|
Replies:
28
-
Last Post:
Oct 12, 2008 4:27 AM
by: jimgris
|
|
|
Posts:
419
From:
Registered:
6/2/06
|
|
|
|
Posts:
227
From:
US
Registered:
7/6/05
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posts:
595
From:
Registered:
3/12/08
|
|
|
|
Re: [advocacy-discuss] Any responses to this Infoworld Article ?
Posted:
Sep 27, 2008 1:10 PM
in response to: sriramn
To: Communities » advocacy » discuss
|
|
Try Ben's response here:
http://cuddletech.com/blog/pivot/entry.php?id=972
What struck me more than the parts Ben has picked out was this quote from Jim Zemlin, Linux Foundation CEO:
"The future is Linux and Microsoft Windows"
In other words - we're not scared of Microsoft, but we're pissing out pants about the current resurgence of Solaris. The first page of the article is then Mr Zemlin telling us how hopeless he thinks Solaris is, although the author apparently believes "that Solaris has some superior features is not really in question."
The only concrete example of how Solaris is a dying duck that is cited is one customer who replaced SPARC Solaris systems with x86 Linux systems. Well blow me if that isn't a lot cheaper to support and runs faster - of course it would! These SPARC systems are probably a good few years old, like 5+, so hardware support from Sun will be costing plenty and as far as speed goes - well everyone knows Moore's Law.
I think the more the Linux "establishment" humph and haw about Solaris, the more they show they are worried Solaris is a serious threat.
(I also don't think it is any coincidence that Linus recently allowed the addition of a kernel debugger to Linux on the same two platforms Sun Solaris runs on - namely x86 and SPARC).
Cheers
Andrew.
|
|
|
|
|
Posts:
494
From:
US
Registered:
6/14/05
|
|
|
|
Re: [advocacy-discuss] Any responses to this Infoworld Article ?
Posted:
Sep 27, 2008 1:35 PM
in response to: andrewk8
|
|
On Sat, Sep 27, 2008 at 3:10 PM, andrew <andrum04 at gmail dot com> wrote:
> Try Ben's response here:
>
> http://cuddletech.com/blog/pivot/entry.php?id=972
>
> What struck me more than the parts Ben has picked out was this quote from Jim Zemlin, Linux Foundation CEO:
>
> "The future is Linux and Microsoft Windows"
>
> In other words - we're not scared of Microsoft, but we're pissing out pants about the current resurgence of Solaris. The first page of the article is then Mr Zemlin telling us how hopeless he thinks Solaris is, although the author apparently believes "that Solaris has some superior features is not really in question."
>
> The only concrete example of how Solaris is a dying duck that is cited is one customer who replaced SPARC Solaris systems with x86 Linux systems. Well blow me if that isn't a lot cheaper to support and runs faster - of course it would! These SPARC systems are probably a good few years old, like 5+, so hardware support from Sun will be costing plenty and as far as speed goes - well everyone knows Moore's Law.
>
> I think the more the Linux "establishment" humph and haw about Solaris, the more they show they are worried Solaris is a serious threat.
>
> (I also don't think it is any coincidence that Linus recently allowed the addition of a kernel debugger to Linux on the same two platforms Sun Solaris runs on - namely x86 and SPARC).
As others point out, it is amusing to see Linux employ the same type
of FUD that was once upon a time hurled at them by Microsoft.
One thing that would help is more wide distribution of articles such as this:
http://www.eweek.com/c/a/IT-Infrastructure/How-the-FAA-Is-Bringing-Its-Air-Traffic-Systems-into-the-21st-Century/
that highlight OpenSolaris. Right now, it seems every time you see
'company replaced 10+ year old sparc servers (that never had a
problem), with brand new quad-core xeons and Linux (because it's
trendy) and saved so much money and got better performance!' (of
course tilted to imply Linux and not Moore's Law was the reason behind
it), the article is plastered all over. Those less technically minded
will just see 'Linux good, Solaris bad' and make decisions
accordingly. More *solaris success stories can help counteract that
effect.
_______________________________________________
advocacy-discuss mailing list
advocacy-discuss at opensolaris dot org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/advocacy-discuss
|
|
|
|
|
Posts:
3,835
From:
JP
Registered:
4/6/05
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posts:
494
From:
US
Registered:
6/14/05
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posts:
215
From:
US
Registered:
5/12/06
|
|
|
|
Re: [advocacy-discuss] Any responses to this Infoworld Article ?
Posted:
Sep 27, 2008 2:15 PM
in response to: sriramn
|
|
Sriram Narayanan wrote:
> http://www.infoworld.com/article/08/09/24/39NF-linux-killing-solaris_1.html
>
Interesting read.
