Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. ×
Sun Microsystems

Sun Recants Solaris Source Closure 67

wfaulk writes "Sun Microsystems, which, a few days ago, announced that they would be re-closing their source code, announced today that they would not be doing so. You can now continue to download Solaris source (where they verify the reversal)."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Sun Recants Solaris Source Closure

Comments Filter:
  • by Gogl ( 125883 ) on Saturday June 30, 2001 @07:27AM (#118134) Journal
    I wonder if this has anything at all to do with the Microsoft ruling? Probably not, I'm probably just being paranoid, but still the timing is quite a coincidence. But hey, it can't hurt to have Sun open up Solaris Sourecode, so I'm definitely not complaining. Viva la open source! (even though it looks like the license they put this under isn't exactly GPL or BSD).
  • Perhaps sun is actally responsive to the demands of the "developer" community that they have amassed? It seems that this presents a few problems:

    a. I always thought that only truly free projects could be responsive (at least that's what I was told by slashdot)
    b. I always thought that Sun was just an OSS parasite, because they take but never give back (but again, I heard that on slashdot).

    Well, I guess I gotta go relearn everything I know about the world now. This just changes everything.
  • Sun rises, source opens. Sun sets, source closes.
  • by interiot ( 50685 ) on Saturday June 30, 2001 @07:29AM (#118137) Homepage
    This is like watching a robot scurrying around when its two drivers are fighting over the joystick.
    --
  • perhaps you should just stop reading slashdot?
  • by gol64738 ( 225528 ) on Saturday June 30, 2001 @07:31AM (#118139)
    hi, i'm sun microsystems! we're like, cool and stuff so we're going to release our source code cuz that's what all the cool people are doing. of course, since our company is so bloated, we'll have to charge like, $75 to just cover the red tape costs.
    (a few months later)
    hey, what's happening? i thought releasing our code would make us cool and stuff. damn, what are we going to do?
    hey! i know, let's say we're going to stop releasing our source so all the open source people will get their panties in a bunch! that's right, and then when we have their attention again, we'll open it back up again and we'll be cool and stuff! wow, we're really smart.
  • see, bitching and complaining really DOES work
    ------------
    a funny comment: 1 karma
    an insightful comment: 1 karma
    a good old-fashioned flame: priceless
  • by legLess ( 127550 ) on Saturday June 30, 2001 @07:34AM (#118141) Journal
    Activism does make a difference. For every person who writes, emails, calls to complain when a large company pisses him off, there are whiners in the background saying, "It won't make any difference; why should a huge company like X even listen to you?"

    Well, twice in a week two of the biggest companies in the world have listened to thousands of us, and done what we asked them to. We threw a collective shit-fit when Micro$oft revealed their Smart Tag plans, and they backed right away [slashdot.org]. We had another fit when Sun said they'd close the Solaris source, and they've now reversed themselves.

    We haven't won the war, and we never will, because it will never end. But dammit, we can make a difference on issues that matter to us. Next time Company Y does something really obnoxious or stupid, remember one of my favorite Frank Herbert quotes: "The most important survival ability for any life form is the ability to change." Successful companies know this, too, and they do listen.

    "We all say so, so it must be true!"

  • Nice to see they didn't do a roundabout releasing the OS, however when I think of Solaris I don't think much of its x86 arch. For those who've used it as well would know it's extremely an intense OS not made for anything under about 192mb ram, and a nice processor. It's CDE under x86 is like watching the thickest cement being sucked through a straw. Slow and clunky.

    On the Sun platforms it's great, but Sun really layed it on think with enough Java to wake the dead. I like being able to jumpstart machines easily, and wish Dan Farmer and team would have kept their Titan program running over at Fish.com [fish.com].

    All in all it (Solaris) has its purposes, how much of that is on x86 is opinionated, and my opinion is, it shouldn't be
  • Reminds me of the sadistic game we would play as little kids, cruelly torturing a poor daisy, pulling at one petal at a time.

    In excruciating pain, the poor daisy sat as we innocently tore at it's dress saying..

    She loves me!
    She loves me not!
    She loves me!
    She loves me not!

    I wonder where we will sit with Solaris when all the petals have fallen out of our hands, drifting slowly to the earth, wafting through the breeze.

    Owelp, I'll just install FreeBSD then.
  • by Khalid ( 31037 ) on Saturday June 30, 2001 @07:53AM (#118144) Homepage
    Open source/Free software is most certainly what can be qualified as a "Vocal Minority"; alas it has also, certainly one of it's other attribute "fundamentalism". But, maybe the two are closely related. You need to be really focused on your believes and dismess other believes if you want to make a difference, or if you want to change things.

