Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Sun COO Schwartz Promises Open Source Solaris

timothy posted more than 10 years ago | from the big-welcome-sign-but-which-license dept.

Sun Microsystems 371

Alapan writes "According to C-Net Asia, Sun plans to make Solaris open source soon. While I hardly expect Sun to make it GPL compatible, I wonder how much restrictions Sun will place on distributing modified solaris systems. And will we some integration of Solaris' strong points into other open source OSes like Linux and BSD?" Update: 06/02 14:16 GMT by T : Correction: Schwartz is Sun's COO and President, but not CEO (as the headline originally had it).

cancel ×

371 comments

I would be wary of this news (5, Insightful)

CreamOfWheat (593775) | more than 10 years ago | (#9313979)

Doesn't anyone else find it strange that we have a Microsoft and Sun deal and now Sun starts touting, "You should not be using Linux, as some day we are going to be making Solaris open source." Yeah sure but are we certain that "some day" will arrive? It has long been a tactic of M$ to announce something as being "almost ready" to forestall interest in a competing product that they really have no answer for. Then by creating enough uncertainty and doubt, they repeatedly harm their competitors with vaporware announcements.

Re:I would be wary of this news (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9314076)

Watch me hack all of j00. alert('YOU ARE HAXORED!!!!!!!!') HAHAHAHAHA I HACKED J00l. I own all of j00. j00 fscking morons. I am so smart and u are all dumb. Call me god. Bow before me. I now own slashdot. Just for good measure. I know HTML by the way. hi

Re:I would be wary of this news (-1, Offtopic)

XsynackX (775111) | more than 10 years ago | (#9314098)

<script>alert('Haxored');</script> Look, my mom taught me to haxor. Im a haxor. I know html.

Re:I would be wary of this news (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9314142)

wtf are you retarded?

Re:I would be wary of this news (-1, Troll)

XsynackX (775111) | more than 10 years ago | (#9314156)

what's ur Ip address. I'm going to hack j00. I hack up smoke. j00 betta ph33r me for I have r00t. ROOT I SAY!!!!

Re:I would be wary of this news (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9314189)

127.0.0.1

Come get some. :)

Re:I would be wary of this news (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9314200)

Hello and welcome to Slashdot Mr Mitnick

Re:I would be wary of this news (4, Insightful)

Allen Zadr (767458) | more than 10 years ago | (#9314109)

Personally, I've come to think of the MS/Sun deal as mostly a P.R. move. It sounds good to potential Sun investors. It sounds good to Microsoft haters and Java writers - (finally, they've worked out something about this damned Java thing).

Sun is responsible for purchasing and open-sourcing Star (Open) Office. They've actually had success with this, and are probably thinking that open-source will really help sell more hardware.

apple and legos (3, Insightful)

cheese_wallet (88279) | more than 10 years ago | (#9313980)

Addressing the question of how Sun plans to make money with an open-source Solaris, he simply said that Sun doesn't have to rely on only the operating system. "We have hardware, storage, services and support. What we are doing is taking that whole thing and selling that whole thing," he said.

This looks like the exact opposite approach of Apple, who makes really cool closed source software to sell their hardware.

It seems to me that it's pretty easy to slap together hardware systems, but developing software systems is a little more daunting of a task. In hardware, it's like putting legos together.

Software tries to do that too, but everybody and their brother tries to make a better lego, and so you end up with millions of incompatible partial solutions that are very difficult to build up into a complete solution.

Re:apple and legos (4, Insightful)

Allen Zadr (767458) | more than 10 years ago | (#9314070)

I would agree with you, when speaking only about X86 systems, but the SPARC line has long been a place where Sun excels

Well, when I say excel, I should really say it in the past tense. Being, really, since the SPARC platform went PCI the whole thing went downhill. But, sun still has some good offerings on the hardware side, and are (supposedly) working on new ones. I think building your own CPU is orders of magnitude harder than writing a "Yet Another Unix Clone" (especially now).

Re:apple and legos (1)

Timesprout (579035) | more than 10 years ago | (#9314088)

It seems to me that it's pretty easy to slap together hardware systems, but developing software systems is a little more daunting of a task. In hardware, it's like putting legos together.

What drugs are you taking? You have the argument completely fuck ways. Anyone can churn out software at little or no cost, building a FAB is an plant entirely different matter.

