> Untrue. Solaris is still cool. Well that comes like drops of cool rain in the middle of the desert. Glad to read it.
Not exactly the impression that's been pounded at around here though. > If we were to exert the same kind of control over > Open Solaris as we > do over Sun's Solaris, then Open Solaris would die. > It would never > ecome what it's supposed to be. That would be a > catastrophe. Please note that control was never an issue or a discussion here. I also never stated anything against open sourcing Solaris -- indeed, OpenSolaris is one of the best things that ever happened to Solaris (notice the link?) > That's just not so. Solaris is still what it's > always been. The only > difference is that you can now get the source and > play with it without > having to go through the hassles you once had to. That's also not my issue with this whole thing. My issue quite simply is that, for the sake of visibility, some people are going to the extremes to put as much distance between Sun's OpenSolaris and OpenSolaris. For crying out loud, we are getting caught in taxonomy here. How would you explain that to someone off of the street? I'll tell them I'm running "SXCR" based on nv_52 with ONNV bits from b_54. What do you think I'll get for looks? I might as well just drop the subject right then and there and walk away. It's hard enough to explain to people that there is life out there beyond Windows and Linux. This message posted from opensolaris.org _______________________________________________ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
