Opinions for a career in OpenSource

[ugjim2k]

Hi,
I am interested in open source software and wanted to find out the differences between Solaris and Linux, as well as FreeBSD. Considering that they are all open source now, other than personal preference, why would an individual or organisation choose Linux over Solaris, or Solaris over Linux, or even FreeBSD over either of the two? Please I do not want to start a flame war or anything. I have read enough of all those sites giving flame wars all over the place and still do not understand what makes the operating systems so different as one would, from first glance imagine that they are all related in a similar way.
Also, since Solaris has become open source and also its increasing support for x86-64 systems, it has been getting traction in the server rooms and its vendor supporters for the software seems to be growing for example Dell now pre-installs Solaris on some of their server lines. Does anyone feel that this would be a threat in the near future for Linux?

Thank you. Please no flame wars

[techieMoe]

Hi,
I am interested in open source software and wanted to find out the differences between Solaris and Linux, as well as FreeBSD. Considering that they are all open source now, other than personal preference, why would an individual or organisation choose Linux over Solaris, or Solaris over Linux, or even FreeBSD over either of the two?

You pretty found the point on your own there. It's personal preference. One significant difference in BSD and Linux is how they are licensed. Yes, both have "open-source" licenses, but BSD's license does not prohibit people from taking that source code and compiling it into a closed-source or commercial product.

Some people like that, some people don't. For those who don't there's Linux, which has a license (GPL) that specifically prohibits you from taking the source code and making it closed to the public. It's up to the individual whether you value one or the other (or just don't care either way).

Solaris is a totally separate animal. It's the product of Sun's efforts to gradually open-source their version of the UNIX operating system. It uses yet another license (the CDDL) that's similar to other open-source licenses but not quite identical.

Also, since Solaris has become open source and also its increasing support for x86-64 systems, it has been getting traction in the server rooms and its vendor supporters for the software seems to be growing for example Dell now pre-installs Solaris on some of their server lines. Does anyone feel that this would be a threat in the near future for Linux?

I don't think this is a threat to Linux, because Linux was never intended to be the "One True Server Operating System (TM)." Linux is an organic thing that is quite different from most commercial operating systems that have come along in the past.

You mention Dell. Dell also installs Linux on their servers (as well as laptops and workstations), so I don't see this as a case of "us versus them." I see this as a case of Dell expanding their market offerings to give their customers more choices, and I don't think that's a bad thing for anyone involved.

[elija]

I also believe that the BSD operating systems are based on the
Berkley Unix whereas Linux is based on... well Linux!

I also seem to remember reading that BSD has a different model
for getting software approved and added, although they can run
Linux software. This model apparently makes it more reliable.

I can't remember the source so you should verify that last point

[techieMoe]

I also believe that the BSD operating systems are based on the
Berkley Unix whereas Linux is based on... well Linux!

Yes, most BSD's trace their lineage back to Berkeley Unix (hence the B in BSD). They eventually changed the code base over so they wouldn't be reliant on the copyrighted Unix code however.

I also seem to remember reading that BSD has a different model
for getting software approved and added, although they can run
Linux software. This model apparently makes it more reliable.

I hear people talk about running Linux on BSD, but I've never been able to get it to work *at all*. It's kind of like everyone saying "Hey! I can fly if I look at my navel long enough." I just can't reproduce it.

As far as their different model, the FreeBSD team develops and tests the entire OS as a package deal, rather than Linux which is developed as a kernel and all the other pieces are up to their individual maintainers, so in theory it means the OS will be more thoroughly tested and stable. Whether that means anything in real life is up for interpretation.