    History has told us, quite often, that it' "Vocal minorities" who change history.

  • They are hardware manufacturers. They make money selling hardware. Not operating systems. You want Solaris 8? So download it. Sparc and Intel are distros are free. You want to run Solaris on a machine, and need a license? Here, fill out this web page and you'll be considered, 'in the green'.

    if they don't make money on selling the OS, why would they care if people had the source code? The only thing that releasing the source code could do is allow people to fix bugs on their own, instead of waiting for the next release.
  • by connorbd ( 151811 ) on Saturday June 30, 2001 @07:59AM (#118146) Homepage
    First off, I think there was more stupidity than gouging involved (approximately, "we thought we'd satisfied the market"), which indicates that Sun is clearly lacking a clue when it comes to Open Source. This isn't news.

    The other thing about the Sun situation that I suspect most people don't consider -- they don't necessarily own all the source code to Solaris. A lot of it is probably still Unix System V (which, last time I checked, was owned by Caldera, another notably less-than-clueful company); there are probably restrictions on just what they can do with the code.

    I do think in general that Sun is one of those companies that has no particular interest in keeping the source code closed per se, though. I think they made that perfectly evident by making Solaris and StarOffice (which should be their flagship products if software was really a focus for them) free downloads. Sun's problem here is that they're doing a very sloppy job of adapting to the realities of the modern Unix world in which Open Source is a force that simply can't be ignored or written off (I hesitate to say it dominates, since there's a lot of Motif work and such still being done out there in the trenches).

    What Sun has just done unfortunately probably doesn't signify anything in the way of a change of heart; they're merely responding to a miscalculation in their market analysis that would have gotten them unnecessary bad press if they'd followed through with it. (Might wake them up, though, you never know...)

    /Brian
  • by Anonymous Coward
    This actually creates a little bit of a problem, not the reappearance of the source, but it's very existance. (Note to potential flames - I'm very glad sun is doing this, and they deserve both praise and kudos for doing it - if windows had something similar a lot of problems would vanish.) Someone else observed above, this isn't exactly GPL. It might actually be a good idea for open source developers to steer clear of this code:

    1) Since sun very definitely still holds the rights to this code, we must be careful not to use their technology in an open source product.

    2) Having seen the code, elegant ideas or new concepts are hard to avoid using when designing new software - of course for the sake of open source and fairness to sun we would try, but the odds of complete success aren't good. When the brain has an idea it becomes part of the working knowledge and thoughts of that person. This is why Microsoft doesn't want it's developers looking at GPL code. For once, they actually have a valid point.

    Again, this is not a criticism of sun. They have done many things to help open source, OpenOffice heading the list, and the Solaris program is very generous (especially if you happen to have a good internet connection.) The purpose here, however, is to enable users of Solaris to better support and debug their computers, as well as get some debugging of the OS back in the process. So yes it is cool, but for individual geeks who don't have solaris boxes to maintain, it might be better to play cautious when it comes to the Sun source code. From the license:

    "Sharing of Covered Code. You may not share
    Covered Code with any non-Licensee under any circumstances.
    You may only share Covered Code with other Licensees on the
    Technology Site, consistent with any rules or guidelines set
    forth in this Agreement and the Technology Site."

    Probably better to stick to GPL, BSD, or other similar licenses. Too much potential troble here.
  • sorry, i was just cranky, woke up and it was like 95 out with 50% humidity. i get all pissy when i wake up and i feel like i am in a swimming pool.
  • I don't think of Sun as a parasite. They've been supportive of Java under Linux, and more importantly, they're pretty open about letting people look at the Java source, write their own compilers/VMs, etc. And aren't they supporting Ximian or GNOME in general, as part of replacing CDE on Solaris 9?

    I can't think of any reason for Sun to GPL Solaris, though. Different market entirely, even though they're shooting for the low end. Even under relatively restrictive licenses, viewable source code is valuable- prevents the kind of single-vendor lock-in nightmares caused by Microsoft, and allows users to customize systems to a greater degree. My school uses Solaris for a number of central servers, with a number of customized apps, and a friend who used to adminster them says being able to access the source would be helpful, if not essential.

    Anyway, I've never taken advantage of the "freedoms" under the GPL/BSD licenses. I just think it's a good thing any time a company decides to be more open and responsive with its products, and stops treating its users like the enemy.
  • by wilkinsm ( 13507 ) on Saturday June 30, 2001 @08:08AM (#118150)
    My work recently switched to solaris 7, and soon to solaris 8 on our E10Ks. However for some stupid idea they will not buy a new sparccomplier compiler to go with it.