What I always find funny about these articles is they're arguing
OpenSolaris/Solaris is irrelevant (as stated in the subheading) or
dying. If that's the case, why go make the argument in the press? It'd
not be worth discussing if it were true, right?
I can certainly think of a good half-dozen UNIX also-rans which are
irrelevant, but OpenSolaris ain't one of 'em.
Don't they prove OpenSolaris's relevance with every article against it?
- Matt
--
Matt Ingenthron
http://blogs.sun.com/mingenthron/
email: matt dot ingenthron at sun dot com
_______________________________________________
advocacy-discuss mailing list
advocacy-discuss at opensolaris dot org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/advocacy-discuss
|
|
|
|
|
Posts:
3,835
From:
JP
Registered:
4/6/05
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posts:
3,783
From:
DE
Registered:
4/27/05
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posts:
689
From:
GB
Registered:
5/18/05
|
|
|
|
Re: [advocacy-discuss] Any responses to this Infoworld Article ?
Posted:
Sep 28, 2008 5:47 AM
in response to: joerg
|
|
On Sep 28, 2008, at 12:00, Joerg Schilling wrote:
> And you should know that most of the claims in this article are
> unfortunately
> true.
Really, Jörg? Let's see:
> Solaris, he said, has almost no new deployments
Untrue. I am aware of a steady stream. I'll leave it to Dan and
Charlie to illustrate though.
> and is a legacy operating environment
Well, "legacy" is a weasel-word. Since Linux is now 10 years into mass
deployment it too gets described as "legacy" by those with an axe to
grind. People selling Windows Vista, for example.
> offered by a company with financial difficulties.
That was true in 2003, for sure. While the stock is down, to be sure,
but the numbers on the business look stable to me at the moment.
> Original equipment manufacturers also do not see a bright future for
> Solaris, he claims.
That would be why HP, Dell and indeed IBM are all carrying it.
> By contrast, Linux is the overwhelming choice for new deployments on
> x86 systems, Zemlin says. Sun has had its strength in applications
> such as ERP systems with a seven- to 20-year life cycle, he adds.
> "What's starting to happen is those life cycles are starting to be
> completed," and those customers are moving to Linux.
Like the curate's egg, that's true in parts. Equally I'm aware of
contexts where it's not. This is as objective as the "legacy" statement.
> That move to Linux is accelerated by Linux's strength in Web
> applications, where developers today are focused, Zemlin adds. "You
> can't really talk to any Web-based application company these days
> that's not using Linux," he says.
Really? I suspect we could come up with quite a few between us.
Gracenote s actually mentioned later in the article, for example.
> Linux also is less costly to run, Zemlin claims.
I'd love to see that sweeping statement sweepingly justified.
> "Customers are pretty aware that Unix is a more expensive legacy
> architecture. They continue to support it because they don't want to
> change their legacy apps over to a new platform because of the
> costs," Zemlin said. "But they know now they eventually need to do
> it because Unix just doesn't have the combined might of all the
> different organizations and individuals that are developing [for]
> Linux."
Zemlin is living in 2002.
> Thanks to its strong support of the x86 hardware architecture, "in
> terms of overall volume, Linux is just a much higher volume product
> than Solaris ever was," says Al Gillen, an IDC analyst. IDC data
> show that worldwide Linux shipments in 2006 were about 2.4 million
> in 2006 and nearly 2.7 million in 2007. By contrast, Solaris
> shipments totaled 376,000 in 2006 and 371,000 last year.
IDC figures here are almost certainly correct, I agree. This is a
strong motivation to make OpenSoalris excellent on x86 as well as on
SPARC.
> Solaris, Zemlin says, is losing market share because it does not
> have a good price performance or value proposition.
My word, this man loves sweeping statements. I do hope he has the
sweeping proofs of all this, because I suspect that any system
offering a good value proposition with Linux will offer an even better
one with OpenSolaris. He seems stuck in 2002 again.
> Zemlin also disputes Sun's notion that Solaris technology gives it
> an edge over Linux. "The only people I hear talk about DTrace
> [Solaris's technology for assessing program and OS behaviours] and
> ZFS [the Zettabyte File System] as competitive features [are] Sun
> Microsystems sales representatives. It's not something I believe is
> impacting the market in any way," he says.
That would be why NetApp was worried enough to start a lawsuit, why
ZFS for FUSE just reached v0.5 and why the Linux Foundation is
sponsoring work on SystemTap.
> That Solaris has some superior features is not really in question;
Well, apart from by Jim Zemlin who is incapable of giving credit where
it is due.
> Sun's OS has received numerous accolades, including InfoWorld's
> Technology of the Year award. But with capabilities such as ZFS and
> DTrace, Sun is trying to compete based on minor features, Zemlin says.