Re:apple and legos (1)

cheese_wallet (88279) | more than 10 years ago | (#9314195)

Anyone can churn out software at little or no cost, building a FAB is an plant entirely different matter

Well, I was talking about systems, not silicon. But even with that argument, there are some tremendously fast FPGAs out there, and you can even get open source RISC cpu cores from here. [opencores.org]

So you don't need a FAB to build a CPU. The resources (that would be the legos I mentioned) are all out there.

SUN Wakes the SCO Army of Sleepy Lawyers (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9313982)

In a related story, SCO draws it beady lawyer eyes on SUN. SUN's CEO retorts by saying that SCO stands for Sucky Companies Outsource and nanny nanny boo boo stick your head in doo doo - of course I paraphrased and may be taking completely out of context but that is the way I heard it.

comments to sun (4, Informative)

millahtime (710421) | more than 10 years ago | (#9313988)

I wonder if sun will accept comments on their system from those who write linux and BSD?

Re:comments to sun (1)

ospirata (565063) | more than 10 years ago | (#9314099)

If Solaris really goes open source, Sun will have no alternative, but to accept comments. Otherwise the project may fork.

I tell this believing Sun will release Solaris code under GPL, because they have few reasons to hide the code of a doomed OS. Sun's focus is linux and its java platform. Not OS market.

Re:comments to sun (1)

Allen Zadr (767458) | more than 10 years ago | (#9314154)

Hey cool, maybe us Linux people can finally fix the infamous Solaris memory leaks!

Re:comments to sun (1)

Short Circuit (52384) | more than 10 years ago | (#9314248)

Remember that SCO's UNIX has little or no author attribution. So it's debatable that SCO can reissue under a different license.

The same may be true with Sun, depending on how well their code is documented. They may need to rewrite huge tracts of it before they can safely say, "We have the right to release all of this code under whatever license we choose."

Gentoo?? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9313993)

I use Gentoo; how does this affect me?

Does this mean that . . . (4, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9313994)

Open Source Java is on its way?

Re:Does this mean that . . . (2, Interesting)

stephenbooth (172227) | more than 10 years ago | (#9314194)

I do know that Eric Raymond went to speak to Sun UK a couple of months ago and it was strongly rumoured that it was about open sourcing Java.

Stephen

God, I hope not. (3, Insightful)

Liselle (684663) | more than 10 years ago | (#9314203)

That's a disaster waiting to happen. Java needs to be under strict control, else we'll have a dozen forks that won't play nice with each other. Open Source and Free Software are all well and good, but when it comes to Java, I'm drawing a line in the sand. It's a noble goal, but not worth the risk of shattering the language. The "write once, run anywhere" mantra would go right out the window. It'll be like 1997 again.

Re:Does this mean that . . . (2, Insightful)

stephenry (648792) | more than 10 years ago | (#9314247)

No, Given the fact that soon after IBM public requested that Sun Open Source Java, Microsoft mysteriously give them a $2Billion settlement, I think it's fair to say that would have been on the basis of NOT open sourcing JAVA. Do you actually think that settlement was on the basis of Microsoft caring about its past -anticompetitive- misdeeds, and saving a competitor thats bleeding revenue like river and would most likely not survive to see a true settlement through the court system? Afterall, it would pretty much destroy .NET and Microsoft's plans for consumer lockin in Longhorn.

First post! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9313995)

First post!

Re:First post! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9314022)

lol gud 1

Sun (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9313997)

Does anyone notice that Sun is a company that is trying to profit off of Java. They didn't even invent Java. What is their problem? I'm sick and tired of their CEO trying to keep Java in the private domain. Anyone agree?

Re:Sun (-1, Troll)

XsynackX (775111) | more than 10 years ago | (#9314049)

You are right on man! Sun is evil. Maybe. All I know is that I am a leet h4x0r. I hack up smoke. No one is better than me. sl007

Free as in Free Free. (2, Insightful)

garcia (6573) | more than 10 years ago | (#9313999)

On the subject of a probable licensing model for the open-source Solaris, John Loiacono, executive vice president of Sun's Software Group, said: "We have to consider what licensing model we use and what levels of free usage we want.

I'll tell you what level of free you should use. The only one that exsists. FREE. Not free with reservations, not free with restrictions, not free blah blah blah, FREE.

Re:Free as in Free Free. (3, Insightful)

shadow303 (446306) | more than 10 years ago | (#9314096)

Oh, so you also support the MIT/BSD license.

