On 11/4/05, Andy Streich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Friday 04 November 2005 09:11 am, Mike McCarty wrote: > > On the whole, I'm happy with Linux. But in a side-by-side comparison, > > IMO Solaris is superior. > > > > No flames, please. > > You are wise to include the "no flames" request. As always this is as more of > an emotional issue for many people than an intellectual or economic one. > > In asking what's best or what's superior you have to state for what intended > purpose. I think it would be hard to make a case for Solaris being the best > OS to run on your workstation at home or your typical webhost when Debian > GNU/Linux is available. But if your company is doing high volume stock and > banking transactions, Solaris may very well be the best.
My defintion of superior is what is more capable and in this case the 'high volume stock...' > In both cases it's > not just about the technical quality of the OS -- although that's critically > important -- it's also about the available community support. In the former > case the community is the essentially the people on this mailing list. In > the latter, I'd much prefer to look to -- and pay for -- the community of > engineers at Sun. This is being too universal -- I like sticking to the 'technical quality' of things. Not to say that those other things (support, etc.) are not important. > (One way in which Sun distinguishes itself is that it is > still a company where engineers dominate, as opposed to Microsoft, as someone > else mentioned, which is purely marketing driven. Sadly the results can be > seen in their stock prices.) > > I doubt many people on this list have much experience working in high-volume, > financial transaction environments where minutes of downtime correspond to > millions of dollars lost. It's not reasonable IMO to expect OSS to serve > that market -- yet. Sounds like you are underrating FLOSS... Isn't Google using the Linux kernel. Or rather aren't you saying that the corporates haven't opened their eyes yet. > As Mike wrote: No flames, please. But I'd be very interested in what others > thing about this. > > Andy
