Re: [osol-discuss] Any news about 2010.3?
On Sat, May 1, 2010 at 8:42 PM, Jim Klimov wrote: > Hello, Callum. > > Thank you for the answer which indicates that the project is possibly not > abandoned by Oracle, at least. ;) > > I'd only like to join others with the plea for some more available > information - since a lot of FUD spreads based on suspicion and lack of > replies. > > Some banner on an OpenSolaris site like "Yeah, we're working on it. Will > release when ready!" might suffice for most of the askers, myself included. > Then we'll see that there *is* something to wait for, while we're lagging > back planned updates of home-grown IT labs, etc. Oracle have stated quite categorically in public (a) that there will be a release, and (b) that it will appear in the first half of calendar year 2010. Constantly asking in the wrong place for answers to questions that have already been answered officially isn't helping anybody. -- -Peter Tribble http://www.petertribble.co.uk/ - http://ptribble.blogspot.com/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Any news about 2010.3?
As stated many times now on many of the public lists on solaris and/or opensolaris: Oracle states something, when it's there! So, as sad as tgat is, we need to get used to it. And others already mentioned that build 134a is done, so that's at least an indication... So, we all need to wait and see! Matthias -Ursprüngliche Nachricht- Von: Jim Klimov An: opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org Gesendet: 1.5.'10, 21:42 Hello, Callum. Thank you for the answer which indicates that the project is possibly not abandoned by Oracle, at least. ;) I'd only like to join others with the plea for some more available information - since a lot of FUD spreads based on suspicion and lack of replies. Some banner on an OpenSolaris site like "Yeah, we're working on it. Will release when ready!" might suffice for most of the askers, myself included. Then we'll see that there *is* something to wait for, while we're lagging back planned updates of home-grown IT labs, etc. I'm afraid, this banner would remind many people of Blizzard's long-awaited projects like Starcraft-2 or Diablo-3, or of the last Duke Nukem which vanished after 12 years in the making... but that's still something fans were waiting for all this time ;) TIA, //Jim -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Any news about 2010.3?
On 01.05.2010 21:42, Jim Klimov wrote: > Hello, Callum. > > Thank you for the answer which indicates that the project is possibly not > abandoned by Oracle, at least. ;) > > I'd only like to join others with the plea for some more available > information - since a lot of FUD spreads based on suspicion and lack of > replies. > > Some banner on an OpenSolaris site like "Yeah, we're working on it. Will > release when ready!" might suffice for most of the askers, myself included. > Then we'll see that there *is* something to wait for, while we're lagging > back planned updates of home-grown IT labs, etc. > > I'm afraid, this banner would remind many people of Blizzard's long-awaited > projects like Starcraft-2 or Diablo-3, or of the last Duke Nukem which > vanished after 12 years in the making... but that's still something fans were > waiting for all this time ;) Or about the various cold-fusion projects that area a mere 20 years away. ;) But seriously, I agree about the lack of communication. It doesn't help (or rather: It helps the cynicism experienced by anyone who's had earlier dealings with Oracle.) //Svein -- +---+--- /"\ |Svein Skogen | sv...@d80.iso100.no \ / |Solberg Østli 9| PGP Key: 0xE5E76831 X|2020 Skedsmokorset | sv...@jernhuset.no / \ |Norway | PGP Key: 0xCE96CE13 | | sv...@stillbilde.net ascii | | PGP Key: 0x58CD33B6 ribbon |System Admin | svein-listm...@stillbilde.net Campaign|stillbilde.net | PGP Key: 0x22D494A4 +---+--- |msn messenger: | Mobile Phone: +47 907 03 575 |sv...@jernhuset.no | RIPE handle:SS16503-RIPE +---+--- If you really are in a hurry, mail me at svein-mob...@stillbilde.net This mailbox goes directly to my cellphone and is checked even when I'm not in front of my computer. Picture Gallery: https://gallery.stillbilde.net/v/svein/ signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Any news about 2010.3?
Hello, Callum. Thank you for the answer which indicates that the project is possibly not abandoned by Oracle, at least. ;) I'd only like to join others with the plea for some more available information - since a lot of FUD spreads based on suspicion and lack of replies. Some banner on an OpenSolaris site like "Yeah, we're working on it. Will release when ready!" might suffice for most of the askers, myself included. Then we'll see that there *is* something to wait for, while we're lagging back planned updates of home-grown IT labs, etc. I'm afraid, this banner would remind many people of Blizzard's long-awaited projects like Starcraft-2 or Diablo-3, or of the last Duke Nukem which vanished after 12 years in the making... but that's still something fans were waiting for all this time ;) TIA, //Jim -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Any news about 2010.3?
On 22/04/2010 00:13, john wrote: Waiting Why no any office news about Opensolaris ? Because, like every other time people have asked, it's not ready yet. Cheeri, Calum. -- CALUM BENSON, Interaction Designer Oracle Corporation, Ireland mailto:calum.benson at oracle.com Solaris Desktop Group http://blogs.sun.com/calum +353 1 819 9771 Any opinions are personal and not necessarily those of Oracle Corp. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Any news about 2010.3?
Waiting Why no any office news about Opensolaris ? -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Any news about 2010.3?
On Wed, Apr 21, 2010 at 9:06 AM, Paul Armstrong wrote: > You're right. > > My memory was that he'd resigned and I only found news articles saying as > much (and until I corrected it, the Wikipedia article also stated he'd > resigned; unfortunately I can't fix the news articles that say he resigned > rather than not being offered a position at Oracle). I had also missed the > sub-thread here where he says as much. > > Paul Oh, ok. Those other sources need to be fixed, too. No prob. %martin ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Any news about 2010.3?
You're right. My memory was that he'd resigned and I only found news articles saying as much (and until I corrected it, the Wikipedia article also stated he'd resigned; unfortunately I can't fix the news articles that say he resigned rather than not being offered a position at Oracle). I had also missed the sub-thread here where he says as much. Paul -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Any news about 2010.3?
On Wed, Apr 21, 2010 at 3:25 AM, Paul Armstrong wrote: > Except that Simon resigned. It was his decision not Oracle's. Who says that? Who or what are your sources?? If I recall correctly, he told the opposite: http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/opensolaris-discuss/2010-April/055436.html Simon Phipps webmink at opensolaris.org Sun Apr 4 19:19:17 UTC 2010 It's been an interesting "does he take sugar" experience watching the conversation about me; I thought I'd interject with a link to a story that has correct information: http://www.infoworld.com/d/adventures-in-it/former-sun-open-source-officer-joins-osi-board-109 S. http://www.infoworld.com/d/adventures-in-it/former-sun-open-source-officer-joins-osi-board-109 April 01, 2010 Former Sun open source officer joins OSI board Simon Phipps is now exploring opportunities and engaging in activism for software freedom By Paul Krill | InfoWorld Share or Email | Print | Add a comment| 11 Recommendations Simon Phipps, who was chief open source officer at Sun Microsystems for the past five years, has become a member of the Open Source Initiative (OSI) board of directors. In an email response to questions Thursday, Phipps said he was not offered a position at Oracle, which closed its acquisition of Sun in January. Phipps worked nearly 10 years at the now-defunct company. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Any news about 2010.3?
Except that Simon resigned. It was his decision not Oracle's. -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Any news about 2010.3?
You can get around the boot loop issue by editing the Grub menu entry (press "e" at the boot screen). Delete the line referencing splash.xpm and remove the text ",console=graphics" from the boot line. You should get past the boot sequence. Edit /rpool/boot/grub/menu.lst to make the changes permanent. -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Any news about 2010.3?
this isn't really a reply. As I can't offer any help. New user to Open solaris. I am really disappointed in the hassle to get any version up and running. I don't have the time or experience (any more) to have to keep coming up with "patches" to get the damn thing to work. I downloaded 2009.06 and it would not recognize my network card. So I went to Open Solaris 2010.03 developer. well it works fine from the live cd. I tried using gpart to make a boot up partition and leave rest unallocated. I tried letting the install program leaving one large partition (the whole disk), I tried making a solaris 2 partition from the installer. Nothing works. Every time I boot from Hard drive it goes into a continual loop, the opening grub menu, back to the bios screen and then the grub again. For a company as big as Sun / Oracle this is totally unacceptable, free or not! I see you people talking about manually adding a line here or there. But unfortunately I have no idea of how to go about this and what the next step would be. An installable version should be just that, installable as is and at least usable to the average user. I tried installing the Solaris 10 version also. It won't boot from a hard drive either. I bought a brand new ACER laptop last month just to experiment with "Solaris" as I figured something would go wrong. It did, it wiped the hard drive and took out the windows partition. As I said I am NOT impressed. As for Sun/ Oracle not communicating with you all. I've seen it and experienced it before. sometimes a company gets so big it thinks it no longer needs the people that made it big and pushes them aside, whether it's employees that deserve better or people like the open community that contribute to the product. Eventually it becomes their downfall and stifles development. Like they say, never bite the hand that feeds you. That is what oracle is doing right now. And there is nothing any of us can do about it. Course for you code writers and programmers, you can always apply your talents to another version of unix / linux/ solaris. Just don't write for Oracle themselves. They want to be secretive, fine, then let them do it all on their own for a while! And see what happens. If you stagnate you wither and die and eventually that is what will happen to the Solaris OS. I've seen it before! So I would suggest you assist in developing some of the other versions of unix / linux/ ubuntu etc. Help them make themselves the best! For me I guess it's back to windows, even though I don't want to go there. -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Any news about 2010.3?
I believe that 2010.03 will be released when some critical bugs (http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/indiana-discuss/2010-April/017812.html) will be fixed - probably in b138 (http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/indiana-discuss/2010-April/017814.html) - but it's not an official info, just found this on indiana-discuss... -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Any news about 2010.3?
You (Svein Skogen) wrote: > > What's it, your after? That study is more than 2 years old now, and the > > RAID-controllers, that didn't work, probably will have updated their FWs by > > now. > > Ahh, so first you use the papers to prove how superior ZFS is to > raidcontrollers for your data. Then, when asked to provide more data > than this claim, the study is too old and the problems are fixed? Which > is it, is the study still valid, or is it deprecated? NO! The CERN study does not mention ZFS at all! So, I did not claim superiority of ZFS (although it is! And, now I'm doing it!), I simply wanted to STATE that RAID in Hardware alone is NOT SUFFICIENT. The study is still valid! But it's NOT about RAID-Controlers alone! You did start the fight on (defending of) RAID-controlers, not me! > > And, therefore, it's now a necessity to do error checking at every level! > > Which is why such error-checking should be done by proper > raid-controllers (and it is, btw). Read that properly. I did not say > that it should _ONLY_ be done in the raid controller. Doing it on > fs-level as well only adds to the protection. > > //Svein Agreed! BUT: With, for example ZFS, there no longer is a need for HW RAID-controlers... Matthias -- Matthias Pfützner | Tel.: +49 700 PFUETZNER | Klaus Kinkel war in China Lichtenbergstr.73 | mailto:matth...@pfuetzner.de | und wollte die Menschen- D-64289 Darmstadt | AIM: pfuetz, ICQ: 300967487 | rechte sprechen, aber die Germany | http://www.pfuetzner.de/matthias/ | waren nicht da. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Any news about 2010.3?
On 14.04.2010 09:33, Matthias Pfützner wrote: > You (Svein Skogen) wrote: >>> Check: >>> >>>http://storagemojo.com/2007/09/19/cerns-data-corruption-research/ >> >> Which is another worthless document, without any info on what >> controllers they actually tested with. >> >> I too can make claim about corruption and data loss. But without >> pointing the finger to what was actually tested, that's just a claim, >> nothing more. >> >> //Svein > > What's it, your after? That study is more than 2 years old now, and the > RAID-controllers, that didn't work, probably will have updated their FWs by > now. Ahh, so first you use the papers to prove how superior ZFS is to raidcontrollers for your data. Then, when asked to provide more data than this claim, the study is too old and the problems are fixed? Which is it, is the study still valid, or is it deprecated? > And: The Authors are listed, so, go ask them, if you really are interested in > those details. > > More importantly is the fact, that bit-errors DO happen, and as I stated > earlier, with the average failure rate and storage size of today it's close to > 100% certainty, that if you have more than 128 TB of data, you have an > error. That's a simple derivative from the infos, available from the > manufactures themselfes: > > For example, for the Seagate ST31000640SS (1 TB SATA): > > AFR: 0,73% > Nonrecoverable Read Errors per Bits Read: 1 sector per 10E15 > Error Control/Correction (ECC): 10 bit > >>From AFR: If you have 200 disks, 1.46 die per year. > ECC: If you have 1024 errors, one will NOT be detected > After that: 1 sector per 10E15 Bit ~= 128 TB is defect > More precisely: 10E15 = (10E3)E5 = 1024E5 Bit = 1024 Terabit = 116.4 > Terabyte => There's a defect sector every 116.4 Terabit. > > These are the DOCUMENTED ERROR RATES of standard consumer disks! Take > enterprise disks, and it's around 1 sector per 10E16 bit and an AFR of 0.55% > (Seagate Savvio 15K.2 ST9146752SS). So, not as bad as above, but still there > are documented possibilities of errors! > > And, therefore, it's now a necessity to do error checking at every level! Which is why such error-checking should be done by proper raid-controllers (and it is, btw). Read that properly. I did not say that it should _ONLY_ be done in the raid controller. Doing it on fs-level as well only adds to the protection. //Svein -- +---+--- /"\ |Svein Skogen | sv...@d80.iso100.no \ / |Solberg Østli 9| PGP Key: 0xE5E76831 X|2020 Skedsmokorset | sv...@jernhuset.no / \ |Norway | PGP Key: 0xCE96CE13 | | sv...@stillbilde.net ascii | | PGP Key: 0x58CD33B6 ribbon |System Admin | svein-listm...@stillbilde.net Campaign|stillbilde.net | PGP Key: 0x22D494A4 +---+--- |msn messenger: | Mobile Phone: +47 907 03 575 |sv...@jernhuset.no | RIPE handle:SS16503-RIPE +---+--- If you really are in a hurry, mail me at svein-mob...@stillbilde.net This mailbox goes directly to my cellphone and is checked even when I'm not in front of my computer. Picture Gallery: https://gallery.stillbilde.net/v/svein/ signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Any news about 2010.3?
You (Svein Skogen) wrote: > > Check: > > > >http://storagemojo.com/2007/09/19/cerns-data-corruption-research/ > > Which is another worthless document, without any info on what > controllers they actually tested with. > > I too can make claim about corruption and data loss. But without > pointing the finger to what was actually tested, that's just a claim, > nothing more. > > //Svein What's it, your after? That study is more than 2 years old now, and the RAID-controllers, that didn't work, probably will have updated their FWs by now. And: The Authors are listed, so, go ask them, if you really are interested in those details. More importantly is the fact, that bit-errors DO happen, and as I stated earlier, with the average failure rate and storage size of today it's close to 100% certainty, that if you have more than 128 TB of data, you have an error. That's a simple derivative from the infos, available from the manufactures themselfes: For example, for the Seagate ST31000640SS (1 TB SATA): AFR: 0,73% Nonrecoverable Read Errors per Bits Read: 1 sector per 10E15 Error Control/Correction (ECC): 10 bit >From AFR: If you have 200 disks, 1.46 die per year. ECC: If you have 1024 errors, one will NOT be detected After that: 1 sector per 10E15 Bit ~= 128 TB is defect More precisely: 10E15 = (10E3)E5 = 1024E5 Bit = 1024 Terabit = 116.4 Terabyte => There's a defect sector every 116.4 Terabit. These are the DOCUMENTED ERROR RATES of standard consumer disks! Take enterprise disks, and it's around 1 sector per 10E16 bit and an AFR of 0.55% (Seagate Savvio 15K.2 ST9146752SS). So, not as bad as above, but still there are documented possibilities of errors! And, therefore, it's now a necessity to do error checking at every level! Matthias -- Matthias Pfützner | Tel.: +49 700 PFUETZNER | Klaus Kinkel war in China Lichtenbergstr.73 | mailto:matth...@pfuetzner.de | und wollte die Menschen- D-64289 Darmstadt | AIM: pfuetz, ICQ: 300967487 | rechte sprechen, aber die Germany | http://www.pfuetzner.de/matthias/ | waren nicht da. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Any news about 2010.3?
