Sun COO Schwartz Promises Open Source Solaris

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).

I would be wary of this news

[CreamOfWheat]

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.

apple and legos

[cheese_wallet]

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.

Free as in Free Free.

[garcia]

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.

Counter to the Linux threat?

[stephenry]

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.

Left hand, meet right hand

[signe]

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:apple and legos

[Allen Zadr]

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).

I'm not holding my breath...

[10Ghz]

...Considering how they licensed their Gnome-based Java Desktop System [linux.com]. And that software was LGPL to begin with! Pray tell, what kind of god-awful monstrocity of a license are they going to come up with Solaris!?

from TFA...

[IGnatius T Foobar]

"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.

*sigh*

[El_Ge_Ex]

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

Re:Free as in Free Free.

[shadow303]

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

This would be welcome news

[drizst 'n drat]

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!

Re:I would be wary of this news

[Allen Zadr]

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.

What is free? Is your free the same as mine?

[LWATCDR]

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.

Think Java

[TheRealMindChild]

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.

God, I hope not.

[Liselle]

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 . . .

[stephenry]

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.

Isn't hardware to be free?

[clump]

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,"

Oh im sorry. Did I not understand yesterday's Slashdot story [slashdot.org]? So they will make money from hardware, which they are saying will be free in a couple of years? Does Sun ever pay attention to what they release?

Re:God, I hope not.

[clump]

Java needs to be under strict control, else we'll have a dozen forks that won't play nice with each other.

Yes because C/C++ are such unsuccessful disasters. We wouldn't want Java to be anything like those languages.

Re:God, I hope not.

[Anonymous Coward]

Why? I dont see PHP, Python and other OS languages having this problem, why should Java?

Re:apple and legos

[Anonymous Coward]

As an ASIC designer who has worked on chips for the large systems like Sun makes, I can tell you from first hand experience that you don't "slap together" these hardware systems.

Years of effort from 100s of engineers goes into developing one of these systems. Its a tremendous undertaking, which may be why we see Sun moving away from this. Too much time and money for not enough return.

And I really hope you don't think you could have a competitive system based on OpenRISC cores routed in an FPGA. Maybe, maybe an embedded system that doesn't really need much performance or has a lot of supporting coprocessing chips, but certainly not an enterprise class server.

Open Source doesn't mean wild'n'crazy

[DavidNWelton]

Oh, come off it.

All it takes is them retaining the rights to the Java (TM) name, ala TeX. I.e. you can't call it Java (TM) if it's not compatible. Same thing goes for TCP/IP - that's been open source for a long time, and you don't see a million incompatible versions.

Enforce compatibility through test suites and (open) standards, not by grabbing everyone by the balls via a proprietary platform.

Re:God, I hope not.

[Anonymous Coward]

Java isn't a purely compiled language, nor is it purely interpreted. It's a hybrid, and Java's similarity to C/C++ doesn't go far beyond syntax. I don't want to find out what happens when all of a sudden you can't rely on the guts of Java to be the same anywhere. The specs are open, anyway. You can always make your own.

Good god. Think for a minute. The fact that the spec exists and is open is EXACTLY WHY Java should be FOSS. You can't talk about how "it'll all be incompatible" (which, btw, is nothing more than FUD in /purist/ form) and in the same breath say "well the spec is open anyway, so isn't that good enough?" Come on. Think about your own logic for 2 seconds.

Re:God, I hope not.

[phrasebook]

as long as Java remains "under strict control", it will be limited to what Sun can do with it. Want Java on a new platform? Wait for Sun to port it and support it. Want an urgent bug fix in JDK? Wait for Sun to do it

Yep, that's all true. So what? You take something and you work with it. Many people like an approach like that. You treat the JRE as a magical black box that executes your code, and if it stuffs up, you live with it and you keep moving.

Yes, sometimes this will be bad for your security or give you a headache or cause you some compatibility problems. Yes, if it was open source you'd have an avenue to deal with the problems yourself, rather than be at the mercy of the vendor, but so what? People don't want to deal with those problems most of the time. And have you ever, for example, ever hit a limitation in Java because of Sun's control over it? No? Didn't think so. Neither have most people. You don't see people sitting around stewing and not using Java because Sun has taken until 1.5beta to put in generics, do you. They just use what the language provides. If later new features become available or new platforms are supported, then great. If not, people use what the platform provides, or they don't use it at all. And plenty of people are using Java.

