Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Operating Systems Software Education Sun Microsystems Linux Business

Linux to Replace Solaris at Duke 462

wwhsgrad2002 writes "At the end of the 2004-2005 academic year, the Sun Solaris computers available in public computing labs at Duke University will be replaced. The replacement computers in these spaces will be Dells, running a version of Centos 3.3 as supported by Linux@DUKE. Pragmatic and technical considerations have driven this change, as Linux continues to gain a greater userbase and more third-party commercial software is made available on the platform. Are other universities eliminating Solaris in favor of a Linux distribution?"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Linux to Replace Solaris at Duke

Comments Filter:
  • by RayDude ( 798709 ) on Wednesday April 13, 2005 @04:46PM (#12227889)
    But my company is moving away from Solaris because the new Dell Boxes are at least three times as fast as the fastest Sun we have.

    And cost one third as much!

    Raydude
    • Now hear this (Score:5, Interesting)

      by turgid ( 580780 ) on Wednesday April 13, 2005 @05:19PM (#12228230) Journal
      But my company is moving away from Solaris because the new Dell Boxes are at least three times as fast as the fastest Sun we have.

      In three days time I will no longer work for Sun since I have been made redundant.

      During my time at Sun I was part of the Companion CD team. We built on x86 and SPARC. For x86 builds we had a Dell 6400, Dell 6600 and finally a Sun V40z (4-way Opteron 246). For SPARC we built on E450, E4500, and V880 (8x900MHz UltraSPARC III) and V880 (8x1200MHz UltraSPARC III).

      Now, I will not go into a long spiel about the realtive merits of the various hardware platforms, and I have no axe to grind now since I get my lasy pay cheque in a fortnight but:

      Why the heck are you buying (32-bit intel) Dells when you can buy (cheaper and faster 64-bit) Opteron boxes from Sun? If you are a Linux fanboy, Sun will sell you one with DeadRat or SuSE. They are Windoze certified in case you have had a lobotomy, and you can run the free (as in beer) 64-bit Solaris 10 on them.

      pBut hey, it's cool to hate Sun on slashdot.

      • Re:Now hear this (Score:4, Interesting)

        by T-Ranger ( 10520 ) <jeffw AT chebucto DOT ns DOT ca> on Wednesday April 13, 2005 @05:31PM (#12228330) Homepage
        Dell has sold IA-64 systems for a while now, and according to dell.com, are now selling 64bit Xeon (x86_64) systems. The GP never said he was buying 32 bit systems. And, for that matter, he never said he was buying 64bit systems, either... and for some apps you're not going to get much from a 64bit system.
        • Re:Now hear this (Score:3, Interesting)

          by turgid ( 580780 )
          intel 64-bit Xeons suck, they are in short supply and I doubt he's got any (due to shortages) and the fact that they've only recently become available.

          Two years ago when Sun decided to do an AMD64 port of Solaris, I spoke to my friendly Dell salesman and asked if they were going to be selling Opterons and he said "we're not sure, maybe if people ask for them."

          Oh well. We bought a bunch of MSI and Tyan motherboards and made our own.

      • Re:Now hear this (Score:2, Informative)

        by brkello ( 642429 )
        Yeah, just like it's cool to make fun of Red Hat and Windows on Slashdot...being a little bit of a hypocrite aren't you?

        I remember as undergraduate CS student looking for a summer internship going from booth to booth looking for a good company to work for. The first question Sun asked me was "Are you comfortable working for tech support?". I just laughed at them and walked away. I am sure there are some good reason they would want interns to start there...but give me a break. Why go with Sun when there
        • Re:Now hear this (Score:5, Interesting)

          by TheGratefulNet ( 143330 ) on Wednesday April 13, 2005 @05:55PM (#12228558)
          you goofed.

          getting into sun would have been a great experience for you. you can move around once you get inside.

          the culture is great, its one of the few places in the valley that STILL have hardwall offices for engineers (nice!), and its got of lot of new tech. going on inside.

          oh, and scott hates windows and MS. that, alone, is worth joining sun for ;)
        • Re:Now hear this (Score:5, Informative)

          by turgid ( 580780 ) on Wednesday April 13, 2005 @06:07PM (#12228639) Journal
          How the hell can you be a unix OS and not include gcc?

          Er, um, well...