What is free? Is your free the same as mine? (3, Insightful)

LWATCDR (28044) | more than 10 years ago | (#9314140)

Is that free as in beer, speech, GPL, or BSD? Not everyone agrees what FREE means. The BSD crowd claims that the GPL is not free because you force people that use GPL code to release the source so you are limiting their freedom to do what they want with the code. The GPL people claim that the BSD people are letting the code be locked away. A lot of people only want free as in I don't pay for it.
Sun could say that it is GPL but only from the Sparc chip AKA QT. Which many feel is free but I do not.
Or it could be you get the source code but you may not sell your changes and must give them back to Sun so they can distrubute it to other Solaris users. This is Free as in getting free labor. Could it be free as in GPL but only for a single CPU?
I do not see it as free as in pure GPL or BSD but who knows.

Re:What is free? Is your free the same as mine? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9314215)

What part of my post didn't you understand? I think I made it perfectly clear which "free" I was talking about. The one that doesn't need to be discussed.

Let's stop playing symantics and just use it the way it was meant to be.

Re:What is free? Is your free the same as mine? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9314254)

The BSD crowd claims that the GPL is not free because you force people that use GPL code to release the source so you are limiting their freedom to do what they want with the code.

Will this FUD ever stop? GPL's restrictions only apply if you distribute GPL. BSD also has restrictions. Have you heard of "public domain"? That's the only "true" free.

Re:Free as in Free Free. (1)

sql*kitten (1359) | more than 10 years ago | (#9314235)

The only one that exsists. FREE. Not free with reservations, not free with restrictions, not free blah blah blah, FREE

You mean public domain? That's not gonna happen.. even RMS isn't that extreme.

Re:Free as in Free Free. (1)

ospirata (565063) | more than 10 years ago | (#9314244)

The way you show things it seems that freedom could be reached with BSD license only.

John Loiacono is right. GPL is a "freedom level" lower than BSD, but still free. And LGPL is another "freedom level" lower than GPL, and it is still free.

Sun has gone mad (3, Interesting)

TyrelHaveman (159881) | more than 10 years ago | (#9314004)

Some time in the last few months, Sun Microsystems has lost their collective mind. Not that I don't agree with their decisions, but they have changed quite a bit. I'm just not sure yet whether it's good or bad.

good or bad? (1)

millahtime (710421) | more than 10 years ago | (#9314032)

it'll be simple to them if it's good or bad.

Make money = good decision

loose money = bad decision

Now, if they are loosing money but still happy with this then they are loosing their minds.

Re:good or bad? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9314231)

Make money = good decision

loose money = bad decision


Sure, you say that about loose money... but how about tight money? What happens if they get rid of all their money that's too loose and get some tight money in exchange?

Loose rhymes with goose and is the opposite of tight. Lose rhymes with fuse and is the opposite of win. Back to grade 3 for you.

Re:Sun has gone mad (1)

El_Ge_Ex (218107) | more than 10 years ago | (#9314180)

Some time in the last few months, Sun Microsystems has lost their collective mind.

You can't lose what you never had. I can sum up this issue in one statement: Scott McNeally [sun.com] is trying to save his a$$. He wasted too much time and money on the M$ lawsuit with not enough to show for it and now he's trying to play catch-up before the investors lose patience.

Prediction: Open-courcing Solaris will lead to cuts in the Solaris funding. If the new Solaris "community" doesn't pick up enough of the slack, they SUN still has a new business partner [microsoft.com] that would be more than willing to provide them with an "alternative" OS solution.

My opinion. Take it as it is.

-B

An Obvious Question (1)

SamiousHaze (212418) | more than 10 years ago | (#9314007)

If SCO would sue ... everyone ... without being open source, then how difficult would it be for Sun/Solaris to make claims that Code / IP was stolen? I'm just sayin...

Re:An Obvious Question (1)

sander (7831) | more than 10 years ago | (#9314181)

you appear to be saying you have lost your mind. With the code being open everybody will be able o run code comparison tools and immediately verify the truth of falsity of such claims.

porting (1)

millahtime (710421) | more than 10 years ago | (#9314013)

I wonder how long until solaris is ported to other archicecture. Could this be a full functioning 64 bit supported OS on the x86 systems?