You don't have to blindly trumpet open source all the time y'know. Not everything is better off open source 'just because'. If Big Bad Sun wants to keep Java for themselves then good on 'em.

I'm sick to death of hearing this stupid moral argument for using OSS all the time, just because there's the possibility that at some stage, at some time in the future, something will no longer be maintained, or there'll be a bug that doesn't get fixed for a century or whatever, and we're all supposed to just wither and die because of it, and if only we'd had the source, blah blah blah. Yes, this is the reality for some companies, they've gotta avoid that risk, there's exceptions, I don't need to hear it. But for you to get on /. and blather on about open source Java, as if 20 years from now you're still going to be maintaining your little Java app, sigh... it is such a tiresome argument. There is stuff out there. There'll always be some risk attached to investing in a platform. Use it if you think it fits now and will fit later. Or don't. Doesn't mean Sun is making some grevious mistake by not opening everything up.

Oh, please

[warrax_666]

Java isn't a purely compiled language, nor is it purely interpreted. It's a hybrid, and Java's similarity to C/C++ doesn't go far beyond syntax.

Language differences are utterly irrelevant. What is relevant (and what the poster points out rather cleverly) is that C/C++ is hugely popular, as cross-platform as you want it to be, etc.

There are lots of implementations of C/C++ that all interoperate perfectly well as long as the programmer sticks to specifications and the compilers do. It will be exactly the same with Java if it's opened up.

I don't want to find out what happens when all of a sudden you can't rely on the guts of Java to be the same anywhere.

You shouldn't rely on the "guts of Java" (by which I assume you mean "implementation of Java") to be the same everywhere. You should rely on the Java specification (that's what it's for!).

Re:God, I hope not.

[Omega1045]

They may not be unsuccessful, but the (sometimes wildly) different implimentations of C++ turns my stomach a bit. I think the way C++ evolved into its "stanard" over the 90s was analogous to watching a car wreck in slow motion. C++ is very, very powerful but also very fragmented by varying levels of support of templates, etc, etc, etc.

That said, I think that there could be an "official" Java release similar to Linus's official kernel, which the vast majority of the world use. I think plain old GPL Java would work very well.

Re:Sun has gone mad

[hackstraw]

Dude, Sun is f*cking nuts. First, the sell this rebranded microtel linux thing and call it java, and sell it at Walmart of all places [walmart.com]. Then, in not the too distant past they say they are going to give away hardware and sell subscription software [slashdot.org], and now they are saying that they are going to open source Solaris. Dunno if they plan to sell a subscription to the source or whatnot, but I think its a pretty weak business plan to open source something so that we can fix it, and then charge us for it. Btw, it should be more common knowledge that Sun's TCP/IP performance has dropped about 30% from version 7 to 9. This has been measured multiple times by a coworker of mine, and Sun has no response to our findings.

Re:from TFA...

[Anonymous Coward]

He's talking about the community involvement model, not the details of the licensing of the source. Can't you see the difference?

Solaris will likely be under an OSI-approved license.

Re:Oh, please

[Anonymous Coward]

So, let's compare C/C++ and Java. There is one specification for each. They are open, anyone can design a compiler to them. There are multiple implementations, some open, some closed. Why does Sun need to open source their implementation, when there are (and can be) other implementations that are open?

Re:I would be wary of this news

[chris_mahan]

Divide and conquer.

Excellent strategy.

What MS has to worry about is not SUN. Sun is going to disappear(probably absorbed by MSFT).

I don't think StarOffice would be as successful as it is if there weren't an OpenOffice.

What happens to OpenOffice if MS acquires Sun? (not now, but in 2007 after SUN has laid off half its staff and lost most of its reserves?)

What happens to Java for that matter?

And honestly, if Solaris is opensourced like Java is opensource, it's not going to mean much.

Re:I would be wary of this news

[Curtman]

Its neat to see Sun employees popping up on various mailing lists [gmane.org] more often. Also, the Gnome HIG [gnome.org] is an invaluable resource, contributed by Sun. I say give them the benifit of doubt for now.

Re:God, I hope not.

[aristotle-dude]

Sorry but how is C/C++ code inherently cross platform or even cross compiler compatible? Can I take an MS C++ 6.0 program and compile it on Borland running on windows?

