Is Sun Solaris on its deathbed?

Linux is a decent enough

Linux is a decent enough operating system for desktop computing (with a distro such as Ubuntu). It however is not an enterprise-class (or enterprise-ready for that matter) Operating system. The sophistication and engineering that has gone into Solaris 10 has put it at least a few generations ahead of any Linux distro out there (with features such as dtrace, FMA, SMF, etc).

I'm afraid Linux just doesn't make the cut for us *NIX administrators. That being said, I'm not against Linux. I encourage the Linux and Opensource community (and am a participant). I just feel that an OpenSolaris variant would be better equipped to handle enterprise workloads. Leave the Desktop to Linux and Mac OS X. Perhaps run some niche apps on Linux (dns servers, dhcp servers, qmail perhaps...even some web servers). I'll never run a data warehouse or an OLTP database that needs to use more than 4 procs.
No matter what the spin on this is...Linux is not UNIX (at least not yet) and it certainly is way inferior to Solaris.

I'm always have to laugh

I'm always have to laugh when I hear a Linux evangelist claim that Linux is going to replace Unix. Linux is just another Unix variant. It would be accurate to say that Linux poses a threat to COMMERCIAL Unix variants such as Solaris and AIX.

I have to agree with the

I have to agree with the first two comments to a point. Considering the Article reads like a Linux cult writing it lacks a lot of credibility. Secondly being as of right now Solaris 10 is a far better Server OS then any distro of Linux including Redhat Enterprise. Finally unless someone can talk Cisco into changing which IOS it uses on it's routers and switches I don't see Unix going anywere anytime soon.

Linux to me looks like

Linux to me looks like another version of Unix. It certainly has mind share--but at the end of the day it is getting splintered. After all you have ubuntu, Suse, and the Red Hat distributions. Binaries compiled for one distribution do not work on other Linux distributions.

My company has found Solaris 10 x86 bundled with Sun's X series servers to have a compelling price/performance story. When developers learn how to write code to effectively use the multithreading capability of the Niagara chip Sun's Solaris for Sparc will gain new life.

Interesting article The

Interesting article

The quote "I honestly have one person who is certified on Solaris. I have four people who are certified on Linux" makes me wonder about the technical background of the person who wrote it :)

I agree, Linux is very good in the Desktop environment and can very well compete with Mac OS X, however there's a big difference between the 'Desktop environment' and the 'Enterprise environment'.
I have been a Solaris user/admin for quite a while now and honestly don't see it going away any time soon. Try replacing an enterprise OS for a desktop OS, then you will believe the "Big Bang" theory :)

I like Linux too, in fact at home I run the Ubuntu distro and feel very much "at home" with it.

I believe both OS have "their place" and it will depend how and where you use them.

What about 128bit filesystem

What about 128bit filesystem ZFS, virtualisation containers (aka zones), Live Upgrade etc? No matter the superior benchmarks for enterprise class workloads that Solaris offers.

Linux is great but still has a way to go to match Solaris as being truly enterprise ready. Also now that Solaris is itself open source, it can only go from strength to strength although Linux should displace it for small and mid-range scales.

Shades of 1992. InfoWorld

Shades of 1992. InfoWorld copies Byte's (circa) 1992 article "Is Unix Dead?" They were wrong in 1992. InfoWorld is dead wrong in 2008 with regards to Solaris.

I administered both Red Hat

I administered both Red Hat (RHEL 2.1,3 and 4) and Solaris (2.6, 7,8,9,10) for several years. There is just no comparison in easiness of administration and quality of support one gets from RH and Sun. For enterprise computing Solaris wins by landslide. For small businesses, scientific labs and home desktops Linux may be more efficient and overall better choice. Federal government is purchasing Sun Solaris and IBM AIX hardware left and right. I don't see it going away in near and not so near future.

The truth is, Sun needs to

The truth is, Sun needs to up their game. For far too many years they have lagged behind, with nothing really innovative. Sad for such pioneers of NFS, NIS, Clustering, diskless clients, etc...

It's funny how the Executive

It's funny how the Executive Director of the Linux Foundation thnks that Linux is going to replace Solaris. I didn't detect any bias, either. (/sarcasm off)

To claim that the future belongs to Linux and Windows, demonstrates that he has his head planted somewhere where it shouldn't be. While I have nothing against Linux, I still don't see how he can make that statement.

Where I work (a government agency), we run multiple Oracle databases using web-based applications to get to the data. During my shift, I am responsible for over 200 different Solaris domains, all doing differen things. We currently move applications from Mainframes and Windows platforms to Solaris in order to take advantages of the reliability and robustness of the OS. For much of what we run, a simple OS like Linux or Windows chokes frequently, and not necessarily just during times of peak usage.

Linux is fine for people who have lightweight apps, but for the serious, business-critical stuff, the smart money is on Solaris.

Ridiculous. I've supported

Ridiculous.
I've supported multiple versions of UNIX for over 10 years.
Solaris is by far the most stable and capable. Solaris 10
is the best I've seen for enterprise installations. Linux is OK for small systems that don't incur much change, but for serious compute environments you want Solaris 10.

