From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on inbox.vuxu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 required=5.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,HTML_MESSAGE, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (minnie.tuhs.org [45.79.103.53]) by inbox.vuxu.org (OpenSMTPD) with ESMTP id e3d68b15 for ; Wed, 11 Sep 2019 22:51:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id 9EE08947F1; Thu, 12 Sep 2019 08:51:25 +1000 (AEST) Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8C494947A0; Thu, 12 Sep 2019 08:50:53 +1000 (AEST) Authentication-Results: minnie.tuhs.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key; unprotected) header.d=kilonet.net header.i=@kilonet.net header.b="BdE1CPGA"; dkim-atps=neutral Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id C4746947A0; Thu, 12 Sep 2019 08:50:51 +1000 (AEST) Received: from p3plsmtpa07-08.prod.phx3.secureserver.net (p3plsmtpa07-08.prod.phx3.secureserver.net [173.201.192.237]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 484B294797 for ; Thu, 12 Sep 2019 08:50:51 +1000 (AEST) Received: from medusa.kilonet.net ([72.69.11.97]) by :SMTPAUTH: with ESMTPA id 8BRpioxUwSgKf8BRqih6SK; Wed, 11 Sep 2019 15:50:50 -0700 Received: from [199.89.231.101] (ender.kilonet.net [199.89.231.101]) by medusa.kilonet.net (8.14.8/8.15.1) with ESMTP id x8BMonuK018034 for ; Wed, 11 Sep 2019 18:50:49 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kilonet.net; s=default; t=1568242249; bh=7Pt0crgEnkq/z6PMwehafTkcWzNk58+AI6q57gRCxV0=; h=Subject:To:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To; b=BdE1CPGA0CZGsEOsc5bh5ijMOncS2UCwmYezvE/T1ArI/3wi+7Vnk3ibayZHSKGDQ ns8duRS6+YUhxjDsB/0orXj2cL1Db/2PzjlJRUO5icdIYZ0Lmc5CQ9ISH8NvqDGBrX 6PlCvEJjDQtPPnZ2oKFPubAC0tXSVakP5D7PBXsU= To: tuhs@minnie.tuhs.org References: <20190911181101.GF3143@mcvoy.com> <20190911185418.GA2046@mcvoy.com> From: Arthur Krewat Message-ID: Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2019 18:50:42 -0400 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.9.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------07E3A2D5303C138BAFDFC5DE" Content-Language: en-US X-CMAE-Envelope: MS4wfBvFJHYa94viAYdpkq+3mmRvdhfY8r+0pd7ocUPoJjAsIXwXyTFlczk8cI97iaAuHjoqMK1FxAPQsDSUFRykg0sE/Dtu9I3XmT0VQUTQQR/me1JCXeX3 n2IBRoIvl9WmwFpeTaY0wzaPbmIT6SAu+0FaYhApd30HNX/cfdqLJ5Az Subject: Re: [TUHS] PWB vs Unix/TS X-BeenThere: tuhs@minnie.tuhs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26 Precedence: list List-Id: The Unix Heritage Society mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: tuhs-bounces@minnie.tuhs.org Sender: "TUHS" This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------07E3A2D5303C138BAFDFC5DE Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit On 9/11/2019 5:57 PM, Clem Cole wrote: > > > On Wed, Sep 11, 2019 at 2:54 PM Larry McVoy > wrote: > > You're probably right but it wouldn't have mattered. SunOS was > very popular > and had a good VM system with a working mmap.  Once it became official > AT&T source everyone would have moved to it over time. > > But Sun would have to accept the economics of Intel processor sooner.  > Which is funny because RoadRunner was a pretty neat machine.  They had > Solaris/386 but was way too little too late.   Sparc was a blind spot > I fear. > One of the reasons I went into Solaris whole-hog during the SunOS->Solaris thing was the availability of a version that ran on Intel. I ran an Intel SVR4.2 (Consensys) BBS in the early 90's, with USENET/NEWS, using a SunOS IPX as a back-end file server. Of course, a few of my customers who did CAD were using Sun workstations, and everything moved to Solaris, so there was also that. Once Solaris X86 came out, I jumped at the chance. I'm still administering PeopleSoft and Oracle on Solaris 11 X86. But sadly, time to move on. Although, Oracle says Solaris support is continuing out until 2031, with extended support to 2034, with Solaris Cluster 4.x following suit. But at $1000/socket for support just for the OS, that pricing is a hard to take when it comes to CentOS/Redhat/Oracle Linux. ak --------------07E3A2D5303C138BAFDFC5DE Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit On 9/11/2019 5:57 PM, Clem Cole wrote:


On Wed, Sep 11, 2019 at 2:54 PM Larry McVoy <lm@mcvoy.com> wrote:
You're probably right but it wouldn't have mattered. SunOS was very popular
and had a good VM system with a working mmap.  Once it became official
AT&T source everyone would have moved to it over time.
But Sun would have to accept the economics of Intel processor sooner.  Which is funny because RoadRunner was a pretty neat machine.  They had Solaris/386 but was way too little too late.   Sparc was a blind spot I fear.


One of the reasons I went into Solaris whole-hog during the SunOS->Solaris thing was the availability of a version that ran on Intel. I ran an Intel SVR4.2 (Consensys) BBS in the early 90's, with USENET/NEWS, using a SunOS IPX as a back-end file server.

Of course, a few of my customers who did CAD were using Sun workstations, and everything moved to Solaris, so there was also that.

Once Solaris X86 came out, I jumped at the chance. I'm still administering PeopleSoft and Oracle on Solaris 11 X86. But sadly, time to move on.

Although, Oracle says Solaris support is continuing out until 2031, with extended support to 2034, with Solaris Cluster 4.x following suit. But at $1000/socket for support just for the OS, that pricing is a hard to take when it comes to CentOS/Redhat/Oracle Linux.

ak
--------------07E3A2D5303C138BAFDFC5DE--