          Did you look on the Companion CD that comes in your media kit?

          Well did you?

          Did you look on www.sun.com?

          Did you hell.

          But you still get modded up.

          And for what it's worth, if you are running the 64-bit AMD Solaris 10 kernel, you are running a Solaris kernel compiled with gcc 3.4.x

          • Re:Now hear this (Score:4, Interesting)

            by fimbulvetr ( 598306 ) on Wednesday April 13, 2005 @06:57PM (#12229056)
            Oh! You mean after we've spent 2 hours installing solairs (8|9), and 6 hours installing patches, and 2 hours using ndd to get the network card to work, you've got to install a 3rd cd too!?!?

            These times are for Dual 280rs w/raid 5. I can't even begin to talk about how long it takes on a netra.

            I've recently started running solaris again, and I now notice there are at least 2-5 recommended/critical patches a WEEK for my system, most requiring reboots. My redhat servers had 2 curl (non-reboot related) vulnerabilites last week, and a couple other ones about 4 weeks ago that didn't require a reboot either. Debian security updates are less often (As in, the packages are stable and vulnerability free for a very long time).

            Debian takes ~8 minutes to install, 10 to update, gcc and bash are installed by default, and the backspace works.

            Solaris (8|9) is a joke, no matter how much work you put in your companion cd, I'm sorry, it just sucks. I remember a few times where I got 600+ days of uptime off solaris, but you need balls of steel when you ignore security updates that long.
            Solaris 10 may be different, I haven't tried. I'm waiting for my ulcer to get better.

            Sorry for the rant, don't take it personally.

            p.s. Thanks for jumpstart (and snoop!).
            p.p.s. Give up on java.
        • Re:Now hear this (Score:5, Insightful)

          by DogDude ( 805747 ) on Wednesday April 13, 2005 @06:19PM (#12228732)
          Why go with Sun when there are 100 other companies that will give me practical experience in programming?

          Ouch. That was a real career blunder on your part. I'm sure that you, like many CS grads, assume that you *deserve* a job programming fresh out of school. The reality is that most of us who became professional developers do have to pay our dues in support. And the experience, even in support, at Sun, would have really set you up on a fast track into some good stuff. I hope your current job is somewhere as prestigious and well-respected as Sun and not some tiny Internet-based startup.
      • Re:Now hear this (Score:4, Interesting)

        by chrysrobyn ( 106763 ) on Wednesday April 13, 2005 @06:29PM (#12228811)

        Why the heck are you buying (32-bit intel) Dells when you can buy (cheaper and faster 64-bit) Opteron boxes from Sun? If you are a Linux fanboy, Sun will sell you one with DeadRat or SuSE. They are Windoze certified in case you have had a lobotomy, and you can run the free (as in beer) 64-bit Solaris 10 on them. But hey, it's cool to hate Sun on slashdot.

        I remember, not that long ago, when Sun boxen were cool. They were "in like Ray Bans [ray-ban.com]". Recently, Sun has done a lot of aggressive legwork to rid themselves of "cool factor" and become an evil company.

        Why buy cheaper Sun boxes when you could buy Dell boxes? Excellent question. You're leaving Sun, so it's time to get away from the distortion field that your company tells your employees.

        Sun is famous for lock-in. They get you hooked on a technology at a loss and then milk you for licensing and upgrades. It's how the Big Boys do it -- the only problem with this scheme is the newbies who don't see it coming. Dell, on the other hand, is a known quantity for everyone. You want more hardware? Simple enough to get an easy-to-read quote. Service? Same thing. Software, they'll happily re-sell you. Last time I had a Sun service call was a horrible experience, but I can't compare that to Dell. Linux support? Who cares about Linux support at a university? Don't they have undergraduates on work-study programs for that?

        When you buy Dell, it's like going to McDonald's. It may not be gourmet, but you know what you'll get. Buying Sun is like going on a blind date. Only the experienced know what to expect and the rest of us will be surprised.

        Don't get me wrong, there are reasons to go with Sun -- and very good ones, too. But Sun trains its employees that its machines are always superior over any other vendor, which clearly is not the case.