On 14.04.2010 09:07, Matthias Pfützner wrote: > You (Svein Skogen) wrote: >> On 31.03.2010 10:06, Orvar Korvar wrote: >>> If you value your data, you should reconsider. But if your data is not >>> important, then skip ZFS. >>> >>> File system data corruption test by researcher: >>> http://blogs.zdnet.com/storage/?p=169 >>> >>> ZFS data corruption test by researchers: >>> http://www.cs.wisc.edu/wind/Publications/zfs-corruption-fast10.pdf >> >> These papers assume that no raidcontrollers perform regular patrol reads >> (what zfs calls scrubs). And that no raidcontrollers use an on-disk >> storage-format that sacrifices a little space to gain "per strip" (what >> linux-folks call "chunk") ecc. >> >> //Svein > > And the CERN study PROOFED, that there are > > a.) RAID controllers that have faulty FWs: > b.) Bit errors happening in more than obvious places and times > > Check: > >http://storagemojo.com/2007/09/19/cerns-data-corruption-research/ Which is another worthless document, without any info on what controllers they actually tested with. I too can make claim about corruption and data loss. But without pointing the finger to what was actually tested, that's just a claim, nothing more. //Svein -- +---+--- /"\ |Svein Skogen | sv...@d80.iso100.no \ / |Solberg Østli 9| PGP Key: 0xE5E76831 X|2020 Skedsmokorset | sv...@jernhuset.no / \ |Norway | PGP Key: 0xCE96CE13 | | sv...@stillbilde.net ascii | | PGP Key: 0x58CD33B6 ribbon |System Admin | svein-listm...@stillbilde.net Campaign|stillbilde.net | PGP Key: 0x22D494A4 +---+--- |msn messenger: | Mobile Phone: +47 907 03 575 |sv...@jernhuset.no | RIPE handle:SS16503-RIPE +---+--- If you really are in a hurry, mail me at svein-mob...@stillbilde.net This mailbox goes directly to my cellphone and is checked even when I'm not in front of my computer. Picture Gallery: https://gallery.stillbilde.net/v/svein/ signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Any news about 2010.3?
You (Svein Skogen) wrote: > On 31.03.2010 10:06, Orvar Korvar wrote: > > If you value your data, you should reconsider. But if your data is not > > important, then skip ZFS. > > > > File system data corruption test by researcher: > > http://blogs.zdnet.com/storage/?p=169 > > > > ZFS data corruption test by researchers: > > http://www.cs.wisc.edu/wind/Publications/zfs-corruption-fast10.pdf > > These papers assume that no raidcontrollers perform regular patrol reads > (what zfs calls scrubs). And that no raidcontrollers use an on-disk > storage-format that sacrifices a little space to gain "per strip" (what > linux-folks call "chunk") ecc. > > //Svein And the CERN study PROOFED, that there are a.) RAID controllers that have faulty FWs: b.) Bit errors happening in more than obvious places and times Check: http://storagemojo.com/2007/09/19/cerns-data-corruption-research/ Matthias -- Matthias Pfützner | Tel.: +49 700 PFUETZNER | Klaus Kinkel war in China Lichtenbergstr.73 | mailto:matth...@pfuetzner.de | und wollte die Menschen- D-64289 Darmstadt | AIM: pfuetz, ICQ: 300967487 | rechte sprechen, aber die Germany | http://www.pfuetzner.de/matthias/ | waren nicht da. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Any news about 2010.3?
On 31.03.2010 10:06, Orvar Korvar wrote: > If you value your data, you should reconsider. But if your data is not > important, then skip ZFS. > > File system data corruption test by researcher: > http://blogs.zdnet.com/storage/?p=169 > > ZFS data corruption test by researchers: > http://www.cs.wisc.edu/wind/Publications/zfs-corruption-fast10.pdf These papers assume that no raidcontrollers perform regular patrol reads (what zfs calls scrubs). And that no raidcontrollers use an on-disk storage-format that sacrifices a little space to gain "per strip" (what linux-folks call "chunk") ecc. //Svein -- +---+--- /"\ |Svein Skogen | sv...@d80.iso100.no \ / |Solberg Østli 9| PGP Key: 0xE5E76831 X|2020 Skedsmokorset | sv...@jernhuset.no / \ |Norway | PGP Key: 0xCE96CE13 | | sv...@stillbilde.net ascii | | PGP Key: 0x58CD33B6 ribbon |System Admin | svein-listm...@stillbilde.net Campaign|stillbilde.net | PGP Key: 0x22D494A4 +---+--- |msn messenger: | Mobile Phone: +47 907 03 575 |sv...@jernhuset.no | RIPE handle:SS16503-RIPE +---+--- If you really are in a hurry, mail me at svein-mob...@stillbilde.net This mailbox goes directly to my cellphone and is checked even when I'm not in front of my computer. Picture Gallery: https://gallery.stillbilde.net/v/svein/ signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Any news about 2010.3?
You (Alex Viskovatoff) ask: > Just out of curiosity, do you know under what OS CERN uses ZFS? No, but either Solaris 10 or OpenSolaris... ;-) Matthias -- Matthias Pfützner | Tel.: +49 700 PFUETZNER | Klaus Kinkel war in China Lichtenbergstr.73 | mailto:matth...@pfuetzner.de | und wollte die Menschen- D-64289 Darmstadt | AIM: pfuetz, ICQ: 300967487 | rechte sprechen, aber die Germany | http://www.pfuetzner.de/matthias/ | waren nicht da. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Any news about 2010.3?
waiting for new release of opensolaris ! -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Any news about 2010.3?
> CERN now uses (not at all yet, but going there) ZFS just for the obvious reasons! They produce massive data, and need that data to be correct Just out of curiosity, do you know under what OS CERN uses ZFS? -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Any news about 2010.3?
Paul, You (Paul Floyd) wrote: > You (Matthias Pfützner) wrote: > > What about Apple? Apple is also a small > > "Unix"-Vendor, has NO OpenSource > > Version, and keeps MacOS alive and kicking to > > generate immense revenue from > > its IP... ;-) > > No need for the double quotes. Mac OS X on Intel is certified SUSv3, i.e., > genuine UNIX. I did put "Unix" in quotes, as most Apple Users don't have the "slightest" notion about what Unix is, and why they should care... ;-) And because also some "Linux" people don't know, that Linux is a "unix-oid" OS... > Also, the kernel parts are opensource (Darwin), though that's far from being > all of the operating system. Yes, I also learned that recently, thanks for the update! > Paul Matthias -- Matthias Pfützner | Tel.: +49 700 PFUETZNER |Keith Packard said: Lichtenbergstr.73 | mailto:matth...@pfuetzner.de | R5 is different from R4. D-64289 Darmstadt | AIM: pfuetz, ICQ: 300967487 | That's why we changed the Germany | http://www.pfuetzner.de/matthias/ | release number :-) ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Any news about 2010.3?
> What about Apple? Apple is also a small > "Unix"-Vendor, has NO OpenSource > Version, and keeps MacOS alive and kicking to > generate immense revenue from > its IP... ;-) No need for the double quotes. Mac OS X on Intel is certified SUSv3, i.e., genuine UNIX. Also, the kernel parts are opensource (Darwin), though that's far from being all of the operating system. Paul -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Any news about 2010.3?
> Hmmm... I am glad I can change the backdrop. :-) Now, In the future it will most likely violate the usage agreement to remove or revamp any Oracle logos. -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Any news about 2010.3?
The problems you identified were spot on and your solutions worked perfectly! Thank you! -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Any news about 2010.3?
When using debug I noticed the problem that John Martin described above which is: /kernel/misc/amd64/pci_autoconfig: undefined symbol 'pcie_get_rc_dip' WARNING: mod_load: cannot load module 'pci_autoconfig' I used the exact steps he published and am working now in b134! Thank you! -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Any news about 2010.3?
On 04/ 8/10 11:58 AM, bsd wrote: Peace pipe accepted. :-) I set 'console=text' but it still loops. I have also set 'acpi-user-options=2' because otherwise I get a kernel panic. Anything after b129 is problematic for some reason. It's a Toshiba L505D-S5983. Try creating a grub entry adding -kd flags for kernel$ to drop you into the kernel debugger. I have this entry in my /rpool/boot/grub/menu.lst title OpenSolaris Development snv_133 Debug findroot (pool_rpool,0,a) bootfs rpool/ROOT/opensolaris kernel$ /platform/i86pc/kernel/$ISADIR/unix -kd -B $ZFS-BOOTFS module$ /platform/i86pc/$ISADIR/boot_archive When you get the kernel debugger prompt, enter [0]> moddebug/W 8000 [0]> :c and you should see how far it gets before bailing. -- Ian. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Any news about 2010.3?
On 04/ 7/10 07:58 PM, bsd wrote: Peace pipe accepted. :-) I set 'console=text' but it still loops. I have also set 'acpi-user-options=2' because otherwise I get a kernel panic. Anything after b129 is problematic for some reason. It's a Toshiba L505D-S5983. Upgrading from b129 on several of my systems required applying these two fixes documented in: http://opensolaris.org/jive/thread.jspa?threadID=125446&tstart=0 The first one fixed the panic reboot loop. 6914346 upgrade from OpenSolaris 2009.06 (111b2) to 130 fails with stale http://bugs.opensolaris.org/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=6914346 After updating to build 130 or beyond, the system may panic with messages of the form /kernel/misc/amd64/pci_autoconfig: undefined symbol 'pcie_get_rc_dip' WARNING: mod_load: cannot load module 'pci_autoconfig' panic[cpu0]/thread=fbc2e3a0: failed to load misc/pci_autoconfig Work-around: Boot the original boot environment (BE) instead and correct the boot archive as follows u...@host$ pfexec beadm mount /mnt u...@host$ pfexec bootadm update-archive -F -R /mnt u...@host$ pfexec beadm unmount At this point, the new BE can be booted into. 12380 image-update loses /dev/ptmx from /etc/minor_perm http://defect.opensolaris.org/bz/show_bug.cgi?id=12380 When using image-update or the Package Manager to update to build 125 or greater, remote access to the system via ssh(1) or rlogin(1) may become unavailable. Alternatively, using terminal programs such as gnome-terminal(1) or xterm(1) may result in characters not being echoed or commands unable to be typed. Work-around: Boot the original boot environment (BE) instead and correct the /etc/minor_perm file contained within as follows u...@host$ pfexec beadm mount /mnt u...@host$ pfexec sh -c \ "grep ^clone: /etc/minor_perm >> /mnt/etc/minor_perm" u...@host$ pfexec touch /mnt/reconfigure u...@host$ pfexec bootadm update-archive -R /mnt u...@host$ pfexec beadm unmount At this point, the new BE can be booted into. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Any news about 2010.3?
Peace pipe accepted. :-) I set 'console=text' but it still loops. I have also set 'acpi-user-options=2' because otherwise I get a kernel panic. Anything after b129 is problematic for some reason. It's a Toshiba L505D-S5983. -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Any news about 2010.3?
On 04/ 7/10 04:53 PM, Matthias Pfützner wrote: So, how's build 134 doing? It seems, you have an thinkpad with a nvidia card, as the only reported systems having that reboot-loop-problem were some such... I had the same problem with my Nvidia Quadro 1600M Graphics card in a Clevo D901C Portable Workstation. Paul ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Any news about 2010.3?
Hey, anonymous bsd mascot green, calm down... I did call some statements of yours bullshit, especially the one "claiming" that osol was only made for x86. That's been a wrong statement, and as you kept insisting, I called it bullshit. I know otherwise, as I could follow internally what's been the ideas... So, now, that we're getting back to business, I'd like to bury the war-axe and smoke a peace-pipe... And as you saw, decent questions do get decent answers, that I would not call idiotic... So, how's build 134 doing? It seems, you have an thinkpad with a nvidia card, as the only reported systems having that reboot-loop-problem were some such... Matthias -Ursprüngliche Nachricht- Von: bsd An: opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org Gesendet: 7.4.'10, 22:38 Nice there was no reprimand for the idiot who keeps saying BULLSHIT. So, your comments are BULLSHIT. Now, I bet I get some comments telling me my language is inappropriate, although that never happened to the other BULLSHITTER. BULLSHIT BULLSHIT BULLSHIT -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Any news about 2010.3?
You did state it yourself. Why should Oracle, the second largest SW company on rge planet, put something s minor on the front page of oracle.com? There are way more important things there... And opensolaris.com never did count-downs... And opensolaris.org is NOT responsible for the binary distribution... So, where do you think, such a statement should occur? Matthias -Ursprüngliche Nachricht- Von: Don Quichotte Just one little statement on the main page saying something like "Sorry folks, looks like 2010.03 won't be out because we've got some bugs to kill" so we at least know the delay isn't because they're quietly letting this project wither and die. It's not asking much, it's just courtesy. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Any news about 2010.3?
On 04/ 7/10 03:37 PM, bsd wrote: Nice there was no reprimand for the idiot who keeps saying... Folks, please keep it civil or take your discussion off-list. Can we please let this thread die now? -Shawn ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Any news about 2010.3?
Nice there was no reprimand for the idiot who keeps saying BULLSHIT. So, your comments are BULLSHIT. Now, I bet I get some comments telling me my language is inappropriate, although that never happened to the other BULLSHITTER. BULLSHIT BULLSHIT BULLSHIT -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Any news about 2010.3?
All of them are at risk to lose their job now? As far as I know we don't know anything about their job security. So since we don't know about their job security (or lack thereof) I'm basing my posts on the assumption that they're not all going to get the sack anytime soon. I'm not asking them to push this thing out the door, screaming and kicking, nor am I asking them to divulge to us their entire financial plans. I merely asking why they haven't said *anything* whatsoever about OpenSolaris. Just one little statement on the main page saying something like "Sorry folks, looks like 2010.03 won't be out because we've got some bugs to kill" so we at least know the delay isn't because they're quietly letting this project wither and die. It's not asking much, it's just courtesy. -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Any news about 2010.3?
> > > The question is IF. And WHY all the silence and > > secrecy?? > > > > Because they have other things to do? > > > Because it's *so* much work to make a small > announcement on the main page saying they're sorry > they won't make the previous deadline and maybe give > us a new estimate? If they don' know whether or not they'll have a job tomorrow, how can they estimate when your free software will be ready? Have a little sympathy. -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Any news about 2010.3?
Ok, I was patient enough and enough is enough. No point arguing with you about basic facts Mr Anonymous Coward. -- Robert Milkowski http://milek.blogspot.com ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Any news about 2010.3?
