Interactive vs. Solaris x86 vs. Linux?

Interactive vs. Solaris x86 vs. Linux?

Post by Ken Mitt » Thu, 20 Jul 1995 04:00:00



I am an A/UX user, looking to leap to a floating ship. I have a fairly
underpowered laptop (Toshiba T1910: 486sx/33, 8 MB ram, about 120 MB HD
available to UNIX. I currently am using Linux without X. How do
Interactive UNIX and Solaris/x86 compare to each other (price,
functionality) and Linux (functionality)? I checked www.sun.com, and it
mostly had hype. Eventually I will be moving to a much more powerful
notebook, but not immediately. I do need a C compiler, either bundled,
purchased seperately, or gcc. Thanks...

     --Ken Mitton

     http://ucsu.colorado.edu/~mittonk/

 
 
 

Interactive vs. Solaris x86 vs. Linux?

Post by Pete Clin » Fri, 21 Jul 1995 04:00:00


: I am an A/UX user, looking to leap to a floating ship. I have a fairly
: underpowered laptop (Toshiba T1910: 486sx/33, 8 MB ram, about 120 MB HD
: available to UNIX. I currently am using Linux without X. How do
: Interactive UNIX and Solaris/x86 compare to each other (price,
: functionality) and Linux (functionality)? I checked www.sun.com, and it
: mostly had hype. Eventually I will be moving to a much more powerful
: notebook, but not immediately. I do need a C compiler, either bundled,
: purchased seperately, or gcc. Thanks...

:      --Ken Mitton

:      http://ucsu.colorado.edu/~mittonk/
--
Peter Clinch                  Dundee University & Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust
Tel 44 1382 660111 x 3637     Medical Physics, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177            Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK


 
 
 

Interactive vs. Solaris x86 vs. Linux?

Post by Andrew Gabrie » Fri, 21 Jul 1995 04:00:00




Quote:> I am an A/UX user, looking to leap to a floating ship. I have a fairly
> underpowered laptop (Toshiba T1910: 486sx/33, 8 MB ram, about 120 MB HD
> available to UNIX. I currently am using Linux without X. How do
> Interactive UNIX and Solaris/x86 compare to each other (price,

When I last looked, Interactive UNIX was a lot more expensive, but that
was a while back. I asked Sun why and the reply was that they have to
pass on heavy licence fees for it. This was probably 2 years ago; things
might have changed and pricing here in the UK might be different.

Quote:> functionality)

Well, that depends what you are wanting to do. Interactive UNIX is faster
than Solaris x86 for simple tasks, with the OS and X being much faster
on medium sized systems (say 16Mbytes). (It was designed to work in much
smaller machines than are typical today.)  However, I think I would
avoid Interactive UNIX now for anything new since it's future is at best
likely to be static. (I have just decided to stop purchasing updates.)

OTOH, Solaris is based on System 5 Release 4, which has many performance
enhancing features over System 5 Release 3.2 (Interactive UNIX). Some of
these come for free, and others must be explicitly exploited. If your
apps can benefit from these, you would do better under Solaris x86. It
won't run on small machines (less than 16Mbyte).
Solaris x86 is my current preferred choice.

Quote:> and Linux (functionality)?

I've not used it for a while, but performance wise, it was similar to
Interactive UNIX, scoring particularly well on small and medium sized
machines. At that time, it could only be described as a Unix emulator (not
something one would have said in a Linux newsgroup however), but I think
it has now "come of age" and for most practical purposes can be regarded
as a real Unix. It is being developed much faster than any commercial
Unix, and although not my own personal preference yet, it could well
be within the next couple of years. (This should be worrying the
commercial unix vendors much more than it seems to be.)

Quote:> I checked www.sun.com, and it
> mostly had hype. Eventually I will be moving to a much more powerful
> notebook, but not immediately. I do need a C compiler, either bundled,
> purchased seperately, or gcc. Thanks...

Your current RAM, and probably hard disc too, are too small for Solaris.

gcc is available for all three unixs. Interactive and Solaris also have
unbundled compilers. The Solaris one is very expensive, but is often
reduced on special offers. Interactive's is very reasonable (IIRC, there
is more than one).

One comment I would make if you are looking for a new system on which
to run Solaris is (in addition to checking out the hardware compatibility
list) to go for a good video adaptor which is driven in accelerated mode.
I run Solaris on a 486DX33 at home with an accelerated card, and at work
on a P100 with an accelerated card which Solaris does not seem to drive
in accelerated mode. The 486 is *much* faster for anything GUI related
than the P100 !
It would be helpful if Sun said which cards they drive in accelerated
mode in the hardware compatibility list (last time I looked, they didn't).
For a notebook, this area is probably even more tricky.

Hope that helps. You'll get as many different opinions as replies!
--


 
 
 

Interactive vs. Solaris x86 vs. Linux?

Post by Bruce Co » Fri, 21 Jul 1995 04:00:00


: I am an A/UX user, looking to leap to a floating ship. I have a fairly
: underpowered laptop (Toshiba T1910: 486sx/33, 8 MB ram, about 120 MB HD
: available to UNIX. I currently am using Linux without X. How do
: Interactive UNIX and Solaris/x86 compare to each other (price,
: functionality) and Linux (functionality)? I checked www.sun.com, and it
: mostly had hype. Eventually I will be moving to a much more powerful
: notebook, but not immediately. I do need a C compiler, either bundled,
: purchased seperately, or gcc. Thanks...