Re:porting (3, Informative)

grigori (676336) | more than 10 years ago | (#9314039)

Expected at end of year with Solaris 10: 64 bit on SPARC and AMD, 32 bit on Pentium

Re:porting (2, Informative)

mh123083 (514387) | more than 10 years ago | (#9314059)

Umm, I assume you have heard of Solaris X86 and also Sun's Opteron based servers.

Solaris *HAS* been ported to other architectures (1)

gorim (700913) | more than 10 years ago | (#9314102)

The x86 port has existed for years, with every new Solaris release since 2.5 ? (maybe earlier) At Solaris 2.5.1 there was a PowerPC port. It only lasted that release though... It would be cool to run Solaris on my Mac!!! (Yes I can be perverted at times...but I always thought Sun and Apple should join forces...Apple makes a better desktop UNIX workstation now than Sun ever could, and that used to be Sun's bread and butter).

maybe they'll do an X? (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9314018)

maybe they will do what Apple is doing with OS X???

Actually, the current Solaris release *IS* X (1)

gorim (700913) | more than 10 years ago | (#9314133)


Solaris X has been released I believe.

Err...thats Solaris 10...sorry...

How soon before the live CD comes out?? (1)

the_rajah (749499) | more than 10 years ago | (#9314019)

Can't wait. Love those live CD's that are so much fun to use to freak out co-workers when they boot up in the morning.

"Do the Right Thing. It will gratify some people and astound the rest." - Mark Twain

Odd.. (5, Informative)

jwthompson2 (749521) | more than 10 years ago | (#9314021)

Just yesterday we were talking about this [slashdot.org] ...which just leaves me saying huh!? Unless they meant Shared-Source and not really OSI-Style open source...

Re:Odd.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9314083)

I think it's just the buzz of the week. It will eventually die down when everyone realizes what it really means (high costs or high DRM rates).

Once a nice spring rain comes through and cools it all off we can go back to being happy running our already free as in free OSs and Sun can go back to being a company that used to be cool.

I could make a joke but i won't (or maybe i will) (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9314024)

So if the software is free and the hardware is free...

1. give away everything
2. ???
3. profit!

no seriously, do they think they can pull off a profit from providing support services a la red hat, or will they try to squeeze profit from their other software offerings? makes no sense to me... have then gone insane?

Re:I could make a joke but i won't (or maybe i wil (5, Interesting)

stratjakt (596332) | more than 10 years ago | (#9314103)

do they think they can pull off a profit from providing support services

Yes, they have the experience and cred in the industry to do just that, unlike Red Hat who were (are) viewed as an upstart by many CTOs.

One thing holding back the adoption of Sun (and it was true in my office when we started looking to replace HP-9000 MPE based systems) is uncertainty as to the future of the OS. If we drop a boatload of cash into a bunch of Solaris boxes, and MSFT buys up and dissolves Sun tomorrow, then what?

Hell forget the hardware, what happens to our all our apps that we've tightly integrated into Solaris? Do we port all that stuff yet again to another unix?

With the source, that worry is gone. This is why Linux is succeeding, and because of Linux and the various free BSD's, folks who write checks are nervous about proprietary Unixes. Thing is, they want the support and expertise of a company like Sun, but they see the value in the openness of systems like Linux.

This is a very smart move on Sun's part, it'll push a lot of folks onto their side of the fence, and they should net a metric assload in support contracts and hardware sales.

Re:I could make a joke but i won't (or maybe i wil (4, Funny)

nightsweat (604367) | more than 10 years ago | (#9314237)

1. give away everything
2. ???
3. profit!

The Nineties are back! Hoorah!

Re:I could make a joke but i won't (or maybe i wil (1)

sander (7831) | more than 10 years ago | (#9314239)

replace 2 with 'get everybody to sign a support contract'

Did they reveal the details? (1)

kugeln (680574) | more than 10 years ago | (#9314026)

Sun and Microsoft never did disclose the details of that deal that went down. I'd be willing to bet that Sun is now just another exotic car parked in Bill's garage (or at least a nice new lease)

Best Grammar Ever (2, Funny)

Edward Faulkner (664260) | more than 10 years ago | (#9314029)

"And will we some integration of Solaris' strong points into other open source OSes like Linux and BSD?"

Mmmm. Some integration will we make.

Re:Best Grammar Ever (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9314210)

And you can't forget to see "how much restrictions" are placed either. Definitely looks like the grammar police stepped out for some donuts and coffee.

