that’s whacked

thoughts on open spaces

Quick links: content, navigation, search.

Navigation

Why it’s not (necessarily) “Linux-like”

Thursday, Jul 12. 2007 – Category: OpenSolaris

A lot of the recent articles and press have been about how with Project Indiana, Sun is trying to make OpenSolaris (and by extension, Solaris) more “Linux-like”.

OpenSolaris would like to be more approachable and usable to Linux users; but this doesn’t make it necessarily “Linux-like”. Would you claim Ubuntu is “Windows-like”? I doubt it, but yet it is more approachable to Windows users.

I am looking forward to seeing the results of Indiana… the new release model will be a great vehicle, if nothing else for delivering exposure to some of the great work happening within OpenSolaris engineering. Certainly I think not enough people were aware of the already existing work going on within the Install group with its new Dwarf Caiman installer, or ON’s new packaging work happening, modernisation project, and power management group. This was all work to bring OpenSolaris up to modern standards with any OS, not necessarily Linux.

I think Linux has been a great catalyst for pushing OpenSolaris to adopt these features, and I think Indiana will be a great delivery mechanism for bringing these new features to everybody…. but I certainly don’t think that makes OpenSolaris “Linux-like” anymore than Linux is “Windows-like” for adopting those same features.

No Trackbacks to “Why it’s not (necessarily) “Linux-like””

5 Comments to “Why it’s not (necessarily) “Linux-like””

Damian Wojsław Says:
July 13th, 2007 at 03:59
Then you get the message wrong. Because what is seen outside seems like you try to do a Linux-like distro based on OpenSolaris. Maybe you ought to rethink the way it is being presented?
Larry B Says:
July 13th, 2007 at 09:11
Damian,

Does that make linux more BSD like when they follow or use OpenBSD projects / software?

When there’s a development model that people would like to follow, that doesn’t make the project like another project that uses the same development model.

When theres a user interface that people would like to mimic, that doesn’t make the project like another project that mimics another interface to make the interface being mimic’d in the 2nd project.

Just because Linux uses the development model, and is following other development groups leads in user interface usage (with some modifications), that doesn’t mean that any other project that uses the same resources is Linux like.

It only means that they have chosen to go down the same paths for their projects.

Development tools and resources are projects, opensource, that are included in Linux, but not exclusive to. User Interface / Window managers are projects, opensource, that are included in Linux, but not exclusive to.

Why would using these same toolsets make it more Linux like?

It doesn’t.

Thanks for playing….
ethana2 Says:
July 14th, 2007 at 13:04
So we won’t be able to swap kernels like we swap DE’s? Dang. I was looking forward to that

Seriously, though- I understand there are some licensing issues preventing the open exchanging of kernel module and such, and I would love to see that disappear.

Even better would be to see a series of colossal merges, like the opensolaris and linux kernels, xfce, kde, fluxbox, compiz fusion, and gnome, etc. Some point to the situation and call it “choice”, but I’m one of those who calls it “division”. Some would also call that a pipe dream. Well, we have independence from microsoft, right? They said that would never happen too.

I think that one step forward would be to lay out standard DE interfaces, and more clearly define and divide the roles of different software. For example, I see no reason why gnome should have it’s own screensaver app.

If sun were to really jam its foot into the entire desktop environment arena, I think we could see some exciting change.
A Hettinger Says:
August 7th, 2007 at 18:34
Ethana2:

I find it amusing that in the same breath as you are happy to have multiple OSes, you are upset at multiple window managers. different people have different needs in a interface, and thats OK. The reason we have them is because every one of the interfaces you mentioneds is ugly and works poorly. some of them may meet your needs, but they dont meet mine.

ill support the one true WM when everyone relises its E17 (with the shelves, and “desktop” disabled)
Damian Wojsław Says:
August 8th, 2007 at 01:29
I don’t discredit a “better development model”. I’m trying to make you see, that what is seen outside indiana-discuss is that Insiana is gonna be some Linux distro with OpenSolaris kernel. I know it’s not the case, but this is how the message sounds like. I’m saying that maybe the message needs to be made really clear? All.