On Mon, Jun 28, 2010 at 5:05 PM, Edward Martinez <mindbende...@live.com> wrote: >> >> How is that any different from how Sun positioned it? I always got the >> impression >> that OS was the development platform for Solaris Next. How has that changed? >> >> fpsm > > I had the impression with a stable release and a service contract, > OpenSolaris could > be also be used in production enviroments. I think the Sun fire x2250 server, > now it's > E-O-L, was one of SUNs servers that also listed opensolaris as one of the > supported > OS. I think non of Oracle's current Sun servers lists both Solaris and > OpenSolaris > as supported OS, they only list solaris 10. but as usual i can be wrong ;)
[...] Ah... there's the rub. It comes down to the definition of "production". Just because a vendor says that they will support something, does not necessarily make it recommended or preferred as a production solution. It's a matter of due diligence on the part of the customer to look at all of the factors, including the probable long term plan for a product and stated intended use by the vendor for a product, before deciding to put that product in "production" in their environment. In this case I think Sun, and now Oracle, have been pretty consistently clear that OpenSolaris is intended as the development platform for Solaris Next, not as a parity choice with Solaris 10. To me that says "bleeding edge", which in my experience is almost never particularly well suited for a production environment. For development? Sure. For proof of concept? Yep. For production support of non-mission critical, non-core service. Maybe. For core business processes? Not even close. fpsm _______________________________________________ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
