Re: GPL'ing Solaris won't save SUN

begin  UNIX admin wrote:

>> They don't.  And CEOs don't either. If you talk to people in IT, SUN
>> is becoming the definition of clueless. Most Unix shops are now run by
>> Linux advocates, look how quickly Linux is replacing Unix.  If Linux
>> advocates don't guide the PHB to SUN (and they won't if it doesn't
>> have a TRUE Linux strategy), then IBM will get all SUN's business.
>> Funny how quickly the tables turn.  Throughout the 90's SUN was eating
>> IBM's mainframe business, and now SUN is totally clueless.
> 
> But that doesn't make Linux better. In fact, Linux has severe problems
> when it comes to integrating it into the enterprise infrastructure, for
> example into an NIS/NFS/AutoMounter/CacheFS network.

Such as?

> Linux support is more expensive than Sun's own. 

Sayxing so does not make this true

> The only thing it has 
> going for it is bigger (not necessarily better) PC-bucket HW support and
> the fact that in runs on ultra-cheapo PC-bucket hardware. And therein lies
> the misconception that Linux is cheaper.

Tell us more about this

> But it is not cheaper, it is more expensive than Solaris. Well actually,
> we can't even compare it with Solaris, because Linux is just the kernel,
> and not an OS. So much for our
>

Our? Since when is an Outhouse Fast Shit user one of "we"?

>IT-takeover-one-size-fits-all-magically-solves-all-problems-and-generates-to
> ns-of-money-runner-upper.

Good thing that you don't know anything about what you're talking about
-- 
Linux: Because rebooting is for adding new hardware