blocks|key|3587933|text|有些软件是专门为AIX/Solaris等编写的，而有些“有钱人”不信任“免费”软件(我亲眼目睹过，有人告诉我不得不在操作系统上花钱！)但大多数时候都是为了得到24/365的支持。|type|unstyled|depth|inlineStyleRanges|entityRanges|data|entityMap^0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|C|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]]|B|$]]

Well some software is specifically written for AIX/Solaris etc. while some 'money men' don't trust 'free' software (I've witnessed this myself, someone told me I HAD to spend money on OS!). But most of the time it's to get 24/365 support.

blocks|key|5886864|text|因为这样你就有了一个大名鼎鼎的名字，你可以用它来提供一个二语习得。|type|unstyled|depth|inlineStyleRanges|entityRanges|offset|length|data|entityMap|0|LINK|mutability|MUTABLE|url|http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Service_level_agreement^0|S|4|0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|K|8|@]|9|@$A|L|B|M|1|N]]|C|$]]]|D|$E|$5|F|G|H|C|$I|J]]]]

Because then you have a big name behind it that you can talk to for providing a <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Service_level_agreement" rel="nofollow noreferrer">SLA</a>.

blocks|key|5887456|text|因为你不想被锁在一个开放的系统里。|type|unstyled|depth|inlineStyleRanges|entityRanges|data|5887457|--+无名IBM主管，1991年年|offset|length|entityMap|0|LINK|mutability|MUTABLE|url|http://www.scribd.com/doc/2556211/Communications-Week-Getting-Locked-Into-Open-Systems^0|0|3|E|0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|M|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|B|3|C|5|6|7|N|8|@]|9|@$D|O|E|P|1|Q]]|A|$]]]|F|$G|$5|H|I|J|A|$K|L]]]]

Because you don't want to get locked into an open system.

-- <a href="http://www.scribd.com/doc/2556211/Communications-Week-Getting-Locked-Into-Open-Systems" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Unknown IBM executive, 1991</a>

blocks|key|3588004|text|添加到以前的答案:这取决于您要在服务器上运行什么。示例:如果您想要运行Oracle，那么您需要使用(包括硬件和)操作系统，Oracle自己说它的(特定版本的)软件经过测试(由它们认证)运行。|type|unstyled|depth|inlineStyleRanges|entityRanges|data|entityMap^0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|C|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]]|B|$]]

Adding to previous answers: It depends on what you are going to run on the server. Example: If you want to run Oracle, you go with (both hardware and) operating systems that Oracle itself says its (particular version of the) software is tested (certified by them) to run on.

blocks|key|5887004|text|这样，企业和政府部门的客户会感到更安全。他们习惯于为软件付费，当免费提供一些东西时，他们会认为它的质量较低。|type|ordered-list-item|depth|inlineStyleRanges|entityRanges|data|5887005|技术支持。例如，当您为RHEL付费时，您支付的是技术支持和更新。|5887006|硬件供应商有时会将您锁定在这种情况下。例如，IBM为其机架和刀片服务器提供了兼容性列表，列表中的所有UNIXes都得到了大公司的支持:+RHEL、SLES、Solaris、AIX、VMWare+ESX等等。您可以在这些服务器上运行一个免费的开放操作系统(我一直在这样做)，但您失去了在硬件驱动程序问题发生时要求IBM提供支持的能力。例如，您可以在Debian、CentOS、VMWare+ESXi上安装光纤通道卡的驱动程序，但如果不能这样做，您将得不到IBM的支持。尽管我认为在RHEL或SLES上安装这些驱动程序并不容易。|entityMap^0|0|0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|G|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|B|3|C|5|6|7|H|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|D|3|E|5|6|7|I|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]]|F|$]]

