Solaris / OpenSolarisThis forum is for the discussion of Solaris and OpenSolaris.
General Sun, SunOS and Sparc related questions also go here.
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Introduction to Linux - A Hands on Guide
This guide was created as an overview of the Linux Operating System, geared toward new users as an exploration tour and getting started guide, with exercises at the end of each chapter.
For more advanced trainees it can be a desktop reference, and a collection of the base knowledge needed to proceed with system and network administration. This book contains many real life examples derived from the author's experience as a Linux system and network administrator, trainer and consultant. They hope these examples will help you to get a better understanding of the Linux system and that you feel encouraged to try out things on your own.
Click Here to receive this Complete Guide absolutely free.
Sure it is but don't confuse Open Standards & Specifications with Open Source. AIX, HP-UX and Solaris (outside OpenSolaris distributions) are examples of Open Standards based Operating systems that are proprietary and closed source.
HP quit selling RISC chip based servers. Now they only sell Itanium for HP-UX. In the meantime RedHat has recently announced they'll quit supporting Itanium. HP spent years trying to get away from a proprietary chip by going to Intel and may find themselves being the only ones selling the chip before long. The cost savings they hoped for might go away if Intel is their only supplier and HP is the only one buying them.
Intel CPUs, whether Itanium or x86 architecture, are proprietary too.
I meant an HP proprietary chip.
x86 isn't only made by Intel and hasn't been for some time. In fact there was a point where AMD had leapfrogged them in multi-core technology and they had to play catch up. Itanium is only made by Intel and if you read the rest of my post you'd see that I was clearly recognizing the fact that Intel was the only source for Itanium.
Seizing on one word in a post and ignoring the context around it does not serve you well.
@MensaWater: I'm sorry if I misunderstood proprietary to mean home made in you posting #31 but it seems to me your last two are still showing some confusion around Open Systems, Open Source, Freeware and proprietary. Let me clarify my opinion about it.
Solaris, HP-UX and AIX are proprietary OSes. The fact Sun (now Oracle) decide or not to provide Solaris as freeware doesn't change that fact. It is just a marketing decision. The fact a substantial part of Solaris 10 source code has been released under an Open Source license doesn't change it either. Only redistributable distributions built from the OpenSolaris.org source code might be qualified as Open Source.
Similarily, PA-RISC, x86 and IA-64 (Itanium) are proprietary architectures. The fact Itanium which was originally designed by HP then jointly developed by Intel doesn't change that fact. These companies have licensed their technologies to each other but kept it proprietary. If you want to build an ia-64 compatible chip without having some agreement with them, be prepared to suffer some legal action.
The x86 64 bit architecture was also developed outside Intel, by AMD as you pointed out. This doesn't means at all it is an open architecture. Intel has licensed it from AMD to develop its current 64 bits chips just like AMD has licensed the x86 architecture from Intel to develop AMD64 and its former 32 bits compatible chips. May be can this crossed-license architecture be called co-proprietary but not Open Standard and even less Open Source. If you want to build an x86_64 compatible chip without having some agreement with them, be prepared to suffer some legal action although you might eventually win arguing about monopoly abuse.