Popularity of the current Solaris releases
in [Solaris]
|
Prev: Anyone have a date for the next OpenSolaris ?
Next: UX:lp: ERROR: The LP print service could not read your request
From: Paul Floyd on 29 Nov 2009 16:17 On Sun, 29 Nov 2009 14:04:11 -0700, Canuck57 <Canuck57(a)nospam.com> wrote: > often the benifit. It is that or some sucky MS-Windows boxen from hell. Is that a typo for dell? Or are they the same thing anyway? A bientot Paul -- Paul Floyd http://paulf.free.fr
From: Bill Waddington on 29 Nov 2009 17:31 On Sun, 29 Nov 2009 14:12:06 -0700, Canuck57 <Canuck57(a)nospam.com> wrote: >Richard B. Gilbert wrote: >> Dave wrote: >Agreed. But one hold back for Solaris on x86 is the lack of SATA >ICHR7/8/9/10 drivers in modes other than IDE emulation, which many BIOS >no longer supports the IDE downgrade part. > >I have 3 perfectly good common mobo based systems at home, none will run >Solaris nor OpenSolaris outside a VM. And the chipsets are amongst the >most common in the desktop quad processor arena there is. Pardon my ignorance, but is there something different about the ICH10R chipset? Or maybe I'm misreading this. I've got an EVGA i7 x58 mobo happily booting S10 U7 and SNV 113. The SATA mode in BIOS is straight AHCI for the hard drives and opticals. Not IDE emulation. Bill -- William D Waddington william.waddington(a)beezmo.com "Even bugs...are unexpected signposts on the long road of creativity..." - Ken Burtch
From: Thomas Tornblom on 30 Nov 2009 02:28 Canuck57 <Canuck57(a)nospam.com> writes: > Agreed. But one hold back for Solaris on x86 is the lack of SATA > ICHR7/8/9/10 drivers in modes other than IDE emulation, which many > BIOS no longer supports the IDE downgrade part. > > I have 3 perfectly good common mobo based systems at home, none will > run Solaris nor OpenSolaris outside a VM. And the chipsets are > amongst the most common in the desktop quad processor arena there is. > I don't know what system boards you're using, but my cheap intel DG33TL happily uses native SATA ion its ICH9R controller with both Solaris Express and Opensolaris: From scanpci: pci bus 0x0000 cardnum 0x1f function 0x02: vendor 0x8086 device 0x2922 Intel Corporation 82801IR/IO/IH (ICH9R/DO/DH) 6 port SATA AHCI Controller Have you enabled SATA mode in the BIOS? The default appears to be IDE emulation on many systems. I have friends happily using SATA on other boards with Solaris, so your knowledge appears to be dated. Have you run SDDTool? "Use this tool to determine whether the devices that are detected in your system are supported by the drivers that exist in the Solaris OS for the x86/x64 platform."