Mr. Zemlin certainly has his

Mr. Zemlin certainly has his opinions. Let's see if we can add some facts. Arguably one of the strongest measures of an operating systems success in the market is the number of ISV's who choose to support their software on it. As of April 2008 here was the count of the number of unique applications shipping that support Solaris 10 SPARC/X86, RHEL 3/5, SLES Itanium/x86. No double counting across architectures for Solaris 10 which means Oracle 10g on Solars SPARC & x86 was counted just once.
-Solaris10/SPARC=6,052
-Solaris10/x86=4,046
-RHEL3/x86=2,501
-SLES/x86+Itanium=1,457
-RHEL5/x86=713

Statistics obtained from each vendor's ISV support web site (sun.com/solaris/apps, hp.com, ibm.com, redhat.com, novell.com)

Next post will include some data on support costs.

This comment is in response

This comment is in response to Mr. Zemlin's comment on substantial support cost savings when deploying Linux vs Solaris. I can't be certain but I suspect that Mr. Zemlin is comparing a software only support contract for a Linux distro versus a hardware maintenance contract (spare parts, SLA's, on site service, phone support, etc.) from Sun which always includes support (phone, updates, patches) for Solaris. The following comes from a TCO analysis conducted in October '07 by Crimson Consulting on behalf of Sun (modeled for 375 servers):

Cost Category...............Solaris10...RHEL
Initial Acquisition.........$0..........$47,553
Subscription Support........$989,326....$1,383,311
Initial O/S Implementation..$108,323....$108,323
Admin & Operations..........$2,211,043..$2,586,724
Total Cost Over 3 years.....$3,308,691..$4,125,911....20%

Total Cost Per Year/Server..$2,941......$3,667

The analysis report is available for review at http://www.sun.com/service/executivereports/solarisoswhitepaper.pdf

This article does a

This article does a disservice to NY Times readers. Would have been nice if the writer/reporter had verified the facts-I no longer can trust the writer either...!

NONE OF ZEMLINs "FACTS" ARE SUBSTANTIATED. This is pure FUD and hyperbole and the NY Times, ITWorld and other new sites who regurgitate this article is disseminating pure nonsense.

It is clear from the attitude of Zemlin, the Linux foundation Executive Director, that he is defensive, and clearly worried of Solaris gains. Why else would he have to make such arrogant claims without substantiation?

Here is just a few of the non-substantiated absurdities:

"Solaris, he said, has almost no new deployments.. Original equipment manufacturers also do not see a bright future for Solaris, he claims" - NONSENSE- Why would Intel, IBM, Dell and Fujitsu-Siemens all OEM Solaris in last 2 years if there are no new deployments on Solaris?

Intel: http://www.sun.com/2007-0122/feature/
Dell: http://www.gartner.com/resources/153500/153528/sun_benefits_further_from_de_153528.pdf
Fujitsu: http://www.sun.com/aboutsun/pr/2008-06/sunflash.20080610.2.xml
IBM: http://www.gartner.com/DisplayDocument?id=549413
And finally: http://solaris-x86.org/

If you'd like to see how many latest "no new deployments on Solaris" go to here: http://www.sun.com/bigadmin/apps/

compare this to latest #'s of applications supported on latest RedHat release: https://www.redhat.com/apps/isv_catalog/browse_by_vendor.html

From what I can see, Solaris supports almost 3x more applications than RedHat Linux. Why is this Zemlin-Hello??

Zemlin then claims" Linux also is less costly to run, Zemlin claims. Sun, he declared, should just move over to Linux". Maybe Zemlin needs to do a little research before making such nonsense claims:

The Solaris 10 Advantage: Understanding the Real Cost of Ownership of Red Hat Enterprise Linux
http://www.informationweek.com/whitepaper/Business_and_Careers/wp100028?articleID=100028

Zemlin then makes incorrect claim on IDC figures: "IDC data show that worldwide Linux shipments in 2006 were about 2.4 million in 2006 and nearly 2.7 million in 2007"

Have you checked your IDC facts Zemlin?-You won't find any IDC quotes using these #'s. Based on actual IDC Server tracker data, I see closer to 1.5M servers shipped with Linux in 2006 and a little over 1.6M in 2007. A little bit of a stretch from 2.4M -2.7M huh??

And oh, did you see this article Zemlin?

http://www.linuxworld.com/newsletters/linux/2007/0305linux2.html

Then Zemlin also disputes Sun's notion that Solaris technology gives it an edge over Linux. "The only people I hear talk about DTrace [Solaris's technology for assessing program and OS behaviors] and ZFS [the Zettabyte File System] as competitive features.

But then he states:
"Given Sun's own Linux support on its Sparc and x86 servers, Zemlin suggests that it should make ZFS and DTrace available under a Linux-compatible license"

Then goes on to state: "With capabilities such as ZFS and DTrace, Sun is trying to compete based on minor features, Zemlin says " HUH???

Have you asked Apple why they integrated ZFS and DTrace into Mac OSX?

If ZFS and DTrace are so trivial, why aren't there equivalents in Linux and why is there a need to make ZFS and DTrace available under a Linux-compatible license?

Enough Said.

Good one.. I knew IT jokes would gain momentum

This article made me laugh, seriously! Thanks Paul / Jim , I needed it.

Not so!

On paper atleast .. Solaris kicks Linux butt http://blogs.sun.com/BVass/resource/SolarisRHELWinComparison.pdf

A great Laboratory Perfomer

We use Solaris 10 here on a fairly old Dell Platform. It easily outperforms a modern Microsoft Platform day in and day out with a 3x faster CPU.

The day to day stablity is marvelous. Of course like Lin ux there is no apparent "slowdown" as observed on Microsoft Platforms.

Frankly classic Unix with slight modernization is very welcome in Computer Language Research and Robotic Intelligence.

###