Date: Thu, 13 Feb 1997 15:16:27 -0700 (MST) From: Patrick Giagnocavo <support@xinside.com> To: hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Sun Workshop compiler vs. GCC? Message-ID: <199702132216.PAA02367@chon.xinside.com> In-Reply-To: <199702132125.NAA18583@vader.cs.berkeley.edu> References: <Pine.GSO.3.95.970213110530.9550A-100000@aris> <199702132125.NAA18583@vader.cs.berkeley.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Satoshi Asami writes: > * One final observation: Isn't it scary that merely by recompiling their OS > * with the new compiler, the next version of Solaris/x86 (2.6) should be > * significantly faster than the previous version, making it an even bigger > * threat to the free UNIX's for commercial users, and ESPECIALLY the > * education market? While FreeBSD and Linux have an advantage by being > > I'm optimistic about this. My understanding is that the slowness and > number of bugs of Solaris is intrinsic to its complexity of design > (and also the fact that it was designed for workstations in mind, > initially). You just can't make a huge mammoth run fast, no matter > how much cash you sink into the compiler. Compiler optimization is no > cure for bad design. I tried to get Solaris x86 up on two different machines. No go. Can however install Linux FreeBSD etc. on these systems no problem. System A - it didn't properly detect my Adaptec 1542B. System B - couldn't install the boot blocks properly on an IDE (not EIDE) drive. Solaris won't capture the market, because they don't have a good installation program. Maybe this isn't a very technical problem, but it is a very real consideration when dealing with people who are just trying to get things to work... I'd plunk down the money for Solaris x86 if it would install easier - but it doesn't. cordially --Patrick
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199702132216.PAA02367>