Minor features, like a revolutionary file system, a revolutionary
observability tool and a revolutionary management facility, just to
name three.
> "That's literally like noticing the view from a third-story building
> as it burns to the ground." And the Linux community is working on
> rival technology, Zemlin adds.
So, let's get this straight, none of the revolutionary features in
OpenSolaris matter one jot, but the Linux community is nonetheless
wasting time trying to clone them?
> Given Sun's own Linux support on its Sparc and x86 servers, Zemlin
> suggests that it should make ZFS and DTrace available under a Linux-
> compatible license. Sun instead uses its Common Development and
> Distribution License (CDDL), which is not compatible with the Linux
> GNU General Public License. (Sun says CDDL provides licensing
> support for a greater universe of systems than GPL does.)
Ah, OK, so ZFS and DTrace are "minor features" that are "not something
I believe is impacting the market in any way" and yet Zemlin wishes
they were easily available to him to use?
> A key reason is that more people are available to support Linux than
> Solaris, says Noah Broadwater, vice president of information
> services at Sesame Workshop. "I honestly have one person who is
> certified on Solaris. I have four people who are certified on
> Linux," Broadwater said.
Yep, I agree with this one, needs work. I think it's in-hand but that
would be up to the Sun marketing folk to confirm.
> The other key issue with Solaris boils down to one word: cost.
> Sesame is saving about $20,000 a year in support costs by moving to
> Linux, Broadwater says.
Is this a fair comparison? They moved off Solaris classic on old SPARC
hardware? These sorts of examples usually have that as the story. They
may have saved even more if they had moved to OpenSolaris on commodity
hardware.
> The Linux Foundation's Zemlin, though, dismisses Sun's open-source
> Solaris as "too little, too late." His foundation has also charged
> that there is no real open source community around OpenSolaris,
This is philosophically very hard stuff here that doesn't benefit from
the sort of irresponsible sound bite Zemlin is using. There is no open
source community around RHEL either - in fact I'd posit that
OpenSolaris 2008.11 has a stronger community than RHEL. Yet it is
based on solid open source community work just as OpenSolaris is, both
in Fedora and in the component communities like GNOME, Mozilla, X and
many more.
> arguing that Sun still controls development.
I'd agree that Sun employees all the key developers on the "kernel",
yes, and that's a key difference from the Linux kernel. I assume this
is the item you are actually referring to, Jörg?
> To back up its point, the foundation points to blogs detailing
> disputes over control of OpenSolaris and the Sun-driven OpenDS
> directory projects, from February 2008 and November 2007. Sun
> declined to comment on the specifics of these issues and noted they
> both happened several months ago.
& I'm not interested in digging up those old skeletons either, beyond
noting that citing Roy's gesture like that ignores a whole lot of
community reality and OpenDS is unrelated to OpenSolaris and had its
own very special context.
> Zemlin claims Open Solaris is no more than an attempt to expand the
> Solaris user base to drive customers to commercial Sun technology.
Absolute, unalloyed rubbish that Zemlin should be ashamed of,
especially as he is so proud of HP and IBM who actually /do/ have that
as their strategy around HP-UX and AIX.
So, "most of the claims" are true, Jörg?
S.
_______________________________________________
advocacy-discuss mailing list
advocacy-discuss at opensolaris dot org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/advocacy-discuss
|
|
|
|
|
Posts:
3,783
From:
DE
Registered:
4/27/05
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nicolas Dorfsman
ndo@unikservice.com
|
|
|
|
Re: [advocacy-discuss] Any responses to this Infoworld Article ?
Posted:
Sep 28, 2008 6:20 AM
in response to: joerg
|
|
Le 28 sept. 08 à 14:53, Joerg Schilling a écrit :
> I was obviously replying to:
>
> http://redmonk.com/sogrady/2008/02/20/linux-vs-opensolarisagain-the-
> qa/
>
> Have a closer look at the paragraph then mentions Roy Fielding.
Hey. Nobody talked about that on the advocacy list !
I'm now on ogb list.
There's a lack of some news (or rss) page which lists important
events, something prepared for advocates like me who tries to stay
aware, but who have to earn money to eat also...
Nicolas
_______________________________________________
advocacy-discuss mailing list
advocacy-discuss at opensolaris dot org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/advocacy-discuss
|
|
|
|
|
Posts:
689
From:
GB
Registered:
5/18/05
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posts:
803
From:
Plano, TX
Registered:
4/27/05
|
|
|
|
Re: [advocacy-discuss] Any responses to this Infoworld Article ?