    Since solaris went to a 64-bit kernel in solaris 7, I have lost control of debugging kernel-level problems because our old sparc compiler does support the 64-bit kernel. This makes me very upset.

    My question is, if I can get my hands on the solaris 8 source code, can I use the symbols and headers in it to cross-compile a gcc to support the 64-bit symbols and functions I need?

    Kind of a odd way to do it, but I can afford to get the source code, but not the sparccompiler.
  • by Tim Macinta ( 1052 ) <twm@alum.mit.edu> on Saturday June 30, 2001 @08:09AM (#118151) Homepage
    I always thought that Sun was just an OSS parasite, because they take but never give back (but again, I heard that on slashdot).

    Sun purchased the company that made Star Office (Applixware), probably for several million dollars, and then proceeded to release it under the GPL [linuxnews.com]. I don't know what your definition of "giving back" to the OSS community is, but that certainly fits mine. The open source community instantly gained perhaps the single biggest piece that it was missing for global desktop domination (an extensive office suite).

    There are one or two other examples I could think of off the top of my head where Sun has "given back", but the Star Office example should suffice in proving your original source incorrect.

  • I don't want to analyze this to death. I just want to say: I appreciate that Sun has chosen to follow this path. This is great news to me, and hopefully it will help Sun in some way.

    I know a lot of people say that SUNW is a Big Evil Corporation like MSFT, but I disagree. I really like products such as Java (slow, but the APIs are fairly symmetric, and the JVM is predictable), whereas the stuff Microsoft puts out often is less than satisfactory (who here *likes* Visual Studio? who here uses Visual Studio just to get the job done, but secretly wishes it was called GCC Studio? that's what I thought).

    I'm even willing to pay for some of Sun's stuff (e.g. Solaris Media Kit). The horror of it!

    P.S. I know gcc is available for win32, so don't flame me about that. Please.

  • FYI there are prebuilt gcc for Solaris/SPARC binaries available that you can download - I'm not sure where, but I was talking to a guy at work yesterday who had found them. He also mentioned that they're available somewhere on Sun's site. Sorry to be so vague.
  • Applixware did not make Star Office. Applix is a totally different office suite.
  • http://www.sunfreeware.com and it's in convenient pkg format as well. VERY sweet; first thing you need to make a solaris box usuable on a daily basis is the gzip packages. :-)
  • to get people to be aware of their code, and get them to download it.
  • Ummm, I like Visual Studio a lot. I didn't have much of a problem with Sun until a keynote address I attended from one of their execs. It was like listening to Larry Ellison. Sun open sources its software to make Microsoft look bad. Plain and simple. Whether that's a bad things or not is a matter of opinion, but I think their motivation is out of hatred in their execs for Microsoft and not out of any support for the open source movement.
  • by Anonymous Coward
    Sun bought out their license to System V from AT&T (back when that was who owned it) so they do have full rights to do what they please with the code. That said, this particular $75 program was not very popular because it only included a small portion of Solaris (basically just the source code for a bunch of the userland utilities; no kernel or device driver code at all).

    Rumor has it that the original discontinuation was not due to some evil nefarious plan, but due to lack of interest! Nobody was doing anything with this source code program, due to the limited availability and also because the license restrictions wouldn't let them do very much with it. (This was not SCSL, it was even more restrictive.) It wasn't worth the $$ it was costing them to support it, and Sun (like other companies) is trying desperately to find ways to save money. There are probably at least a few people who work on maintaining this full-time.

    If they want the program to be successful, they need to release the complete system (so that people can work on device drivers or file systems, for example) and using licensing terms that allow people to make other than personal use of their changes.

    Note that Sun still makes the source code for the complete system available, as they always have, for a rather steep price.

  • Perhaps the biggest lesson to be learned here is that you shouldn't blindly do as suggested and break the law because of some sort of concept of freedom. Don't forget that the GPL works BECAUSE of copyright law and BECAUSE you can license software.
  • by sheldon ( 2322 ) on Saturday June 30, 2001 @08:40AM (#118160)
    "We threw a collective shit-fit when Micro$oft revealed their Smart Tag plans, and they backed right away."

    Microsoft doesn't listen much to the public anti-Microsoft whiners.

    Really, sorry to disappoint you, but they know whatever they will do you will whine. Besides, you don't buy their product so why should they care?

    But Microsoft does listen to the Beta-testers. On the beta newsgroups one of the chief gripes about Smarttags in IE was that it was distracting having various words highlighted like that. They also didn't see it being all that useful.

