Re: Re[2]: [cobalt-users] RE: No Solaris Petition

["Arsalan Mahmud" <arsalan@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I just have a simple questions which I am sure you would be able to
answer...

Lets say cobalt shifts to Solaris and uses it on the raq 5 series.. Lets say
consumers like it allot hell they sell a zillion boxes.. Just tell me this..
since Sun doesn't have the "energy" to further develop Linux where will we
be left with our raq 3i's and 4 r's not to mention the 2's and 1's and the
qubes and cache raq's and all the other products they already have ?

Lets say their is a new exploit out for the apache http server that we run
right now on all of our raq's. Sun isn't interested in Linux any more so you
would rater have all of your servers compromised right ?

As pointed out that not allot of users actually use the command line so..
how will they fix problems when the platform is no longer supported by the
parent company ?

Who will be making the patches and stuff... even now their patches aren't
fully tested (it seems) will you be making them for us ? will you dedicate a
whole department for the few THOUSAND raq's out there ?

Should we consider our 50+ raq's as a bad investment ?

Let me know your thoughts !!

Arsalan Mahmud
Nexus Technologies



----- Original Message -----
From: "Kris Dahl" <krislists@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <cobalt-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Wednesday, October 04, 2000 12:35 AM
Subject: Re: Re[2]: [cobalt-users] RE: No Solaris Petition


> Honestly I am not hearing a lot of arguments as to why NOT Solaris.  I
have
> always been very impressed by the performance of Solaris.
>
> I am a OpenSource software fan, but honestly Cobalt is has done very
little
> to kick back to the OS community.  ChiliSoft ASP is still closed source,
as
> is the special suace, etc.  So essentially, besides market share, the
Linux
> community gains very little from Cobalt, while Cobalt gains a lot.  Now
that
> Cobalt is essentially Sun, I have a hard time believing that it is not in
> their advantage to use Solaris.  Additionally the Cobalt profit margin is
> high enough to easily cover perhaps a 'special' Solaris license.  Sun may
> even make a Cobalt Solaris distro for use on these things that will be
much
> less expensive than a normal Solaris license.
>
> That being said, I wouldn't actually mind that much running Solaris on a
> machine.  It is not really all that different than Linux--especially on a
> server vs. a workstation--a skilled administrator shouldn't have too many
> issues with the learning curve.  Advantages (playing the Devils advocate
> here a bit) is you can go to Sun for support, 'improved' security,
> accountability, etc.
>
> Disadvantages include
> * Closed Source
> * License Cost -- which would be included in the cost of the machine so
they
> would probably not increase in price
> * Slow to respond to security -- again, a net effect of zero
> * More Stable
>
> Most of the worlds 100 largest/highest traffic web sites use Solaris as
> their OS.  A few use BSD, NT and Linux.  But Solaris has more than all
> others added together.
>
> So.  I guess I am saying that I don't have a problem with Solaris.  It is
a
> quality product.  I would have a problem, perhaps, if it became much more
> expensive, or if they limited functionality.  But a straight across swap I
> would not have a whole lot of problems with.
>
> Cheers,
> -k
>
> _______________________________________________
> cobalt-users mailing list
> cobalt-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> To Subscribe or Unsubscribe, please go to:
> http://list.cobalt.com/mailman/listinfo/cobalt-users
>
>