<ol>
<li>Corporate and government sector clients feel safer this way. They are used to paying for software and when something is offered for free they would think it is of lower quality.</li>
<li>Technical support. When you pay for RHEL for example you are paying for technical support and updates.</li>
<li>Hardware vendors sometimes lock you in the situation. For example IBM has a compatibility list for their rack and blade servers and all of the UNIXes on that list are the ones backed by big companies: RHEL, SLES, Solaris, AIX, VMWare ESX etc. You can get away with running a free and open OS on those (I've been doing that) but you loose the ability to ask for support from IBM in case of hardware driver issues etc. For example, you can install drivers for their Fiber Channel cards on Debian, CentOS, VMWare ESXi (which is free) with some effort, but you won't get support from IBM in case you can't do it. Although I'd imagine the procedure for installing those drivers on RHEL or SLES is not much easier.</li>
</ol>

blocks|key|3588111|text|就Solaris和Linux而言，我可以说我的眼睛有点睁大了，读了Sun出版的"Solaris内部件“一书。|type|unstyled|depth|inlineStyleRanges|entityRanges|offset|length|data|3588112|如果你想和你的操作系统一刀两断，你会发现在优先级、调试挂钩、进程到CPU绑定和内存模型优化等方面有很大的不同。|3588113|Solaris的一些特性如下：|3588114|德特里斯+(轻松地连接到系统调用的能力)|unordered-list-item|3588115|非均匀存储体系结构支持|3588116|板条存储器分配+(碎片预防)|3588117|半虚拟化的solaris区|3588118|当然，Linux支持这些特性中的许多，并且发展迅速(尽管dtrace无疑是Solaris相对于Linux的一个优势)。|entityMap|0|LINK|mutability|MUTABLE|url|http://rads.stackoverflow.com/amzn/click/0131482092|1|http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DTrace|2|http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-Uniform_Memory_Access|3|http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slab_allocation|4|http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solaris_Containers^0|14|A|0|0|0|0|0|4|1|0|0|9|2|0|0|7|3|0|5|8|4|0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|17|8|@]|9|@$A|18|B|19|1|1A]]|C|$]]|$1|D|3|E|5|6|7|1B|8|@]|9|@]|C|$]]|$1|F|3|G|5|6|7|1C|8|@]|9|@]|C|$]]|$1|H|3|I|5|J|7|1D|8|@]|9|@$A|1E|B|1F|1|1G]]|C|$]]|$1|K|3|L|5|J|7|1H|8|@]|9|@$A|1I|B|1J|1|1K]]|C|$]]|$1|M|3|N|5|J|7|1L|8|@]|9|@$A|1M|B|1N|1|1O]]|C|$]]|$1|O|3|P|5|J|7|1P|8|@]|9|@$A|1Q|B|1R|1|1S]]|C|$]]|$1|Q|3|R|5|6|7|1T|8|@]|9|@]|C|$]]]|S|$T|$5|U|V|W|C|$X|Y]]|Z|$5|U|V|W|C|$X|10]]|11|$5|U|V|W|C|$X|12]]|13|$5|U|V|W|C|$X|14]]|15|$5|U|V|W|C|$X|16]]]]

In terms of Solaris vs Linux I can say my eyes were somewhat opened reading the Sun published book "<a href="http://rads.stackoverflow.com/amzn/click/0131482092" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Solaris Internals</a>".

If you want to get down-and-dirty with your operating system you'll find there are considerable differences with prioritisation, debugging-hooks, process-to-CPU binding and memory model optimisation, etc.

Some features of Solaris are:

<ul>
<li><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DTrace" rel="nofollow noreferrer">dtrace</a> (ability to hook into system calls with ease)</li>
<li><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-Uniform_Memory_Access" rel="nofollow noreferrer">non-uniform memory architecture</a> support</li>
<li><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slab_allocation" rel="nofollow noreferrer">slab memory allocation</a> (fragmentation prevention)</li>
<li><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solaris_Containers" rel="nofollow noreferrer">solaris zones</a> for semi-virtualisation</li>
</ul>

Of course Linux supports many of these features and evolves rapidly (although dtrace is unquestionably an advantage of Solaris over Linux).

blocks|key|5886909|text|1、一家大型蓝筹股公司的支持。|type|unstyled|depth|inlineStyleRanges|entityRanges|data|5886910|5886911|2+.具有已知的操作平台。您从IBM购买大型机，您知道您的软件将与它一起工作，并且有很高的启动时间。|entityMap^0|0|0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|F|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|B|3|-4|5|6|7|G|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|C|3|D|5|6|7|H|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]]|E|$]]