From: Dave on 30 Nov 2009 04:51 Richard B. Gilbert wrote: > Dave wrote: >> Canuck57 wrote: >>> Dave wrote: >>>> There are basically 4 current Solaris operating systems? >>>> >>>> * Solaris 10 on SPARC processors >>>> * Solaris 10 on x86 processors >>>> * OpenSolaris on SPARC processors >>>> * OpenSolaris on x86 processors. >>>> >>>> how do they compare in popularity? >>>> >>>> I assume it fairly safe to assume that OpenSolaris on SPARC is less >>>> popular than OpenSolaris on x86, but I'm less sure how the others rank. >>>> >>>> I guess Solaris 10 is more popular on SPARC than x86, but maybe that >>>> is not true. >>> >>> My guess for business is: >>> >>> 1) Solaris 10 on SPARC processors >> >> My feeling is that would be top too. >> >>> 2) Solaris 10 on x86 processors >>> 3) OpenSolaris on x86 processors. >>> 4) OpenSolaris on SPARC processors (and could be near zero) >> >> My feeling that would be bottom too. >> >>> For hobbiests and at home: >>> >>> 1) Solaris 10 on x86 processors >>> 2) OpenSolaris on x86 processors. >> >> I would have thought that OpenSolaris (on x86) is much more popular >> for home/hobbyists than Solaris 10 on x86, simply because OpenSolaris >> has a better desktop experience and better support for drivers for >> commodity x86 hardware. >> >> I guess if your reason for running Solaris is to learn something that >> you might be able to use for employment, Solaris 10 would be a better >> choice, but then I would have thought it better to buy a SPARC in that >> case. >> >>> 3) Solaris 10 on SPARC processors >>> 4) OpenSolaris on SPARC processors (and could be near zero) >> >> Yes, I get the feeling that OpenSolaris on SPARC is near zero. >> >> >>> In each case, the top 2 represent 98% of the cases. >>> >>> The best thing about Solaris on AMD/intel is simple, you can learn >>> skills that port well to big iron. Even develop nice apps on x86 and >>> port to Sparc for the business side. >> >> >> >>> I also suspect x86 for business servers is also growing at Sun, or >>> fairing better than Sparc as a percentage of sales. >> >> Probably true, as performance per � is better. It's a shame for Sun, >> as I'm led to believe the profit on x86 is small compared to SPARC. >> That said, judging by the amount of money Sun wanted for RAM and disks >> for my Ultra 27 (Intel Xeon), was it any surprise I bought it with 500 >> GB disk and 2 GB RAM? (I did consider buying with no disk or RAM, but >> thought that would be more difficult if a warranty issue arose). >> >> I bought the other 10 GB from Crucial, and the enterprise grade disks >> elsewhere, for a hell of a lot less than Sun wanted for them. >> >> > > Just don't expect Sun to service third party hardware. You'll need to > keep your own spares and be prepared to replace disks or memory DIMMs at > inconvenient times! In my case, I've not paid for a support contract - but are covered by things like the Sale of Goods Act in the UK. I've kept the original 500 GB disk, but I've mirrored it with an identical part number from Hitachi. I'm still using the original 2 GB DIMM. -- I respectfully request that this message is not archived by companies as unscrupulous as 'Experts Exchange' . In case you are unaware, 'Experts Exchange' take questions posted on the web and try to find idiots stupid enough to pay for the answers, which were posted freely by others. They are leeches.
From: Dave on 30 Nov 2009 04:59
Canuck57 wrote: > Dave wrote: >> I bought the other 10 GB from Crucial, and the enterprise grade disks >> elsewhere, for a hell of a lot less than Sun wanted for them. > > I will give Sun this, their memory prices are better than IBM or HP, but > then their sales are in the tank for UNIX iron. > > But still, the pricing on Sparc hurts. But at least Sun's stuff works > with COTs parts. I too have put memory and disk from COT suppliers. You > are at waranty risk but saving $20,000 on a base $20,000 machine is > often the benifit. It is that or some sucky MS-Windows boxen from hell. Does anything beat what HP wanted for RAM to upgrade my HP 1320nw Postscript printer? Back in 2006, then wanted �680 to add 128 MB, which was far more than I'd paid for printer. It worked out at �5440 per GB or $9646 / GB (based on exchange rate in 2006). I ended up pay �29.99 for 128 BM, which made HP RAM more than 22x the cost of Crucial. This was my post on the subject back in 2006. http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.postscript/browse_thread/thread/77d22782adeeb685/ea260856692d1d02?hl=en&ie=UTF-8&q=hp+1320nw+memory#ea260856692d1d02 Sun wanted a bit over twice Crucial for the RAM for the Ultra 27. -- I respectfully request that this message is not archived by companies as unscrupulous as 'Experts Exchange' . In case you are unaware, 'Experts Exchange' take questions posted on the web and try to find idiots stupid enough to pay for the answers, which were posted freely by others. They are leeches. |