Posted:
Sep 28, 2008 7:16 AM
in response to: webmink
|
|
On Sun, Sep 28, 2008 at 7:47 AM, Simon Phipps <webmink at sun dot com> wrote:
>
> On Sep 28, 2008, at 12:00, Joerg Schilling wrote:
>
>> And you should know that most of the claims in this article are
>> unfortunately
>> true.
>
> Really, Jörg? Let's see:
>
>> Solaris, he said, has almost no new deployments
>
> Untrue. I am aware of a steady stream. I'll leave it to Dan and
> Charlie to illustrate though.
>
>> and is a legacy operating environment
>
> Well, "legacy" is a weasel-word. Since Linux is now 10 years into mass
> deployment it too gets described as "legacy" by those with an axe to
> grind. People selling Windows Vista, for example.
>
>> offered by a company with financial difficulties.
>
> That was true in 2003, for sure. While the stock is down, to be sure,
> but the numbers on the business look stable to me at the moment.
>
>> Original equipment manufacturers also do not see a bright future for
>> Solaris, he claims.
>
> That would be why HP, Dell and indeed IBM are all carrying it.
>
>> By contrast, Linux is the overwhelming choice for new deployments on
>> x86 systems, Zemlin says. Sun has had its strength in applications
>> such as ERP systems with a seven- to 20-year life cycle, he adds.
>> "What's starting to happen is those life cycles are starting to be
>> completed," and those customers are moving to Linux.
>
> Like the curate's egg, that's true in parts. Equally I'm aware of
> contexts where it's not. This is as objective as the "legacy" statement.
>
>> That move to Linux is accelerated by Linux's strength in Web
>> applications, where developers today are focused, Zemlin adds. "You
>> can't really talk to any Web-based application company these days
>> that's not using Linux," he says.
>
> Really? I suspect we could come up with quite a few between us.
> Gracenote s actually mentioned later in the article, for example.
>
>> Linux also is less costly to run, Zemlin claims.
>
> I'd love to see that sweeping statement sweepingly justified.
>
>> "Customers are pretty aware that Unix is a more expensive legacy
>> architecture. They continue to support it because they don't want to
>> change their legacy apps over to a new platform because of the
>> costs," Zemlin said. "But they know now they eventually need to do
>> it because Unix just doesn't have the combined might of all the
>> different organizations and individuals that are developing [for]
>> Linux."
>
> Zemlin is living in 2002.
>
>> Thanks to its strong support of the x86 hardware architecture, "in
>> terms of overall volume, Linux is just a much higher volume product
>> than Solaris ever was," says Al Gillen, an IDC analyst. IDC data
>> show that worldwide Linux shipments in 2006 were about 2.4 million
>> in 2006 and nearly 2.7 million in 2007. By contrast, Solaris
>> shipments totaled 376,000 in 2006 and 371,000 last year.
>
> IDC figures here are almost certainly correct, I agree. This is a
> strong motivation to make OpenSoalris excellent on x86 as well as on
> SPARC.
>
>> Solaris, Zemlin says, is losing market share because it does not
>> have a good price performance or value proposition.
>
> My word, this man loves sweeping statements. I do hope he has the
> sweeping proofs of all this, because I suspect that any system
> offering a good value proposition with Linux will offer an even better
> one with OpenSolaris. He seems stuck in 2002 again.
>
>> Zemlin also disputes Sun's notion that Solaris technology gives it
>> an edge over Linux. "The only people I hear talk about DTrace
>> [Solaris's technology for assessing program and OS behaviours] and
>> ZFS [the Zettabyte File System] as competitive features [are] Sun
>> Microsystems sales representatives. It's not something I believe is
>> impacting the market in any way," he says.
>
> That would be why NetApp was worried enough to start a lawsuit, why
> ZFS for FUSE just reached v0.5 and why the Linux Foundation is
> sponsoring work on SystemTap.
>
>> That Solaris has some superior features is not really in question;
>
> Well, apart from by Jim Zemlin who is incapable of giving credit where
> it is due.
>
>> Sun's OS has received numerous accolades, including InfoWorld's
>> Technology of the Year award. But with capabilities such as ZFS and
>> DTrace, Sun is trying to compete based on minor features, Zemlin says.
>
> Minor features, like a revolutionary file system, a revolutionary
> observability tool and a revolutionary management facility, just to
> name three.
>
>> "That's literally like noticing the view from a third-story building
>> as it burns to the ground." And the Linux community is working on
>> rival technology, Zemlin adds.
>
> So, let's get this straight, none of the revolutionary features in
> OpenSolaris matter one jot, but the Linux community is nonetheless
> wasting time trying to clone them?
>
>> Given Sun's own Linux support on its Sparc and x86 servers, Zemlin
>> suggests that it should make ZFS and DTrace available under a Linux-
>> compatible license. Sun instead uses its Common Development and
>> Distribution License (CDDL), which is not compatible with the Linux
>> GNU General Public License. (Sun says CDDL provides licensing
>> support for a greater universe of systems than GPL does.)