    One of the other interesting things is that a lot of you anti-Microsoft whiners tend to misrepresent stories. Then later on when the story is corrected and the truth comes out you like to claim that you won your battle. I don't see how this is true, but if it makes you feel all warm and fuzzy inside, then more power to you.
  • Ummm, I like Visual Studio a lot.

    Thats great, but have you tried kdevelop [kdevelop.org]. Many people I know who cannot just use gcc/gdb find it quite usable and preferable to vc++.

    Sun open sources its software to make Microsoft look bad. Plain and simple.

    Can you provide some proof of this or is this pure speculation?

    I personally think Sun has good intentions, but sadly history has shown their lack of direction and poor business sense in recent years.

  • Sun making Star Office GPL is at least as much a strategic move against microsoft as it is a contribution to OSS. They did it when they were flush with cash and a high share price. I doubt they would do the same today.

    It is a lot like SAP making their relational database, SAPDB, OSS. Hardly anyone buys SAPDB without SAP R/3 on top of it. But, Oracle is trying to move into the marketspace in which SAP R/3 mostly dominates. By freeing SAPDB, SAP lost very little revenue, but now Oracle has to compete with a product that, while not quite as good as Oracle's database, is definitely a high-quality, industrial strength, fully-scalable, buzzword, buzzword, buzzword system.
  • by Anonymous Coward
    As with their other free products like Solaris 8 binaries, the $75 is to cover the media kit if you want the manuals and CD's. If you're concerned about the cost you can just download it for nothing.
  • >Microsoft doesn't listen much to the public anti-
    >Microsoft whiners Microsoft does listen to the
    >Beta-testers

    >One of the other interesting things is that a
    >lot of you anti-Microsoft whiners tend to
    >misrepresent stories

    Well maybe you are suffering from the same syndrom too, think about it :)

    Maybe the Open Source crowd is not the only group who has reacted ! but there have been a lot of stories in the press and I am pretty sure that M$ PR departement who are not idiot, have pressetend that this thing could become a communication debacle !
  • You really need the Forte 6 compilers. Trying to compile this code on gcc is incredibly tedious, trust me. You can generate 30 day try-n-buy licenses somewhere on sun.com.

    BTW if you do download gcc for SPARC, make sure that it's version 3. There is a new backend code generator for SPARC which makes it "suck less" when generating 64bit code - performance on previous versions is pretty terrible.
  • Applixware did not make Star Office. Applix is a totally different office suite.

    Oops, you're right - my bad. I don't know why I thought Applix was the name of the company Sun bought to get StarOffice.

  • Ah, was not aware.

    The fact remains that it's rather pointless of them not to make the code for the whole system available -- Solaris can hardly be much of a profit center for them anymore.

    /Brian
  • As stated in the AC's post you sound more like an environmentalist than someone who has a clue. Let me post some comments on this.
    Activism does make a difference. For every person who writes, emails, calls to complain when a large company pisses him off
    Firstly where do you see any mention of activism in any of the articles linked? Secondly if you think someone is going to sit through millions of email if they were spammed, you're off your rocker. Emails such as those are almost always sent to a null account.
    there are whiners in the background saying, "It won't make any difference; why should a huge company like X even listen to you?"
    Company X will not listen to you, it may listen to someone close to the company who may have overheard a rumor, or someone that sees what the big bosses mis, but Company X has a paid staff that looks into how the company is going to make money. You know that thing called money right? Company X's bottom line is keeping investors happy on returns, not what the consumer wants as most people would like to think.
    Well, twice in a week two of the biggest companies in the world have listened to thousands of us
    Clearly this is where you sound more like a 15 year old rebel without a cause, as opposed to someone with a clue. This whole article has nothing to do with activism on any scale, so where did you get this rant from?
    and done what we asked them to. We threw a collective shit-fit when Micro$oft revealed their Smart Tag plans
    Who threw a collective shit fit. Do you think the people at MS care at this point what someone, especially someone using alternatives to MS, thinks? They just beat the Department of Justice, which paves the way for them to do whatever they like. Surely you'd have to be kidding yourself if you think MS' backing off Smart Tags for now has anything to do with someone bitching about it.
    and they backed right away. We had another fit when Sun said they'd close the Solaris source, and they've now reversed themselves.
    Again your dissillusioned by thoughts of grandeur. I'd like to see one person in this place come up with a fair rebuttal word for word to counter what I've said. I know I have some flaws, but your original post sounds like nothing but someone who's been playing quake too long, and thinking they're some sort of "Cyber Super Hero"
    We haven't won the war, and we never will, because it will never end.
    I rest my case
  • It's such a relief to hear this news. I'm just not myself in the morning until I've had a few cups of coffee and compiled Solaris from the source code.
  • Agreed. It's an attitude that Apple [apple.com] could learn from. OS X isn't supported on the clones, (which are pretty old anyway) so every machine out there that can run it is a piece of hardware Apple manufactured and shipped with a Mac OS license.
  • FYI (from the Sun 2000 Annual Report):

