* Posts by Victor

23 posts • joined 25 Mar 2008

Pillar Data - Larry Ellison's other storage company


SUS 7000

Chris, you obviously didn't research into the Unified Storage past the hardware bits.

The software on the SUS 7000 is based on OpenSolaris, yes. But the interface that makes it relevant and powerfull is not. Oracle loves that stuff.

Also, as stated by the previous commenters, the Fishworks' developed interface turns these servers into an storage appliance that can fully compete against NetApps' offerings, without much effort.

As Sun unravels, it's time for a new suit


Open Storage/Network

"This Open Storage effort, despite its coming in layered or tiered flash cache editions, with system software tweaked to use it, will not revolutionise the storage industry. Sun is wrong when it asserts that proprietary storage architectures will go the same way as proprietary server architectures and be washed away by commodity hardware and open source software, like Sun's Open Storage 7000 line. They won't."

Ok, care to ask your magic ball why does it say storage and networking will stay proprietary? Any base to fundament this? or only hot gas?

Linux-Lego man trumpets OSH revolution



Open Source hardware will not happen, it already happened, quite some time ago http://www.opensparc.net/

Thanks for stating the obvious.

Life hands Sun steaming sack of...

Thumb Down


It's the worst article I have read for some time now...

Pro tip: don't write more articles Ted

Sun will Rock in 2009


@Goat Jam

no, the article is correct when referring to 256 threads... as it doesn't refer to OS threads, but CPU threads... it's like you had 256 independent CPUs in one

Citrix and Intel go to bare metal to virtualize PCs



being different architectures doesn't make them less comparable... the Intel/Citrix plan is nothing new... Intel is late to the game, as usual (just as with SMP, CMT, 64-bits CPUs and so many other things)

but as usual, the lateness of innovation from Intel is celebrated by the ignorant crowd... just like windows with MS... when will we be free of the Wintel monarchy...?

About sun4v being SPARC only... well, that's obvious, but OSs only need to be ported... just ask the Ubuntu and NetBSD people about that... OpenSparc's licence and openness is allowing the architecture advance a lot more than what it seems, I just hope it continues with that trend

Virtualbox IS open source, under the GPLv2 licence... there is another version, ruled by the PUEL, but vbox is open source, so stop spreading FUD... let's wait and see when VMware Workstation and Parallels Desktop become as open source as vbox.... protip: don't wait for it standing



I think enough time has passed for the Innotek reference to be relevant... it's been a year since the acquisition, it might be time to accept that it's part of Sun already.

Or maybe you would like to add the MS Virtual PC came from the Connectix acquisition... or that Parallels Desktop came from the twoOStwo development paid by Netsys and might be legally dubious...

Aside from that, I don't see that as such a big deal... Xen, VBox, ESX, VMware workstation and most other hypervisors alredy make use of the hardware extensions... and if you want a true hardware hypervisor, go check Sun's sun4v arquitecture, also known as Niagara... LDOMs is truly a H/W hypervisor, monitored from S/W... and not only that, it's completely opensource, both hardware and software... how can intel/citrix compare with that?

Sun adds goodies to OpenSolaris 2008.11


Follow up: major/minor updates

@AC again

I forgot to mention that the number "5" preceding every SunOS version since Solaris 2.0 (SunOS 5.0) comes from it being a SVR4 (UNIX System "5" Release 4) derivative, unlike SunOS 4, the last BSD derived SunOS (later rebranded Solaris 1.0).

In conlusion, do not expect a SunOS 6.x release anytime soon...


major/minor updates


"Solaris 10 was SunOS 5.10, Open Solaris is SunOS 5.11. In Sun terms that's a minor update. 5.x to 6.x would be a major update, that's unlikely to happen any day soon."

Take in account that Solaris 7 was SunOS 5.7, Solaris 8 was SunOS 5.8 and Solaris 9 was SunOS 5.9 ... all of them were major updates and meant a new Solaris release.

In Sun terms, SunOS 5.11 means Solaris 11, or as they also call it, Solaris Next, a major update, stated to be released by next year or by 2010... or somewhere around that.

What Dunstan said is correct.

Sun, Fujitsu launches entry quad-core Sparc box



"Glad to see that "Ikkaku" is the Japanese for "narwhal"... now wtf is "narwhal"? A city/place, possibly, but no capital letter? It's certainly not English (to my knowledge - I'm willing to bet a small amount of money), so "narwhal" is what for what? Someone please put me out of my misery."

or, you could just google it AC.. it's not that hard

Sun splits DARPA photon-linkage cake with Kotura


DARPA and Sun

Maybe IBM's solution was not as good as Sun's and because of that, they got the funding?...

who said Sun is quitting chips business?.. opensource, java, solaris... that's only software... IBM does hardware and software too... doing one doesn't imply leaving the other... your logic fails

Sun and NetApp gain market share



Thumper is mostly storage, almost nothing server... why shouldn't it be included?... it's a solution in a box

Sun loses MySQL Asia-Pac veteran



"Loss of MySQL talent from Sun will resurrect concerns among MySQL customers over the long-term development of the database now it's with Sun."

not really, people come, people go.... all the time, in all companies... it's not like it's the first time someone quits a company.

"hy wait to get laid off when you can take your money and run. Look at how many billionaires there are from people who quit Sun. Google...eBay...salesforce...etc..

face it Sunsucks"

Look at what you wrote. working at Sun seems to give very good results in the long run, doesn't it?

In fact, Sun seems like a great company to work to.

Sun spreads more VirtualBox love


type 2 hypervisor

I agree that the "type 2" designation is just a marketing stunt, but it IS different from emulation.