>
> Ah, OK, so ZFS and DTrace are "minor features" that are "not something
> I believe is impacting the market in any way" and yet Zemlin wishes
> they were easily available to him to use?
>
>> A key reason is that more people are available to support Linux than
>> Solaris, says Noah Broadwater, vice president of information
>> services at Sesame Workshop. "I honestly have one person who is
>> certified on Solaris. I have four people who are certified on
>> Linux," Broadwater said.
>
> Yep, I agree with this one, needs work. I think it's in-hand but that
> would be up to the Sun marketing folk to confirm.
>
>> The other key issue with Solaris boils down to one word: cost.
>> Sesame is saving about $20,000 a year in support costs by moving to
>> Linux, Broadwater says.
>
> Is this a fair comparison? They moved off Solaris classic on old SPARC
> hardware? These sorts of examples usually have that as the story. They
> may have saved even more if they had moved to OpenSolaris on commodity
> hardware.
>
>> The Linux Foundation's Zemlin, though, dismisses Sun's open-source
>> Solaris as "too little, too late." His foundation has also charged
>> that there is no real open source community around OpenSolaris,
>
> This is philosophically very hard stuff here that doesn't benefit from
> the sort of irresponsible sound bite Zemlin is using. There is no open
> source community around RHEL either - in fact I'd posit that
> OpenSolaris 2008.11 has a stronger community than RHEL. Yet it is
> based on solid open source community work just as OpenSolaris is, both
> in Fedora and in the component communities like GNOME, Mozilla, X and
> many more.
>
>> arguing that Sun still controls development.
>
> I'd agree that Sun employees all the key developers on the "kernel",
> yes, and that's a key difference from the Linux kernel. I assume this
> is the item you are actually referring to, Jörg?
>
>> To back up its point, the foundation points to blogs detailing
>> disputes over control of OpenSolaris and the Sun-driven OpenDS
>> directory projects, from February 2008 and November 2007. Sun
>> declined to comment on the specifics of these issues and noted they
>> both happened several months ago.
>
> & I'm not interested in digging up those old skeletons either, beyond
> noting that citing Roy's gesture like that ignores a whole lot of
> community reality and OpenDS is unrelated to OpenSolaris and had its
> own very special context.
>
>> Zemlin claims Open Solaris is no more than an attempt to expand the
>> Solaris user base to drive customers to commercial Sun technology.
>
> Absolute, unalloyed rubbish that Zemlin should be ashamed of,
> especially as he is so proud of HP and IBM who actually /do/ have that
> as their strategy around HP-UX and AIX.
>
>
> So, "most of the claims" are true, Jörg?
>
> S.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> advocacy-discuss mailing list
> advocacy-discuss at opensolaris dot org
> http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/advocacy-discuss
>
Simon,
As the Sun Open Source Ombudsman, and the (approximate) organizational
counterpart to Zemlin, I think that you should pen a rebuttal and have
it published in the NY Times, Infoworld etc. And my thought is that
the article should be a statement of how poorly Linux is doing
(technically) compared to (Open)Solaris, especially in the server
space and why they have failed to innovate, or achieve innovation
leadership, when compared to Solaris technologies like DTrace and
ZFS. And why the Linux Foundation has failed to unify the 50 million
Linux derivatives.. blah, blah. And yes this piece would look more
like an "attack" piece than a defend/justify/rebuttal piece.
While I don't favor open warfare with the Linux Foundation -
OpenSolaris has enough credibility and community participation to
where we should, as a community, not be shy about exerting ourselves
in the technical world and let it be known that we won't put up with
this type of cheap, shoddy and inaccurate drivel from idiots like
Zemlin. To let this "article" (I use the term very loosely) go
unanswered would simply open the door to more abuse from
Zemlin-copycats.
Personally I've put enough time and effort into Solaris and
OpenSolaris to where I (personally) won't tolerate this drivel and
won't allow anyone to publicly trivialize my personal efforts - or the
tireless efforts of other community members - regardless of how many
widely read publications agree to parrot this drivel.
Zemlin opened this door - it's time for us, as a community, to slam it
shut in his face.
PS: I'm hoping to graduate from the Academy of Assertive Self
Expression next month! :)
Regards,
--
Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc,Plano,TX al@logical-approach.com
Voice: 972.379.2133 Timezone: US CDT
OpenSolaris Governing Board (OGB) Member - Apr 2005 to Mar 2007
http://www.opensolaris.org/os/community/ogb/ogb_2005-2007/
_______________________________________________
advocacy-discuss mailing list
advocacy-discuss at opensolaris dot org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/advocacy-discuss
|
|
|
|
|
Posts:
689
From:
GB
Registered:
5/18/05
|
|
|
|
Re: [advocacy-discuss] Any responses to this Infoworld Article ?