    On August 5, 1999, we acquired Star, by means of a merger transaction pursuant to which all of the shares of Star were converted into the right to receive cash for total consideration of approximately $60 million. Simultaneously with the acquisition of Star, Sun acquired certain assets and liabilities of StarOffice GmbH, a related party of Star, for total cash consideration of approximately $14 million
    --
    Charles E. Hill
  • I was ready to sign and fax (!) back the license agreement to download the source, until I read this:

    "By signing the Solaris 8 Foundation Source license agreement, you agree that all Internet discussions about the Solaris 8 Foundation Source in which you are involved must be held on the Solaris 8 Foundation Source Discussion Forum."

    Seems like a pretty heavy restriction to me. I've never had to restrict my speech to download anything. What if I'm participating in a discussion on a newsgroup about kernels, and then Sun's kernel comes up. "Oh, I'm sorry, but I can only discuss that on Sun's discussion forum. Sorry." Fuck that.

    LS
  • For those who've used it as well would know it's extremely an intense OS not made for anything under about 192mb ram, and a nice processor. It's CDE under x86 is like watching the thickest cement being sucked through a straw. Slow and clunky.

    CDE runs quite well under 128 megs of ram. It's what else you run, that sucks up memory to 192megs+

    And anyway, why dont you compare solaris x86 running gnome, against linux running gnome, and the same applications? Now that's a valid comparison.

  • Don't you mean a couple of cups of Java [sun.com]?
  • this particular $75 program was not very popular because it only included a small portion of Solaris (basically just the source code for a bunch of the userland utilities; no kernel or device driver code at all).
    You are incorrect; the source code includes most of the SunOS code, incluyding kernel, libraries, and utilities. My criticism of it is that it included nothing outside SunOS, i.e. no CDE, OpenWindows, etc. But at $75 for the CD (free if you download) it is good value.
  • Let me get this straight:
    You have E10ks but you cant afford the compiler?

    When working with E10k's I highly recommend using the sun compiler. Depsite gcc 3.0's sparc performance improvements from earlier gcc versions, it still is no sun compiler. No the sun compiler is a huge pain in the ass, and the bugs are never ending, and compiling 3rd party code on it is a pain in the ass. But, you are using million dollar hardware, and you want to make the best of that investment.

  • Must be out in boston then, eh?
  • A CD costs 5 cents to mass produce. A full retail shrinkwrap style package (with CD) costs less than $5 to produce in SMALL quantities.

    $75 is NOT to cover the cost of the media kit.
  • Perhaps Microsoft realized that if they went that far that they would have a whole lot more anti-Microsoft whiners and Open Source fundementalists.

    Microsoft does finally listen to REAL end users when a house is about to fall on them.

    They will do what is necessary to finally prevent mass defection, nothing more.

    This is much like moving away from MS-DOS 11 years after the release of the Macintosh.
  • My question is, if I can get my hands on the solaris 8 source code, can I use the symbols and headers in it to cross-compile a gcc to support the 64-bit symbols and functions I need?
    The Solaris 8 source media kit includes the Sun compiler (binary only) for SPARC or x86, depending whether you order SPARC or x86 (the source code has both x86 and SPARC, but the binaries for the compiler, OS, and other collateral or either x86 or SPARC, but not both) I haven't bothered to try the compiler CD. The paper insert in the package implies that a separate license is required for the compiler (Workshop 5.0), but the the license might be free.
  • I see a lot of people whining about the source is not really open. That is true. There are restriction so you cannot distribute the source or reveal details. But it is not Sun's fault - they cannot make it open source because of third-party embedded source. But if you are a Solaris developer it is worth downloading the source. I did that and have no intentions on compiling it or even fixing bugs (I leave that to Sun), but it still helped me a lot in tracking down a really tough bug in my own software.
  • by Anonymous Coward
    If you actually have a hardcopy of the license agreement (which I'm sure you do if you were going to fax it back) then just edit it to fit your demands.