    • Mod parent down to troll unless RayDude can come up with specifics. Are you comparing memory and cache handicapped Ultras from the late 1990s to brand new Dell boxes with gobs of memory? Are you comparing Solaris 8 Sparc to linux's 2.6 kernel? Have you even looked at the capabilitys and independent benchmarks of Solaris 10 or are you going to wing it on urban folklore? Which dell boxes and how do they compare to Sun's AMD 64 bit offerings for low end servers? I use both linux and Solaris on a daily basi
    • Informative? Jeez! (Score:3, Insightful)

      by fm6 ( 162816 )
      Your Sun machines aren't slower than your Dell machines because they're Sun machines. They're slower because they're old.

      Presumably your purchasing people are smarter than you and compared these new Dell machines with current Sun machines. Now, Sun's SPARC-based systems are still basically more powerful than Dell's Pentium-based systems. But Pentium-based systems cost a lot less to make, so your company finds its more cost effective to buy more Dell machines to make up the difference in raw processing pow

  • Centos 3.3? Why? (Score:5, Informative)

    by NitroWolf ( 72977 ) on Wednesday April 13, 2005 @04:47PM (#12227892)
    Not that the CentOS distro is bad, but it's really more for a server, not a user box. Since this is going in the computing labs, and presumably the students will be logging into the box(es), it would seem to me that using another distro more geared towards users would be appropriate, since the CentOS 3.3 is geared towards enterprise servers.

    I'm sure it can be tweaked to be just fine, but it seems kind of an odd choice to me, for a computing lab.

    • I agree. If you look at the CentOS forums you'll notice a lot of people are using (and Linux newbies) it for desktops. I'm not sure why they don't just use Fedora, Ubuntu or something else for their desktops, but they don't.

      Either way CentOS does come with gnome, X, etc. by default so there isn't anything that stops you from using it as a desktop OS.
      • CentOS is just re-compiled RHE - as such, you can be assured that the kernel and patchsets it comes with is rock-solid and tested through and through. You can not say the same thing about Fedora and Ubuntu - no matter how good you perceive them to be, they have simply not had the same rigorous QA cycle.

        When you are talking about deploying an OS onto a crapload of workstations at either a University or company, it is not important if they support the latest USB doo-dads out of box, or that they have the fan
    • by Anonymous Coward
      I don't know much about CentOs, but I would guess that proprietary apps built for RH run on it without major tweaks to the CentOS file system.

      Most Solaris labs are used for engineering and similar technical work, often on proprietary apps distributed in binary for for only 1 or 2 major linux distros. This probably makes support a breeze compared to all sorts of tweaks and hacks to make these apps run under Unbuntu or others.
    • I run Tao Linux on my laptop, which is just another RedHat Enterprise clone like CentOS is. I'm not exactly sure what you mean by "geared toward servers" though. Previously I had Fedora 2 on the box, and I see little difference between the two installs beyond age of the underlying apps.

      To answer your question though, they probbably want a stable, low cost distribution that's going to be supported several years per release. That's Centos. What they don't want is a cutting edge distribution that's going
    • CentOS is based on the RHEL sources. It is geared towards Enterprise use, but not necessarily server use.

      Red Hat Desktop
      Workstation
      Enterprise Server
      Advanced Server

      Advanced server has the functionality (read packages) of all the ones below it. That includes Evolution et cetera.

      If there is a reason for them to use that, it is because every ISV that supports Linux (and I mean most every ISV) supports RHEL 3.x.
  • Both Linux and Solaris seem to have their respective merits, and with the OpenSolaris project, it would seem that Sun might be leaning towards the open source world, but this is an interesting choice by Duke, as one might think that a large university such as Duke would perhaps go with something with more corporate backing like with Sun. But Dell also has been pimping Linux to the server market for awhile now...

    • Duke was probably planning this switch long before Solaris 10 and OpenSolaris rolled around. Solaris 10 is what UNIX should have been years ago, if only because of DTrace (DTrace is really really cool, and would be great for a senior-level elective).
  • UMD (Score:5, Informative)

    by ltbarcly ( 398259 ) on Wednesday April 13, 2005 @04:48PM (#12227903)
    The math department at University of Maryland, College Park recently decided to replace it's Sun workstations with linux computers, probably Dell's.

    I for one welcome our Educational Linux using ahchchhc cough cough.
    • Re:UMD (Score:3, Informative)

      by Erwos ( 553607 )
      The CS department has been offering new Linux boxes to replace the old desktop Solaris boxes, too.