> > The question is IF. And WHY all the silence and > secrecy?? > > Because they have other things to do? > Because it's *so* much work to make a small announcement on the main page saying they're sorry they won't make the previous deadline and maybe give us a new estimate? I realise we might not be their biggest concern right now but come on, this silence is not doing much good to their beloved open source community now is it? -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Any news about 2010.3?
Thank you. -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Any news about 2010.3?
I (Matthias Pfützner) wrote: > > It's great on a laptop. But the last build I can get to work on my laptop > > is 129. I tried again last night when I reinstalled with build 129 and did > > an image-update. It merely does a continuous loop. I get the grub menu > > and select the new b-e then it reboots the laptop, although 129 still works > > fine. I may just keep it at 129 instead of reinstalling with something > > else. > > Did you ever try to NATIVELY install build 134? Directly off of an USB stick? > > http://genunix.org/ has it, just try! Yes, there's a bug in 134, that has to do with "console=graphics", but that's been in Nevada, not Indiana, afaik. Try to remove "console=graphics" from the grub menu, perhaps it resolves your boot problem... Matthias -- Matthias Pfützner | Tel.: +49 700 PFUETZNER | A "securely run Unix sys- Lichtenbergstr.73 | mailto:matth...@pfuetzner.de | tem" is merely an accident D-64289 Darmstadt | AIM: pfuetz, ICQ: 300967487 | waiting to happen. Germany | http://www.pfuetzner.de/matthias/ | Unix Haters Handbook ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Any news about 2010.3?
On 04/ 7/10 11:57 AM, bsd wrote: You people are really uptight and defensive about OpenSolaris and any talk about negative intentions Oracle may have towards it. I stand by my position about x86/Sparc, it was developed for x86 laptops (OpenSolaris is like PC-BSD), because who would develop a data center operating system that is complete with gnome, firefox, NWAM (which is nice, but not for dc depolyment), an image viewer, forced to use ZFS, I can go on with unneeded software for data centers. It's great on a laptop. But the last build I can get to work on my laptop is 129. I tried again last night when I reinstalled with build 129 and did an image-update. It merely does a continuous loop. I get the grub menu and select the new b-e then it reboots the laptop, although 129 still works fine. I may just keep it at 129 instead of reinstalling with something else. The b134 has a glitch that it will do exactly as you see. To fix that you need to edit the grub menu. Here is a copy of mine, located at: /rpool/boot/grub/menu.lst # #Created with GrubEd on StarDate Tue Mar 9 21:53:21 2010 # #End User Verification Process Initiated # splashimage /boot/solaris.xpm timeout 5 default 3 #TITLE-BODY# title osol-132 bootfs rpool/ROOT/osol-132 kernel$ /platform/i86pc/kernel/$ISADIR/unix -B $ZFS-BOOTFS,console=graphics module$ /platform/i86pc/$ISADIR/boot_archive title osol-133-1 bootfs rpool/ROOT/osol-133-1 kernel$ /platform/i86pc/kernel/$ISADIR/unix -B $ZFS-BOOTFS,console=graphics module$ /platform/i86pc/$ISADIR/boot_archive title osol-133_openoffice bootfs rpool/ROOT/osol-133_openoffice kernel$ /platform/i86pc/kernel/$ISADIR/unix -B $ZFS-BOOTFS,console=graphics module$ /platform/i86pc/$ISADIR/boot_archive title osol-134 bootfs rpool/ROOT/osol-134 kernel$ /platform/i86pc/kernel/$ISADIR/unix -B $ZFS-BOOTFS,console=text module$ /platform/i86pc/$ISADIR/boot_archive #END-TITLE-# Notice the entry for osol-134, it's different then the other entries. The difference is "console-text". Change your entry and you should be able to boot into 134. Paul They're my own opinions and what I think doesn't have any affect on Oracle's decision to keep it or dump it. How I read a vague statement is my personal decision although it seems here one has no personal opinion or thoughts. Rather one must join the collective and assimilate or be persecuted. Any personal thoughts on the future of OpenSolaris that aren't butterflies and daffodils and you want to burn someone at the stake. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Any news about 2010.3?
You (bsd) wrote: > You people are really uptight and defensive about OpenSolaris and any talk > about negative intentions Oracle may have towards it. At least we know, who we are, and aren't posting anonymously... Just again, to state it clearly: Open Source is Open Source is Open Source! You CAN NOT revert that! Is that really so difficult to understand? > I stand by my position about x86/Sparc, it was developed for x86 laptops > (OpenSolaris is like PC-BSD), Repeating BULLSHIT doesn't make it Champagne! > because who would develop a data center operating system that is complete > with gnome, firefox, NWAM (which is nice, but not for dc depolyment), an > image viewer, forced to use ZFS, I can go on with unneeded software for data > centers. Solaris ALWAYS had a windows system! So, no news here... Again: Red my lips: Repeating BULLSHIT doesn't make it Champagne! > It's great on a laptop. But the last build I can get to work on my laptop is > 129. I tried again last night when I reinstalled with build 129 and did an > image-update. It merely does a continuous loop. I get the grub menu and > select the new b-e then it reboots the laptop, although 129 still works fine. > I may just keep it at 129 instead of reinstalling with something else. Did you ever try to NATIVELY install build 134? Directly off of an USB stick? http://genunix.org/ has it, just try! > They're my own opinions and what I think doesn't have any affect on Oracle's > decision to keep it or dump it. How I read a vague statement is my personal > decision although it seems here one has no personal opinion or thoughts. > Rather one must join the collective and assimilate or be persecuted. That's utter none-sense. No one is FORCING you to BELIEVE anything. We're simply and still only trying to CORRECT your WRONG statements. That's all! > Any personal thoughts on the future of OpenSolaris that aren't butterflies > and daffodils and you want to burn someone at the stake. Or do you have any OTHER REAL INSIGHT into what Oracle's REAL plans are? You've got a crystal ball? You're the Oracle at Delphi, able to see the future? Is that, what you're trying to tell us? Still sticking to my statements, that you're only trying to spread FUD. Yes, there are bugs in EVERY SINGLE BUILD of osol, but, again, it's software in development, NOT a production version, nor a PRODUCT. So, what exactly are you complaining about? Matthias -- Matthias Pfützner | Tel.: +49 700 PFUETZNER | A "securely run Unix sys- Lichtenbergstr.73 | mailto:matth...@pfuetzner.de | tem" is merely an accident D-64289 Darmstadt | AIM: pfuetz, ICQ: 300967487 | waiting to happen. Germany | http://www.pfuetzner.de/matthias/ | Unix Haters Handbook ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Any news about 2010.3?
You people are really uptight and defensive about OpenSolaris and any talk about negative intentions Oracle may have towards it. I stand by my position about x86/Sparc, it was developed for x86 laptops (OpenSolaris is like PC-BSD), because who would develop a data center operating system that is complete with gnome, firefox, NWAM (which is nice, but not for dc depolyment), an image viewer, forced to use ZFS, I can go on with unneeded software for data centers. It's great on a laptop. But the last build I can get to work on my laptop is 129. I tried again last night when I reinstalled with build 129 and did an image-update. It merely does a continuous loop. I get the grub menu and select the new b-e then it reboots the laptop, although 129 still works fine. I may just keep it at 129 instead of reinstalling with something else. They're my own opinions and what I think doesn't have any affect on Oracle's decision to keep it or dump it. How I read a vague statement is my personal decision although it seems here one has no personal opinion or thoughts. Rather one must join the collective and assimilate or be persecuted. Any personal thoughts on the future of OpenSolaris that aren't butterflies and daffodils and you want to burn someone at the stake. -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Any news about 2010.3?
As well as in: http://www.idc.com/getdoc.jsp?sessionId=&containerId=lcUS22283210 It's an IDC Statement w.r.t.: A Sun Support Migration Plan: Oracle Announces New Support Offerings for Systems I (Matthias Pfützner) wrote: > You might be interested in reading: > > http://bit.ly/9Yzjs0 > > You (bsd) wrote: > > Hmmm. I guess it is who you are and if your opinions are in line with > > Oracle/OpenSolaris because the previous post seems to be against the > > agreement in joining and nothing has been said to them? > > -- > > This message posted from opensolaris.org > > ___ > > opensolaris-discuss mailing list > > opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org > > > > -- > Matthias Pfützner | Tel.: +49 700 PFUETZNER | A "securely run Unix sys- > Lichtenbergstr.73 | mailto:matth...@pfuetzner.de | tem" is merely an accident > D-64289 Darmstadt | AIM: pfuetz, ICQ: 300967487 | waiting to happen. > Germany | http://www.pfuetzner.de/matthias/ | Unix Haters Handbook > -- Matthias Pfützner | Tel.: +49 700 PFUETZNER | A "securely run Unix sys- Lichtenbergstr.73 | mailto:matth...@pfuetzner.de | tem" is merely an accident D-64289 Darmstadt | AIM: pfuetz, ICQ: 300967487 | waiting to happen. Germany | http://www.pfuetzner.de/matthias/ | Unix Haters Handbook ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Any news about 2010.3?
You might be interested in reading: http://bit.ly/9Yzjs0 You (bsd) wrote: > Hmmm. I guess it is who you are and if your opinions are in line with > Oracle/OpenSolaris because the previous post seems to be against the > agreement in joining and nothing has been said to them? > -- > This message posted from opensolaris.org > ___ > opensolaris-discuss mailing list > opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org > -- Matthias Pfützner | Tel.: +49 700 PFUETZNER | A "securely run Unix sys- Lichtenbergstr.73 | mailto:matth...@pfuetzner.de | tem" is merely an accident D-64289 Darmstadt | AIM: pfuetz, ICQ: 300967487 | waiting to happen. Germany | http://www.pfuetzner.de/matthias/ | Unix Haters Handbook ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Any news about 2010.3?
Hmmm. I guess it is who you are and if your opinions are in line with Oracle/OpenSolaris because the previous post seems to be against the agreement in joining and nothing has been said to them? -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Any news about 2010.3?
On 07/04/2010 01:54, bsd wrote: You can read many things into words and statements, but if you read carefully how Oracle responds to questions about Solaris and OpenSolaris, you can only wonder what will happen once the dust settles. "Oracle is investing more in Solaris than Sun did prior to the acquisition, and will continue to contribute technologies to OpenSolaris, as Oracle already does for many other open source projects." Oracle is investing more in Solaris... then mentions they will contribute technologies to OpenSolaris. To me this clearly illustrates that Oracle is going to be developing Solaris independent of OpenSolaris, meaning OpenSolaris isn't just a development project for Solaris. Especially given this: It seems you don't understand how Solaris is being developed. Your conclusion here doesn't really make any sense. "Oracle CEO Larry Ellison said at then end of January that Solaris would become Oracle's enterprise operating system for SPARC-based systems and for clusters." Oracle intends to use Solaris for SPARC and clusters. OpenSolaris wasn't developed for SPARC, but rather x86. This is also indicative that Oracle intends to develop Solaris independently of OpenSolaris and that OpenSolaris isn't a development project for Solaris. So you claim you've been involved with Open Solris since its inception (care to reveal your true name?) yet you don't know that it always has been developed for both SPARC and x86? Then the Indiana distribution (currently known as OpenSolaris distribution) has initially been packaged and delivered for x86 systems as it's main target audience were developers/sysadmin/etc. who want an access to latest&greatest technologies and almost all of them have access to x86 (laptop, pc, ...) and not necessarily SPARC. Then when time was right the OS distribution has started to be provided for SPARC as well (before Oracle acquisition). The Open Solaris as the Solaris Next in-development (source code) has always been developed both for SPARC and x86 and has always been provided in some form for both architectures (SXCE, Indiana, ...). '"Oracle will ensure customers running OpenSolaris have an option for support on Oracle Sun Systems where it's required, though given the very little sales here, this will not be something we expect many customers to deploy going forward," Roberts said.' OpenSolaris support will be available, but only on hardware purchased from Oracle, and it seems if they determine it's required. I'm not sure if it's been decided yet. So we have to wait and see. "It's a change we're still getting use to, though hopefully many of the public statements are very clear that Solaris is our now No. 1 enterprise OS and we will increase investment. We won't be able to talk about specific features, but the future is very bright." Again, Solaris is our number 1 enterprise OS. Yes, for SPARC hardware, which is where the investments will be made. OpenSolaris isn't their enterprise OS and isn't for SPARC hardware, so I don't see much investment by Oracle. Open Solaris runs both on SPARC and x86. And yes, Solairs has been the #1 enterprise OS and not Open Solaris - both for Sun and now Oracle. Nothing new here and nothing really surprising. To some degree it's a definition of enterprise - stable and proven code and not the bleeding edge. It's the same with other operating systems - RedHat does not consider Fedora it's enterprise offering but it doesn't stop customers deploying it in live when/if it makes sense. The same is with Open Solaris. Personally, I don't see the commitment to OpenSolaris by Oracle. Because judging from your emails I believe you don't want to see the commitment no matter what. It doesn't make sense for them to invest heavily in developing an enterprise Solaris for SPARC while simultaneously investing substantially in OpenSolaris, which won't offer them any signifcant return on investments. No, it wouldn't make sense - fortunately Sun/Oracle doesn't work the way you think it does. I'm not saying that Oracle does a great job right now about communicating its plans - it doesn't. Also I'm not saying that there aren't any concerns - there are and we have to wait and see and complain so maybe Oracle will notice. But the conclusions you presented here seem to have little if anything to do with reality. -- Robert Milkowski http://milek.blogspot.com ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Any news about 2010.3? (Please don't feed the troll)
I do accept other opinions. But: You're not correct, and you're misreading stuff in a subtle way and using well-constructed mis-leading WRONG assumptions drawn from what YOU interpret into YOUR reading... I just proofed it with a SINGLE sentence that you put into your last email. I'm to lazy to start dissecting EVERY SINGLE BIT OF YOUR STATEMENTS, but I can assure the others here, they are also based on MIS-INTERPRETATIONS! And you're doing it repeatedly, and that's why we start calling you a "troll". Because it's YOU who wants others to believe YOUR interpretation. We all can see, that you've made clear your intentions and your fears. We all try to counter them to re-assure you, but you keep insisting... That's trolling! Matthias You (bsd) wrote: > I'm entitled to share my thoughts, especially since I've used OpenSolaris > from its inception through build 129; but it seems you're only accepting of > opinions that align with your own? > -- > This message posted from opensolaris.org > ___ > opensolaris-discuss mailing list > opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org > -- Matthias Pfützner | Tel.: +49 700 PFUETZNER | Durch die Locke wird die Lichtenbergstr.73 | mailto:matth...@pfuetzner.de | nackte Frau zur sinnlichen D-64289 Darmstadt | AIM: pfuetz, ICQ: 300967487 | Unbekleideten. Germany | http://www.pfuetzner.de/matthias/ | Jean-Michel Ribes ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Any news about 2010.3?