Re:Best Grammar Ever (1)

sander (7831) | more than 10 years ago | (#9314220)

yes, yes, just like koffice and gnumeric and abiword are reusing lots of code from OpenOffice.org

What license? (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9314030)

Sun's idea of "open source" is sometimes a peculiar one. What license will Solaris be OSed with?

Great news though... free hardware AND software from Sun. How does Sun make money? Volume!

Counter to the Linux threat? (3, Insightful)

stephenry (648792) | more than 10 years ago | (#9314041)

Would it be possible -and I'm no expert by any means- that this is a direct attack on Linux. By that I mean that in all likelyhood Sun will probably use a GPL incompatible license, and aim to steer development effort away from Linux and on to Solaris; over which they would have more control, causing, in essence, a fork in Linux Kernel Development. I bet Microsoft got a good deal of influence on Sun's business decisions for $2Billions.

Probably not GPL... (1, Troll)

clifgriffin (676199) | more than 10 years ago | (#9314045)

And for good reason. The GPL is stupid. It's saying "Here's are code. But oh wait...you can only use it how we want."

The BSD license is the best "Here's our code. Use it however you want. Please don't sue us."

Now I don't expect Solaris to be released under either, I'm sure there's will be geared towards comforting those who love sing the same old tired out tune about open source software being inately more secure.

So stop complaining, Sun is trying to convince /.'s that they do value Open Source values...but let's face it. Sun's business model can't support everything you're going to want.

Take what you can get, and stop whining.

Re:Probably not GPL... (2, Interesting)

RdsArts (667685) | more than 10 years ago | (#9314193)

No, the GPL says "here's the code, use it how you want but you have to give it back if you make a binary publicly available." This is one clearly-defined use condition that is easily met. The way you describe the GPL is more fitting of SharedSource or any of a number of other, proprietary vendor's license on source. Many of whom started with or included BSD-licensed code.

Interesting view (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9314050)

Probably the most interesting quote in the article:-

But one problem that Schwartz wants to avoid is having Solaris splintered into different distributions like Linux, which he said creates application incompatibilities. Going the way of Linux-type licensing, he suggested, creates open source but not open standards.

"There is a big difference between both (open source and open standards). There is one Linux company in the world today that's confusing the two concepts, and that is Red Hat. And it is very dangerous," said Schwartz.

"They are saying that because they are open source, they are open standards. But they are losing track of something that we've always been focused on. Which is that open standards enable substitution, choice and competition. Customers want to use our application server, or they may want to use Websphere, or BEA or a J2EE-compliant JBox," he added.


So, the salient points:-

Open source does not mean open standards

Splintered distributions is bad

So when did Sun become Microsoft?

April 2, 2004 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9314211)

So when did Sun become Microsoft?

They became Microsun on April 2, 2004 [slashdot.org]

Of course, there have been messages from Jim Gosling telling us to have faith and not to panic. But then Schwartz opens his mouth...

Solaris has already been open source (1)

jdigital (84195) | more than 10 years ago | (#9314051)

Depending on your personal definition of 'open'. But I purchased the full source to x86/SPARC off the Sun site 4 years ago - it cost me around $40. They canned that program pretty quick.

Ummm I thought hardware was going to be free (-1, Redundant)

Mandrias (5341) | more than 10 years ago | (#9314055)

Ok so now Sun is saying that they will open source Solaris? I thought we just had a story [slashdot.org] on how Sun says software is going to be all subscription based and the hardware will be free... hmmm

Really? (1, Interesting)

countach (534280) | more than 10 years ago | (#9314057)

Firstly, I really really doubt that it will be real open source, so much as Sun's pseudo open source (aka Java). I can understand Sun's desire to prevent forks and retain compatibility, but that doesn't make it real open source.

Secondly, won't SCO have something to say about this? I would have thought there were some contracts to do with Unix that would prevent them open sourcing it. I know Sun "bought out" the rights, but surely that didn't include open sourcing the whole thing and destroying SCO's ability to licence Unix to other people?

Left hand, meet right hand (2, Insightful)

signe (64498) | more than 10 years ago | (#9314062)

I guess he hasn't been talking to his COO lately, considering that just yesterday [slashdot.org] we were reading that Sun says that hardware will be free. So if Sun's hardware is going to be free, and their OS is going to be free, where do I sign up?