      We also got a "new" Linux lab a couple years ago in the new CSIC building.

      Finally, I believe the Solaris boxen in the labs are being phased out as well.

      Linux is very much in the vogue for cluster computing at our fine school as well - astro uses Condor to have a night cluster, as well as a dedicated one at the bottom of the CSS building.

      Bio also has something, not quite sure of the specifics.

      OIT, not too l
    • by Rei ( 128717 )
      We've been moving away from Sun with our MRI-analysis software where I work, as our lab trades SGIs for Linux boxes one by one, and as do other universities using our software. Interestingly enough, the "new" push has been for Mac support.
    • The Johns Hopkins University is also replacing its old (old!) Slowaris boxes in the undergraduate computing lab with new Dell workstations running Fedora Core 3.

      The old Suns run SunOS 5.6, also called Solaris 2.6. That's before Sun started really running with the Solaris trademark. They had 128 megabytes of RAM, slow-as-molasses X, and could hardly run mozilla. They had SSH version 1 installed.

      The new machines have two Pentium 4 chips at 2.80GHz. They have 1024KB of cache. They have 1.5 gigabytes o
  • Linux / Sparc (Score:2, Informative)

    by wolenczak ( 517857 )
    We have a lab full of UltraSparcs running Linux at ITESM (www.itesm.mx).
    • Re:Linux / Sparc (Score:2, Flamebait)

      by turgid ( 580780 )
      Well, that's silly. Solaris kicks Linux's arse on UltraSPARC hardware.

      What's doubly silly is going from 64-bit SPARC running Solaris to 32-bit intel (Dell) running Linux.

      Going to 64-bit AMD running Linux (or even Solaris) I could understand...

      It makes me feel conceited to think that I know better than wise and learned university staff.

  • Is it just me or does centos remind you of breath mints or something?
  • BYU (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Stibidor ( 874526 ) on Wednesday April 13, 2005 @04:49PM (#12227919) Homepage
    BYU [byu.edu] switched several years ago. By the time I took CS 240 [byu.edu] back in 2000 what had once been the UNIX lab was full of Dell linux boxes.
    • by Otter ( 3800 )
      The Athena network at MIT (you know, the one for which the Unix GUI was invented) used to be overwhelmingly Solaris. It was shifting to Red Hat / GNOME when I stopped working there a few years ago and I'd imagine the trend has continued.
    • what had once been the UNIX lab was full of Dell linux boxes.

      What do you mean, "used to be the unix lab"?

      Sounds like it still is the unix lab, just a different flavor, and a different hardware platform.
    • I can confirm this. They switched from Solaris on Sparc to Red Hat on Dell. I believe they are now using Fedora Core 2 on the same machines.

      -Dan
  • The few Sun workstations we had went two years ago. The servers that run busy NFS and mail systems, on the other hand, are alive and kicking; they seem to be pretty reliable too. Evidence of a focus shift?
  • Maybe? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by BAILOPAN ( 694545 ) on Wednesday April 13, 2005 @04:52PM (#12227945) Homepage
    My father works at the Holy Cross math department, where they have their own internal network setup separate from the rest of the school. All of the math professors use Solaris, and they have been for years.

    Over time this has slowly changed though -- Sun upgrades their hardware and takes back the old machines on a cyclical basis, and recently all of the desktops were replaced with thin clients (about as big as a cabel modem!). And I'm pretty sure the main server was migrated to Linux.

    Since all the professors have been using Solaris for probably around a decade, it's doubtful they'll change the clients anytime soon... but from what I can tell, they're slowly testing out Linux as a replacement.

    I'm not gonna speculate why, I'm just answering the question :)
    • Re:Maybe? (Score:3, Informative)

      by 0racle ( 667029 )
      If they're thin clients and the hardware is supported by Sun, they are probably using SunRay clients which implies a large Solaris system hiding somewhere.
  • Yale (Score:2, Informative)

    by izzo nizzo ( 731042 )
    The CS department lab at Yale runs SuSe. Most of our public computers are either Mac or Windows, though.
    • That's cool, sounds like Yale has got it together. Of all the linux distros I've used, suse is well put-together out of the box, and seems to best capture that old school hp-ux flavor, while very up-to-date and a good performer.