"bsd", just one word: You (bsd) wrote: > OpenSolaris wasn't developed for SPARC, but rather x86. BULLSHIT! Pure and simple: BULLSHIT! Matthias -- Matthias Pfützner | Tel.: +49 700 PFUETZNER | Durch die Locke wird die Lichtenbergstr.73 | mailto:matth...@pfuetzner.de | nackte Frau zur sinnlichen D-64289 Darmstadt | AIM: pfuetz, ICQ: 300967487 | Unbekleideten. Germany | http://www.pfuetzner.de/matthias/ | Jean-Michel Ribes ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Any news about 2010.3? (Please don't feed the troll)
On 07/04/2010 03:02, bsd wrote: I'm entitled to share my thoughts, especially since I've used OpenSolaris from its inception through build 129; but it seems you're only accepting of opinions that align with your own? It doesn't matter for how long you've been using Open Solaris. Frankly, your thought on the subject do not make sense and I tend to agree with Eric that you seem to be trolling. -- Robert Milkowski http://milek.blogspot.com ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Any news about 2010.3? (Please don't feed the troll)
On 07.04.2010 03:30, Erik Trimble wrote: > Email from "bsd" is a consistent (if subtle) troll. > > > Please do not feed him by replying to any posts of his. Seems the definition of "troll" here is "someone who isn't drinking the fanboi koolaid". I had hoped that such rabid behavior was something left behind with the militant penguinistas, or the Church of St. Jobs. //Svein -- +---+--- /"\ |Svein Skogen | sv...@d80.iso100.no \ / |Solberg Østli 9| PGP Key: 0xE5E76831 X|2020 Skedsmokorset | sv...@jernhuset.no / \ |Norway | PGP Key: 0xCE96CE13 | | sv...@stillbilde.net ascii | | PGP Key: 0x58CD33B6 ribbon |System Admin | svein-listm...@stillbilde.net Campaign|stillbilde.net | PGP Key: 0x22D494A4 +---+--- |msn messenger: | Mobile Phone: +47 907 03 575 |sv...@jernhuset.no | RIPE handle:SS16503-RIPE +---+--- If you really are in a hurry, mail me at svein-mob...@stillbilde.net This mailbox goes directly to my cellphone and is checked even when I'm not in front of my computer. Picture Gallery: https://gallery.stillbilde.net/v/svein/ signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Any news about 2010.3?
This bug with ZFS deduplication is another one that needs to be fixed correctly before the next "long term support" stable release of OpenSolaris comes out: http://bugs.opensolaris.org/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=6924824 -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Any news about 2010.3? (Please don't feed the troll)
I'm entitled to share my thoughts, especially since I've used OpenSolaris from its inception through build 129; but it seems you're only accepting of opinions that align with your own? -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Any news about 2010.3? (Please don't feed the troll)
Email from "bsd" is a consistent (if subtle) troll. Please do not feed him by replying to any posts of his. -- Erik Trimble Java System Support Mailstop: usca22-123 Phone: x17195 Santa Clara, CA Timezone: US/Pacific (GMT-0800) ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Any news about 2010.3?
You can read many things into words and statements, but if you read carefully how Oracle responds to questions about Solaris and OpenSolaris, you can only wonder what will happen once the dust settles. "Oracle is investing more in Solaris than Sun did prior to the acquisition, and will continue to contribute technologies to OpenSolaris, as Oracle already does for many other open source projects." Oracle is investing more in Solaris... then mentions they will contribute technologies to OpenSolaris. To me this clearly illustrates that Oracle is going to be developing Solaris independent of OpenSolaris, meaning OpenSolaris isn't just a development project for Solaris. Especially given this: "Oracle CEO Larry Ellison said at then end of January that Solaris would become Oracle's enterprise operating system for SPARC-based systems and for clusters." Oracle intends to use Solaris for SPARC and clusters. OpenSolaris wasn't developed for SPARC, but rather x86. This is also indicative that Oracle intends to develop Solaris independently of OpenSolaris and that OpenSolaris isn't a development project for Solaris. '"Oracle will ensure customers running OpenSolaris have an option for support on Oracle Sun Systems where it's required, though given the very little sales here, this will not be something we expect many customers to deploy going forward," Roberts said.' OpenSolaris support will be available, but only on hardware purchased from Oracle, and it seems if they determine it's required. "It's a change we're still getting use to, though hopefully many of the public statements are very clear that Solaris is our now No. 1 enterprise OS and we will increase investment. We won't be able to talk about specific features, but the future is very bright." Again, Solaris is our number 1 enterprise OS. Yes, for SPARC hardware, which is where the investments will be made. OpenSolaris isn't their enterprise OS and isn't for SPARC hardware, so I don't see much investment by Oracle. Personally, I don't see the commitment to OpenSolaris by Oracle. It doesn't make sense for them to invest heavily in developing an enterprise Solaris for SPARC while simultaneously investing substantially in OpenSolaris, which won't offer them any signifcant return on investments. -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Any news about 2010.3?
I think the engineers at Sun should take their time with this release and release it whenever it's ready and bug free and not let peer pressure from the community or from management force them to make a final 2010.04 release that has critical bugs in it. I want to use this next release on production servers which means that hopefully the critical bug list will be minimal. This bug especially: http://bugs.opensolaris.org/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=6923585 seems like another good reason I've been staying with snv_129, as I don't think it's affected by it, but I'll test in VirtualBox just to make sure. -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Any news about 2010.3?
On 06.04.2010 11:04, Matthias Pfützner wrote: > You (James Mansion) wrote: >> ?? ?? (Martin Bochnig) wrote: >>> No, you are missing the point. >>> The idea was to provide a free and open AllInOne A to Z software >>> platform stack, that would be able to compete with LinUX and to win >>> the OS battle. >>> >> Then that was a mind-numbingly stupid strategy - because: >> a) it would take so long that Sun would be out of business first (oh, look >> ...) >> b) I'm not sure that's what customers really want >> c) having the best free stack is pointless without revenue >>> This would have increased hardware sales and sales of >>> service/maintenance/support contracts. >>> >> So - we've given up trying to be like Microsoft, let's try and be like Red >> Hat? > > What about Apple? Apple is also a small "Unix"-Vendor, has NO OpenSource > Version, and keeps MacOS alive and kicking to generate immense revenue from > its IP... ;-) Funny that you should mention just Apple. I see that Solaris 10 has "genuine" Adobe Flash. This gives me the impression that Adobe has no problems developing software for Solaris. Now think about the boost in hardware-sales (for _REALLY_ high end workstations) that could've been generated by something like Creative Suite for OpenSolaris. Those of Apples customers that are not ... rabid iFanatics, are Apple-customers just to run Creative Suite on something "not windows". I personally know several who would've preferred running Creative Suite on hardware that didn't come bundled with iTunes... (I for one would've preferred it on my ThinkPad W500)... //Svein -- +---+--- /"\ |Svein Skogen | sv...@d80.iso100.no \ / |Solberg Østli 9| PGP Key: 0xE5E76831 X|2020 Skedsmokorset | sv...@jernhuset.no / \ |Norway | PGP Key: 0xCE96CE13 | | sv...@stillbilde.net ascii | | PGP Key: 0x58CD33B6 ribbon |System Admin | svein-listm...@stillbilde.net Campaign|stillbilde.net | PGP Key: 0x22D494A4 +---+--- |msn messenger: | Mobile Phone: +47 907 03 575 |sv...@jernhuset.no | RIPE handle:SS16503-RIPE +---+--- If you really are in a hurry, mail me at svein-mob...@stillbilde.net This mailbox goes directly to my cellphone and is checked even when I'm not in front of my computer. Picture Gallery: https://gallery.stillbilde.net/v/svein/ signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Any news about 2010.3?
> What about Apple? Apple is also a small "Unix"-Vendor, has NO OpenSource > Version, and keeps MacOS alive and kicking to generate immense revenue from > its IP... ;-) > I would like to give some of my thoughts regarding this statement. Namely,Apple doesn't sell MacOS - it actually sells hardware bundled with MacOS.It is, from my perspective very important thing, since they are selling somesort of Embedded System, which cannot be compared with OpenSolaris projectat all. > I guess, that's not an option for OpenSolaris, as OSOL is Open Source but it > might well be an option for Solaris, just like the Mainframe OS etc... > > These "IP-Advantages" will be coming in the form of "appliances" (like the > Exadata...) If we try to compare Apple "embedded systems" strategy with Exadata - again,it would not be good since there are lot of third-party applications thatare developed or ported on OpenSolaris. Of course, there are lot of third-partyapplication ported on MacOS but usually it was done by great help of Appledevelopers taking care that application be highly optimized regardingspeed execution. > > BUT TO STATE THAT CLEAR HERE: I DON'T HAVE ANY INSIGHT INTO ORACLE'S PLAN > W.R.T. SOLARIS/OPENSOLARIS! > >Matthias > -- > Matthias Pfützner | Tel.: +49 700 PFUETZNER | Wer in diesen Tagen manche > Lichtenbergstr.73 | mailto:matth...@pfuetzner.de | Bonner Politiker kindisch > D-64289 Darmstadt | AIM: pfuetz, ICQ: 300967487 | nennt, beleidigt eindeutig > Germany | http://www.pfuetzner.de/matthias/ | die Kinder. Glosse in SZ > ___ > opensolaris-discuss mailing list > opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org _ Your E-mail and More On-the-Go. Get Windows Live Hotmail Free. https://signup.live.com/signup.aspx?id=60969___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Any news about 2010.3?
You (James Mansion) wrote: > Microsoft have never had a problem with ISV mindshare because they made > things cheap and accessible. Free is just one form of cheap from that > perspective. I absolutely believe that Microsoft's success is not nearly so > much related to monopolistic practices as to their early ability to court > ISVs and their ability to use ABIs (like VBXs and OLE controls) to create a > marketplace for small ISVs. Microsoft took their eye off that ball a few > years back but they seem to have recovered. But MS was and is in a very different position... ;-) Now, with the second largest SW-vendor on earth as the owner of Solaris things might well change... > Maybe I'm just an old fart but I recall my dismay at the Byte headlines I did read Byte too, and am deeply sad, that it ceased to exist. Even its online archive is gone, which is a big shame! > that OO had failed and components had won. I was an early C++ adopter and > it was galling - because it was true. How many businesses ever got anywhere > with aftermarket controls on any of the X toolkits? Maybe Qt will create an > ecosystem - I don't know. But I think the lesson was that open standards > don't create that sort of ISV-friendly environment on their own and the > existence of such a market does wonders. Look at the iPhone app shop. Same > thing again. So right! Look at all the hype around the iPad this easter weekend... ;-) Nothing open, still more revenue than what's been decided to provide Haiti as earthquake relieve help... Matthias -- Matthias Pfützner | Tel.: +49 700 PFUETZNER | Wer in diesen Tagen manche Lichtenbergstr.73 | mailto:matth...@pfuetzner.de | Bonner Politiker kindisch D-64289 Darmstadt | AIM: pfuetz, ICQ: 300967487 | nennt, beleidigt eindeutig Germany | http://www.pfuetzner.de/matthias/ | die Kinder. Glosse in SZ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Any news about 2010.3?
You (James Mansion) wrote: > ?? ?? (Martin Bochnig) wrote: >> No, you are missing the point. >> The idea was to provide a free and open AllInOne A to Z software >> platform stack, that would be able to compete with LinUX and to win >> the OS battle. >> > Then that was a mind-numbingly stupid strategy - because: > a) it would take so long that Sun would be out of business first (oh, look > ...) > b) I'm not sure that's what customers really want > c) having the best free stack is pointless without revenue >> This would have increased hardware sales and sales of >> service/maintenance/support contracts. >> > So - we've given up trying to be like Microsoft, let's try and be like Red > Hat? What about Apple? Apple is also a small "Unix"-Vendor, has NO OpenSource Version, and keeps MacOS alive and kicking to generate immense revenue from its IP... ;-) I guess, that's not an option for OpenSolaris, as OSOL is Open Source but it might well be an option for Solaris, just like the Mainframe OS etc... These "IP-Advantages" will be coming in the form of "appliances" (like the Exadata...) BUT TO STATE THAT CLEAR HERE: I DON'T HAVE ANY INSIGHT INTO ORACLE'S PLAN W.R.T. SOLARIS/OPENSOLARIS! Matthias -- Matthias Pfützner | Tel.: +49 700 PFUETZNER | Wer in diesen Tagen manche Lichtenbergstr.73 | mailto:matth...@pfuetzner.de | Bonner Politiker kindisch D-64289 Darmstadt | AIM: pfuetz, ICQ: 300967487 | nennt, beleidigt eindeutig Germany | http://www.pfuetzner.de/matthias/ | die Kinder. Glosse in SZ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Any news about 2010.3?
On 04/ 5/10 09:43 PM, Harry Putnam wrote: Matthias Pfützner writes: more ISVs, ISV ? Independent Software Vendor ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Any news about 2010.3?
If it's the definition you're looking for, it is "independent software vendor." -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Any news about 2010.3?
Matthias Pfützner writes: > more ISVs, ISV ? ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Any news about 2010.3?
Simon Phipps wrote: Exactly right. As it turned out it was also comfortably profitable. Sun's terminal problems lay elsewhere. Which bit of the last financial statement shows evidence of this - that the profits came from open sourcing, not merely from software that was open source before Sun bought it or that was already being licensed before it was open source? (Hmm - and in mysql's case, we could also ask 'how much more profitable than spending the billion on gov't bonds'?) James ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Any news about 2010.3?
Matthias Pfützner wrote: You (James Mansion) wrote: if you look at Sun's annual earnings documents, you might notice, that most of Sun's revenue and especially margin was generated by big iron hardware. Indeed I had. And the money coming in from software was mostly licebnses to OEMs (think Java), as far as those numbers have ever been published. So, I'm a bit interpreting stuff here. I agree. And I think that revenue did not improve materially from open sourcing that IP - while the move to open source surely gives up a degree of control. apps. And, yes, that worked! Not in the way many hoped it would, but yes, it generated more mind-share, and with that additional HW-sales. Microsoft have never had a problem with ISV mindshare because they made things cheap and accessible. Free is just one form of cheap from that perspective. I absolutely believe that Microsoft's success is not nearly so much related to monopolistic practices as to their early ability to court ISVs and their ability to use ABIs (like VBXs and OLE controls) to create a marketplace for small ISVs. Microsoft took their eye off that ball a few years back but they seem to have recovered. Maybe I'm just an old fart but I recall my dismay at the Byte headlines that OO had failed and components had won. I was an early C++ adopter and it was galling - because it was true. How many businesses ever got anywhere with aftermarket controls on any of the X toolkits? Maybe Qt will create an ecosystem - I don't know. But I think the lesson was that open standards don't create that sort of ISV-friendly environment on their own and the existence of such a market does wonders. Look at the iPhone app shop. Same thing again. So, Oracle now is the second biggest SW-company of the world, they KNOW how to monetize SW, and I hope and am sure, we will see some big monetizations coming out of the assest that Oracle got with the acquisition of Sun. And that in turn will again allow to let OpenSolaris live as well as Java. Larry stated it cleary: "It's not needed to produce margin or revenue directly, as long as it helps generate revenue and margin over-all!" Well, I hope so. I really want Solaris and Java to survive and thrive - hopefully in a form that I can afford. I don't want or need the source code for that to happen and I don't believe anyone outside of Oracle really needs it either - I think 'free as in beer' is enough, though as I've said to Martin its advantageous if the delivery is in a form that allows custom distributions to be created. Time was we all linked our kernels from objects, what was wrong with that? Modularity is the key - not an ability to run cc. And personally I'm entirely happy to pay (a modest amount) for security fixes and upgrades. I'm not questioning whether its worthwhile courting a hobbyist or SME market or even universities. I *am* questioning whether the full monty open source is necessary - or particularly helpful for long term viability, given what the release costs you. James ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Any news about 2010.3?