-Todd

Re:Left hand, meet right hand (1)

frieked (187664) | more than 10 years ago | (#9314227)

Schwartz IS the COO
So said Sun Microsystems' president and chief operating officer Jonathan Schwartz at an Asia Pacific press conference in Shanghai today.

Scott McNealy is still CEO last I checked

Free Hard, free soft... (1)

mirko (198274) | more than 10 years ago | (#9314064)

So, yesterday they told [slashdot.org] th ehardware would be free, today, it's the software, so will this be the support, tomorrow ?
If yes, then I wonder whether their business plan looks like Swiss Cheese or not. :)

Too little, too late.... (1)

jarich (733129) | more than 10 years ago | (#9314066)

This is just an obvious attempt to keep Linux from taking their market...

10 years ago, it might have worked but it's too late now.

Re:Too little, too late.... (1)

u-235-sentinel (594077) | more than 10 years ago | (#9314115)

Part of the problem is Sun "thinks" they are a hardware company. I've argued with them over this again and again. How many hardware companies are making money these days? Not many. Sun definitely isn't doing all that hot either.

Solaris if they open source it could do good things for Sun. I'm curious how they will handle this in the future. Like you said, I'm afraid this might be a little late also. They tried selling it and that died for some reason (anyone know why? I can't get a straight answer). I'm hearing it might have been because people were used to getting it with the hardware for free.

I like Solaris. Been using it for years. Hoping it works out.

Again? (1)

Dave9876 (591025) | more than 10 years ago | (#9314078)

I seem to remember that sun allowed people to buy cheap solaris source licenses a few years ago. I think there were a lot of restrictions on what you could do with it, but this won't be the first time for opened solaris source.

from TFA... (5, Insightful)

IGnatius T Foobar (4328) | more than 10 years ago | (#9314081)

"Look, you only need to look at what we've done with Java to understand how Sun views the value of incorporating community feedback. Java could not exist if only Sun is supporting it. It exists because there are hundreds and thousands of partners. We need to now take the model with Java and bring it to Solaris," he said.

Ok, so ... according to Mr. Schwartz, Solaris will be open source soon, just like Java is open source today. Evidently this is some new definition of "open source" that I was not previously aware of.

I want some of whatever he's been smoking.

It's a shame, because if they would truly open source Solaris and Java, the open source community would rally around both products and actually help Sun get out of the death spiral they seem to be in right now. If they have any doubt about that, all they have to do is look in their own source repositories to see how well it's worked for OpenOffice.org.

Sun needs a regime change. The current crop of morons are not fit for management.

Huge. (4, Interesting)

1lus10n (586635) | more than 10 years ago | (#9314085)

This is an epic thing. If Sun does what Sun usually does and makes Solaris available under the BSD style licenses this will boost all unix like OS's. However I think they will end up using a Sun specific license (one that was developed for this specific purpose). I also think they did this because by opensourcing solaris they can start some serious cutbacks, a large amount of the OS can be handled by the community, and this might be a major cost cutting move motivated to save sun's ass.

Solaris has probably the best security and stability out of any of the widely used *nix's. Not to mention the superior threading of the actual OS and its core.

However the article makes mention of using something similar to java's licensing, which is *NOT* open source in any way shape or form. This sounds like another wait-and-see thing from the leader of wait-and-see (although not leading in much else these days.)

*sigh* (2, Insightful)

El_Ge_Ex (218107) | more than 10 years ago | (#9314092)

According to C-Net Asia, Sun plans to make Solaris open source soon.

Yep, just like they'll open source Java soon. [slashdot.org]

This is just another half-assed attempt of SUN trying to compete with IBM [ibm.com] . Move along, nothing to see here...

-B

...must... not... get... angry.... (2, Funny)

mindfucker (778407) | more than 10 years ago | (#9314094)

Java you morons, not Solaris. Almost nobody gives a flying fuck about whether Solaris is opened or not.