      BTW I work for a major auto manufacturer, and linux is slowly creeping into the infrastructure, and starting to take over jobs once held by solaris and hpux boxes. All the new linux servers are suse enterprise v9. The unix admins who've tried suse seem pleasantly surprised at how we
  • Duke sucks. (Score:3, Funny)

    by 0racle ( 667029 ) on Wednesday April 13, 2005 @04:53PM (#12227966)
    Sorry, wrong website.
  • by rovingeyes ( 575063 ) on Wednesday April 13, 2005 @04:53PM (#12227972)
    Pragmatic and technical considerations have driven this change, as Linux continues to gain a greater userbase and more third-party commercial software is made available on the platform

    Really, so that means vendors have stopped supplying new softwares for Solaris! Or does it mean that practically Solaris is not technically a viable solution?

    I really don't see the need to replace an X system with Y system when the X system does the job for you more than adequately. I don't understand why people are always eager to change systems. Of course someone is going to reply to me and say - "hey universities are research institutions and they need new stuff" - too overrated. I am not trying to root for Solaris here, just don't get why you need to replace a system that can do the job that Linux can.

    • just don't get why you need to replace a system that can do the job that Linux can.

      Bang for buck?
      • Well in this case the buck was 0. They already paid for the older boxes. Now I suspect that it really comes down to a budget. This department had a budget for a new system that was approved a long time ago. They chose to spend it on Dell hardware running Linux. Did they "need" that new hardware? Probably not. But they had it budgeted, and if they didn't spend the money they would loose it.

        This gets in to a gripe of mine. I see a ton of people at various companies spending money on software solution
      • by rovingeyes ( 575063 ) on Wednesday April 13, 2005 @05:15PM (#12228188)
        Ok I don't think you have looked at products offered by Sun lately. Just to help you recently the Computer Science department in our University decided to build a cluster of 35 nodes with dual opteron processors and 6GB ram on each node with raid. Initially Sun quoted 440K, Dell quoted 450k and a local beige box vendor about 350k. When we told Sun about it they dropped their price to 220K and guaranteed us 90% of published spec performance for hardware for a year otherwise they'd replace whole node for free including shipping. Apart from that they also offered to investigate in to Solaris OS if we can prove that apps would run better on a Linux box with similar hardware.

        Bang! is an understatement here

        • When we told Sun about it they dropped their price

          I'd be more willing to buy sun if they stopped propping up their reseller channels and just made their real prices available on a web page. Dell (for example) lets me pick the machine I want by choosing parts from a web page and then tells me the price. If I don't like the price I go on to the next vendor. With sun I have to invest time and money just to find out what sun feels like charging, then I have to go back and ask them if they want to change the pr

        • by tsotha ( 720379 ) on Wednesday April 13, 2005 @06:39PM (#12228896)
          As I understand it Sun has been willing to take a hit at universities, since they figure you'll get used to their machines and request Sun hardware when you get into the business world. I know at my company comparable hardware from Dell was about 25% of the Sun price until this year. So we've been moving from Sun to Linux for new projects.

          A couple months ago the Sun guy showed up with this desparate look on his face and said "just tell us what we need to charge to beat Dell and we'll make it happen." This is a welcome change in attitude, but I don't see how they can possibly compete with Dell on price. Dell has just about the most efficient business in the entire world and is used to razor-thin margins. Whatever - that's their problem.

          We used to put up with overpriced hardware because moving to Windows just seemed too painfull, but Linux seems to be a reasonable alternative to Solaris I don't see any reason to pay more. My suspicion is we'll run Solaris when Sun can undercut Dell and Linux otherwise.

    • I really don't see the need to replace an X system with Y system when the X system does the job for you more than adequately.

      True. But that's what folks said to me in 1996 when I said I didn't need to replace my Amiga. I was right then, but soon became wrong.
    • Alot of it has to do with BS accounting practices.

      I worked at a place that wanted to upgrade Office '97 to 2003 due to some application that was using features in 2003.

      It turned out to be cheaper to buy new machines with Office 2003 preinstalled, because we could use capital funds to make the purchase. If we had tried to upgrade, the money would have come out the operational budget and we would've laid off a bunch of contractors.
    • Maybe you should read what you're replying to. 'practical' and 'prgamatic' are, um, practically synonyms :)
  • ...and that ia at my formwer Univeristy (Makerere University http://www.makerere.ac.ug/ [makerere.ac.ug], which was once one of the best institutions on the continent. But, and a big but,...let's get ready for the pundits on this issue: -

    My take on pundits:

    I love pundits for they throw light on issues that the main stream might miss.

