On 11/4/05, Mike McCarty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Kent West wrote: > > Basajaun wrote: > > > > > >>I hope anyone in the list is more enlightened than me, and can make, > >> > >>for example, a brief comparison of Debian Etch and Solaris 10. _That_ > >>would be way more usefull than just calling you "naïve". > >> > >> > > > > I read something recently (wish I could remember where and what - > > probably comments on this Slashdot article - > > http://linux.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/11/02/0418234&tid=90&tid=106) > > that addressed some of this. What I remember was basically that the > > userland utilities were far better in Debian, but the kernel in Solaris > > was more robust, at least when you get to "enterprise levels" (of > > hardware, multiple processors, hotswapping hardware, etc). > > > > I've had a little experience with Solaris 10, and so far, I far prefer > > Debian. But then I'm not using "enterprise level" hardware or have > > "enterprise level" needs, which might make all the difference. > > > > I used Solaris for many years for serious embedded development work, > as well as an embedded operating system. I've used Linux for just > about a year. All the GNU tools can be compiled for Solaris, and > it has a few which Linux doesn't have. Many more vendors build > versions of their software for Solaris than do so for Linux. I also > found the Solaris kernel to be much more robust than Linux. I only > *had* to reboot my Solaris machine (running on a Sparc) one time in > 5 years. It was rebooted maybe one to two times per year for some > sort of upgrade or new install, otherwise. I find that I have to > reboot my Linux machine far more often, maybe every month or two, > to clear up some strange state (though far less often than > I have to reboot my Windows machines). I only saw Solaris crash > two times in over five years. > > I can reliably force my Linux machine to get into a state where it > thinks the floppy is both mounted and unmounted. Then mount fails, > claiming that the floppy is already mounted, and umount fails, > claiming that it is not. > > That sort of weirdness never happened with Solaris. I've also been > unable to umount the floppy, when I know there was no process using > it, using Linux. > > The native cc for Solaris I found to be inferior to gcc, but > we installed gcc and it was happy as a clam. > > I've used multi-processors with Solaris, but not with Linux, so > I don't know how well Linux performs with them, but Solaris > is great. > > Linux seems to be more of a hacker/fiddler's dream, while Solaris > is more of a let's get the job done, it just runs sort of deal. > > On the whole, I'm happy with Linux. But in a side-by-side comparison, > IMO Solaris is superior. > > No flames, please.
Very worthy personal account... Thanks a lot. I wish to see more of this kind on this thread.