Posted:
Sep 28, 2008 7:32 AM
in response to: alhopper
|
|
On Sep 28, 2008, at 15:16, Al Hopper wrote:
> As the Sun Open Source Ombudsman, and the (approximate) organizational
> counterpart to Zemlin, I think that you should pen a rebuttal and have
> it published in the NY Times, Infoworld etc.
I think there have been enough community members making statements for
general consumption, and Sun's response ought to come from the
business unit that staffs Opensolaris (of which I am no longer a part,
having moved to a new corporate location a few months back). Of
course, if they don't act I may well consider this, just not on Sun's
behalf...
As to the Linux community: The Linux Foundation may have "Linux" in
its name but it's a corporate-funded marketing organisation, which
Zemlin demonstrates clearly here. I recommend that we avoid
criticising the Linux community or indeed any other open source
community, whatever rocks may be thrown.
S.
_______________________________________________
advocacy-discuss mailing list
advocacy-discuss at opensolaris dot org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/advocacy-discuss
|
|
|
|
|
Posts:
419
From:
Registered:
6/2/06
|
|
|
|
Re: [advocacy-discuss] Any responses to this Infoworld Article ?
Posted:
Sep 28, 2008 10:08 AM
in response to: webmink
|
|
On Sun, Sep 28, 2008 at 8:02 PM, Simon Phipps <webmink at sun dot com> wrote:
>
> On Sep 28, 2008, at 15:16, Al Hopper wrote:
>
>> As the Sun Open Source Ombudsman, and the (approximate) organizational
>> counterpart to Zemlin, I think that you should pen a rebuttal and have
>> it published in the NY Times, Infoworld etc.
>
> I think there have been enough community members making statements for
> general consumption, and Sun's response ought to come from the
> business unit that staffs Opensolaris (of which I am no longer a part,
> having moved to a new corporate location a few months back). Of
> course, if they don't act I may well consider this, just not on Sun's
> behalf...
>
Wow, I've been busy helping withg a product release, and am pleased to
see so much happened during the past two days !:)
Simon: the original wordings of my post to advocacy-discuss was filled
with a lot of angst about Sun not being proactive in watching out and
targetting FUD. I however, reworded my message to be what I ended up
posting.
It is one thing to count on community based responses. But it is quite
another thing to remain sitting on one's hands while the competition
makes misleading statements and gets away with it. The statements by
the foundation that made those statements were misleading, and by not
issuing a retraction or public apology, that organization is standing
by him and his misleading statements - they are clearly endorsing this
campaign of FUD, dis information, and deliberate maligning of Sun and
OpenSolaris' name, credibility and technology.
Rather than wait for the community to prove how OpenSolaris can be
superior, it is time for Sun/The OpenSolaris Foundation to do so. That
one article has been read by thousands, and it will come up again and
again in google searches. The responses will be difficult to come up
in these searches as easily, and various marketing and advocacy teams
(Sun, OpenSolaris, community distros, community members) will have to
spend time repairing the damage by Zemlin.
I too do not favor an open war with the Linux Foundation (after all,
there is no permanent enemy and no permanent friend). But surely this
is the time to ensure that crooked messages by the competition are
responded to.
-- Sriram
_______________________________________________
advocacy-discuss mailing list
advocacy-discuss at opensolaris dot org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/advocacy-discuss
|
|
|
|
|
Moinak Ghosh
moinakg@belenix.org
|
|
|
|
Re: [advocacy-discuss] Any responses to this Infoworld Article ?
Posted:
Sep 28, 2008 10:14 AM
in response to: sriramn
|
|
On Sun, Sep 28, 2008 at 10:38 PM, Sriram Narayanan <sriramnrn at gmail dot com> wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 28, 2008 at 8:02 PM, Simon Phipps <webmink at sun dot com> wrote:
[...]
>> I think there have been enough community members making statements for
>> general consumption, and Sun's response ought to come from the
>> business unit that staffs Opensolaris (of which I am no longer a part,
>> having moved to a new corporate location a few months back). Of
>> course, if they don't act I may well consider this, just not on Sun's
>> behalf...
>>
>
[...]>
> I too do not favor an open war with the Linux Foundation (after all,
> there is no permanent enemy and no permanent friend). But surely this
> is the time to ensure that crooked messages by the competition are
> responded to.
>
I'd suggest a call on the osol lists to others to do blogging
against the article.
That will show that there is a community and people do not agree to FUD.
Regards,
Moinak.