    However, my issue with [some] pundits is that some of them know nothing, and to make matters worse, they do not know that they know so little or nothing at all! Some of these pundits to t

  • Switching stories (Score:5, Insightful)

    by SunFan ( 845761 ) on Wednesday April 13, 2005 @04:58PM (#12228024)

    Some companies have said that if Sun was doing three years ago what they are doing now (Solaris 10, OpenSolaris, free licensing), they would not have switched to Linux. Consider that Sun still guarantees binary and source compatibility when migrating to Solaris 10 from older versions, while Linux cannot. Linux is very useful, but there are still things that make long-term deployments awkward at times. Mod what you will, but it is true.
    • Universities (well, any large organization) tend to get long term contracts on software they choose to purchase, so they will be issued regular updates...which makes binary support sort of implicit. For the rest of the linux world, sources tend to be available, so once again, binary compatibility is not much of an issue.
  • by b17bmbr ( 608864 ) on Wednesday April 13, 2005 @05:02PM (#12228064)
    Where I teach, the tech people are linux-phobic. They are adamant about "keeping linux off the network" yet aren't so pissy about OS X (which probably means they've been reading Gartner). Of course, the highlight was a few years ago when I was running linux my older laptop, surfing the net, and doing my grades (through wine no less), and the school's distrtict tech guy asks how I can do this since "novell doesn't support linux." I guess our network admin never heard of, what's that thingy called? oh yeah, TCP/IP.
    • by maxpublic ( 450413 ) on Wednesday April 13, 2005 @05:33PM (#12228353) Homepage
      I ran into a similar situation when I took a couple years off to teach middle school. The tech department was adamantly pro-Windows, to the point where it seemed that the highest aspiration of these folks was to someday work for MS, or perhaps give Billy G. a blowjob, or both. Whenever the word 'Linux' was mentioned they began to froth at the mouth - much like a religious fanatic who can't stand the idea that their religion isn't the only one in the world.

      I had my kids convert the Windows lab to a Linux one. The equipment was so old that Linux ran far more efficiently than Win95 did (forget about even installing Win2000 or XP, the computers didn't come close to meeting minimum requirements). I used KDE for the environment since it seems KDE is bound and determined to emulate Windows and that's what the kids were familiar with. Not, it turns out, that it mattered; kids are far more resilient and adaptable than adults are and they had no problem mastering the differences in a matter of days.

      When the techs visited the lab they didn't even recognize the software that supposedly was a crass insult to their Lord and Savior, the Great Bill. They asked me - get this - what version of Windows I was running, and what 'skin' I was using. Since I didn't want my lab disassembled with a sledgehammer wielded by Windows zealots I told them it was Win98 with a skin that I had, erm, designed especially for the kids (snicker). They thought it was cool and asked me if I could give 'em a copy, which I promised I would (although I never delivered, of course).

      Can't imagine what they thought when I moved on to other things and they were left with a lab full of computers which didn't recognize the Windows automatic updating service as a valid tool. But then they never got a service call once I converted the lab, so who knows? Those machines might still be running Linux without anyone the wiser.

      Max
      • by b17bmbr ( 608864 ) on Wednesday April 13, 2005 @06:06PM (#12228630)
        middle school. taught there 7 years. lots of fun. anyways, here's a funny story.

        to get digital school money, we need to have some x:y ratio of computers to students, so the district goes out and buys alot of pentium 120's w/32MB ram. there actually sitting around collecting dust at my school, but we have "computers". so, I snag several and bring them into my classroom, scrounge a switch, and turn them into X clients running off my P3 933 mandrake box. 6 computers running moz, OO.org, etc., great. kids use them without a problem. so, i pitch the idea to the principal, because we have a "lab" full of pentium 120's and 166's that take 10 minutes to start and are practically worthless once running, as they have to load up the novell client, anti-virus, lock down, security, etc., etc. software not to mention windoze. the lab was fully funcitoning, just never used. it was like a root canal with no anasthesia. and all we'd need is an application server, a dual pentium rig, big hard drives, lots of memory. $3000 tops. and we'd have a screaming lab. she's interested. I pitch it to the district and it gets shot down like a duck on opening day.

