19. Re: Upgrade Laptop from Vista -> Solaris - well worth the trouble

    mike wrote:
    > Ian Collins wrote:
    >> mike wrote:
    >>> Ian Collins wrote:
    >>>> mike wrote:
    >>>>> Ian Collins wrote:
    >>>>>> mike wrote:
    >>>>>>> Ok, after a day of downloading and concatenating and burning, I have
    >>>>>>> a solaris dvd.
    >>>>>>> Stuff it into the machine and load up MS VirutalPC.
    >>>>>>> Start the install....................
    >>>>>>> ........................
    >>>>>>> ........................
    >>>>>>> Aborted. This requires 753MB of ram, you have only 453MB.
    >>>>>>> GAME OVER! Don't these Sun people remember about virtual memory?
    >>>>>> How can you have virtual memory without backing store?
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> Select text install.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>> Don't know about yours, but mine has a hard drive for backing store
    >>>>>
    >>>> Which the installer doesn't know about until you assign and partition
    >>>> the drive(s).
    >>>>
    >>> Somehow, linux and windows can figger it out and install just fine.
    >>>

    >> How can they tell which partition is free, or if the drive isn't
    >> labeled, where do they write the data?
    >>

    > I don't know why this is so hard for you to understand.


    Oh I understand alright.

    > In the case of an emulator, there's is only one (virtual) hard drive.
    > It's blank, empty, unused. When you stick in an installation CD, the
    > installation process has to figure out where to put it.


    If the emulator is any good, the OS doesn't realise it is running on one.

    > If it can't,
    > it can surely ask you for guidance.


    And if there isn't anywhere to use for backing store? The Solaris
    installer is designed to work entirely form a RAM disk, that design has
    stood the test of time, but is now on its way out. There are other
    OpenSolaris distributes with much smaller install footprints, including
    LiveCD.

    >
    > I guess when you've struggled to manually configure unix/linux
    > all your life,


    Nope, it's never been a struggle, because I know what I'd doing. The
    new installer's defaults will suffice for most users.

    > something that just plugs in and works is a foreign concept.


    Try Indiana,
    http://dlc.sun.com/osol/indiana/down...in-preview.iso

    > And yes, that's the major stumbling block to widespread adoption
    > of linux...the builders have no concept of what the general public
    > needs...or are just unwilling to meet that need.
    >

    Like Solaris, Linux is open source, so there is probably a distro to
    suite everyone.

    --
    Ian Collins.

  20. Re: Upgrade Laptop from Vista -> Solaris - well worth the trouble

    mike wrote:

    > I guess when you've struggled to manually configure unix/linux
    > all your life,
    > something that just plugs in and works is a foreign concept.


    So Windows just plugs in and works? That's not always been my experience.

    It is probably true installing Solaris 10 on *random* x86/x64 hardware
    will take more time than installing Windows on random hardware. But once
    running, Solaris takes up far less of your time.

    If you want a *very* easy life, just install Solaris 10 on UltraSPARC
    hardware. (I assume the same is true if you install on Sun's x86/x64
    hardware, rather than random bits of unnamed kit, but I have not tried
    that).

    In the 6 months I have owned my laptop, I have reinstalled windows Vista
    three times.

    1) After "upgrading" to Vista Ultimate, from Vista Business, the camera
    and audio drivers would not work, nor would they work after I
    reinstalled them. Totally reinstalling the Vista OS before adding the
    drivers fixed that. Then of course I had to reinstall all the programs
    and restore my user files, which took the best part of a day.

    Perhaps you would have had a better suggestion - Sony did not.

    2) The Adobe Acrobat 8 Professional (about the only bit of *useful*
    software supplied with the laptop), got corrupted and would not work. No
    amount of repairing the installation worked. With no option to remove
    just that product and reinstall just that, I had to do a complete reset
    to factory defaults.

    Perhaps you would have had a better suggestion - Sony did not.

    3) Despite running a Norton security product (forget which), with
    regular updates, the system got infected with some spyware/virus, as
    random programs tried connecting to the internet. (Norton could only
    detect the programs trying to connect, not find the rubbish that was
    causing it). So I reinstalled Vista for the 3rd time.

    Perhaps you would have had a better suggestion - I personally did not
    trust any other solution.

    So that is three times in 6 months I have *needed* to reinstall Vista in
    order to fix a problem. Of course, I could have left the camera, audio
    and Adobe Acrobat not working, and continued to use a system I think was
    infected, but none of them seemed too clever.

    Despite running two Sun workstations 24/7, and an odd one occasionally,
    I have not within the last few years ever had to reinstall an OS. I have
    reinstalled Solaris when it suited me (if a new version of Solaris was
    released), but I have not in the last few years ever had to reinstall
    Solaris because of a problem I could not be fix another easier way.

    > And yes, that's the major stumbling block to widespread adoption
    > of linux...the builders have no concept of what the general public
    > needs...or are just unwilling to meet that need.


    I guess I want something that once set up, continues to work. Solaris
    does that.

+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 LastLast