“Sun Studio 11 software is the latest release of optimizing compilers and tools for the C, C++ and Fortran developer. This release delivers the highest optimizations and the best performance in the development of scalable 32-bit and 64-bit applications on Sun’s newest hardware platforms including the latest multi-core UltraSPARC, x64 and x86 platforms. And Sun Studio 11 software now removes the price barrier and is available for free.”
This is awesome news! Fully optimized binaries.
12 years of wanting this suite but unwilling to pay Sun’s price when GCC was available, and they finally wake up and figure out that it can only help them to make it available to all. Dammit Sun, I’ve waited a long time for you to do this… even come to harsh words with your top reps over your compilers after the switch from SunOS4 (my argument: no UNIX is complete without a C/C++ development suite).
Perhaps Sun really will become relevant again. I’m cautiously enthusiastic given today’s announcements.
Not that it is likely that I’ll go back to Solaris, but it certainly makes it easier to choose it for my existing Sun systems.
Edited 2005-11-16 23:05
It won’t let you download unless you give your full name, email, phone number, and address. It even checks that the address is valid.
There are two check boxes you can leave blank at the bottom (about sharing your info with their affiliates…), but I wouldn’t trust that to not result in more spam and junk mail.
The usual old-skool user/pass combo works, if you choose to be anonymous. Props to Sun for providing it!
Wow! Sun has really been surprising me lately. Open Solaris, free Java Studio Creator/Enterprise, amazing and free ZFS, and now this!! Congrats Sun!
Either they’re being overloaded, or this whole Java thing is over rated. I signed up, and all I get when I go to download any of the products is “fatal exception”.
What fantastic advertising for their products.
Edited 2005-11-17 00:02
The Sun Studio 11 compiler apparently gets some wicked-high SPEC scores on AMD64. I’d be very curious to learn about the lineage of Sun’s compiler.
Browser: Lynx/2.8.5rel.1 libwww-FM/2.14 SSL-MM/1.4.1 OpenSSL/0.9.7f
Are the Sun compilers included in the linux package?
Or just the IDE and tools?
Hi
For Linux uits just IDE + some tools, no native compilers.
http://developers.sun.com/prodtech/cc/support/support_matrix.html
Kev
Compilers for linux are currently “technology preview”:
http://developers.sun.com/prodtech/cc/linux_index.html
Finally!! This release should include support for Linux Compilers (not just IDE as well).
PS – I have been able to download it with no problems.
this is part of sun’s strategy of getting developers for their solaris OS, which if it becomes a major player will really boost the sparc platform as it’s designed to run on sparc a lot better than x86. This will allow developers to run a simple compile for their x86 & x64 apps to run on sparc and both x64.
This is a genius plan because i think they might actually pull it off. If all else fails, their name on massively distributed software will boost sales for the company.
schwartz does seem to be a good COO & president after all!
sorry guys, but it says i have to buy it. where is the link?
http://www.sun.com/software/products/studio/buy.xml
also licensing information:
http://www.sun.com/software/products/studio/faqs/licensing.xml#q3
The Sparc distribution is about 500Mb the x86 distribution for solaris is ~300Mb and the linux x86 distribution is about ~200Mb… Why are there so huge differences? Are there way more features for sparc than solaris? Also has anyone tried to install it in Ubuntu?
The most likely scenario; the Solaris version probably includes necessary operating system patches which are normally either bundled seperately or only available for contract customers – I’m also sure there are some ‘Solaris only features’ that are included with the package as well.
Maybe Sparc binaries are larger, because 64bit code has got longer opcodes than 32bit ?
That would have explained a *slight* increase in space usage, but only by around 10% IIRC; updates are the most likely cause.
Take GNOME 2.0 when it was made available; conservatively, I’d say that atleast 1/4 of the package was patches for Solaris to bring over version of Solaris up-to-date, as to allow it to be able to run on those versions – StarOffice also includes a whole heap of updates; I’m surprised, however, that they don’t bundle these seperately as to avoid downloading things no required, for those customers with an alredy ‘up-to-date’ Solaris installation; then again, I’m sure they’ve done it as to stop support headaches in the future.
That would have explained a *slight* increase in space usage, but only by around 10% IIRC; updates are the most likely cause.
I don’t know how much of the download is code versus data, but RISC code is generally much more than 10% larger than x86-64 code. A stripped binary of a particular program is 152kb on my Mac, and 64kb on my PC. I’m sure the ratio for SPARC is different, but it’s probably not as low as 10%.
No, he was referring to the x86-64 Solaris version vs. the Linux version.
We all know the SPARC/x86 difference, what is being talked about is the difference in size, on different operating systems, using the same architecture.
Ah, I see.
Sun is desperately trying to get more people to their platform and this is just more proof of that.
Sorry to be asking the obvious, but what company that does NOT desperately try to get more people to their platform?
> Sun is desperately trying to get more people to their platform and this is just more proof of that.
I used they’re Studio (they’re ANSI C product) 11 years ago. I was thoroughly unimpressed with the product. It compiled code only slightly more optimized (measured by benchmarking a scanning application I was developing at the time) than gcc -O2. In fact if I hadn’t been mandated to use it back then I probably would have preferred to use gcc, since it produced smaller binaries and fewer memory leaks (when run through Purify). So the question is if they weren’t any better than open source back then, why offer their proprietary solution for free now, after the open source movement has picked up a substantial amount of steam. I’d make more sense for Sun to contribute their “optimized” code into gcc…
Linux was pretty rubbish is 1994, what does that mean now? If V10 sucks it might suggest something about V11, but 10 years is a long time in IT.
That your application generated “more” memory leaks using one compiler than in another does not necessirly suggest anything wrong with the compilers – perhaps also there was something wrong with the program, programmer, Purify, and/or some combination of these?
Dear god, please, don’t judge a product from a bad experience 11 years ago; believe me, their compiler product has come ALONG way since Studio version 5 (before that it was Forté Developer).
On the SPARC platform, there is a definate difference, but for Opteron, I am not too sure, but I have a feeling that SUN has done their best to exploit as many features in the Opteron architecture as possible as to sure that their products, compiled with their compiler, have the performance edge over its competitors.
1-2 weeks ago there was a post about something similair there you had to register yourself somehow to get the software, I’m not sure if it was the same product or not. Does anyone know?
I guess I could search
, anyway, the people who are intrested in this might wan’t to search for the other aswell 
Marcellus: And it works! I’ll switch for sure
Second hit on “studio”, http://www.osnews.com/story.php?news_id=12605
Sorry for being lazy.
Anyone care to explain the differences? That one is Java and this one is C?
pretty much, C, Fortran and C++ in fact.