    Something that both businesses and consumers seem to forget is that each and every contract, license, etc that they sign is an individual one. Don't like the cookie cutter contract you were handed? Cross out what you don't agree with and sign that. If the offering party still accepts it then that contract is legally binding. If you do something that violates the OLD contract, but NOT the NEW one that you revised and they try and call you on it, just have them dig out their copy of the contract and re-read it.

    You could take the original quote that you posted:

    By signing the Solaris 8 Foundation Source license agreement, you agree that all Internet discussions about the Solaris 8 Foundation Source in which you are involved must be held on the Solaris 8 Foundation Source Discussion Forum.

    And change it to:

    By signing the Solaris 8 Foundation Source license agreement, you agree that all Internet discussions about the Solaris 8 Foundation Source in which you are involved must contain a lewd reference to a monkey and a banana.

    It just doesn't matter. As long as you include that reference, they can't do a damn thing about it.

    This is why I HATE EULAs. The company just essentially said "We don't give a fuck about your wishes or opinions and if you want to deal with us, you will do it our way or not at all. This is not open to negotiation." Fuck you and fuck that!

    The really cool part about this, though is that 99% of the time no matter what you change it will be accepted. Why? Because businesses aren't used to having customers with a clue. They assume, without ever reviewing the contract that it was signed and accepted as it was when they handed it to you! So they just put their own seal on it and file it away. Then when you violate the terms of the old contract they try and nail you with it. Sorry bud, you agreed to the new terms. Now if they do anything short of allowing it, THEY are the ones that breached the contract.

    NOTE: One thing though. When I said above to edit the document. I didn't mean scan it using OCR and retype the parts you don't like. I'm not sure on the legallity of that. What you do is just draw a single line through whatever you don't agree with, then initial it.

    Second thing (ok so I lied), this only applies to the US. I don't have any idea how well it would work, if at all, in other countries.

  • As I stated, this is my opinion based on things I heard firsthand from execs of theirs and from personal inferences from their strategies and press releases. I can't prove it, but then again they couldn't have proved Microsoft had a vendetta against Netscape if they hadn't subpoena'd their internal e-mail. It's just what I think. As for Visual Studio, I grew up on gcc, but I found I liked VisStud a lot better after I got acquainted with the MFC. Not that there isn't a lot of room for improvement, but that's true of every development tool. The release of Visual Studio .NET that I've played with was very impressive, allowing developers to switch seemlessly from one language to another while still providing consistent error handling and transactions across the whole process. That will be key for really coding in components and since you can make calls to components located on other servers all in the same transaction with .NET it should really make for some cool stuff. And they appear to have done away with DLL Hell. Lastly, no one seems to give them any credit, but anyone can develop their own .NET versions of languages as long as they provide a mid-level compiler. I think there's even a Pascal.NET on the way. Microsoft is learning from its mistakes too!
  • The reason more people have not downloaded the solaris source is simple:

    you have to fax in a signature to do it.

    that involves actual paper, and the kind of people who would read the solaris source wouldn't naturally take the time.

    mail-in rebates are a way of capitalizing on this kind of stuff.
  • I don't think GCC does 64-bit on solaris.

    Check out ip_filter for instance. To compile this for the kernel on a 64-bit box, you need the sun compiler. I tried with gcc and it wouldn't do 64-bit.

    Maybe somebody got it to work, if so, I'd like to know...
  • I think this is really common. I've seen lots of companies with gazillion-dollar conference rooms, but the engineers are still at 17" monitors with crummy tools.
  • > I'd like to see one person in this place come up with a
    > fair rebuttal word for word to counter what I've said.

    Ok. First, let's define some terms. From Merriam-Webster: Activism: a doctrine or practice that emphasizes direct vigorous action especially in support of or opposition to one side of a controversial issue.

    By the above definition of "activism," I think that emailing and/or calling a company to express polite opposition to one of its policies qualifies. If you disagree with this, please cite your sources, and explain why you consider them to be more reliable than Mirriam-Webster.

    > you sound more like an environmentalist than someone who has a clue.

    Ad homonim; unrelated to the argument.

    > Firstly where do you see any mention of activism in any
    > of the articles linked?

    This link [solariscentral.org] [3rd link in the article] contains: But based on your feedback, we are happy to continue to offer access to the Solaris 8 Foundation Source.

    > Secondly if you think someone is going to sit through millions
    > of email if they were spammed...

    I assume you mean "sift?" No, I don't think for a minute that a human being is going to manually parse every email coming into a company. Many companies use mail server software to perform tasks like this (i.e. routing email based on receiver, subject or content). Also, most companies have multiple incoming email addresses, and sometimes they make these publically available. If you pick the right ones, you can often get a human being at the other end. Furthermore, if you use a decent subject line, you can get their attention and present your case without them having to read the email.

