Sun Microsystems CEO Jonathan Schwartz loves to splatter the media with the line that Windows, Red Hat Linux and Solaris stand as the only operating systems of significance in the server kingdom. We've spent the last few years struggling to appreciate the seriousness of that claim. Sun's declining system sales failed to inspire …
Linux is UNIX. Why is there confusion around this?
RedHat linux is based on Berkeley BSD Unix. Originally, so were early versions of SunOS. Therefore, there should be no getting around the fact that linux is Unix and that the markets are the same. Regarding Solaris (SunOS starting at version 5.0) its roots lie in AT&T's System V release 4 version of Unix. Sun made the switch to get around scaling limitations in BSD. The new Solaris kernel was jointly developed by Sun and AT&T. Solaris' ability to scale vertically and manage very large address space is legendary. Linux will have a hard time getting there given its BSD roots. The primary differences between Linux and Solaris lie in the kernel. That's it. Virtually all of the user land layer is the same.
So, to all of the linux fans out there: When is the last time you had a conversation with your RedHat rep regarding backwards compatibility, futures, quick turnaround on bug fixes, indemnification, support pricing, and mission critical production support? I talk to my Sun rep regularly.
Red Hat based on BSD??
If you think Red Hat Linux is based on BSD Unix, at least the part that deals with scalability - the kernel, you must have been living in your own little IT world over the last 10 years.
Linux is Unix-like and most of the GNU stuff has been ported to every conceivable OS, but the kernel is not BSD or SVR4.
- Lightning strikes USB bosses: Next-gen jacks will be REVERSIBLE
- OHM MY GOD! Move over graphene, here comes '100% PERFECT' stanene
- World's OLDEST human DNA found in leg bone – but that's not the only boning going on...
- Beijing leans on Microsoft to maintain Windows XP support
- Google's new cloud CRUSHES Amazon in RAM battle