I've used Linux and Solarisx86 and I like them both.

But, without bothering to figure out the numbers, I'll point out that
Solaris requires a *lot* more RAM and disk than Linux.  I doubt
you could even get Solaris to boot in 8M RAM or fit it onto 120M HD.

Unless you're willing to spend money on a powerful PC (24M+ RAM and a
big disk), don't get Solaris.  

 
 
 

Interactive vs. Solaris x86 vs. Linux?

Post by Michael R Aldri » Sat, 22 Jul 1995 04:00:00





>> I am an A/UX user, looking to leap to a floating ship. I have a fairly
>> underpowered laptop (Toshiba T1910: 486sx/33, 8 MB ram, about 120 MB HD
>> available to UNIX. I currently am using Linux without X. How do
>> Interactive UNIX and Solaris/x86 compare to each other (price,

Follups deleted.

Just an opinion,   You might also want to check out UnixWare 2.01.
It's the real McCoy when it comes to a PC SysVr4 UNIX.  I have not
used Interactive but do use solaris at work and UnixWare at home, and
VeryMuch perfer Unixware.

ma
--


The MITRE Corporation                   aragorn!michael = home
Bedford MA

 
 
 

Interactive vs. Solaris x86 vs. Linux?

Post by John Martine » Sat, 22 Jul 1995 04:00:00




%


% Follups deleted.
%
% Just an opinion,   You might also want to check out UnixWare 2.01.
% It's the real McCoy when it comes to a PC SysVr4 UNIX.  I have not
% used Interactive but do use solaris at work and UnixWare at home, and
% VeryMuch perfer Unixware.
%
% ma
% --


% The MITRE Corporation                         aragorn!michael = home
% Bedford MA

I had UnixWare 1.1 running on my home PC and was not impressed. Without
starting a religious war, I like Solaris way better. Sun has been in
the UNIX market longer than Novell. Haven't seen UW 2.0 yet. Unless you
need to do some netware stuff, I would stick with Solaris...feels like
my Solaris sparc at work...

Just another $0.02 thrown in the hat...

-jm
--

Quote:>< John Martinez, Technical Services          BATS, Inc.                     <>


Quote:>< UNIX SysAdmin, Internet, WWW Development   Santa Clara, CA  95051         <>

<> http://www.bats.com/bats                   (408)653-0200                  ><
 
 
 

Interactive vs. Solaris x86 vs. Linux?

Post by Kai O'Ya » Tue, 25 Jul 1995 04:00:00



>I've used Linux and Solarisx86 and I like them both.
>But, without bothering to figure out the numbers, I'll point out that
>Solaris requires a *lot* more RAM and disk than Linux.  I doubt
>you could even get Solaris to boot in 8M RAM or fit it onto 120M HD.

I've tried it.... It can install with 16MB. However, it runs ok
afterwards with 12MB. Doesn't boot up with 8MB.

--

Kai O'Yang, SCIT, Peninsula Campus, Monash Uni, Frankston, VIC 3199, Australia.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 
 
 

Interactive vs. Solaris x86 vs. Linux?

Post by Nir Zu » Tue, 25 Jul 1995 04:00:00



>I've tried it.... It can install with 16MB. However, it runs ok
>afterwards with 12MB. Doesn't boot up with 8MB.

  Solaris x86 does not run ok with neither 12MB nor 16MB. With 16MB, running
OpenWindows, emacs and a g++ compilation is a very frustrating thing. If you
are planning to run Solaris on less than 24MB, simply don't ! If you want a
real unix O/S, get 32MB and install Solaris.

Nir.

 
 
 

1. Benchmarks x86 Solaris vs Linux and Solaris 2.6 x86 vs sparc

It has been requested that someone try some benchmark comparing:
1. Solaris 2.6 on various hardware (sparc vs x86)
2. Different OS's on the same x86 hardware.

I did both: http://www.math.fsu.edu/~bellenot/solaris/benchmark.txt
Your Mileage May Vary, I make no claims that these benchmarks
say anything important other than for amusement.

I did two kinds of tests. A numerical test I have been using
for years. And I timed about a 100 source file debug build.

The numerical tests are available, older results are in
http://www.math.fsu.edu/~bellenot/solaris/bench.txt
--

2. Solaris 9 x86

3. Linux vs OS2 vs NT vs Win95 vs Multics vs PDP11 vs BSD geeks

4. Command Line for Setting Up New Monitor in RH8.0?

5. Evaluation pointers: x86-Solaris vs x86-NT vs SPARC-Solaris

6. COMMERCIAL: Red Hat Linux 4.1 for Intel, Alpha, and SPARC!

7. SunOS 5.6 vs Solaris 2.6 vs Solaris 7 vs Solaris 8

8. Asus P2B-S motherboard with on-board Adaptec AIC-7890

9. Linux vs FreeBSD vs Solaris for x86 ?

10. Linux vs FreeBSD vs Solaris Unix for x86

11. linux ppc vs linux alpha vs linux x86?

12. Vision FS (was: Window NT vs x86 solaris vs SCO?)

13. Caldera vs. RedHat 5.x vs Solaris 2.6 x86