    And if you just reach some marketing droid who doesn't care, and who creates some sort of rule to route all related email to /dev/null, you've gained a small victory by making him/her realize that many people are pissed off.

    > ...you're off your rocker

    Ad homonim; unrelated to the argument.

    > Emails such as those are almost always sent to a null account.

    First, I doubt you can prove that. Second, are you saying that because I may not be heard I shouldn't even try? Is that your logic? "It's too hard, so just give up." Cynicism may sound cool on Slashdot, but it's no way to run your life.

    > Company X will not listen to you.

    Provably false. I've received numerous emails back from companies I've contacted. Some are personal, some are canned. Either way you're point's disproven.

    > Company X has a paid staff that looks into how the company
    > is going to make money.

    Missing the point. Often, companies employ professionals in a "Marketing department." Their role is to sell the company's product and make the company look good in public. These people are notoriously sensitive to criticism, and it's part of their job to parse that criticism and relay it up the food chain.

    > You know that thing called money right?

    Ad homonim; unrelated to the argument.

    > Company X's bottom line is keeping investors happy on
    > returns, not what the consumer wants as most people would
    > like to think.

    False dichotomy. Companies keep investors happy by keeping the stock profitable. They often do this my selling large amounts of product to consumers. Ergo, a company's bottom line is often (not always) inextricably tied to kepping consumers happy.

    Bridgestone would agree with me. They've lost over US$1.3 billion [washingtonpost.com] in less than a year, and their sales are off 50%. Killing your customers is the antithesis of keeping them happy.

    > Clearly this is where you sound more like a 15 year old
    > rebel without a cause, as opposed to someone with a clue.

    Ad homonim; unrelated to the argument.

    > This whole article has nothing to do with activism
    > on any scale, so where did you get this rant from?

    Already proven false: see above. Also, here's another quote from a different story [yahoo.com], "Critics Force Microsoft To Drop Smart Tags." To be fair, Microsoft didn't really say that consumer feedback was the primary motive for the decision, but did say that "external feedback" was one of the motives. Nearly every published article I've seen (a couple dozen) expressed skepticism at Microsoft's stated motives, and the consensus is that they dropped Smart Tags because they were getting beaten bloody by the press (not coincidently, almost all users of Windows and IE). It's not solid proof, but it's close enough for me.

    > Who threw a collective shit fit[?]

    Well, nearly all of the technology press, for one. That's pretty important, eh? A Yahoo News search [yahoo.com] turned up 41 Smart Tag articles, nearly all of which are negative. There have been some positive articles, but most people hated the idea. Many who hated it let Microsoft know.

    > Do you think the people at MS care at this point what someone,
    > especially someone using alternatives to MS, thinks?

    Yes, I do, and it's provably true. Microsoft responded nearly instantly to Smart Tag criticism. Microsoft responds fast and vociferously to many criticisms; if they didn't listen, they wouldn't resond. Duh.

    > especially someone using alternatives to MS

    IMHO, these people more than most, actually. They don't need to convince Joe Sixpack to use Windows - he buys a Gateway and uses whatever Gateway feeds him. People using non-MS products, however, often convince other people to switch away from MS products. Just my opinion, though.

    > They just beat the Department of Justice

    Not yet, they haven't. They may prevail in the end, but the case is far from over.

    > which paves the way for them to do whatever they like

    This is hard to argue with; they've shown nothing but contempt for the government, and they'll probably continue to do so.

    > Surely you'd have to be kidding yourself if you think MS'
    > backing off Smart Tags for now has anything to do with
    > someone bitching about it.

    I do think this; see above. Do you have a better explanation? In absence of convincing evidence either way, rational people are free to disagree. The only "evidence" most people have is the prepared speech of a Microsoft spokesdroid, which has evidently convinced very few people.

    > Again your dissillusioned by thoughts of grandeur ... your
    > original post sounds like nothing but someone who's been
    > playing quake too long, and thinking they're some sort of
    > "Cyber Super Hero"

    Ad homonim; unrelated to the argument.

    > I rest my case

    I'm not sure what you mean by this. But if you really rest your case, then I sugest that you've lost. I've demolished nearly every point you've made. Not difficult, since nearly every phrase you typed contained one or more logical fallacies. Personally I think you're just another dumb-fuck troll. But hey, that's just my opinion.

    "We all say so, so it must be true!"