This would be welcome news (4, Insightful)

drizst 'n drat (725458) | more than 10 years ago | (#9314100)

I don't know, but in my humble opinion, Solaris has a lot more going for it than does Linux. No, this isn't meant to be a troll or flamebait. I've used Solaris since 4.1.3 and through 2.5, 2.6, 2.7, 2.8, and now 2.9 and can tell you that this is a really nice operating system. Simple, logical, and extremely robust. Granted, I've used it on SPARC machines and that is where it really shines. I have used 2.7 and 2.8 on the intel platform with decent results. Maybe it's just the familiarity and comfort level associated with working on Sun hardware, but Solaris is solid and a dream to work with. I've used (and still do) RedHat and SuSE and though they look good, and in many cases is more suited to the intel platform, I can't believe that if Sun took to making Solaris more available that more folks wouldn't use it. I know, you need applications and other vendor support, but still ... this is welcome news!

No, it's not. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9314249)

The greatest power Linux has is not its technical qualities (though they're pretty adequate) but it's unique position as a concentrating point for (almost) all open-source development. More "free" OSs would de-focus the effort, giving the competitors to the open source an advantage.

Same as ./ -- it's nothing in itself, but functioning as a place where *everyone* goes makes it really important. For some things the lack of choice is better.

Open Source Solaris (1)

secondsun (195377) | more than 10 years ago | (#9314111)

After R-ingTFA this move is just a FUD announcement against RedHat and Mirosoft who are kicking Sun's ass in thems of name recognition, performance, price, availablity, compatibility, etc.

It will be a GPL-incompatible licence. (1)

DFJA (680282) | more than 10 years ago | (#9314112)

I bet you they will make sure that whatever licence they use is GPL-incompatible. That way Solaris code can't be incorporated into Linux. They are in effect trying to splinter the Open Source world - in a way that benefits them, and ultimately, Micro$oft.

On the assumption that this is what they do, I wouldn't go near this with a bargepole. They are clearly not motivated by wanting to make Open Source (and in particular GPL) software better, only that they think they can drive a wedge into the Open Source movement for their own gain.

SunRay Server software (1)

ronfar623 (784908) | more than 10 years ago | (#9314122)

Hopefully they will also open-source the SunRay Server software. Cheap fuctional Linux X terminals anyone? We have about 60 SunRay 1's just sitting around here that would work perfect for LTSP.

Contribute! (1)

Medievalist (16032) | more than 10 years ago | (#9314245)

I bet if you shipped a dozen of those SunRays over to Jim at LTSP.org he'd have it running on them toot sweet.

If you ship one, it'll be the new door stop. If you ship lots, somebody will get interested in the problem. ...just be sure not to put any return address on the packaging :) .

seeing their other licence (2, Interesting)

molnarcs (675885) | more than 10 years ago | (#9314132)

This is from Jem Matzan, in his review of SUN JDS (rel2).
"Sun JDS Release 2 is the most heavily restrictive software package I have ever seen. Sun takes the heavyweight championship belt for the worst software license ever to have crossed my desk. . . .
So don't hold your breath.

Wait, I thought the hardware would be free? (-1, Redundant)

Bravid98 (171307) | more than 10 years ago | (#9314147)

Didn't Sun just get done saying that in the future hardware would be free and that we would pay subscription fees for software? This doesn't make sense at all. Why would you open source something if you're planning on making money selling a subscription?

We've already seen how this hasn't worked all that great for RedHat; instead of using up2date people are using yum and apt-get. Something isn't right with this picture...

Anyone want to take bets on when Sun will start suing claiming linux stole its source code in violation of their psuedo GPL?

Yes, but... (1)

turambar386 (254373) | more than 10 years ago | (#9314148)

Sun has some seriously strange ideas of what 'open source' means. I expect them to use Microsoft's shared "all your code belongs to us" source license.

I'm waiting until... (1)

swamp boy (151038) | more than 10 years ago | (#9314160)

Wow, first Sun tells us that hardware will be free. Then Sun tells us that Solaris will be open source.

As for me, I'm holding out until they pay me to run their stuff. Shouldn't be long now. I think I hear someone at the door....

Re:I'm waiting until... (1)

Errtu76 (776778) | more than 10 years ago | (#9314250)

this could very well be the best way to attack microsoft's monopoly: giving away free hardware AND free software! Prolly the helpdesk costs $50/minute :P

So Which Is It? (-1, Redundant)

Seanasy (21730) | more than 10 years ago | (#9314165)

Are they giving away hardware and selling software [slashdot.org] or selling hardware and giving away software?

I think Sun is getting a bit senile in it's old age.