I have not even mentioned compatibility with other "platforms" yet.

The great thing about real Java (not that MS Java crap) is that it will run on any current JDK on any platform.

Re:God, I hope not.

[chris_mahan]

So you think that Sun has done such a good job with Java that the only thing a bunch of hippie hackers could do would be to ruin it?

If I recall correctly, the most advanced technology in the world comes from the mind of hippie hackers, and I don't think Neil Armstrong would have walked on Luna if there had not been hippie hackers to help him get there.

Yeah, under strict control. My bum. Things under strict control stagnate and get all tangled in ret tape.

SUN cannot release all of their code...

[Geisel]

Because SUN has partnerships with other vendors, they cannot release all of their OS code.

This is similar to when they released the Solaris 8 source code. I believe anyone could download it for some period of time, or at least it was really easy to get (partners || edu). However, even limiting their distribution channel, they were bound by contracts to vendors to not release parts of their code. I.e. a lot of the fibre source was written by Qlogic or JNIC, so none of that will be released, Open Source or not.

I have to think Sun will release their code, since the Solaris 8 code was pretty publicly available for quite some time. It wouldn't be a major step to release the code publicly now.

Re:Left hand, meet right hand

[Walterk]

But that's how Sun makes most of its money, through support contracts. In fact, if you want to make money: support software, don't write it.

Re:I would be wary of this news

[nathanh]

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, ...

It wasn't a "deal". It was a settlement. As in, Microsoft acknowledged that they had done wrong and owed compensation to Sun to the tune of approximately $2 billion in cash and stock and other stuff.

And you can buy supported versions of Linux from Sun. I hardly see how that is them saying you "should not be using Linux". You can buy an AMD64 server running Linux, right now, today, right on their website [sun.com].

You might also notice that they have certified their AMD64 servers to run Red Hat Enterprise or SuSe Enterprise (or Windows 2003 *cough*). Sun doesn't prevent you from installing and running competitor software on their hardware. Though of course, they won't support any software except their own.

You can also get Sun's Java Desktop which is NOT just a rebadged SuSe Linux. There is a fair bit of value-add on top of SuSe, including all the nifty enterprise management software. The EMS won't mean anything to you unless you have 1000+ seats to maintain. But if you are in that space then NONE of the other Linux distros come anywhere near JDS. Of course, dimwitted reviewers who expect JDS to be in the same space as Lindows and Mandrake are inevitably disappointed when it doesn't support their SATA hard drives. But that says volumes about dimwitted reviewers and very little about Sun's commitment to Linux.

I realise Sun-bashing is extremely popular right now but honestly it's entirely unjustified.

Re:Massive security holes will be found

[Anonymous Coward]

BUT: I humbly predict that when Solaris is opened, people will pour through the code and find (a) many old security holes, unpatched, and (b) many new security holes, due to the number of eyes on the code.

Sure. The exact same thing happened when Apple opened Darwin.

Oh wait. It didn't.

Re:I would be wary of this news

[njcoder]

You can't blame sun for thinking that it's unix os that it's been working on for a lot longer than linux has been around is better. They've put a lot of time and effort into it. IBM has said the same thing in regards to AIX vs Linux. [ibm.com] McNealy has an odd way of putting things though.

Some of the terms he used were bad choices, but look at the target he's talking to. He's said it's not for corporate IT shops but it is for IT specialists and hobbyists (bad choice of words). Meaning the datacenter is going to be going to a different model soon and the OS that is run, the computers that are run on etc will be likely irrelevant for many purposes. It will be the middleware that is what the corporate customers should be concerned with.

This goes to the whole feeling of turning the datacenter into a utility type service just like gas, electricity, etc. You pay for computing power to run apps, not for servers. IBM and HP appear to be going in the same direction.

McNealy should really get a speech writer.

Re:Open Source doesn't mean wild'n'crazy

[njcoder]

Oh so the name is so important? If IBM forks Java and calls it the WebsphereVM you don't think people will buy into it? That's the biggest concern, not microsoft anymore.

Open standards are important and if one vendor can gain too much control then they can control the market and screw others. Concidering how Sun isn't ruling the java market as a vendor I think they're doing a good job as a steward.