Мартин Бохниг (Martin Bochnig) wrote: No, you are missing the point. The idea was to provide a free and open AllInOne A to Z software platform stack, that would be able to compete with LinUX and to win the OS battle. Then that was a mind-numbingly stupid strategy - because: a) it would take so long that Sun would be out of business first (oh, look ...) b) I'm not sure that's what customers really want c) having the best free stack is pointless without revenue This would have increased hardware sales and sales of service/maintenance/support contracts. So - we've given up trying to be like Microsoft, let's try and be like Red Hat? The difference, however, is massive: look at how much IP Sun created, and how much Red Hat create. Red Hat are canny in employing high profile (and high influence) Linux hackers, but how much do they actually fix or write? They look good on stats next to other Linux collaborators, but next to Sun's Solaris investment? If you want Solaris to be Linux then say so. To me, a good differentiator was that Sun had leadership, authority, and resources. And you need those things to avoid tinkering on the periphery, and to enable doing hard or just nasty stuff. Unfortunately, two of those things seem to have caused what some people think is an epic fail in community engagement. Trouble is, I'd rather Sun had those things and could drive Solaris than that they became great community members and mere peers. To you, maybe Open Solaris is an opportunity to play at being an OS provider. But to an OS user like me it was a way to observe the process and see what's coming - and get an affordable and reasonably current release based on the observation rather than marketing getting feature complete for an 'industrial' release. Whether or not source code was available to anyone outside Sun is largely irrelevant to me *providing* the binary bits are available in a way that would enable repackaging in a way like Belinix or Nexenta, which do provide refreshing alternatives of approach. I do think there's plenty of value to be had from openness that doesn't cede control or even necessarily expose sources - its just a shame that there has been some severe issues with expectation management and/or execution in the case of Open Solaris. There the cash would have come from. See, how IBM makes a living? I don't see DB2 or AIX or the OS/400 or mainframe stuff being free. Sure, IBM sell services too, but they don't give away their IP. Looks like they're happy to milk Sun's tho. I'm not saying you can't make a moderate open source business selling services on Other People's Stuff. I'm concerned about what happens when you're the main author, and carry all the R&D costs, and all the pre-market investment risk. Bear in mind that the time delay between the engineering investment and the development technology risk both conspire to mean that you have to get a big return to pay for that R&D - and if the stuff is free then the other guys you've let into the playing field as peers don't have those costs or risks to recoup. Or you can embrace the emperor's new clothes and develop in the open, and lose control and any USP. Maybe Sun could have gone all out for community and given up control - and fired 90% of their engineers to reduce costs in line with a new business model where they're packagers and Innovation Happens Elsewhere? Is that really what you wanted? Could that build ZFS? Java? Its usually bad enough having bike shed discussions internally. Sometimes authoritative leadership with resources is necessary - compare and contrast the Debian ecosystem before and after Mr Shuttleworth's intervention. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Any news about 2010.3?
Volker A. Brandt wrote: > Hmmm... I have seen a number of OGB members post in the various lists. > What do you want them to do? Post "yes, there will be 2010.03" every > day? None of the new OGB members are involved with the 2010.03 release. People need to remember the OGB manages the community, not the distro. The distro comes out of Project Indiana and various internal teams. -- -Alan Coopersmith-alan.coopersm...@oracle.com Oracle Solaris Platform Engineering: X Window System ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Any news about 2010.3?
On Apr 5, 2010, at 14:19, Matthias Pfützner wrote: > Therefore the idea > to opensource the software has never been intended to create additional > revenue from it, but to generate mind-share with the developer community, so > that in FUTURE more ISVs, or big software-companies or even smaller mid-market > software companies would again prefer Solaris as the basis for their > apps. And, yes, that worked! Not in the way many hoped it would, but yes, it > generated more mind-share, and with that additional HW-sales. Exactly right. As it turned out it was also comfortably profitable. Sun's terminal problems lay elsewhere. S. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Any news about 2010.3?
You (James Mansion) wrote: > Simon Phipps wrote: >>> Ths thing I find interesting in the article, and indeed in many of your >>> statements, is that you show absolutely no sign of self-doubt about >>> whether open sourcing everything you could actually destroyed shareholder >>> value and drove Sun down the toilet. >> >> That's because it did not. See the penultimate paragraph of >> http://webmink.com/2010/03/08/sundown/ >> >> > I don't understand. I'm looking at 'we've achieved some amazing things ... > despite the success of Sun's open source business, it still wasn't enough > to rescue Sun'. > > That looks self-congratulatory to me, not doubting. I'm not sure how the > open sourcing was successful for Sun shareholders. Definitely successful > for Red Hat shareholders though. Where's the bit that says 'maybe > embracing open source was a huge mistake and we screwed up'? Its one thing > to embrace open source by consuming it, but embracing it by taking a huge > IP investment and chucking over the wall? (Well, mostly ...) > > The whole strategy seems to have been predicated on 'the enemy of my enemy > is my friend', presumably based on a massive chip-on-shoulder brought about > by NT eating your market in CAD and financial workstations. > > Hopefully Larry's management team will see that there IS some market for a > not-Windows alternative for PC-clone workstations and that the consistency, > stability of interfaces and compatibility that defined Solaris are a > differentiator that can make it more attractive to OEMs than Linux > variants. But I'm not hopeful. > > James James, if you look at Sun's annual earnings documents, you might notice, that most of Sun's revenue and especially margin was generated by big iron hardware. And the money coming in from software was mostly licebnses to OEMs (think Java), as far as those numbers have ever been published. So, I'm a bit interpreting stuff here. Sun has never been in the end-user-market, and has never been able to sell small-money items to many people (no online-shop, et.al.). Therefore the idea to opensource the software has never been intended to create additional revenue from it, but to generate mind-share with the developer community, so that in FUTURE more ISVs, or big software-companies or even smaller mid-market software companies would again prefer Solaris as the basis for their apps. And, yes, that worked! Not in the way many hoped it would, but yes, it generated more mind-share, and with that additional HW-sales. Sun lost the "movement" when it started selling E10K's and relied on that success and as a successor to that partially neglected the Universities and their IT-departments. That's, when the mind-share drifted to Linux, despite its weaknesses and faults. So, Oracle now is the second biggest SW-company of the world, they KNOW how to monetize SW, and I hope and am sure, we will see some big monetizations coming out of the assest that Oracle got with the acquisition of Sun. And that in turn will again allow to let OpenSolaris live as well as Java. Larry stated it cleary: "It's not needed to produce margin or revenue directly, as long as it helps generate revenue and margin over-all!" Matthias -- Matthias Pfützner | Tel.: +49 700 PFUETZNER | Die Phantasie ist die Lichtenbergstr.73 | mailto:matth...@pfuetzner.de | wichtigste erogene Zone. D-64289 Darmstadt | AIM: pfuetz, ICQ: 300967487 | Germany | http://www.pfuetzner.de/matthias/ | Federico Fellini ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Any news about 2010.3?
2010/4/5 Мартин Бохниг (Martin Bochnig) : > 2010/4/5 Мартин Бохниг (Martin Bochnig) : >> James: For 3 pretty ROI-worthless aquisitions alone (Cobalt, STK and >> MySQL) Sun's top-management spent 10 Billion USD (ten thousand >> millions!!!). >> Every time the behaved like kids: At hopelessly overheated markets - >> instead of selling something - they bought! Obviously the paid way >> overpriced amounts for much too little counter-valueadd. >> >> >> If you closely watched the NYSE charts over the years you should know, >> that these 10 Billions are more $$$, than Sun ever managed to generate >> as a profit in all these years summed up. >> >> To me that appears to be more related to Sun's liquidity problems. >> And those were indeed severe management faults at the HIGHEST levels. > > > > During a recession, a company should cheaply acquire what it can get. > During overheated times, one should sell a few sub-enterprises for lots of > cash. > > > Sun did the exact opposite: In both overheated times (2000 and > 2005till2007) and in both recessions (after 911 and now). > > Effectively they spent their gold reserves for worthless ROI. > Which brought them into a shortage of cash which could no longer > simply be compensated through mass-layoffs. At the end they were > forced to give themselves away for a few pennies! > > > p.s. Another aspect of their strategic mistakes was, that they focused > too much on a single market, while neglecting the rest. When that > single market suddenly collapsed (US market, and there only the TOP > 500 enterprises and banks), they had a problem. > > > Also, they produced wonderful Ad´s but did not distribute them > sufficiently. And they didnt use enough distribution channels for > their hardware. When I wanted to spent unbelievable EUR 1900,- for a > pretty minimalistic Sun Blade 150 with 128MB memory (!) in 2003, it > took them 2 or 3 weeks until I had it. And I could only order it via > FAX. Compare this to how Dell does it! Now I recall the rest. This price was pre-VAT!!! Like all the prices on their site until circa 2007 or 2008! Therefore add 16 % German VAT to these EUR 1900 for a humble Blade 150! (Besides: Meanwhile German VAT is at 19%). > %mab > ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Any news about 2010.3?
2010/4/5 James Mansion : > Мартин Бохниг (Martin Bochnig) wrote: >> >> Solaris code for marketing purposes, rather than creating an >> independent, community-led, open source project with the ability to >> make real decisions. >> > > I think you're missing the point. What is the benefit to Sun shareholders > to have Solaris so open, really? Simple question - where does the money > come from? No, you are missing the point. The idea was to provide a free and open AllInOne A to Z software platform stack, that would be able to compete with LinUX and to win the OS battle. This would have increased hardware sales and sales of service/maintenance/support contracts. There the cash would have come from. See, how IBM makes a living? %martin ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Any news about 2010.3?
2010/4/5 Мартин Бохниг (Martin Bochnig) : > James: For 3 pretty ROI-worthless aquisitions alone (Cobalt, STK and > MySQL) Sun's top-management spent 10 Billion USD (ten thousand > millions!!!). > Every time the behaved like kids: At hopelessly overheated markets - > instead of selling something - they bought! Obviously the paid way > overpriced amounts for much too little counter-valueadd. > > > If you closely watched the NYSE charts over the years you should know, > that these 10 Billions are more $$$, than Sun ever managed to generate > as a profit in all these years summed up. > > To me that appears to be more related to Sun's liquidity problems. > And those were indeed severe management faults at the HIGHEST levels. During a recession, a company should cheaply acquire what it can get. During overheated times, one should sell a few sub-enterprises for lots of cash. Sun did the exact opposite: In both overheated times (2000 and 2005till2007) and in both recessions (after 911 and now). Effectively they spent their gold reserves for worthless ROI. Which brought them into a shortage of cash which could no longer simply be compensated through mass-layoffs. At the end they were forced to give themselves away for a few pennies! p.s. Another aspect of their strategic mistakes was, that they focused too much on a single market, while neglecting the rest. When that single market suddenly collapsed (US market, and there only the TOP 500 enterprises and banks), they had a problem. Also, they produced wonderful Ad´s but did not distribute them sufficiently. And they didnt use enough distribution channels for their hardware. When I wanted to spen unbelievable EUR 1900,- for a pretty minimalistic Sun Blade 150 with 128MB memory (!) in 2003, it took them 2 or 3 weeks until I had it. And I could only order it via FAX. Compare this to how Dell does it! %mab ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Any news about 2010.3?
Мартин Бохниг (Martin Bochnig) wrote: Solaris code for marketing purposes, rather than creating an independent, community-led, open source project with the ability to make real decisions. I think you're missing the point. What is the benefit to Sun shareholders to have Solaris so open, really? Simple question - where does the money come from? And yes - they could have engaged and formed more of a community. Quite true. But I don't accept that its necessarily relevant, unless you really think that Sun would fire 90% of its engineers and expect most of the development to come from the community and run lean and mean as a distro creator like Red Hat, with a few high profile engineers to show they have commitment and at least some core skills. Whether or not OpenSolaris has a community or not is all but irrelevant so far as I can see because either way its not a revenue generator, and what Sun needed was revenue. James ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Any news about 2010.3?
Joerg Schilling wrote: You are correct: without OpenSourcing Solaris, Sun would have been in trouble earlier. What evidence do you have for this? I know there have been externally sourced code contributions, but how much of it needed source rather than the stable ABIs, and how material is it really? More to the point - what revenue did it generate? So you can answer your question "I'm not sure how the open sourcing was successful for Sun shareholders." with a _yes_, as it helped to raise the Sun stock price. Very briefly, yes, but since then I think it hasn't materially helped shift anything that generated revenue for Sun, and Sun's stock hardly trended up on its recent improving quality. I further believe that a closer collaboration with the cummunity (as intended by Sun in September 2004) would have given the additional momentum for Sun to push it into the win zone for a longer time. Well you can believe that, but belief in that is behind a lot of the open source hype, and one thing that's hard to find is concrete evidence of how it translated into a sound business plan and revenue. This is however a lost chance and we cannot roll back time... Indeed, but we can try to learn from it, and I think questioning how and when open source is helpful to a technology creator is worthwhile. Sun's position was fundamentally different to Red Hat and post-NetWare SUSE, since they owned the things they were giving away, and had done most of the development (or had paid for it). I think its worth considering what they could have done differently and why. I can't help thinking that they would have had a better chance by going in completely the other direction and using their grip on Java and Open Office (and mysql, eventually) to try to cut off Linux's air supply and stunt its datacentre growth until Solaris on X64 could get a decent foothold, but its all conjecture, and it would have accepted handing a potential short-term gain to Microsoft. James ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Any news about 2010.3?
James, here you see that the opposite of your claims appears to be "more true" : http://www.ratliff.net/blog/2008/02/14/not-with-a-bang-but-a-whimper/ Roy Fielding[1] finally quit the OpenSolaris community today, see his resignation letter[2]. The kettle finally boiled over and the realization come to many (but not all) that Sun is publishing their Solaris code for marketing purposes, rather than creating an independent, community-led, open source project with the ability to make real decisions. It seemed so promising at first: “[T]hey made promises about it being an open development project. … Sun gave up its right to make arbitrary decisions regarding the phrase ‘OpenSolaris’ as part of its public agreement with the community in the form of the Charter. That was a self-imposed restriction in exchange for the benefits of community-driven development, freely made, and cannot be changed except in accordance with the charter itself (for example, by amending or dissolving the charter).” (excerpt from Roy Fielding’s resignation letter) But it was a sham: “The charter has therefore been violated. … Sun agreed that ‘OpenSolaris’ would be governed by the community and yet has refused, in every step along the way, to cede any real control over the software produced or the way it is produced, and continues to make private decisions every day that are later promoted as decisions for this thing we call OpenSolaris.” (excerpt from Roy Fielding’s resignation letter 2010/4/5 Мартин Бохниг (Martin Bochnig) : > I agree with that summary of real events and facts. > Hence I decided to post everything inline: > > > http://www.michaeldolan.com/1102 > > > Thursday, February 14th, 2008 > “I told you so” in order? Roy Fielding resigns from OpenSolaris > > http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/ogb-discuss/2008-February/004488.html > > In my opinion, Roy came up short in fully describing the issue, but he > did a great job focusing on the thread at hand regarding OpenSolaris > and trademark. The fact is, Sun is not an open source community or > development player. Sun wants all the benefits of saying it’s all > about open and freedom, yet, Sun does something completely different. > Nearly 3 years into OpenSolaris, the development is still behind the > firewall inside Sun. Nearly 3 years into OpenSolaris, open source > community developers would have to get Sun engineers to agree to > accept code. Nearly 3 years into OpenSolaris, developers have to > contribute copyright co-ownership to the corporation, Sun, in order to > contribute to OpenSolaris. Nearly 3 years into OpenSolaris, there are > still essential parts of the Solaris OS that are still not opened > under a free license (they call it the OpenSolaris Binary License… aka > proprietary). I could go on and on… but let me refer to Roy’s view > below. > > Will Ian be next to resign? I can’t believe he really believes this is > the right execution of what sounded like an “open” strategy 2 years > ago… I knew better, but many fell for the bedtime story that sounded > sweet. Some will still argue that Sun’s great, open, etc., but they’re > brainwashed; anyone who really knows what’s going on should not be > fooled at this point in the game. “Open”Solaris is an OS that is > created by 1 company, with no outside input or control and has a code > repo on opensolaris.org… besides that, what has it done to contribute > or help any community of users? > > Some choice quotes: > > Sun didn’t just make vague statements to me about OpenSolaris; > they made promises about it being an open development project. That’s > the only way they could get someone like me to provide free labor for > their benefit. Given Sun’s recent track record on breaking promises, > another one doesn’t surprise me at all. > > … > > Most of the stuff in that letter about Sun’s responsibilities in > regard to “International Trademark Law” is nothing more than > snow being tossed in the eyes of technical folks who don’t have > access to their own lawyers. > > … > > In fact, if it weren’t for the extremely pig-headed way in which > Indiana was thrust on the community as Ian’s private domain, it could > have easily been a unifying path for > all of the distros. It could have given them a gate within > OpenSolaris in which to collaborate, instead of doing all of their > work in separate communities outside OpenSolaris. > > Indiana is just another private marketing team within Sun that is > making private decisions about “OpenSolaris” that aren’t even in line > with the internal processes of Solaris Engineering, let alone the > published governance model of the OGB. > > … > > Sun agreed that “OpenSolaris” would be governed by the community > and yet has refused, in every step along the way, to cede any real > control over the software produced or the way it is produced, and > continues to make private decisions every day that are later promoted > as decisions for this thing we call Open
Re: [osol-discuss] Any news about 2010.3?
