On TechRepublic: Five super-secret features in Windows 7
BNET Business Network:
BNET
TechRepublic
ZDNet
TalkBack 27 of 27:
« Previous
Liability, licenses
I think it is amazing that SUN can release a free version of Solaris that is owned by SCO and licensed to them. Seems like it would be a clear violation of copyright as SCO is accusing the Linux world and IBM of. I don't see anything from SUN addressing the possible lawsuits that could result from using O-SUK (Open Solaris Unix Kernel).

I also have to wonder just how functional the open released Solaris 10 will be. Where I work we purchased a 4800 with shared disk between the domains, a deciding factor was that they told us amoung other things, the shared FS was "baked into Solaris". That is true, however it required a $70,000 license per domain per terrabyte per domain to use it (1 terrabyte minimum). That was more than the machine and peripherals! We also had other issues with that machine that were very bitter and took a year to iron out before we could put the machine into production. Yes, that is right, a year.

In the article, Dartmouth's Dobson has the nerve to complain about RedHat's licensing? Chump change side of how SUN jacks up their customers. To say that RedHat doesn't innovate shows how ignorant or biased perhaps that he is. RPM for example set a new standard for software packaging, puts SUN's package manager to shame (common guys, you know it really sucks and needs to go!). Maybe he likes using patchadd and paying out the yin yang for a simple c compiler, the FS that is not 20 years (or more) old and other stuff.
Posted by: armonica   Posted on: 09/16/04 You are currently: a Guest | Members login | Terms of Use
Reply to Story Reply to Message

Alert moderator to an offensive message

Subscribe to this discussion via Email or RSS

I KNEW it was going to happen!!!! Go MS and Sun!!!  No_Ax_to_Grind | 09/13/04
Now I must wonder if that is why...  No_Ax_to_Grind | 09/13/04
WinFS  tjung_z | 09/14/04
Maybe the smartest thing to do to compete with Linux.  No_Ax_to_Grind | 09/13/04
MS filesystems on Solaris?  balsover | 09/13/04
NTFS???? What are you talking about?  No_Ax_to_Grind | 09/13/04
Having read the technical description of WinFS from Microsoft...  B.O.F.H. | 09/13/04
Thank you for making my point so clear.  No_Ax_to_Grind | 09/14/04
Still sits on NTFS!  B.O.F.H. | 09/14/04
Stupid Sun again?  tjung_z | 09/14/04
Those in the know call WinFS vaporware  balsover | 09/15/04
Dump Solaris?  Roger Ramjet | 09/14/04
No not crazy  balsover | 09/15/04
There is room for Solaris!  George Mitchell | 09/13/04
Can I borrow your glasses for a while  Richard Flude | 09/14/04
Sun has an identity crisis  balsover | 09/13/04
Um no...  No_Ax_to_Grind | 09/13/04
Whats wrong with running Longhorn on Sun servers?  George Mitchell | 09/13/04
Personally I'd pick Solaris over Linux anyday  voska | 09/14/04
The chips (SPArc and Intel) are not binary compatible.  B.O.F.H. | 09/14/04
Until the Sun/MS agreement I would have said yes.  No_Ax_to_Grind | 09/14/04
Not suer about the demand for WIndows on SPArc.  B.O.F.H. | 09/14/04
They don't need to be  balsover | 09/15/04
Sun Hardware is less expensive than DELL  voska | 09/14/04
Slowaris  tjung_z | 09/14/04
Contradiction of the Sun--Microsoft Agreement  David Mohring | 09/14/04
Liability, licenses  armonica | 09/16/04

What do you think?

SponsoredWhite Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads

advertisement
advertisement

SmartPlanet

Click Here