Re:I would be wary of this news

[Anonymous Coward]

You fail to appreciate that while Dell will sell you some cheapo x86 box that'll last a few years at most, IBM will sell you _real_ stuff. Built-like-a-tank hardware, often non-x86, that has been thoroughly tested and QAed.

I mean, compare the rock-solid IBM-made ThinkPads with Dell's flakey Taiwanese ODM-produced-and-relabeled laptops. No comparison.

So while there's some truth in what you're saying, IBM does deserve kudos for its hardware. It really is incredibly well designed and built.

Re:I would be wary of this news

[passthecrackpipe]

Open Office would continue more or less unaffected? I don't think so - 95% of the development effort that goes into OOo is done by Sun employees - when Sun pulls out of OOo the loud thud you will hear is a hugely inscrutable codebase hitting the floor with nobody around that can support it.

How much do you think it is worth for MS to have OOo out of the way? 2 billion? 20 billion? OOo is the single component that makes corporate desktop linux work. It is the kingpin of Open Source software.

Think about it.....

Re:Massive security holes will be found

[kjd]

Solaris source code is already widely available, just not legally for most people. You can bet that anyone with serious interest in exploiting flaws in Solaris already has the source.

Re:I would be wary of this news

[acsinc]

How the hell did you get moded up? This ALL speculation with no facts at all.

There is no evidence that Sun is going to disappear, just becuase it is doing poorly now does not mean its doomed. Just look at Apple.

Microsoft will not buy Sun. What would MS gain by this? A bunch of RISC technology that they don't want to even exist? Some more OSes? Another language? MS has thier product line and has shown no intention of devation. MS's motivations aside - the antitrust courts would never go for it.

As for Solaris being opensoured like Java, well thats just an erroneous statement since Java is not opensourced.

Why should we care?

[ciggieposeur]

I'm not excessively familiar with Solaris from an admin standpoint, but I have done quite a bit of porting C/C++ stuff to it and a lot of admin'ing AIX. To be blunt, I don't care much for Solaris and should I ever be in the position to authorize a purchase I'd almost certainly look at Linux first and AIX second. Here's why:

1) Linux is pretty darn good. It would take some *unusually* serious needs before you *have* to look outside the Linux camp to find a workable solution. Linux has XFS, JFS, and ReiserFS, really good support for reliable and fast high-end SCSI, SMP, Beowulf'ing, and a huge community to provide free-as-in-beer help.

2) On a per-processor basis, Linux-on-Intel/PowerPC is faster than Solaris-on-anything hands down. (This will probably change after the next generation of Sparc chips comes out.)

3) Solaris tends to be a pain to port code to. Much like AIX, it's got the AT&T-derived libraries and proprietary crud that doesn't function with as much polish as the GNU stuff. So you end up installing a huge set of GNU tools and libraries on Solaris and ... geez by this time you've almost got GNU/Linux again on Sun hardware. AIX 5L has at least started to reverse the trend -- you can get most of the GNU tools pre-installed. (Yes, the native compiler on Solaris and AIX produces much faster code than gcc. Most of my apps don't need the speed, they need the portability. I can optimize at the higher layers and get the speed I need.)

I see plenty of places where *today* Solaris has a great role, but I don't see much in the future. And Sun hardware is nice, but certainly not extraordinarily better than IBM hardware.

This just seems like "too little too late". (Of course, this leads right into the critical question: is there *anything* Sun can do that would be worth paying for?)

Comments?

Re:I would be wary of this news

[j3ll0]

I don't know what support you've gotten from IBM, but some of the stuff I've seen is pretty damn impressive.

At the hosted DRP site down here in Sydney .au, there is a little 620 AS/400.

It stands at a 45 degree angle to the ground.

The story goes, a Warehouse guy for one of the car manufacturing firms down here got laid off, so he drove his forklift into the main building, picked up the AS/400 on the forks, and dropped it out a 2 story window. He then drove out of the building and down to the gound level and repeatedly rammed it.

Now, it turns out that in AS/400 land (at least back then), the only controller that could read from an array was the controller that wrote to it. So the IBM support guys literally rebuilt the card. They then pulled the data off of that box and recovered.

That machine still sits there just to show potential customers I guess how far IBM will go to recover their data.

Say what you want dude, but IBM support, at least at the corporate end of the market, is worth it. GSA on the other hand.....*bleh*