1, Support from a major blue chip company. 
2, Having a known operating platform. You buy a mainframe from IBM, you know that your software will work with it and have a high up time.

blocks|key|3587975|text|井,|type|unstyled|depth|inlineStyleRanges|entityRanges|data|3587976|可能会出现商业化的问题，因为一家大公司为了收取许可费而手握着手，感觉“更安全”(尽管Red等人可以反驳Linux的这一论点)。|3587977|有些公司更喜欢使用“已知”的名称，特别是如果他们在供应商那里拥有遗留系统，而且供应商在维护或从一个操作系统迁移到其组合中的另一个操作系统方面具有重要的专业知识。|3587978|可能有一些技术特性只能在一个特定的操作系统中使用，或者公司可能更喜欢限制他们选择操作系统的特定品牌硬件。|3587979|有些公司总是“这样做”，认为没有必要(或无意)改变。|3587980|有些公司可能有专门针对一个操作系统的应用程序，迁移到另一个OS平台可能会带来风险或高昂的成本。|entityMap^0|0|0|0|0|0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|M|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|B|3|C|5|6|7|N|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|D|3|E|5|6|7|O|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|F|3|G|5|6|7|P|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|H|3|I|5|6|7|Q|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|J|3|K|5|6|7|R|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]]|L|$]]

Well,

There may be issues of commercialisation where a corporate feels 'safer' with a big-name company holding their hand for a licence fee (although the likes of Red Hat etc. could counter this argument for Linux).

Some companies will prefer to stay with a 'known' name, especially if they have legacy systems with the supplier and the supplier has significant expertise in maintaining or migrating from one OS to another within their portfolio.

There may be technical features that are only available in one specific OS or the company may prefer specific branded hardware that restricts their choice of OS.

Some corporates have always 'done it that way' and see no need (or have no inclination) to change.

Some corporates may have applications that are specially tuned to one OS and there may be a risk or high cost in migrating to another OS platform.

blocks|key|3588156|text|>但我们都知道，只有当您的时间没有价值时，Linux才是免费的，而且我发现我的时间花在做其他事情上比无休止的移动目标升级舞蹈更好。|type|unstyled|depth|inlineStyleRanges|entityRanges|offset|length|data|3588157|编辑-这很有趣。正如你可以从页面的顶部看到的，这是1998年JWZ采访时引用的一句话。两年后的2000年，当他在最上面写了一篇短文时，他有了一个更好的看法。现在是2010年。但还是很有趣。|entityMap|0|LINK|mutability|MUTABLE|url|http://www.jwz.org/doc/linux.html^0|0|1T|0|0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|M|8|@]|9|@$A|N|B|O|1|P]]|C|$]]|$1|D|3|E|5|6|7|Q|8|@]|9|@]|C|$]]]|F|$G|$5|H|I|J|C|$K|L]]]]

<a href="http://www.jwz.org/doc/linux.html" rel="nofollow noreferrer">> But as we all know, Linux is only free if your time has no value, and I find that my time is better spent doing things other than the endless moving-target-upgrade dance.</a> 

Edit - this was funny. As you can see from the top of the page, this was a quote from a 1998 interview JWZ did. He had a better opinion 2 years later in 2000, when he wrote the blurb at the top. And it's 2010 now. But it's still funny.