I agree with that summary of real events and facts. Hence I decided to post everything inline: http://www.michaeldolan.com/1102 Thursday, February 14th, 2008 “I told you so” in order? Roy Fielding resigns from OpenSolaris http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/ogb-discuss/2008-February/004488.html In my opinion, Roy came up short in fully describing the issue, but he did a great job focusing on the thread at hand regarding OpenSolaris and trademark. The fact is, Sun is not an open source community or development player. Sun wants all the benefits of saying it’s all about open and freedom, yet, Sun does something completely different. Nearly 3 years into OpenSolaris, the development is still behind the firewall inside Sun. Nearly 3 years into OpenSolaris, open source community developers would have to get Sun engineers to agree to accept code. Nearly 3 years into OpenSolaris, developers have to contribute copyright co-ownership to the corporation, Sun, in order to contribute to OpenSolaris. Nearly 3 years into OpenSolaris, there are still essential parts of the Solaris OS that are still not opened under a free license (they call it the OpenSolaris Binary License… aka proprietary). I could go on and on… but let me refer to Roy’s view below. Will Ian be next to resign? I can’t believe he really believes this is the right execution of what sounded like an “open” strategy 2 years ago… I knew better, but many fell for the bedtime story that sounded sweet. Some will still argue that Sun’s great, open, etc., but they’re brainwashed; anyone who really knows what’s going on should not be fooled at this point in the game. “Open”Solaris is an OS that is created by 1 company, with no outside input or control and has a code repo on opensolaris.org… besides that, what has it done to contribute or help any community of users? Some choice quotes: Sun didn’t just make vague statements to me about OpenSolaris; they made promises about it being an open development project. That’s the only way they could get someone like me to provide free labor for their benefit. Given Sun’s recent track record on breaking promises, another one doesn’t surprise me at all. … Most of the stuff in that letter about Sun’s responsibilities in regard to “International Trademark Law” is nothing more than snow being tossed in the eyes of technical folks who don’t have access to their own lawyers. … In fact, if it weren’t for the extremely pig-headed way in which Indiana was thrust on the community as Ian’s private domain, it could have easily been a unifying path for all of the distros. It could have given them a gate within OpenSolaris in which to collaborate, instead of doing all of their work in separate communities outside OpenSolaris. Indiana is just another private marketing team within Sun that is making private decisions about “OpenSolaris” that aren’t even in line with the internal processes of Solaris Engineering, let alone the published governance model of the OGB. … Sun agreed that “OpenSolaris” would be governed by the community and yet has refused, in every step along the way, to cede any real control over the software produced or the way it is produced, and continues to make private decisions every day that are later promoted as decisions for this thing we call OpenSolaris. Rather than be honest about it and restructure the community to correspond to this MySolaris style of over-the-wall development, Sun prefers to lie to the external community members while ignoring their input. … This well is poisoned; the company has consumed its own future and any pretense that the projects will ever govern themselves (as opposed to being governed by whatever pointy-haired boss is hiding behind the scenes) is now a joke. … There’s nothing particularly wrong with that choice — it is a perfectly valid open source model for corporations that don’t need active community participation. IMO, the resulting code tends to suck a lot more than community-driven projects, but it is still open source. In any case, I am done with it. I hereby resign my status as a Member of the OpenSolaris Community, effective immediately. 2010/4/5 Мартин Бохниг (Martin Bochnig) : > James: For 3 pretty ROI-worthless aquisitions alone (Cobalt, STK and > MySQL) Sun's top-management spent 10 Billion USD (ten thousand > millions!!!). > Every time the behaved like kids: At hopelessly overheated markets - > instead of selling something - they bought! Obviously the paid way > overpriced amounts for much too little counter-valueadd. > > > If you closely watched the NYSE charts over the years you should know, > that these 10 Billions are more $$$, than Sun ever managed to generate > as a profit in all these years summed up. > > To me that appears to be more related to Sun's liquidity problems. > And those were indeed severe management faults at the HIGHEST levels. > > Other errors certainly include a pricing policy
Re: [osol-discuss] Any news about 2010.3?
James: For 3 pretty ROI-worthless aquisitions alone (Cobalt, STK and MySQL) Sun's top-management spent 10 Billion USD (ten thousand millions!!!). Every time the behaved like kids: At hopelessly overheated markets - instead of selling something - they bought! Obviously the paid way overpriced amounts for much too little counter-valueadd. If you closely watched the NYSE charts over the years you should know, that these 10 Billions are more $$$, than Sun ever managed to generate as a profit in all these years summed up. To me that appears to be more related to Sun's liquidity problems. And those were indeed severe management faults at the HIGHEST levels. Other errors certainly include a pricing policy, where 5 years old processors still stood on the price list at their launch prices (such as something like 7995 USD for a 600MHz UltraSPARC III non-Cu module for the Blade 2000). And were the option price for a simple stupid generic IDE-DVD-ROM drive for the Blade 150 was 295 EUR on sun.de (at least from 2003 till 2006). You are blaming the wrong man! I made this mistake myself for far too long. I agree with Joerg's statements below: Sun was not open enough. For this reason substantial parts of real community-support were sent to dust. While those parts of the community lost their trust ... (2007 ...Ian-Diana ... etc.) You forgot the trouble? Reminder: http://www.michaeldolan.com/1102 Thursday, February 14th, 2008 “I told you so” in order? Roy Fielding resigns from OpenSolaris Some choice quotes: Sun didn’t just make vague statements to me about OpenSolaris; they made promises about it being an open development project. That’s the only way they could get someone like me to provide free labor for their benefit. Given Sun’s recent track record on breaking promises, another one doesn’t surprise me at all. THAT was lost "share holder value". %martin On Mon, Apr 5, 2010 at 12:38 PM, James Mansion wrote: > Simon Phipps wrote: >>> >>> Ths thing I find interesting in the article, and indeed in many of your >>> statements, is that you show absolutely no sign of self-doubt about whether >>> open sourcing everything you could actually destroyed shareholder value and >>> drove Sun down the toilet. >> >> That's because it did not. See the penultimate paragraph of >> http://webmink.com/2010/03/08/sundown/ >> >> > > I don't understand. I'm looking at 'we've achieved some amazing things ... > despite the success of Sun's open source business, it still wasn't enough to > rescue Sun'. > > That looks self-congratulatory to me, not doubting. I'm not sure how the > open sourcing was successful for Sun shareholders. Definitely successful > for Red Hat shareholders though. Where's the bit that says 'maybe embracing > open source was a huge mistake and we screwed up'? Its one thing to embrace > open source by consuming it, but embracing it by taking a huge IP investment > and chucking over the wall? (Well, mostly ...) > > The whole strategy seems to have been predicated on 'the enemy of my enemy > is my friend', presumably based on a massive chip-on-shoulder brought about > by NT eating your market in CAD and financial workstations. > > Hopefully Larry's management team will see that there IS some market for a > not-Windows alternative for PC-clone workstations and that the consistency, > stability of interfaces and compatibility that defined Solaris are a > differentiator that can make it more attractive to OEMs than Linux variants. > But I'm not hopeful. > > James > > ___ > opensolaris-discuss mailing list > opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org > ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Any news about 2010.3?
James Mansion wrote: > Simon Phipps wrote: > >> Ths thing I find interesting in the article, and indeed in many of your > >> statements, is that you show absolutely no sign of self-doubt about > >> whether open sourcing everything you could actually destroyed shareholder > >> value and drove Sun down the toilet. > >> > > > > That's because it did not. See the penultimate paragraph of > > http://webmink.com/2010/03/08/sundown/ > > > > > I don't understand. I'm looking at 'we've achieved some amazing things > ... despite the success of Sun's open source business, it still wasn't > enough to rescue Sun'. > > That looks self-congratulatory to me, not doubting. I'm not sure how the > open sourcing was successful for Sun shareholders. Definitely You mentioned above that OpenSourcing Solaris was not enough to rescue Sun. You are correct: without OpenSourcing Solaris, Sun would have been in trouble earlier. So you can answer your question "I'm not sure how the open sourcing was successful for Sun shareholders." with a _yes_, as it helped to raise the Sun stock price. I further believe that a closer collaboration with the cummunity (as intended by Sun in September 2004) would have given the additional momentum for Sun to push it into the win zone for a longer time. This is however a lost chance and we cannot roll back time... Jörg -- EMail:jo...@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin j...@cs.tu-berlin.de(uni) joerg.schill...@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Any news about 2010.3?
Simon Phipps wrote: Ths thing I find interesting in the article, and indeed in many of your statements, is that you show absolutely no sign of self-doubt about whether open sourcing everything you could actually destroyed shareholder value and drove Sun down the toilet. That's because it did not. See the penultimate paragraph of http://webmink.com/2010/03/08/sundown/ I don't understand. I'm looking at 'we've achieved some amazing things ... despite the success of Sun's open source business, it still wasn't enough to rescue Sun'. That looks self-congratulatory to me, not doubting. I'm not sure how the open sourcing was successful for Sun shareholders. Definitely successful for Red Hat shareholders though. Where's the bit that says 'maybe embracing open source was a huge mistake and we screwed up'? Its one thing to embrace open source by consuming it, but embracing it by taking a huge IP investment and chucking over the wall? (Well, mostly ...) The whole strategy seems to have been predicated on 'the enemy of my enemy is my friend', presumably based on a massive chip-on-shoulder brought about by NT eating your market in CAD and financial workstations. Hopefully Larry's management team will see that there IS some market for a not-Windows alternative for PC-clone workstations and that the consistency, stability of interfaces and compatibility that defined Solaris are a differentiator that can make it more attractive to OEMs than Linux variants. But I'm not hopeful. James ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Any news about 2010.3?
On Apr 4, 2010, at 21:46, James Mansion wrote: > Simon Phipps wrote: >> It's been an interesting "does he take sugar" experience watching the >> conversation about me; I thought I'd interject with a link to a story that >> has correct information: >> http://www.infoworld.com/d/adventures-in-it/former-sun-open-source-officer-joins-osi-board-109 >> > Ths thing I find interesting in the article, and indeed in many of your > statements, is that you show absolutely no sign of self-doubt about whether > open sourcing everything you could actually destroyed shareholder value and > drove Sun down the toilet. That's because it did not. See the penultimate paragraph of http://webmink.com/2010/03/08/sundown/ S. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Any news about 2010.3?
Simon Phipps wrote: It's been an interesting "does he take sugar" experience watching the conversation about me; I thought I'd interject with a link to a story that has correct information: http://www.infoworld.com/d/adventures-in-it/former-sun-open-source-officer-joins-osi-board-109 Ths thing I find interesting in the article, and indeed in many of your statements, is that you show absolutely no sign of self-doubt about whether open sourcing everything you could actually destroyed shareholder value and drove Sun down the toilet. I'm certain that there was a decision to be made about being mean and nasty to the open source systems that were eating your lunch (and dinner) or whether to cosy up. But I'm not sure you made the right one, because Solaris did run on Intel and Java was a powerful card, and the companies that are still standing are ones who didn't give away all their IP and show their competitors their cards. You might have done the right thing for society as a whole (maybe: we'll see how your big customers fare and whether ultimately there's a reduction in real choice) but I'm not at all sure you did the right thing for Sun shareholders. I'm not one, but I've been a fairly happy user at major banks. (I was a less happy personal customer - I paid as much for your C++ compiler on Solaris 2.5 as I did for MSDN Universal - and guess which got me support and updates for a year? And which was the better compiler?) Personally I don't give a fig whether Solaris is free (in either sense) - so long as it has a version that's affordable, preferably in the ballpark of Windows or MacOS. After all, Esix and Interactive are long gone. It remains to be seen whether that happens. I'd be quite happy for Oracle to dismantle the freedom in exchange for a hundred dollar UNIX with a stable ABI and an NDA-happy relationship between the driver integrators and nVidia and ATI that can deliver Mac-like stability and video integration and performance on vanilla hardware, but I suspect I'll be disappointed since Oracle have hardly courted that sort of market. Maybe I'll just have to get a Mac - I've been resisting. :-( Let's remember: Sun opened a lot of technologies - but I rather think it was done without seeing how to monetise it. And you can't put the genie back in the box. Sun is now history. Maybe it would have been anyway, its speculation, but the management at Sun failed, badly. James ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Any news about 2010.3?
> No, because I understand Jim is not who can send us CD's and/or > minibooks for our next Latinamerican Installation Festival (we sent, > from the Venezuela, Colombia, and Argentina, for exampe, several emails > about this), or who is in charge of sending us news about the position > of Oracle about the UGs. I am sure you are correct. But maybe he can tell you who is. > Maybe I am wrong. Am I? Leaving the answer to that question to people more knowledgeable about the UG management within Sun/Oracle... Regards -- Volker -- Volker A. Brandt Consulting and Support for Sun Solaris Brandt & Brandt Computer GmbH WWW: http://www.bb-c.de/ Am Wiesenpfad 6, 53340 Meckenheim Email: v...@bb-c.de Handelsregister: Amtsgericht Bonn, HRB 10513 Schuhgröße: 45 Geschäftsführer: Rainer J. H. Brandt und Volker A. Brandt ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Any news about 2010.3?