  • Sun, you make way too much money to be cool.
  • Only problem there is, gcc *still* doesn't support 64-bit compilation for Solaris (which is understandable I suppose - after all, Solaris has only been 64-bit for about 3 years now...).

    A bit of a pain when Sol8 is a 64-bit OS.

    So yes, gcc is available, and even useable for some userland applications, but forget it for serious stuff, I'm afraid.

    --
  • What a lot of people forget - and I'm surprised that more people don't pick up on this - is that EULAs are techincally illegal. The law states implicitly that a contract will be judged illegal if a reasonable man in a reasonable state of mind would not sign that contract given reasonable conditions. What all this means is basically this: The contract must be reasonable. If it is not, it is illegal and cannot be used as grounds for prosecution.

  • Earlier someone complained about the $75.00 cost, which goes to show how pervasive ADD is in this readership. Learn to follow through to the end of the agreements spaz boy. The $75 fee is if they actually ship you media, you can download it for free [sun.com]. Now you do have to receive the key to the super secret download url by receiving a letter at your residence or business. Which means you get to give them your address and information. Not so bad, but I read this line and thought twice about abstaining on my first amendment rights:
    " By signing the Solaris 8 Foundation Source license agreement, you agree that all Internet discussions about the Solaris 8 Foundation Source in which you are involved must be held on the Solaris 8 Foundation Source Discussion Forum. You will receive information about how to participate in this forum along with a special serial number that will enable you to access the forum once you download the product. The number will appear on your download receipt page under the heading "Serial Number." "
    Ok let's review, it's free but I have to give you all my personal info and you can do what you want with it. So far not a bad deal. Now, you also want me to give up all my rights regarding talking about your product? Sure that sounds great, how about outside the internet. What if my friend who I told it about it then posts it to the internet? Is that contributory?? one last bit, here is a nice notice towards the end:
    PLEASE NOTE: IF YOU ARE ORDERING A MEDIA KIT BEFORE DECEMBER 11. YOU MAY SUBMIT YOUR ORDER TODAY BUT THE PRODUCT WILL NOT SHIP UNTIL AFTER DECEMBER 11. [sun.com]
  • The manuals ain't cheap to produce in the limited quantities that they are shipping sol x86 etc. Plus packaging etc
  • I don't want to go way off topic, since the source code we were talking about wasn't GPL'd anyways, but since I was the one to bring up the GPL I should finish this :)

    If you can't copyright something, you can't control what other people do with it. The GPL is not about public domain, it is about ensuring freedom the indefinite future, through software licensing. Without copyright, the GPL would be without any basis in law.

  • I wouldn't be surprised; one of the 'great strengths' of Open Source software is also it's great weakness; sure, thousands and thousands of college kiddies are churning out code, but how many of them have multiprocessor sun boxes? Or big iron? And, of course, the pervasive idea that 'if it compiles, it's done...oh, and compiler warnings don't count.' QA is not one of OSS's strengths. Oh, and if 'but who cares, because you have the source and can fix any problems you find,' then why have the fine folks at Slashdot NOT FIXED MySQL SUCH THAT THEY DON'T HAVE TO REBOOT THE DATABASE SERVER OFTEN ENOUGH THAT IT'S THE FIRST PROBLEM TO COME TO MIND WHEN THEY NOTICE THE SITE'S DOWN?! Ahem....I've calmed down now.
  • Assuming your assertion is correct (IANAL), you would still have to show that a standard Microsoft EULA is not something someone would sanely agree to. IMO, that's just not the case: Microsoft's terms may, in a limited number of cases, feel unreasonable, but I doubt they're so unreasonable that the vast majority of Microsoft customers wouldn't be willing to agree to them.

    It's not as if agreeing to an EULA means you're having to give your right arm to Microsoft, or that you agree to a year of your life as Bill Gate's sex slave.
    --

  • Why? It means there is a nice centralised place for Solaris 8 source discussion to occur. Why is that a bad thing?
  • Sun Freeware has a snapshot version that compiles 64-bit binaries. It's not totally stable, though.
  • Quoth someone,

    ... Frank Herbert quotes: "The most important survival ability for any life form is the ability to change."

    More simply put: "The ability to adapt is the ability to survive." -- Ray Bradbury

  • Well, it's not that much more than the ~$50 USD you pay for a linux distro on CD. So, yeah, there's a markup, but heck, I'd rather pay $75 than 200 or so for Win2k! ;)
  • I'm writing software for a million-dollar UNIX platform.

    I'm also on a Sparc 20.

    I'm not kidding.

Put not your trust in money, but put your money in trust.

Working...