blocks|key|3588568|text|(主要以Solaris为中心；还没有使用AIX。我在BSD和Linxu方面有很多经验--从93年开始。|type|unstyled|depth|inlineStyleRanges|entityRanges|data|3588569|商业联合公司在一些令人敬畏的硬件上运行是一个原因。x86在很多方面都很不错，但是在SPARC+T系列服务器上运行，您可以像其他任何东西一样高度并行工作负载。您可以进一步将任何机器拆分为具有Solaris区域的虚拟机器，而不需要任何开销(因为只有一个内核)。我见过在VMware下运行负载的基准测试，与相同硬件上的区域相比，吞吐量降低了30%25。|3588570|我相信AIX有类似的特性。|3588571|与Linux相比，我还喜欢Solaris的"fit+and+finish“。由于一个组织负责代码，所以事情往往是以连贯的方式进行的。BSD也是类似的，因为您有团队合作，而不是Linux中的hogdge+podge。发行版确实有帮助，但您可以看出它是分散的。|3588572|商业联合网站上的文档也很好，因为人们实际上是付费编写它的--Linux在这方面有很多漏洞。|3588573|免费很好，但在大多数情况下，您不能在大型生产环境中使用它。没有人力资源管理/客户关系管理/SAP信息的支持合同是行不通的。到那时，如果你不得不开支票的话，最好还是找个更大的机构。|3588574|另外，在甲骨文收购Sun之前，Solaris的支持实际上比Red更便宜，我相信在拉里·埃里森(+Larry+)的领导下，这种情况已经改变了。|3588575|我还认为Solaris是一个优秀的操作系统。我已经做了几年了，而且(例如)我看到通常每年一次左右。在使用Solaris的十多年中，我从未看到这种情况发生。我在Solaris机箱上看到了200%2B的平均负载，而且它们的响应能力仍然足以让我进去看看到底发生了什么。在Linux中，有很多情况下，我不得不弹跳这个盒子，因为它已经自动退出了:这是我在Windows而不是Unix中所期望的。|3588576|按照对服务器的偏好顺序，我会选择(ceteris+paribus)|3588577|Solaris+10|unordered-list-item|3588578|FreeBSD|3588579|其他BSD|3588580|Linux|3588581|我确实更喜欢FreeBSD的端口系统，但您可以与NetBSD的多平台Pkgsrc+(在其他OSes上工作)关闭传真。(在台式机上，我的第一选择是Mac，如果我不得不使用自由和开放源码软件，FreeBSD将排在第二位--不过，如果我主要是一个特定的操作系统，我会在我的桌面上吃狗粮。)|entityMap^0|0|0|0|0|0|0|0|0|0|0|0|0|0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|13|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|B|3|C|5|6|7|14|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|D|3|E|5|6|7|15|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|F|3|G|5|6|7|16|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|H|3|I|5|6|7|17|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|J|3|K|5|6|7|18|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|L|3|M|5|6|7|19|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|N|3|O|5|6|7|1A|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|P|3|Q|5|6|7|1B|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|R|3|S|5|T|7|1C|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|U|3|V|5|T|7|1D|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|W|3|X|5|T|7|1E|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|Y|3|Z|5|T|7|1F|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|10|3|11|5|6|7|1G|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]]|12|$]]

(Mostly Solaris-centric; haven't used AIX. I have a lot of experience with the BSDs and Linxu--starting in '93.)

The commercial Unices run on some awesome hardware is one reason. x86 is pretty good for many things, but running on (say) the SPARC T-series servers, you can highly parallel workloads like almost nothing else out there. You can further split any machine into virtual ones with Solaris zone, without any overhead (since there's only one kernel). I've seen benchmarks where running a load under VMware you get 30% less throughput compared to zones on the same hardware.

I believe AIX has has similar features.

I also like the "fit and finish" of Solaris compared to Linux. Since one organization takes care of the code, things tend to be done in a coherent way. The BSDs are similar, since you have on team working on everything, instead of a hogdge podge in Linux. The distributions certainly helped, but you can tell it's decentralized.

The documentation on commercial Unices also tends to be good, as people are actually paid to write it--Linux has a lot of holes in this area.

Free is nice, but you can't actually use that in a large production environment in most cases. Not having a support contract for your HR/CRM/SAP information isn't going to fly. At which point, if you have to cut a cheque, might as well go with a larger organization.

Also, until Oracle bought out Sun, Solaris support was actually cheaper than (say) Red Hat's. This has changed I think under Larry Ellison's watch I believe.

I also think that Solaris is a superior operating system. I've been doing this stuff for a few years now, and (for example) I see Linux live lock usually once a year or so. I have never, in over ten years of using Solaris, see that happen. I've seen load averages of 200+ on Solaris boxes, and they were still responsive enough for me to get in and see what was going on. With Linux, there have been many occasions that I had to bounce the box because it had gone AWOL: this is something I would expect with Windows, not Unix.

