IWETHEY v. 0.3.0 | TODO
1,095 registered users | 0 active users | 0 LpH | Statistics
Login | Create New User

Welcome to IWETHEY!

New Don't expect it to get any better
Vendors see the holy grail in Linux and Open Source, as long as it does not conflict with their particular product. The less you spend on other pieces of the system, the more you have for them.

So they are reluctant to support something like Solaris x86 (miniscule market presence, same effort of development and support as Linux).

You would need a MAJOR $$ client to push for something like that.
New It's not the same effort.
As long as you don't have to worry about endian stuff, the code is exactly the same for Solaris x86 as for Sparc.

Going between Solaris and Linux is a much larger effort (I've done this before).

The key with Solaris x86 is that there are some Solaris admins out there who realize that Sparc hardware is slower for a lot of things, but they don't want to deal with Linux to get the speed gains. Things like commodity web servers, etc., are great targets for Solaris x86 in an all-Solaris shop. Keep the database on the big many-CPU iron, and put the load balanced smaller stuff on cheap fast machines.

-scott anderson

"Welcome to Rivendell, Mr. Anderson..."
     Solaris 10 x86 vendor support - (admin) - (21)
         Don't expect it to get any better - (broomberg) - (1)
             It's not the same effort. - (admin)
         thanx - (boxley) - (8)
             Who told you? - (admin) - (3)
                 let me sniff around tomorrow -NT - (boxley) - (2)
                     Thanks. - (admin) - (1)
                         we have sun paid evangelists onsite :-) -NT - (boxley)
             Sun may be betting the farm on it... - (ben_tilly) - (3)
                 Agreed - (broomberg) - (2)
                     sure but if solaris is opensource? - (boxley) - (1)
                         Won't matter - (broomberg)
         Can someone give the abridged description of "endian"? (new thread) - (drewk)
         Linux Application Environment - (boxley) - (8)
             Thanks. - (admin)
             lxrun != LAE - (admin) - (6)
                 yes it is :-( - (boxley) - (5)
                     Not according to Sun - (admin) - (4)
                         " LAE is supposed to be kernel-level support" - (boxley) - (3)
                             Re: " LAE is supposed to be kernel-level support" - (admin) - (2)
                                 just repeating what the insider is telling me -NT - (boxley) - (1)
                                     Moot point until they release LAE anyways. - (admin)

Why do you ask me? You know I cannot do this thing anymore with the bugs.
68 ms