Solaris 9 x86 proves uneven

When it comes to Unix, Sun Microsystems' Solaris operating system shines on the company's 64-bit SPARC processors. Unfortunately, the picture is less bright for the version of Solaris written for Intel's 32-bit Pentium family.

Free IT resource Open Source Business Conference (OSBC) May 22-23, 2007 Sponsored by OSBC Free IT resource TechNet: More ways to know it, share it, and keep it running. Sponsored by Microsoft Sun Solaris 9 for x86 Sun Microsystems, sun.com/solaris Good  6.0 criteria score weight Administration 8 20% Availability 3 20% Security 8 20% Hardware support 4 15% Scalability 5 15% Setup 8 10% Cost: $99 for uniprocessor laptops or desktops; $250 for dual-processor workgroup servers or desktops; $1,500 for four-processor servers. Sun also charges a significant piece of the list price for a right-to-use license on used systems with Solaris installed. Platforms: 32-bit Intel x86 servers, desktops, and laptops Bottom Line: Positioned as a competitor for Linux on Intel-based systems, Solaris 9 for x86 lacks broad hardware support. A dearth of Sun and third-party applications limits value to Sun shops seeking low-priced servers, desktops, or laptops. About our Reviews and Scoring Methodology

Solaris 9 x86 offers two potential benefits: First, the availability of a Solaris version for common, off-the-shelf server hardware gives IT managers a lower-cost platform for deploying Solaris. Second, Solaris 9 can serve as a nonopen-source Unix alternative to Linux.

But after testing the most recent, December 2002 update of Solaris 9 x86, my feelings are mixed. Upon close examination, neither benefit is compelling. There's nothing technically wrong with Solaris 9 x86 -- it's a good OS -- but without solid application and hardware support, there's little reason to deploy it instead of Solaris SPARC or Linux x86.

As a replacement for Linux, Solaris x86 enjoys some technical advantages: a solid OS kernel, built-in Volume Manager and Resource Manager tools that simplify system resource management, a native journaling file system, strong internal security using a built-in secure shell -- Kerberos 5 authentication -- and an excellent SunScreen firewall. Those security enhancements are new to Solaris 9 and are quite welcome.

But Solaris x86 isn't particularly scalable and lags far behind Linux and Windows in terms of application availability, including app support from Sun itself.

Overall, Solaris x86 is a credible OS that might make sense as a low-end server platform for Sun shops, perhaps as an Apache Web server platform, or for hosting custom applications. It can also be used to drive laptops and desktop PCs as a substitute for more expensive SPARC workstations. But that's about it.

Wanted: more app support

Sun initially declined to participate in this review and thus didn't provide InfoWorld with a media kit or discs. So I had to start by downloading 1.37GB of data from Sun’s Web site for which I paid a $20 licensing fee. (You have to pay for the x86 binaries, whereas it's free to download the SPARC version of Solaris).

After burning x86 to CD, it look a little time to bring up two separate systems -- once we found compatible hardware. Indeed, it was an initially frustrating process to find hardware that would run Solaris x86. There was no hardware compatibility list for version 9 on Sun's Web site, so I resorted to trial and error. Sun later advised me to use the hardware compatibility list for Solaris 8, last updated in February 2002.

My two newest Xeon-based servers, an HP ProLiant DL560 and a Dell PowerEdge 2650, are not supported by Solaris x86. I was able to install Solaris x86 on an old IBM ThinkPad 600 notebook (300MHz Pentium II) and a Dell PowerEdge 2450 server (dual 733MHz Pentium III). On those machines, the installation process for Solaris 9 x86 was fast and easy, on par with recent versions of Red Hat Linux and faster than installing Windows 2000 Server or the Windows Server 2003 beta.

Any administrator familiar with Linux installation will have no difficulty bringing up Solaris, especially now that the default user interface is the Gnome 2.0 found on many Linux distributions, instead of Sun's own CDE (Common Desktop Environment). New wizards and hardware sniffers truly automate the installation. But on the ThinkPad, I had no multimedia support; the drivers were not available.