Sun Posts Increasing Loss 350
Chromodromic writes "Sun Microsystems posted an increasing loss at a time when many tech firms are beginning to report stable or increasing earnings and stocks are looking up. According to the Wall Street Journal, it looks like Sun, the formidable peddlers of Solaris, Java, and UltraSPARC Fire servers are facing competition from measly ol' Dell and Intel. Even Scott McNealy has been reported to concede in a May 2002 meeting with top execs that Sun has to change, including building up trust with customers that have been put off by McNealy's sometimes controversial personality and Sun's reputed internal disarray which according to Merrill Lynch is indicating that Sun requires a makeover. The Merrill Lynch report was, in fact, particularly scathing and has raised a few Wall Street eyebrows."
Not surprising (Score:5, Interesting)
This was on running code from the profs (so research code), which is mainly what the machines would be used for.
SUN's required fix (Score:5, Insightful)
Today, they are the same company they were 6 years ago. With the same operating system, the same hardware, but without the cool people and in fact without much at all that is still cool. The fact that they haven't changed with the times is exactly the problem.
In order for Sun to fix itself, it needs:
Re:SUN's required fix (Score:2, Funny)
(Adding Emacs should also prevent most users to do so)
Well, the above is symptomatic : the Sun platform is a Rolls : very solid but ergonomically showing its age.
Re:SUN's required fix (Score:4)
A super cool, fast and cheap workstation.
In some ways this would be getting back to Sun's roots.
Recall that prior to the late 1980's when they started to develop SPARC that they relied upon Motorola and its 68000 series processors.
UNIX companies originally thrived because the kernel (BSD, SysV) were easily available, easily portable to whatever was the fastest hardware.
Sun still has great hardware for the big SMP machines that need high data throughput, but its desktop and small server business has gotten eaten by Linux, which is ironic considering how much of UNIX progress has been due to the contributions of Sun.
But the Sun's predicament in finding a new business model is a difficult one. The forces of commoditisation from Linux/x86 are a sea change happening to them (SGI has already suffered a lot from the same forces.)
For the most common purposes that a desktop computer is used these days, a factor of 10 or 100 in CPU speed or many other performance measures doesn't matter. What I see most of the time are web browsers, email clients, word processors and presentation software running on machines that are rarely taxed by those tasks.
The standard workload of the computer needs to be expanded into an area that people find attractive and which requires the kind of special hardware performance and system integration that Sun could deliver for them to reclaim the desktop. That's harder to do now than 10 years ago, with the latest x86 chips so much closer to the best performaning chips than they were. Windows on x86 is Good Enough for most people on today's desktop.
I disagree about "Java is boring". A lot of highly useful and highly profitable lines of business are "boring". Java has already been through the fire of proving itself to be useful and not just some hyped-up vaporous bloatware. Sun should build on Java, in the embedded device market, Wi-Fi. And they should continue to champion useful standards, just like they did with NFS. Customers are likely to view Sun as a nicer player if it is a standards bearer that is generous about opening up. Then, customers will feel more secure that Sun isn't just out to wrap them up in some technology over which dictatorial control and executive fiat could wreak financial havoc. They should follow through completely with Java as a open international standard.
Re:SUN's required fix (Score:2)
To a lot of people speed still does matter. These are the same people that were buying Sun workstations instead of PCs 10 years ago.
Sun's real problem is simple, their machines still cost
Re:SUN's required fix (Score:2)
Re:SUN's required fix (Score:2)
Re:SUN's required fix (Score:2)
Your telling me that the ultra-costly UltraSPARC can compeate vs the hardware that I see now?
Didn't
Re:SUN's required fix (Score:2)
Excuse me, why?
Re:Not surprising (Score:2)
Re:Not surprising (Score:2)
IANAB (B for Bookkeeper), but currently Sun has roughly US$ 1B more in the bank than IBM. Don't know about IBM, but Sun's cash position is still rising quarter after quarter. So it all depends on how you measure. Like with CPU speeds
Re:Not surprising (Score:2)
Re:Not surprising (Score:2)
Now, can any IBM user here on /. give any close numbers? Exactly - it's overprices, underperformed and under-reliable hardware designed specially for the dot-com bubble when no one CTO/CIO/COO cared a shit about a future of his/her startup company and spen
Re:Not surprising (Score:3, Insightful)
Not to excuse Sun's business behavior, but I've done side-by-side comparisons of database jobs on Sun and WinTel gear (with the Window box clocked twice as fast), and the Sun server beat it by a factor of two.
When it came to raw CPU performance, