Has anybody ever heard of Solaris 10? What do you think of it ? is it any good?

[swoll1980]

Let me know please

[juantao]

Yes. I tried it. I Downloaded the 5 ISOs installed it on a computer and while the installation wasn't as easy to follow as some of the Linux distributions I've used, I succeeded in installing it. There are some differences -but it's worth a look. I started with RedHat in '98, used Mandrake, then Debian and now Ubuntu and tried many others along the way such as Caldera, Gentoo, FreeBSD and NetBSD. All of my experimenting has been valuable and highly recommend you try Solaris - but if you're like me, you'll probably find Ubuntu to be the easiest and most complete OS. Good luck.

[dca]

Solaris was only recently added to the sharing list from years of being a proprietary closed source OS. Solaris is an enterprise class OS for servers primarily so whatever you decide to install it on will probably require drivers for EVERYTHING.... Nexenta is a Solaris kernel w/ a bunch of GNU goodies (Ubuntu) added...

http://www.gnusolaris.org/gswiki

[smoker]

...Nexenta is a Solaris kernel w/ a bunch of GNU goodies (Ubuntu) added...

http://www.gnusolaris.org/gswiki

is there any benefit to running ubuntu with a solaris kernel, rather than a linux kernel?

[dca]

Uh oh, that could spark a debate...

None that I can see. Solaris does offer quite a few features that Linux developers would like:

ZFS file system (versus running something similar on Linux in user space or ext3)
DTrace (a great way of troubleshooting system issues)
Compartments (virtualization dealie)

[liquidfunk]

I got the DVD of it, there was an ad on the site, so I ordered some. Popped the DVD in, and yuck, possibly the uglyest thing i've ever seen. It looked like Windows 3.01. Shocking. The installer was so confusing too. Didn't like it.

-End-

[StarsAndBars14]

I have a couple of Solaris Ultra computers which I still need to find hardware for but once I do Solaris 10 is going on them.

[cunawarit]

It looked like Windows 3.01. Shocking. -End-

Come on, it's not THAT bad! That's what a real OS looks like ;) Maybe I'm biased, I haven't much experience with Solaris 10 but I had a summer job back in 1997 using a Sun workstation and I love it.

[angryfirelord]

I got the DVD of it, there was an ad on the site, so I ordered some. Popped the DVD in, and yuck, possibly the uglyest thing i've ever seen. It looked like Windows 3.01. Shocking. The installer was so confusing too. Didn't like it.

-End-

That was the CDE desktop. Select Java Desktop at the gdm and you'll see a more appealing desktop. http://www.sun.com/2003-1104/feature/images/DefaultDesktop.gif

As for the kernel, it's believed that the Solaris kernel is more stable than the Linux kernel. I have no proof, nor do I have a preference, but it's still something to be looked at.

[SunnyRabbiera]

Solaris is promising, of course its got a bit to go before it catches up with linux and BSD but its off on a good start.

[blah blah blah]

It sucks.

[mips]

It sucks.

Hmm, that is a very explanetary comment. Sucks at what ? Desktop, Server, Development etc ?

It does NOT suck ! Maybe it's just not as good at being a desktop yet.

[blah blah blah]

Hmm, that is a very explanetary comment. Sucks at what ? Desktop, Server, Development etc ?

It does NOT suck ! Maybe it's just not as good at being a desktop yet.

Most everything really.

[angryfirelord]

Most everything really.
Solaris isn't Windows. Solaris isn't Linux. If you try to compare it in that manner, then you won't get very far with it. It's not designed to be an easy to use system, just to get the job done well.

Sure it has some weak areas, but don't diss it w/o a detailed explanation.

[joe.turion64x2]

I tried Solaris 10 last year and liked it (it has QUITE rock solid), however the lack of support for my hardware along with the need to use that HD moved me from it. From what I saw in the Java Desktop Environment it resembles Linux (GNOME) in many aspects with only minor differences (OpenOffice -> StarOffice, and less configuration options). If I need to set up a server some day I'll definitely put Solaris on it.

I agree that it was not as friendly as Linux (or Windows), but, was it supposed to be? It is a professional OS.

Joe.

[liquidfunk]

"That was the CDE desktop. Select Java Desktop at the gdm and you'll see a more appealing desktop. http://www.sun.com/2003-1104/feature...ultDesktop.gif"

- I stand corrected, Windows 95.

[angryfirelord]

Soalris isn't meant to be a desktop oriented OS. Who cares how it looks?

Don't bash it before you try it, or you're just as bad as any linux basher.

[blah blah blah]

I've tried it.

[angryfirelord]

I've tried it.
Then list your reasons on why you don't like it.

[blah blah blah]

Then list your reasons on why you don't like it.

Its slow
It has very few drivers
most of the code sucks

[ericzb]

I ordered DVD from their website, followed everything and ended up with a half working "desktop" os, it does not work with my soundcard, it took me like a day to find the driver. It actually driving me crazy, unbearablely slow, and you wont find many apps aroud. As ppl mentioned, it is meant to be a server os. So if you are looking for a desktop one, Linux is stable enough for home use.
I wont say it is ugly, neither beatiful. it's a server, many servers even do not have any GUI.

If for enterprise class server, it definitely the one you are looking for.

[swoll1980]

Its slow
It has very few drivers
most of the code sucks

Slow? from what they were saying on there web site (I don't know if it's true or not) it holds world records for speed, and the fact that it sucks is not very specific. They are putting this OS on $7000 computers I doubt that it sucks. As far as looks go eye candy is cool and everything but has nothing to do with what OS I put on my computer. If that were the case i'd be cutting a check to old billy for three hundred and some dollars. That sounds like something my girlfriend would say. She does not like ubuntu because it does not "look like" XP go figure.

[jrusso2]

I have not used Solaris since Solaris 7. But back in the day when I discovered Linux I decided if this is good I wonder what Unix is like.

At the time I decided to try as many as I could get for free. ScoUnixware, Solaris 7, Berkley BSD, FreeBSD, and Open BSD I think were the ones I tried.

When I finished my experiment I discovered if you want a desktop Linux is far and away the best. The others makes some great servers.

If you think driver support is bad on Linux try some of the Unix for Intel.

Solaris had ancient driver support which was ok for me because I had a huge inventory of old network and sound cards and I was able to find ones that worked.

Also there was many Linux applications that were supported on Solaris which helped because there is not a lot of free applications for it. There are not nearly as many of the newest and lastest applications for it.

Now these Unix happen to make a terrific server, and this is an area where a lot of the other parts that lacking are not as important.

Now from what I understand from Solaris people is that the sparc ports are much better, they are faster and better tuned and of course all the hardware works.

But I never did get around to buying a sparc.

But if you just want to play around and learn more power to you. That's what I did. But if you want the best Unix like desktop Linux is far and away the best IMHO. YMMV.

[Extreme Coder]

hmm.. I read on Sun's site that Solaris has the ability to run Linux applications... I wonder how well that works.

[blah blah blah]

Slow? from what they were saying on there web site (I don't know if it's true or not) it holds world records for speed, and the fact that it sucks is not very specific. They are putting this OS on $7000 computers I doubt that it sucks.

Maybe for symmetric multiprocessing years ago.

[swoll1980]

"IKyPN8xzQG"? Did your cat sit on your keyboard? lol

[blah blah blah]

"IKyPN8xzQG"? Did your cat sit on your keyboard? lol

I wanted it to be a random for some reason.