2010/4/4 Matthias Pfützner : > Martin, > > sorry, yes, you're right, I didn't want to discredit you... > > There's been too much FUD here lately, thererfore I might be over-reacting! > > Sorry again! > > Matthias Matthias, ok. Thanks for publicly correcting your previous statement. I can understand your general agression towards "FUD-fed" threads like that. And nowadays I did not initiate it. Like you I rather protested against it: http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/opensolaris-discuss/2010-April/055347.html All that I did say earlier today was, that Oracle is not an innocent holy Saint Sunacle. And while I disagree with the OracleHasKilledOpenSolaris-FUD (which it clearly was), that I find it at the same time important not to praise or defend Oracle more than they deserve at this point (of current knowledge) in IT-history. Only time can show, if they decide to back their (few) pro-OpenSolaris words with good action. Then we know more. %martin > > You (?? ?? (Martin Bochnig)) wrote: >> 2010/4/4 Matthias Pfützner : >> > You (?? ?? (Martin Bochnig)) wrote: >> >> Did you notice? Their first move after the takeover was to lay-off Sun >> >> open-source officer Simon Phipps. Can you explain this with your >> >> logics from above? How would you? >> > >> > He left on his own: >> > >> > http://twitter.com/webmink/status/10861922797 >> > >> > http://webmink.com/2010/03/08/sundown/ >> > >> > As he left on March 8th, and the change to Oracle in the UK was on March >> > 1st, >> > it's absolutely clear, that he decided on his own to leave Oracle. He had a >> > job at Oracle, otherwhise he would have left BEFORE March 1st! >> >> >> Sorry for this (single) point of having been misinformed. >> I got my Info from a (new) OGB member and - given his trustworthyness >> - believed him without further verifying (in contrast to my usual >> behaviour). >> >> >> >> >> > So, do not TURN >> > truth to FUD, like you try to do for days, if not weeks lately! >> [snip] >> > Matthias >> > -- >> > Matthias Pfützner | Tel.: +49 700 PFUETZNER | Erst als die Faschisten >> > Lichtenbergstr.73 | mailto:matth...@pfuetzner.de | die Comics zensierten, >> > D-64289 Darmstadt | AIM: pfuetz, ICQ: 300967487 | wurde mir klar, wie übel >> > Germany | http://www.pfuetzner.de/matthias/ | diese Leute waren. >> > Fellini >> > >> >> >> >> DITTO! >> >> Interesting. >> I ??? >> >> You must be confusing me with somebody else. >> I hardly posted, and if I did, then it was not related to this subject. >> >> You have no URL?? >> You corrected me in one aspect. That´s good. >> But be so friendly and do your homework before writing something like this: >> >> > So, do not TURN >> > truth to FUD, like you try to do for days, if not weeks lately! >> [snip] >> > Matthias >> >> >> >> You cannot mean me. >> >> >> Trink ´ne Tasse Kaffee und denk drueber nach. >> > > -- > Matthias Pfützner | Tel.: +49 700 PFUETZNER | Lieber morgens zu müde vom > Lichtenbergstr.73 | mailto:matth...@pfuetzner.de | Sex, als abends zu müde > D-64289 Darmstadt | AIM: pfuetz, ICQ: 300967487 | für Sex! > Germany | http://www.pfuetzner.de/matthias/ | Unbekannte Quelle > ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Any news about 2010.3?
And, for the audience to note here, we (a couple people inside Sun/Oracle) are also trying to get those, who can speak to send out some words. But, as Simon said: Oracle is a company that passes information along, once the decisions are made. As long as there are no decisions, there is no info. It's as simple as that. Matthias I (Matthias Pfützner) wrote: > OK, as Simon now stated, that he has not been offered a position at Oracle, I > have to withdraw my assumption, that everybody who "passed March 1st" was > offered one... > > Sorry for the confusion... > > Matthias > > I (Matthias Pfützner) wrote: > > You (Joerg Schilling) wrote: > > > Matthias Pfützner wrote: > > > > > > > You (?? ?? (Martin Bochnig)) wrote: > > > > > Did you notice? Their first move after the takeover was to lay-off Sun > > > > > open-source officer Simon Phipps. Can you explain this with your > > > > > logics from above? How would you? > > > > > > > > He left on his own: > > > > > > > >http://twitter.com/webmink/status/10861922797 > > > > > > > >http://webmink.com/2010/03/08/sundown/ > > > > > > > > As he left on March 8th, and the change to Oracle in the UK was on > > > > March 1st, > > > > it's absolutely clear, that he decided on his own to leave Oracle. He > > > > had a > > > > job at Oracle, otherwhise he would have left BEFORE March 1st! So, do > > > > not TURN > > > > > > Unles you can explain us the legal situation in Britain, you seem to make > > > assumptions that have not been proven. > > > > > > In Germany there is paragraph 613a BGB (Betriebsübergang) that grants the > > > continuation of a job even if the company is sold. If there is something > > > similar > > > in Britain, your asumptions are false. > > > > I know from a lot of my colleagues inside Sun/Oracle, that ALL that saw the > > LEC have had new contract-offers and have to had those signed BEFORE. > > > > >From that I assume, that this is the same for Simon. Yes, an assumption, > > >but > > based on infos from a lot of colleagues over there in UK! > > > > And the BGB is one of the reasons, why LEC in Britain was earlier than the > > LEC > > in Germany (expected July 1st). > > > > > > truth to FUD, like you try to do for days, if not weeks lately! > > > > > > The text in his Blog seems to be neutral and I cannot see a hint that > > > proves one > > > or the other. > > > > > > In Germany it is completely unusual to leave a company on days different > > > from > > > the end of a month or at least the mid of a month. If someone leaves at > > > March > > > 8th and does not immediately start a new job, this would be a hint for > > > being > > > fired. Without an explanation from Simon, everything is speculative. > > > > Yes, it might be good to hear from Simon, but, as stated, everyone that saw > > March 1st had an offer from Oracle (afaik)... > > > > > Note that Simon originially claimed that he does not yet know whet to do > > > next. > > > The fact that he now is a director at the OpenSource Initiative does not > > > help > > > us > > > > > > Jörg > > > > Matthias > > -- > > Matthias Pfützner | Tel.: +49 700 PFUETZNER | Lieber morgens zu müde > > vom > > Lichtenbergstr.73 | mailto:matth...@pfuetzner.de | Sex, als abends zu müde > > D-64289 Darmstadt | AIM: pfuetz, ICQ: 300967487 | für Sex! > > Germany | http://www.pfuetzner.de/matthias/ | Unbekannte Quelle > > > > -- > Matthias Pfützner | Tel.: +49 700 PFUETZNER | Lieber morgens zu müde vom > Lichtenbergstr.73 | mailto:matth...@pfuetzner.de | Sex, als abends zu müde > D-64289 Darmstadt | AIM: pfuetz, ICQ: 300967487 | für Sex! > Germany | http://www.pfuetzner.de/matthias/ | Unbekannte Quelle > -- Matthias Pfützner | Tel.: +49 700 PFUETZNER | Lieber morgens zu müde vom Lichtenbergstr.73 | mailto:matth...@pfuetzner.de | Sex, als abends zu müde D-64289 Darmstadt | AIM: pfuetz, ICQ: 300967487 | für Sex! Germany | http://www.pfuetzner.de/matthias/ | Unbekannte Quelle ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Any news about 2010.3?
OK, as Simon now stated, that he has not been offered a position at Oracle, I have to withdraw my assumption, that everybody who "passed March 1st" was offered one... Sorry for the confusion... Matthias I (Matthias Pfützner) wrote: > You (Joerg Schilling) wrote: > > Matthias Pfützner wrote: > > > > > You (?? ?? (Martin Bochnig)) wrote: > > > > Did you notice? Their first move after the takeover was to lay-off Sun > > > > open-source officer Simon Phipps. Can you explain this with your > > > > logics from above? How would you? > > > > > > He left on his own: > > > > > >http://twitter.com/webmink/status/10861922797 > > > > > >http://webmink.com/2010/03/08/sundown/ > > > > > > As he left on March 8th, and the change to Oracle in the UK was on March > > > 1st, > > > it's absolutely clear, that he decided on his own to leave Oracle. He had > > > a > > > job at Oracle, otherwhise he would have left BEFORE March 1st! So, do not > > > TURN > > > > Unles you can explain us the legal situation in Britain, you seem to make > > assumptions that have not been proven. > > > > In Germany there is paragraph 613a BGB (Betriebsübergang) that grants the > > continuation of a job even if the company is sold. If there is something > > similar > > in Britain, your asumptions are false. > > I know from a lot of my colleagues inside Sun/Oracle, that ALL that saw the > LEC have had new contract-offers and have to had those signed BEFORE. > > >From that I assume, that this is the same for Simon. Yes, an assumption, but > based on infos from a lot of colleagues over there in UK! > > And the BGB is one of the reasons, why LEC in Britain was earlier than the LEC > in Germany (expected July 1st). > > > > truth to FUD, like you try to do for days, if not weeks lately! > > > > The text in his Blog seems to be neutral and I cannot see a hint that > > proves one > > or the other. > > > > In Germany it is completely unusual to leave a company on days different > > from > > the end of a month or at least the mid of a month. If someone leaves at > > March > > 8th and does not immediately start a new job, this would be a hint for > > being > > fired. Without an explanation from Simon, everything is speculative. > > Yes, it might be good to hear from Simon, but, as stated, everyone that saw > March 1st had an offer from Oracle (afaik)... > > > Note that Simon originially claimed that he does not yet know whet to do > > next. > > The fact that he now is a director at the OpenSource Initiative does not > > help > > us > > > > Jörg > > Matthias > -- > Matthias Pfützner | Tel.: +49 700 PFUETZNER | Lieber morgens zu müde vom > Lichtenbergstr.73 | mailto:matth...@pfuetzner.de | Sex, als abends zu müde > D-64289 Darmstadt | AIM: pfuetz, ICQ: 300967487 | für Sex! > Germany | http://www.pfuetzner.de/matthias/ | Unbekannte Quelle > -- Matthias Pfützner | Tel.: +49 700 PFUETZNER | Lieber morgens zu müde vom Lichtenbergstr.73 | mailto:matth...@pfuetzner.de | Sex, als abends zu müde D-64289 Darmstadt | AIM: pfuetz, ICQ: 300967487 | für Sex! Germany | http://www.pfuetzner.de/matthias/ | Unbekannte Quelle ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Any news about 2010.3?
You (Joerg Schilling) wrote: > Matthias Pfützner wrote: > > > You (?? ?? (Martin Bochnig)) wrote: > > > Did you notice? Their first move after the takeover was to lay-off Sun > > > open-source officer Simon Phipps. Can you explain this with your > > > logics from above? How would you? > > > > He left on his own: > > > >http://twitter.com/webmink/status/10861922797 > > > >http://webmink.com/2010/03/08/sundown/ > > > > As he left on March 8th, and the change to Oracle in the UK was on March > > 1st, > > it's absolutely clear, that he decided on his own to leave Oracle. He had a > > job at Oracle, otherwhise he would have left BEFORE March 1st! So, do not > > TURN > > Unles you can explain us the legal situation in Britain, you seem to make > assumptions that have not been proven. > > In Germany there is paragraph 613a BGB (Betriebsübergang) that grants the > continuation of a job even if the company is sold. If there is something > similar > in Britain, your asumptions are false. I know from a lot of my colleagues inside Sun/Oracle, that ALL that saw the LEC have had new contract-offers and have to had those signed BEFORE. >From that I assume, that this is the same for Simon. Yes, an assumption, but based on infos from a lot of colleagues over there in UK! And the BGB is one of the reasons, why LEC in Britain was earlier than the LEC in Germany (expected July 1st). > > truth to FUD, like you try to do for days, if not weeks lately! > > The text in his Blog seems to be neutral and I cannot see a hint that proves > one > or the other. > > In Germany it is completely unusual to leave a company on days different from > the end of a month or at least the mid of a month. If someone leaves at March > 8th and does not immediately start a new job, this would be a hint for being > fired. Without an explanation from Simon, everything is speculative. Yes, it might be good to hear from Simon, but, as stated, everyone that saw March 1st had an offer from Oracle (afaik)... > Note that Simon originially claimed that he does not yet know whet to do next. > The fact that he now is a director at the OpenSource Initiative does not help > us > > Jörg Matthias -- Matthias Pfützner | Tel.: +49 700 PFUETZNER | Lieber morgens zu müde vom Lichtenbergstr.73 | mailto:matth...@pfuetzner.de | Sex, als abends zu müde D-64289 Darmstadt | AIM: pfuetz, ICQ: 300967487 | für Sex! Germany | http://www.pfuetzner.de/matthias/ | Unbekannte Quelle ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Any news about 2010.3?
Martin, sorry, yes, you're right, I didn't want to discredit you... There's been too much FUD here lately, thererfore I might be over-reacting! Sorry again! Matthias You (?? ?? (Martin Bochnig)) wrote: > 2010/4/4 Matthias Pfützner : > > You (?? ?? (Martin Bochnig)) wrote: > >> Did you notice? Their first move after the takeover was to lay-off Sun > >> open-source officer Simon Phipps. Can you explain this with your > >> logics from above? How would you? > > > > He left on his own: > > > > http://twitter.com/webmink/status/10861922797 > > > > http://webmink.com/2010/03/08/sundown/ > > > > As he left on March 8th, and the change to Oracle in the UK was on March > > 1st, > > it's absolutely clear, that he decided on his own to leave Oracle. He had a > > job at Oracle, otherwhise he would have left BEFORE March 1st! > > > Sorry for this (single) point of having been misinformed. > I got my Info from a (new) OGB member and - given his trustworthyness > - believed him without further verifying (in contrast to my usual > behaviour). > > > > > > So, do not TURN > > truth to FUD, like you try to do for days, if not weeks lately! > [snip] > > Matthias > > -- > > Matthias Pfützner | Tel.: +49 700 PFUETZNER | Erst als die Faschisten > > Lichtenbergstr.73 | mailto:matth...@pfuetzner.de | die Comics zensierten, > > D-64289 Darmstadt | AIM: pfuetz, ICQ: 300967487 | wurde mir klar, wie übel > > Germany | http://www.pfuetzner.de/matthias/ | diese Leute waren. > > Fellini > > > > > > DITTO! > > Interesting. > I ??? > > You must be confusing me with somebody else. > I hardly posted, and if I did, then it was not related to this subject. > > You have no URL?? > You corrected me in one aspect. That´s good. > But be so friendly and do your homework before writing something like this: > > > So, do not TURN > > truth to FUD, like you try to do for days, if not weeks lately! > [snip] > > Matthias > > > > You cannot mean me. > > > Trink ´ne Tasse Kaffee und denk drueber nach. > -- Matthias Pfützner | Tel.: +49 700 PFUETZNER | Lieber morgens zu müde vom Lichtenbergstr.73 | mailto:matth...@pfuetzner.de | Sex, als abends zu müde D-64289 Darmstadt | AIM: pfuetz, ICQ: 300967487 | für Sex! Germany | http://www.pfuetzner.de/matthias/ | Unbekannte Quelle ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Any news about 2010.3?
On Sun, Apr 4, 2010 at 10:19 PM, Simon Phipps wrote: > It's been an interesting "does he take sugar" experience watching the > conversation about me; I thought I'd interject with a link to a story that > has correct information: > > http://www.infoworld.com/d/adventures-in-it/former-sun-open-source-officer-joins-osi-board-109 > > As for Oracle: Oracle are famous for their clearly-defined strategy of not > making statements about unreleased products. I anticipate that most advance > information will come in the form of actions rather than words. > > S. Hi Simon, I would like to apologize, that I did not recognize back then (2007), how much more I should have trusted you. Thank you for being a "good one" and for your achievements! I regret, that I did not see it before. GOOD LUCK to you on all scales!!! %martin ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Any news about 2010.3?
