openSUSE Leap vs. Oracle Solaris

OpenSUSE Leap is well suited for just about any Linux task. Especially I like to use it as Docker base image for my software deployments, because it has a wide variety of software packages available already precompiled and packages are well maintained - vulnerable software versions are patched in reasonable time. OpenSUSE Leap is rpm based system, and it wouldn't install Debian or other systems packages. If your software is not an rpm package then OpenSUSE Leap would not be suitable for your system.

It's good for environments that need to operate 24/7 due to its stability, as I mentioned before. It's also very good for enterprise applications that can't afford unscheduled downtime, for truly high-priority environments. I don't think it would be recommended for small companies with people who have no prior knowledge of the tool, as the learning curve is quite steep.

• Maintenance of software packages using YAST
• Availability of patches when a vulnerability is discovered
• Distribution upgrades

• Preferred Operating System to run Oracle Databases
• Performs well with Java and Oracle applications
• Great for Virtualizations.

Incentivized

• Commercial packages not always available
• Stable packages sometimes lag behind the latest releases

Incentivized

• It seems that Solaris is becoming an afterthought at Oracle.
• Oracle should be more vocal in their commitment to Solaris
• Support Costs

Incentivized

You need to take the time to learn it. It is a massive product.

The support teams are well trained and responsive. Patches are rolled out regularly and are easy to deploy and backout.

Stress testing and timing is key. You need test systems that mirror the live environments. User testing must be reflected in peak loads.

openSUSE Leap has wide variety of already precompiled software packages in default repositories. It even has some specific packages in official repositories that are not available in other Linux distribution repositories. It is also very stable and reliable distro - we can predict when new versions will be released and when we should make system upgrades.

We used Windows Server quite a bit because of the ease of use for the team, file sharing, Active Directory, and systems integrated with Windows; learning was easier, and the interface was more user-friendly. On the other hand, Oracle stood out for its stability because we provide services that keep environments up and running 24/7.

• More effective maintenance means a smaller headcount needed for running the production servers.
• The easiness of deployment means more time we can spend on software development of company-specific applications.
• Great community support and overlap with other Linux systems mean that an answer to nearly any problem is usually one google query away.

• Possibility to migrate old servers protecting previous inversions
• reduces implementation times and accelerates time to obtain value in the market.

Incentivized