INCORRECT TITLE (5, Informative)

bstil (652204) | more than 10 years ago | (#9314169)

Jonathan Schwartz is Sun Microsystems' president and chief operating officer, not CEO as the title, "Sun CEO Schwartz Promises Open Source Solaris" suggests!

application incompatibilities? (1)

Errtu76 (776778) | more than 10 years ago | (#9314170)

But one problem that Schwartz wants to avoid is having Solaris splintered into different distributions like Linux, which he said creates application incompatibilities

Application incompatibilities? I've never heard of an application that will run on, for example, RedHat but not on Slackware (unless it's a package ofcourse, but even then you have rpm installers for non-rpm based distros).

Re:application incompatibilities? (2, Informative)

grigori (676336) | more than 10 years ago | (#9314257)

Well I sure as heck have, and even breaks going from say RH 7.0 to 7.1 to 7.3 to 8 to 9! Let alone cross distro. Yes, recompiling from scratch usually gets you there, or changing environment variables to use old threading model, or installing 800 prereq RPMs that you don't already have, or removing some RPMs you have that break the code you want or.... Sure, no problem! Seriously - it IS a problem!

Think Java (4, Insightful)

TheRealMindChild (743925) | more than 10 years ago | (#9314172)

Solaris may end up open source, but you are going to find it work very much like Java.... if you want to make your own implementation, you have to follow VERY VERY strict guidelines as to maintain PERFECT compatibility.

I am sorry, but I dont want another linux mess, where there is a "Debian Solaris" and a "SESolaris", etc. I am happy with a single one... maybe two... for workstation and server.

Riiiight (2, Interesting)

jimfrost (58153) | more than 10 years ago | (#9314173)

I'll believe they open source Solaris the day it actually happens. It's pretty unlikely since Solaris is SVR4 based. Unless Sun has a really unusual license they don't own the code in the first place and cannot open source it without the blessing of SCO.

What do you suppose the odds of that are?

Open source problematic when not Free (2, Interesting)

gspr (602968) | more than 10 years ago | (#9314196)

Open source but non-free (as in Freedom) software has its problems, even for those of us who love openness. There will always be some idiot developer who has been reading a lot of non-free, open Sun code who decides to contribute something to a GPL'ed project such as Linux - and boom, there you have it - disaster! It's "impossible" for the maintainers of Free software to be 100 % sure that contributed code is not already distributed under a non-Free license.

Wait... Who owns Solaris? (1)

jruschme (76180) | more than 10 years ago | (#9314199)

Okay, help me out here... I thought that Solaris was basically SVr4 Unix with a bunch of Sun extensions (OpenWindows, etc.). If so, then isn't the core OS tied up somewhere in the whole Novell/Caldera/SCO mess?

Or am I missing something here?

Correction: Schwartz is not CEO (1)

Jonathan Quince (737041) | more than 10 years ago | (#9314201)

Jonathan Schwartz is Sun's COO and President.

Scott McNealy is the CEO.

Is it for real this time? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9314230)

Some may remember -- I certainly do -- Sun's abortive effort to disseminate the Solaris source a few years ago. That foundered on problems with their licensing of the Sys V codebase; does this mean they've worked out those details?

Solaris is a top-notch system under the hood, and even though I'm less involved with Sun systems by an order of magnitude these days, I'd still welcome the chance to get ahold of the code.

-Watchful Babbler

huh (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9314238)

And will we some integration of Solaris' strong points into other open source OSes like Linux and BSD?"

Solaris has strong points? Since when?

priceless (5, Funny)

evocate (209951) | more than 10 years ago | (#9314241)

sun hardware: $0
solaris: $0
java: $0

watching the Sun go down: priceless

Integration (3, Interesting)

PrimeNumber (136578) | more than 10 years ago | (#9314256)

And will we some integration of Solaris' strong points into other open source OSes like Linux and BSD?"

I hope not, as unpredictable and indecisive as Scott McNealy is, Darl McBride is relatively stable.

One week McNealy likes Linux, the next week he doesn't. That and the fact after years of slamming Microsoft (as much as they deserve it), and making himself appear like a raving lunatic to the detriment of other important business decisions, Sun and Microsoft kiss and make up, and everything is suppossed to be OK now.

Well, its not OK, this looks like another desperate move by a company seeking something, anything to gain mindshare and revenue. If solaris becomes free, and their hardware will be free [slashdot.org] , how exactly is Sun supposed to make money again? And why should the open source community use source from Solaris from a company with such conflicting outlooks on open source and Linux?
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...