        here's the {funniest|saddest} part: this was in late spring, when the next years funding proposals, etc. take place. the next year, our resident technidiot spends his time breaking down the literally 100+ old pentiums, stacking up the 1GB hard drives, organizing the 8MB SIMMs, etc. the only thing I could think to relate was he was doing graves registration duty. better to eliminate any possibiltiy than actually have a lab that the kids could use. part of the reason the computer were never used was because it costs about $300-$350 to put a workstation in front of a kid even if you give us the hardware. and 100 X $300...

        he argued that they want to "standardize" on windows, as if he didn't realize how stupid and uninformed that comment was. he was concerned they wouldn'tbe able to use word. hell, we were still using word97 in 2002. As if Abi or OO aren't capable of typing papers, etc.
        • Yep.. A few years ago now, I helped setup a computer lab system for a small charter school.. We got the server, a decent cheap box with a couple of 36gig scsi disks. I setup NFS/NIS/autofs. We took an old P100 to setup as a firewall, and a resurected what we could out of a stack of P166s. We installed RH6.2 (latest and greatest release at the time) with abiword, and a few other apps. This was the first time the school had more than 5 computers running at one time.. previous to that, the P166 win98 just c
  • TJHSST [tjhsst.edu] has a full lab of both Linux computers (Debian!) as well as another, much smaller, lab with Solaris thin clients. We plan to move to Linux thin clients, as they offer both increased customizability as well as speed.
  • The CSE department at Ohio State University uses Solaris 8 and is planning on migrating to Solaris 10 in a couple of years. But there's also a RedHat Enterprise site license available and a lot of reasearchers are running Redhat (ranging from 8 to Enterprise 3) on the machines in their labs.
  • I was at Duke in November to participate in the ACM. My team got stuck in a room with a Sun terminal. Oh boy did we get screwed in that regard!

    The only window manager that worked on it was CDE which was butt ugly and difficult to use, vim was configured in a way that was completely different from anything we had ever used, and the Sun keybaord had many keys in different positions! Not that we would have won, but the High Point University freshman team may have done a little better.
  • Since Duke doesn't want them, I'll gladly take them off their hands.
  • Edinburgh (Score:3, Interesting)

    by psychofox ( 92356 ) on Wednesday April 13, 2005 @05:27PM (#12228295)
    Curious. That's pretty much what they did at Edinburgh University, Scotland, 5 years ago...
  • MiT is currently ditching all of it's high end Dell-based linux lab workstations in favor of ...brand new sparc IPXs. Apparently they can fit an entire server cluster into the sysadmin's backpack.
  • Notre Dame too (Score:3, Informative)

    by Samari711 ( 521187 ) on Wednesday April 13, 2005 @05:28PM (#12228311)
    They did a pretty big upgrade over the summer of all the computer resources. they removed all but a few of the Solaris machines from the Engineering building and replaced them with HP boxes running RHEL. They would have ditced Sun entirely but there are still a few programs that a few classes use that haven't been ported over to Linux yet.

    Of course they aren't exactly using best management practices IMO but OIT never really took care of the Sun boxes either.

  • Caltech (Score:2, Informative)

    My university uses mostly solaris for the central servers, and they still have a lab of solaris 8 workstations. Nobody uses those, however, because most departments have their own labs, mostly using Dell/Linux. The CS department was using Redhat and FreeBSD for years, but they just switched to Mandrake when Redhat changed its license.
  • by E-Lad ( 1262 ) on Wednesday April 13, 2005 @05:29PM (#12228322)
    I'm one of the two people here at UMBC [umbc.edu] who run the core servers for the campus.

    We use AFS [openafs.org] here for everyone's home directory, mail spool, web space, and other things. To maintain this, we currently have about 6 servers with direct-attached storage serving everyone's AFS home directory volumes. These servers are a mix of Dell and Sun gear running Linux and Solaris. Both platforms have run well over the years, but each server's direct-attached SCSI storage is limitting and, well, aging.