QEMU is an emulator, because it actually emulates the CPUs for the guest systems. On the other hand, vbox and vmware workstation virtualize the real CPU for the guests... meaning that they don't actually do emulation, they "just" redirect the instructions from the guest to the host in the assigned scheduling time for the hypervisor.

As a rule of thumb to recognize when you are dealing with a emulator and when it's an hypervisor, if the programs allows you to run machines designed for different CPU architectures than the Host's, then it's an emulator (like QEMU, that works on Hosts and with Guest designed for x86, x64, PPC, Sparc and others... other emulators include gaming consoles emulators, like ZSNES for the super nintendo, ePSXe for the PSX, and MAME for many different systems) else, if it only works with Guests under the same architecture as the Host's, it's virtualization (of any type), like VirtualBox, VMware workstation, parallels workstation, Xen and it's derivatives, LDOMs and others...

the "type 1" and "type 2" differ on whether the hypervisor is an OS by itself (baremetal) or not. For example, "type 1" x86 hypervisors include VMware ESX, Sun xVM Server, Xen, MS Hyper-V... type 1 VMM sit right over the hardware, meaning that they are the booting kernel (in Xen's case, it's the Nemesis-derived microkernel)... over this booting kernel sits a main domain (in Xen's language, a Dom0) which becomes the interface where you control the Guests or secondary domains (DomU in Xen's speech). Sun's LDOMs are the equivalent hypervisor but for SPARC systems.

OTOH, "type 2" hypervisors require an existing OS to work over it... examples include the ones mentioned before: xVM VirtualBox, VMware workstation and Parallels WS.

If there are any questions, please do ask.


RE: @some

vbox is not an emulator, it's an hypervisor.. a type 2 hypervisor, like vmware workstation, get your facts right.

vbox is NOT based on QEMU, the only code it shares with QEMU is the dynamic recompilator, which is hardly used.

vbox has good guest OS compatibility... just try to run Plan9 or openBSD on VirtualPC...

sun will not rewrite it in java, that's a stupid comment... sun has not rewritten anything in java so far...

when you refer to "vmware" specify if you talk about ESX or workstation... if you talk about the first one, it's comparable to xVM server, not vbox... vbox is comparable to vmware workstation and does a good job at it... unlike other commenters, I have had good experiences with vbox

to clear out the last paragraph, vbox is not targeted at enterprise, xVM server is... so don't try to compare it to ESX

vbox is the 2nd most popular solution for linux users to use windows apps (first one is vmware player)... currently, market penetration does not only refer to licenses sold, but actual users... so the comment about "zero market penetration" is just baseless FUD, vbox is used by many... and xVM server is based on Xen.

NetBeans 6.5 beta promises PHP simplicity


@andy, @jeremy

"In other words, features which have been available in many other editors for a good number of years now! "

PHP support is just being added to netbeans, so it is trivial that these features are new to PHP developers in netbeans... even if other PHP IDEs have them, netbeans does too now

"SO Sun, you are integrating PHP in netBeans, well thats nice for you.

Forgive me for not being familiar with netBeans in anything other than name, but is this product something that has a price tag or is it going to be available free in any form."

sarcasm and ignorance do not mix well together... if you are going to be sarcastic, at least be informed... netbeans is 100% open source, under a double license, GPLv2 and CDDL... and yes, it actually IS nice that sun is adding PHP to netbeans

Sun profits evaporate as darkness falls on US economy



HP should not be cataloged in the "same economy as Sun"... the biggest source of revenue for them is the printer's cartridges and Sun doesn't sell printers or cartridges. If you are talking volume, Sun doesn't sell volume, unlike IBM and Dell... Sun is not as diversified as the others, so they are HARDLY in the "same economy" as them

Re-jigged Intel mobile Linux stack dumps Ubuntu

Thumb Down


ok, so they are going to drop Ubuntu, the most widely adopted linux distro, for fedora to attract developers?... under what premise does the distro change helps attract people?... If anything, a better change would be to try and make it platform independant... I call a bad move on this

also, I don't really find RPM to be better than DEB in anyway... if he wanted to change it because that's what he likes, ok... but it's not because RPM is better

SCO ordered to pay Novell $2.5m Unix royalties



"I think SUN will have a VERY hard job proving they didn't know exactly what they were getting in to when dealing with SCO - that would require a frankly unbelievable failure of due diligence."

Did you actually see what just happened or did you miss something?

It was only after all this legal process that it was decided that SCO did not own UNIX, but Novell did... If it was so clear before, all of this process would never have happened at all.

Maven and Eclipse strive for Visual Studio 'power'



Sun killed an older set of tool to make room to the new and better ones, based on Netbeans... a fact that seems to have been forgotten in this article... I would put my money on Netbeans and not Eclipse

Red Hat meanders into hypervisor market



why do they conveniently forget about Sun's xVM too?... it's also open source... and ubuntu also uses KVM... so being open source it's not an actual advantage when using red hat's solution...

IBM 'advises' staff to opt for a Microsoft Office-free world



what about promoting OpenOffice.org?

IBM chips into EnterpriseDB love fund


Sun and Postres

what everybody seems to be forgetting is that Sun also sells and supports PostgreSQL, so it isn't really competing against Sun... both postgres and mysql are part of Sun's stack

also, I agree with AC... this EnterpriseDB keeps saying their product is Postgres and that is opensource, when they only take the real Postgres, add some non-opensource stuff and sell it

IBM is not funding the postgres opensource DB, it's funding the closed enterpriseDB who knows for what...


Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2022