RE: [UUG/MLUG] Solaris Source to be released.

[Keith Kleiner <EMAIL:PROTECTED>]

This may be true:  Solaris x86 may have been around longer than Linux.
However, I still argue that it was ported over, rather than built from the
ground up like Linux, and this seems to me to mean that Solaris x86 might
not work as good as it should on x86.  Ryan Dooley had Solaris on an x86
with 64mb ram and it ran REALLY slow as I recall.  

-keith

On Fri, 1 Oct 1999, David Lloyd wrote:

> I thought Solaris x86 had been around about as long, if not longer, than
> Linux.  Not to say that I'd choose Solaris over Linux (personally, I just
> don't like it--try to argue with that logic), but I think that it's
> reasonably stable and usable on Intel platforms.  For a corporation to
> release a product like that, it's got to be pretty stable.
> 
> Dave Lloyd
> 
> On Fri, 1 Oct 1999, Keith Kleiner wrote:
> 
> > I think it is hard to tell the implications at this point.  Solaris
> > certainly has an abundance of excellent code!  However, Solaris was
> > not built from the ground up for the intel x86 architecture and its
> > peripherals like linux was.  Hence, from my perspective, it seems like
> > Solaris would need some major modification and updates before it would be
> > ready to take PC's by storm and compete with Linux, FreeBSD, and others.
> > Whatever happens, it seems clear to me that the end user will benefit
> > because now there will be that much more excellent code on the table to
> > choose from.
> > 
> > -keith
> > 
> > On Fri, 1 Oct 1999, Bradshaw, Neil P. (UMC-Student) wrote:
> > 
> > > This is kind of heavy. Solaris is a big company, and for them to be
> > > releasing their source code is even bigger. I was reading an artice linked
> > > from Slashdot that the implications of this could severly hurt the rising
> > > popularity of Linux.
> > > 
> > > Here's the text I am refering to:
> > > 
> > > http://www.osopinion.com/Opinions/MichaelWhitmore/MichaelWhitmore2.html
> > > 
> > > Anybody have any thoughts on this?
> > > 
> > > -- Neil Bradshaw
> > > 
> > 
> > 
>