    So we can better use our storage and improve things for everyone in general, I'm in the process of rolling out a fiber channel SAN with new servers and RAID arrays to replace what's currently running. The new server gear we chose? Sun's V20z Opteron server running Solaris 10 . Linux is right out.

    Why no more Linux, or rather, why Solaris? A few reasons. Solaris's storage management is TONS easier to deal with and do interesting things with than what is available in Linux. Namely, we've found and have been fustrated by Linux's software RAID. Yeah, it works... but that's about it. Weee look, I can make a mirror! Solaris's SVM (aka DiskSuite) is no VxVM, but it does allow us to do things such as disk sets to share between hosts and monitor our metadevices in detail. Linux's raidutils on the other hand are poorly documented and toublesome (usage options don't match reality, etc)

    Another aspect on Linux vs. Solaris in mass storage is (as far as I know) a lack of multi-pathing in Linux. Multi-pathing is a no-brainer especially in the context of Fiber Channel networks and Solaris's MPxIO is in-built and works quite well.

    But I'm just poo-pooing Linux here on this specific point. We offer Linux workstations in every one of our computing labs. Linux replaced SGI/IRIX workstations there many moons ago and work well for that purpose. Linux servers also are used for our general shell login servers. But on the backend, where we need reliable features, consistency, and heavy-lifting... we're enthralled with Sun x86 servers and Solaris 10. The V20z Opteron hardware actually is cheaper (for us) than a Dell 2650 and offers a ton more features all-alround.

    There is an irony, though. The service processor on the Sun V20zs run Linux. Ah well ;)
  • by fool ( 8051 ) on Wednesday April 13, 2005 @05:40PM (#12228430) Homepage
    i'm a sysadmin for UT's computer science unix machines and our longterm plan is to stay with linux and solaris. we've already junked IRIX, HPUX, and AIX a long time ago. there are a couple of reasons for this continuing two-forked path:

    • monoculture is bad. people say this all the time on slashdot; nobody likes a windows-only world. linux monoculture is maybe not just as bad, but it's not a win. anyone who tries to build some of the stuff from sourceforge on non-linux platforms and discovers it to be completely linux-centric and non-portable will probably agree with me here--we want code that runs on unix, not code that runs on linux, and students will matriculate hopefully with a broader sense of what that can mean with more opportunities available to them. furthermore, solaris has been 64bit for far longer than (mainstream) linux so even though linux is catching up now, there was a time when the platform gap was even larger and more "useful" in a research-and-education sense. finally stuff like timing cache hits and instructions-per-clock-cycle become more interesting when you have some true platform contrast.

    • sun's pricing is still competitive for us (they do a lot of matching donations and cheating on already-low edu prices to make it so) and in certain niche markets (thin clients, >=16-way servers), they are just easier to cope with than trying to homebrew a sufficiently sturdy solution (we use their thin clients in labs that are unlocked 24/7, for instance.)


    do students massively prefer the PC's to the sunblades and sunrays? sure. many professors care less. but do we want to limit any of them to a single platform? definitely not.
  • Sun Hardware (Score:3, Interesting)

    by vlad_petric ( 94134 ) on Wednesday April 13, 2005 @06:02PM (#12228606) Homepage
    While Sun hardware is very stable and reliable, their processors just suck. They work well for some type of workloads (webserving, oltp), but for pretty much everything else AMD and Intel chips just kick their asses. Sure, you can scale more with Sun, but in general it's preferable to have a fast chip than multiple chips that are considerably slower. And it's not just clockspeed. Intel/AMD chips are doing out-of-order execution for 3 generations now (PPro, PII/PIII, PIV and K6, K7, K8), Sun -- well, they're still in-order.

    Why do you think Sun is doing Opteron servers these days ?

    My university, too, is mid-way switching from Sun to Linux. With Sun hardware you pay a premium for a slow product (at least CPU-wise, which, for the kind of stuff university people do, is the most important). Simply not worth it.

  • SCO karma (Score:3, Funny)

    by Salo2112 ( 628590 ) on Wednesday April 13, 2005 @06:04PM (#12228615)
    I suppose I should refrain from commenting since I have no dog in the fight, but I am glad to see some migration away from Sun to linux since Sun helped fund SCO by buying licenses.

    A Nelson HA HA to you, Sun.

Understanding is always the understanding of a smaller problem in relation to a bigger problem. -- P.D. Ouspensky

Working...