In order of preference on servers, I'd go with (ceteris paribus)

<ul>
<li>Solaris 10</li>
<li>FreeBSD</li>
<li>other BSDs</li>
<li>Linux</li>
</ul>

I do like FreeBSD's Ports system better than anything else, but you can can a close facsimile with NetBSD's multi-platform Pkgsrc that works on other OSes. (On desktops my first choice would be Mac OS X, with FreeBSD coming in second if I had to use FOSS--though if I'm admining mostly a particular OS, I'd dog-food it on my desktop.)

blocks|key|5887167|text|所有的Linux/UNIX系统都是商业化的，软件供应商喜欢为可预测的OSes开发一个大型软件(即甲骨文)。免费系统的供应商不能保证系统的可预测性和向后兼容性。|type|unstyled|depth|inlineStyleRanges|entityRanges|data|entityMap^0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|C|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]]|B|$]]

All Linux/UNIX systems for the serious production are commercial, the software vendors like to make a big software (i.e. Oracle) for the predictable OSes. Vendors of the free systems can't ensure the predictability and a backward compatibility.

blocks|key|3588293|text|这不是因为你为好东西付钱，这是我所相信的。但很多人认为是相反的。10亿人可能是错的。|type|unstyled|depth|inlineStyleRanges|entityRanges|data|entityMap^0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|C|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]]|B|$]]

It's not because you pay for something it is good, this is what I trust. But alot of people think the converse. 1 000 000 million people can be wrong.

blocks|key|3588488|text|当然，这笔钱是用于支持和赔偿的。这是redhat的基本价值主张，在这一点上，redhat可能会为他们的linux产品出售比aix更多的支持合同。如果仅仅是获取技术，那么目前可以在没有cost...centos的情况下实现的是免费的红帽叉，而且freebsd已经整合了solaris+(zfs、dtrace等)和osx+(大中央调度，clang)的许多技术优势。|type|unstyled|depth|inlineStyleRanges|entityRanges|data|entityMap^0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|C|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]]|B|$]]

certainly the money is for support and indemnification. this is the fundamental value-proposition of redhat, who at this point is probably selling more support contracts for their linux product than ibm is for aix. were it simply about obtaining technology, that can be done presently at no cost...centos is a free fork of redhat, and freebsd has incorporated many of the technical advantages of solaris (zfs, dtrace etc) and osx (grand central dispatch, clang).

I'm fairly new to Unicies. With the advent of GNU/Linux and BSDs, what are the reasons for companies to prefer AIX, Solaris and other commercial systems?

Why pay for UNIX?

翻译质量差，导致语言生硬或混乱。

没有提供实际的解决方法或示例。

解答不清晰，无法理解或解决问题。

页面排版不美观，阅读体验差。

文章

问答

视频

学习中心

腾讯云实验室

直播

竞赛

腾讯云代码分析专区

腾讯iOA零信任安全管理系统专区

腾讯云架构师技术同盟交流圈

腾讯云数据库专区

腾讯云顾问专区

腾讯云原生专区

腾讯混元专区

腾讯云TCE专区

腾讯云Lighthouse专区

腾讯云HAI专区

腾讯云Edgeone专区

腾讯云存储专区

腾讯云智能专区

腾讯轻联专区 

腾讯云开发专区

TAPD专区

腾讯轻量云游戏服专区

腾讯云最具价值专家

腾讯云架构师技术同盟

腾讯云创作之星

腾讯云开发者先锋

腾讯云代码助手

云原生构建

TAPD 敏捷项目管理

Cloud Studio

SDK中心

API中心

命令行工具

涵盖代码开发、场景应用、自动测试全流程，助你从零构建专属AI助手

一站式MCP教程库，解锁AI应用新玩法

我对联通很陌生。随着GNU/Linux和BSD的出现，公司选择AIX、Solaris和其他商业系统的原因是什么？

问为什么要为UNIX付费？
EN

回答 13

Server Fault用户

Server Fault用户

Server Fault用户

社区

活动

圈层

关于

腾讯云开发者

热门产品

热门推荐

更多推荐

问为什么要为UNIX付费？EN

回答 13

Server Fault用户

Server Fault用户

Server Fault用户

社区

活动

圈层

关于

腾讯云开发者

热门产品

热门推荐

更多推荐

问为什么要为UNIX付费？
EN