--
================================
http://www.belenix.org/
http://moinakg.wordpress.com/
_______________________________________________
advocacy-discuss mailing list
advocacy-discuss at opensolaris dot org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/advocacy-discuss
|
|
|
|
|
Posts:
374
From:
US
Registered:
12/9/05
|
|
|
|
Re: [advocacy-discuss] Any responses to this Infoworld Article ?
Posted:
Sep 28, 2008 10:17 AM
in response to: Moinak Ghosh
|
|
On Sep 28, 2008, at 1:14 PM, Moinak Ghosh wrote:
> I'd suggest a call on the osol lists to others to do blogging
> against the article.
> That will show that there is a community and people do not agree
> to FUD.
That has been occurring in its own way, to some degree, already. One
thing to be careful of is fighting FUD with FUD, which does no good
and turns the argument from a diplomatic one into a pissing match
which is exactly what Zemlin is inviting.
/dale
_______________________________________________
advocacy-discuss mailing list
advocacy-discuss at opensolaris dot org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/advocacy-discuss
|
|
|
|
|
Posts:
9
From:
US
Registered:
5/19/05
|
|
|
|
Re: [advocacy-discuss] Any responses to this Infoworld Article ?
Posted:
Sep 28, 2008 10:44 AM
in response to: alhopper
|
|
> Simon,
>
> As the Sun Open Source Ombudsman, and the (approximate) organizational
> counterpart to Zemlin, I think that you should pen a rebuttal and have
> it published in the NY Times, Infoworld etc. ...
> we should, as a community, not be shy about exerting ourselves
> in the technical world and let it be known that we won't put****with
> this type of cheap, shoddy and inaccurate drivel from idiots like
> Zemlin. To let this "article" (I use the term very loosely) go
> unanswered would simply open the door to more abuse from
> Zemlin-copycats.
>
I absolutely agree...even drivel, if repeated often enough, starts to
acquire an air of credibility. Having a reply piece that Sun field
people can hand to customer when they reference the Time or
InfoWorld article is needed. It's tough enough out here in the
field for us without having to invent our own responses to such
****.
_______________________________________________
advocacy-discuss mailing list
advocacy-discuss at opensolaris dot org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/advocacy-discuss
|
|
|
|
|
Posts:
3,835
From:
JP
Registered:
4/6/05
|
|
|
|
Re: [advocacy-discuss] Any responses to this Infoworld Article ?
Posted:
Sep 28, 2008 4:56 PM
in response to: hfoxwell
|
|
H**** Foxwell wrote:
>> Simon,
>>
>> As the Sun Open Source Ombudsman, and the (approximate) organizational
>> counterpart to Zemlin, I think that you should pen a rebuttal and have
>> it published in the NY Times, Infoworld etc. ...
>> we should, as a community, not be shy about exerting ourselves
>> in the technical world and let it be known that we won't put up with
>> this type of cheap, shoddy and inaccurate drivel from idiots like
>> Zemlin. To let this "article" (I use the term very loosely) go
>> unanswered would simply open the door to more abuse from
>> Zemlin-copycats.
>>
>>
>
> I absolutely agree...even drivel, if repeated often enough, starts to
> acquire an air of credibility. Having a reply piece that Sun field
> people can hand to customer when they reference the Time or
> InfoWorld article is needed. It's tough enough out here in the
> field for us without having to invent our own responses to such
> ****.
If Sun wants to communicate to its field, that's fine, but that's not
really a community issue and we have no visibility into that. Same deal
about Sun responding in the press. That's a corporate issue. And the
decision-making process for a corporate response is very different for
the company than it is for us. There are vastly different dependencies
and constraints to consider.
The problem with asking Sun to formally respond for us is that it
changes the dynamic of the issue significantly. The press and Sun
competitors would have every right to bring up every single corporate
issue they please. And they would. That's part of the game. The result?
The original issue gets buried or distorted and others pile on and
around we all go. When people attack in the media, they are /looking/
for a response. They plan for it. That's why they attack. That's also
why these attacks are directed primarily at Sun and not the community.
It's more difficult to hit a "community" since it's distributed widely.
It's times like these that we should stand up on our own feet and
respond ourselves /as individuals/. To me, that's a more effective way
to assert ourselves as a community rather than having Sun do it for us.
However, I'm mindful of Simon's words about not hitting other
communities or their technologies in the process. It's fine to correct
mis-statements in blogs and comments and lists, but it's not fine to
toss mud back at them because that will only draw a counter response.
It's a balance, I realize, but I find that responding with a touch of
humility and pride does the trick.
