Crystal Ball Sunday #2: OpenSolaris vs. Linux

khess 0 Tallied Votes 366 Views Share

Welcome back to Crystal Ball Sunday. This week in the Crystal Ball are my predictions for OpenSolaris vs. Linux. The release of OpenSolaris on May 5th has caused quite a stir. Many say that it will replace Linux on the Desktop and in the Data Center.

My first prediction is that there will be sizable battle waged between the two in the Press and in IT labs alike. I foresee a lot of debate going back and forth about the two operating systems, their pros, their cons, and the stalwarts in both camps. This is going to be somewhat of a religious battle so prepare yourselves accordingly.

Second, and perhaps more important, is the license that both operating systems will eventually live under. Linus Torvalds opposes GPL3 and currently refuses to allow the kernel to be governed by it. OpenSolaris was released under the CDDL (Common Development and Distribution License).
I think the first one of these operating systems that is releases under GPL3 will probably gain widespread acceptance with developers, corporations, and adopters. The reason is that most of the other open source apps released under GPL3 will receive vigorous adoption and development by the kernel that also matches that license.

Third, I think that while OpenSolaris will gain some ground in both the Data Center and Desktop spaces, it won't enjoy the amount of Press it probably deserves--except to argue for or against it (See Prediction 1 above). The reason is that Linux has such a large following, like Windows, or Mac and there is much invested in its status as a viable operating system.
As viable as OpenSolaris may ever become, it will pale in acceptance and investment compared to that of Linux. It isn't Linux, it isn't Windows, and it really doesn't fit into any other category except niche OS.

Finally, there will be very few good-selling books on the topic of OpenSolaris. Publishers may allow one or two to slip through the cracks here and there but you will never find volumes written about it and I doubt there will ever be an OpenSolaris Magazine or OpenSolaris Journal with a large enough readership to cover costs of production.

My Crystal Ball grows a bit dark where OpenSolaris is concerned but it will be interesting to track its progress over the coming months.

Dani AI

Generated

This thread captures exactly the arguments people were trading around 2008: technical strengths vs. ecosystem, plus a loud license debate. set the tone, and replies from , and show the split between “license matters” and “I care about support/drivers.” In practice the winners were the projects and vendors that delivered ongoing maintenance, drivers, and an active community — not the side that won the press fights.

The decisive commercial event was Oracle’s takeover of Sun and the shift in how Solaris was developed and released. Oracle announced and then completed the acquisition in 2009–2010, and that change in stewardship led to the effective end of the OpenSolaris binary cadence and pushed work out of Oracle’s public development stream. That sequence is what forced community forks rather than letting OpenSolaris continue as a Sun/Oracle‑led alternative to Linux. (sec.gov)

Those community efforts produced illumos (an open core replacement for the OpenSolaris bits) and distributions such as OpenIndiana, and ZFS continued under the OpenZFS umbrella so its technology didn’t disappear. The licensing reality matters here: the CDDL (used by Solaris/ZFS) is regarded by the FSF as incompatible with the GPL, which explains why packaging ZFS on Linux produced prolonged legal and community debate and why distributions took careful, different approaches. (illumos.github.io)

Practical takeaway: pick an OS or filesystem by the ecosystem and support model you need, not by license slogans. If you need Solaris features, use an illumos distribution (OpenIndiana or a commercial illumos vendor) or Oracle’s supported Solaris; if you want ZFS on Linux, use OpenZFS builds and be explicit about how you will distribute kernel modules and binaries — consult legal counsel before shipping combined binaries. Quick checklist:

  • Verify vendor support and update cadence.
  • Confirm driver/hardware compatibility for your platform.
  • If redistributing kernel modules (ZFS on Linux), get a legal review.

For historical detail and project pages see the illumos/OpenIndiana and OpenZFS sites cited above. (docs.openindiana.org)

jwenting 1,905 duckman Team Colleague

The people who matter couldn't care less whether something is CDDL, GPL2, GPL3, or whatever, or if they care they want the product to choose have any license BUT GPL (in whatever form).
Only religious fanatics do want GPL, and among those the fight between adherents of GPL2 and GPL3 are as fanatical in their fighting as any 2 religious sects.

jbennet 1,618 Most Valuable Poster Team Colleague Featured Poster

The CDDL is better than the GPL for vendors, driver makers and ultimately users.

If opensolaris did become GPL though, GNU would have to change its name LOL as GNU would be unix.

scru 909 Posting Virtuoso Featured Poster

I don't see this large Linux following that you keep talking about.

Be a part of the DaniWeb community

We're a friendly, industry-focused community of developers, IT pros, digital marketers, and technology enthusiasts meeting, networking, learning, and sharing knowledge.