It's been an interesting "does he take sugar" experience watching the conversation about me; I thought I'd interject with a link to a story that has correct information: http://www.infoworld.com/d/adventures-in-it/former-sun-open-source-officer-joins-osi-board-109 As for Oracle: Oracle are famous for their clearly-defined strategy of not making statements about unreleased products. I anticipate that most advance information will come in the form of actions rather than words. S. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Any news about 2010.3?
Matthias Pfützner wrote: > You (?? ?? (Martin Bochnig)) wrote: > > Did you notice? Their first move after the takeover was to lay-off Sun > > open-source officer Simon Phipps. Can you explain this with your > > logics from above? How would you? > > He left on his own: > >http://twitter.com/webmink/status/10861922797 > >http://webmink.com/2010/03/08/sundown/ > > As he left on March 8th, and the change to Oracle in the UK was on March 1st, > it's absolutely clear, that he decided on his own to leave Oracle. He had a > job at Oracle, otherwhise he would have left BEFORE March 1st! So, do not TURN Unles you can explain us the legal situation in Britain, you seem to make assumptions that have not been proven. In Germany there is paragraph 613a BGB (Betriebsübergang) that grants the continuation of a job even if the company is sold. If there is something similar in Britain, your asumptions are false. > truth to FUD, like you try to do for days, if not weeks lately! The text in his Blog seems to be neutral and I cannot see a hint that proves one or the other. In Germany it is completely unusual to leave a company on days different from the end of a month or at least the mid of a month. If someone leaves at March 8th and does not immediately start a new job, this would be a hint for being fired. Without an explanation from Simon, everything is speculative. Note that Simon originially claimed that he does not yet know whet to do next. The fact that he now is a director at the OpenSource Initiative does not help us Jörg -- EMail:jo...@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin j...@cs.tu-berlin.de(uni) joerg.schill...@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Any news about 2010.3?
Hi, Volker! On 04/ 4/10 06:12 AM, Volker A. Brandt wrote: Hello HeCSa! I (we) sent emails to the "assigned" Oracle employee to deal with the communities, but didn't receive an answer in more than a month, or maybe more time. Have you tried emailing Jimm Grisanzio, or someone from the OGB? This sounds more like a communications problem. No, because I understand Jim is not who can send us CD's and/or minibooks for our next Latinamerican Installation Festival (we sent, from the Venezuela, Colombia, and Argentina, for exampe, several emails about this), or who is in charge of sending us news about the position of Oracle about the UGs. Maybe I am wrong. Am I? Thanks, and best regards, HeCSa Regards -- VOlker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Any news about 2010.3?
Hi Peter, ok, thanks for the polish! Regards, %martin 2010/4/4 Peter Tribble : > 2010/4/4 Мартин Бохниг (Martin Bochnig) : >> On Sun, Apr 4, 2010 at 12:12 PM, Volker A. Brandt wrote: >>> Hello HeCSa! >>> >>> I (we) sent emails to the "assigned" Oracle employee to deal with the communities, but didn't receive an answer in more than a month, or maybe more time. >>> >>> Have you tried emailing Jimm Grisanzio, or someone from the OGB? >>> >>> This sounds more like a communications problem. >>> >>> >>> Regards -- VOlker >> >> >> >> Now you are getting too Oracle-friendly. >> While it is indeed nonsense to bash Oracle based on rumors and FUD, >> this time you are going too far to the opposite end (not every of >> their PR-statements might turn out to be the truth). > > Oracle haven't made many statements so far, but I have yet to see > one that was untrue. > >> Did you notice? Their first move after the takeover was to lay-off Sun >> open-source officer Simon Phipps. Can you explain this with your >> logics from above? How would you? > > I believe Simon quit. And Oracle have kept most of the engineering > organization intact; development work seems to continue to be active. > >> Another thing which makes me really wonder is all the silence that >> (does not) go(es) out from the newly elected OGB. And they don´t need >> to be afraid of losing their jobs, because almost all of them either >> never had a Sun position, or quit Sun long ago. Why this silence from >> *them*?? > > Frankly, because we don't know either. And we've managed to get more > information and commitments out of Oracle than I think they would have > issued on their own. Also, the new OGB has been in office maybe three > days, and we haven't yet had a formal meeting. > >> Back to the OpenSolaris 2010.03 delay: If really just a technical >> stopper is the reason for the delay, then it could be a thing as >> simple as converting all vendor and license strings from Sun to >> Oracle. On caiman this was webref´ed last week. Plus getting a fancy >> Oracle backdrop in red, plus a new Grub- and bootup- screen etc, plus >> the opensolaris.com website ... etc. >> >> The question is IF. And WHY all the silence and secrecy?? > > Sun had a corporate culture that was very open and emphasized > communication. (Too much talk, too little profit, to be honest) > > Oracle's corporate culture seems to be entirely the opposite. And not > only is the culture orders of magnitude more secretive, but I think the > newly acquired Sun employees are still adjusting. > > I have no more idea what the release date is than anybody else. But > there have been absolutely clear public commitments that there will be > a release, and the only official statement on the date I've seen is that it > will be in the first half of calendar year 2010. (If people have been paying > attention they may have seen the term 2010.H1 used in places.) > > -- > -Peter Tribble > http://www.petertribble.co.uk/ - http://ptribble.blogspot.com/ > ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Any news about 2010.3?
2010/4/4 Matthias Pfützner : > You (?? ?? (Martin Bochnig)) wrote: >> Did you notice? Their first move after the takeover was to lay-off Sun >> open-source officer Simon Phipps. Can you explain this with your >> logics from above? How would you? > > He left on his own: > > http://twitter.com/webmink/status/10861922797 > > http://webmink.com/2010/03/08/sundown/ > > As he left on March 8th, and the change to Oracle in the UK was on March 1st, > it's absolutely clear, that he decided on his own to leave Oracle. He had a > job at Oracle, otherwhise he would have left BEFORE March 1st! Sorry for this (single) point of having been misinformed. I got my Info from a (new) OGB member and - given his trustworthyness - believed him without further verifying (in contrast to my usual behaviour). > So, do not TURN > truth to FUD, like you try to do for days, if not weeks lately! [snip] > Matthias > -- > Matthias Pfützner | Tel.: +49 700 PFUETZNER | Erst als die Faschisten > Lichtenbergstr.73 | mailto:matth...@pfuetzner.de | die Comics zensierten, > D-64289 Darmstadt | AIM: pfuetz, ICQ: 300967487 | wurde mir klar, wie übel > Germany | http://www.pfuetzner.de/matthias/ | diese Leute waren. Fellini > DITTO! Interesting. I ??? You must be confusing me with somebody else. I hardly posted, and if I did, then it was not related to this subject. You have no URL?? You corrected me in one aspect. That´s good. But be so friendly and do your homework before writing something like this: > So, do not TURN > truth to FUD, like you try to do for days, if not weeks lately! [snip] > Matthias You cannot mean me. Trink ´ne Tasse Kaffee und denk drueber nach. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Any news about 2010.3?
You (?? ?? (Martin Bochnig)) wrote: > Did you notice? Their first move after the takeover was to lay-off Sun > open-source officer Simon Phipps. Can you explain this with your > logics from above? How would you? He left on his own: http://twitter.com/webmink/status/10861922797 http://webmink.com/2010/03/08/sundown/ As he left on March 8th, and the change to Oracle in the UK was on March 1st, it's absolutely clear, that he decided on his own to leave Oracle. He had a job at Oracle, otherwhise he would have left BEFORE March 1st! So, do not TURN truth to FUD, like you try to do for days, if not weeks lately! > Another thing which makes me really wonder is all the silence that > (does not) go(es) out from the newly elected OGB. And they don´t need > to be afraid of losing their jobs, because almost all of them either > never had a Sun position, or quit Sun long ago. Why this silence from > *them*?? They are NOT all Oracle people, so it's up to THEM to decide how and what to tell when... BTW: Simon Phipps is PART of the new OGB! > Back to the OpenSolaris 2010.03 delay: If really just a technical > stopper is the reason for the delay, then it could be a thing as > simple as converting all vendor and license strings from Sun to > Oracle. On caiman this was webref´ed last week. Plus getting a fancy > Oracle backdrop in red, plus a new Grub- and bootup- screen etc, plus > the opensolaris.com website ... etc. So, what's your point here? That needs to be done! Regardless of delay in OSOL2010.0X... > The question is IF. And WHY all the silence and secrecy?? That's the question! Yes! But here, no-one can answer, because, as stated multiple times, the people here simply don't know! Matthias -- Matthias Pfützner | Tel.: +49 700 PFUETZNER | Erst als die Faschisten Lichtenbergstr.73 | mailto:matth...@pfuetzner.de | die Comics zensierten, D-64289 Darmstadt | AIM: pfuetz, ICQ: 300967487 | wurde mir klar, wie übel Germany | http://www.pfuetzner.de/matthias/ | diese Leute waren. Fellini ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Any news about 2010.3?
> > I have no more idea what the release date is than anybody else. But > there have been absolutely clear public commitments that there will be > a release, and the only official statement on the date I've seen is that it > will be in the first half of calendar year 2010. (If people have been paying > attention they may have seen the term 2010.H1 used in places.) If ORACLE can do it, I believe that majority of community would be happyif you mark Releases like 2010.Qx where x is member of following set -{1, 2, 3, 4}. Uros > > -- > -Peter Tribble > http://www.petertribble.co.uk/ - http://ptribble.blogspot.com/ > ___ > opensolaris-discuss mailing list > opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org _ Hotmail: Trusted email with powerful SPAM protection. https://signup.live.com/signup.aspx?id=60969___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Any news about 2010.3?
> this time you are going too far to the opposite end (not every of > > their PR-statements might turn out to be the truth). > > Of course. This is called "marketing". :-) > This is called "bad marketing". Once you promise something you have tofulfill it, otherwise nobody would trust you if you again promise something. > > Did you notice? Their first move after the takeover was to lay-off Sun > > open-source officer Simon Phipps. Can you explain this with your > > logics from above? How would you? > > 1. They have worked on the takover for almost a year. > 2. It is not clear whether he was laid off or decided to quit. And >I certainly wouldn't know. > > > Another thing which makes me really wonder is all the silence that > > (does not) go(es) out from the newly elected OGB. And they don´t need > > to be afraid of losing their jobs, because almost all of them either > > never had a Sun position, or quit Sun long ago. Why this silence from > > *them*?? > > Hmmm... I have seen a number of OGB members post in the various lists. > What do you want them to do? Post "yes, there will be 2010.03" every > day? > I'm speaking with Jim very frequently and he even doesn't have enough fundsto send me few OpenSolaris Bibles so we could have one in each branch andfor our "Honored" members. > > Back to the OpenSolaris 2010.03 delay: If really just a technical > > stopper is the reason for the delay, then it could be a thing as > > simple as converting all vendor and license strings from Sun to > > Oracle. On caiman this was webref´ed last week. Plus getting a fancy > > Oracle backdrop in red, plus a new Grub- and bootup- screen etc, plus > > the opensolaris.com website ... etc. > > Hmmm... I am glad I can change the backdrop. :-) > > > The question is IF. And WHY all the silence and secrecy?? > > Because they have other things to do? At least ORACLE could publish one Community-oriented statement tellingeveryone what is going on, and what will happen in near future. It'd consumenot more than one hour writing such statement. > > > Regards -- Volker > -- > > Volker A. Brandt Consulting and Support for Sun Solaris > Brandt & Brandt Computer GmbH WWW: http://www.bb-c.de/ > Am Wiesenpfad 6, 53340 Meckenheim Email: v...@bb-c.de > Handelsregister: Amtsgericht Bonn, HRB 10513 Schuhgröße: 45 > Geschäftsführer: Rainer J. H. Brandt und Volker A. Brandt > ___ > opensolaris-discuss mailing list > opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org Regards,Uros _ Hotmail: Free, trusted and rich email service. https://signup.live.com/signup.aspx?id=60969___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Any news about 2010.3?
Hi Sarah, Due to some security concerns and other issues, I'd flipped a coin and await the forthcoming snv_b138 kernel release. As for any independent distro releases between now and before snv_b138, my opinion is to wait on doing any major system upgrades, 'production' related migrations, or journalistic reviews until snv_138 is officially released. This is for mainly commented for current users using OpenSolaris for 'very' high-end production-grade audio/video workstations or high-availability servers with several TBs of in-flux data. If you are having ANY major issues with a prior OpenSolaris release, just give OSOL 2010.03 until April 16th or await the snv_138 kernel release. You'll be 'very' glad you did. ~ Ken Mays -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Any news about 2010.3?
> (If people have been paying > attention they may have seen the term 2010.H1 used in places.) Aaah, so that's what it means. Thanks Peter. Regards -- Volker -- Volker A. Brandt Consulting and Support for Sun Solaris Brandt & Brandt Computer GmbH WWW: http://www.bb-c.de/ Am Wiesenpfad 6, 53340 Meckenheim Email: v...@bb-c.de Handelsregister: Amtsgericht Bonn, HRB 10513 Schuhgröße: 45 Geschäftsführer: Rainer J. H. Brandt und Volker A. Brandt ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Any news about 2010.3?
2010/4/4 Мартин Бохниг (Martin Bochnig) : > On Sun, Apr 4, 2010 at 12:12 PM, Volker A. Brandt wrote: >> Hello HeCSa! >> >> >>> I (we) sent emails to the "assigned" Oracle employee to deal with the >>> communities, but didn't receive an answer in more than a month, or maybe >>> more time. >> >> Have you tried emailing Jimm Grisanzio, or someone from the OGB? >> >> This sounds more like a communications problem. >> >> >> Regards -- VOlker > > > > Now you are getting too Oracle-friendly. > While it is indeed nonsense to bash Oracle based on rumors and FUD, > this time you are going too far to the opposite end (not every of > their PR-statements might turn out to be the truth). Oracle haven't made many statements so far, but I have yet to see one that was untrue. > Did you notice? Their first move after the takeover was to lay-off Sun > open-source officer Simon Phipps. Can you explain this with your > logics from above? How would you? I believe Simon quit. And Oracle have kept most of the engineering organization intact; development work seems to continue to be active. > Another thing which makes me really wonder is all the silence that > (does not) go(es) out from the newly elected OGB. And they don´t need > to be afraid of losing their jobs, because almost all of them either > never had a Sun position, or quit Sun long ago. Why this silence from > *them*?? Frankly, because we don't know either. And we've managed to get more information and commitments out of Oracle than I think they would have issued on their own. Also, the new OGB has been in office maybe three days, and we haven't yet had a formal meeting. > Back to the OpenSolaris 2010.03 delay: If really just a technical > stopper is the reason for the delay, then it could be a thing as > simple as converting all vendor and license strings from Sun to > Oracle. On caiman this was webref´ed last week. Plus getting a fancy > Oracle backdrop in red, plus a new Grub- and bootup- screen etc, plus > the opensolaris.com website ... etc. > > The question is IF. And WHY all the silence and secrecy?? Sun had a corporate culture that was very open and emphasized communication. (Too much talk, too little profit, to be honest) Oracle's corporate culture seems to be entirely the opposite. And not only is the culture orders of magnitude more secretive, but I think the newly acquired Sun employees are still adjusting. I have no more idea what the release date is than anybody else. But there have been absolutely clear public commitments that there will be a release, and the only official statement on the date I've seen is that it will be in the first half of calendar year 2010. (If people have been paying attention they may have seen the term 2010.H1 used in places.) -- -Peter Tribble http://www.petertribble.co.uk/ - http://ptribble.blogspot.com/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org