Jim
--
http://blogs.sun.com/jimgris/
_______________________________________________
advocacy-discuss mailing list
advocacy-discuss at opensolaris dot org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/advocacy-discuss
|
|
|
|
|
Posts:
5,504
From:
US
Registered:
3/9/05
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posts:
40
From:
US
Registered:
2/27/08
|
|
|
|
Re: [advocacy-discuss] Any responses to this Infoworld Article ?
Posted:
Sep 29, 2008 1:50 PM
in response to: alanc
|
|
Folks,
We've set up a Sun response discussion with Paul for later this week,
where the Solaris BU folks will respond directly to the article. And
while I expect we'll do significant work to point out the absurdity of
so much around this, we can't be sure of what Infoworld will print.
So, it's great that so many people are blogging about this, and talking
about why OpenSolaris and/or Solaris is important to you. And I love
how folks are going after all the factual issues in his sweeping
statements that aren't backed up with anything. He's just the attack
dog though, beholden to the folks that pay lots of money to keep the
Linux Foundation around.
We can also take a look at getting more of our internal messages that
we're creating for the Sun field posted publicly for the record.
Thanks
Dan
_______________________________________________
advocacy-discuss mailing list
advocacy-discuss at opensolaris dot org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/advocacy-discuss
|
|
|
|
|
Posts:
595
From:
Registered:
3/12/08
|
|
|
|
Re: [advocacy-discuss] Any responses to this Infoworld Article ?
Posted:
Oct 1, 2008 8:56 AM
in response to: droberts
To: Communities » advocacy » discuss
|
|
> Folks,
>
> We've set up a Sun response discussion with Paul for
> later this week,
> where the Solaris BU folks will respond directly to
> the article. And
> while I expect we'll do significant work to point out
> the absurdity of
> so much around this, we can't be sure of what
> Infoworld will print.
>
> So, it's great that so many people are blogging about
> this, and talking
> about why OpenSolaris and/or Solaris is important to
> you. And I love
> how folks are going after all the factual issues in
> his sweeping
> statements that aren't backed up with anything. He's
> just the attack
> dog though, beholden to the folks that pay lots of
> money to keep the
> Linux Foundation around.
It doesn't say much for the Linux Foundation that that it is openly bashing one of its members.
Cheers
Andrew.
|
|
|
|
|
Posts:
40
From:
US
Registered:
2/27/08
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posts:
241
From:
Registered:
8/30/06
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posts:
15
From:
CA
Registered:
8/1/08
|
|
|
|
Re: [advocacy-discuss] Any responses to this Infoworld Article ?
Posted:
Sep 28, 2008 3:12 AM
in response to: sriramn
To: Communities » advocacy » discuss
|
|
This article was also "re-printed" in the "New York Times" !
wow, how low can "they" go. !
http://blogs.sun.com/jimgris/entry/deathbed
|
|
|
|
|
Posts:
123
From:
Lodz, Poland
Registered:
3/3/07
|
|
|
|
Re: [advocacy-discuss] Any responses to this Infoworld Article ?
Posted:
Sep 28, 2008 10:58 PM
in response to: scjet
|
|
On Sun, Sep 28, 2008 at 03:12:44AM -0700, Rick N wrote:
> This article was also "re-printed" in the "New York Times" !
> wow, how low can "they" go. !
My feeling is that they become frightened of Solaris/OpenSolaris.
Regards
Przemyslaw Bak (przemol)
--
http://przemol.blogspot.com/
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Tanie i proste polaczenia telefoniczne!
Sprawdz >> http://link.interia.pl/f1f23
_______________________________________________
advocacy-discuss mailing list
advocacy-discuss at opensolaris dot org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/advocacy-discuss
|
|
|
|
|
Posts:
15
From:
CA
Registered:
8/1/08
|
|
|
|
Re: [advocacy-discuss] Any responses to this Infoworld Article ?
Posted:
Oct 5, 2008 9:56 AM
in response to: przemolb
To: Communities » advocacy » discuss
|
|
you are right my friend,
fear and desparation (if it's greedy?) breeds only the same..."
-unfortunately.
:)
|
|
|
|
|
Posts:
3,835
From:
JP
Registered:
4/6/05
|
|
|
|
Re: [advocacy-discuss] Any responses to this Infoworld Article ?
Posted:
Oct 12, 2008 4:27 AM
in response to: scjet
|
|
And the saga continues ...
Anatomy of an attack: The New York Times on Solaris
http://blogs.zdnet.com/Murphy/?p=1268
Paul Murphy smokes the Krill piece. Point by point. More importantly,
though, is that the original article not only fell flat but it was
actually aggressively rejected by many in the open source community.
That's an interesting shift out there. And a good one, too.
Jim
--
http://blogs.sun.com/jimgris/
_______________________________________________
advocacy-discuss mailing list
advocacy-discuss at opensolaris dot org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/advocacy-discuss
|
|
|
|
|
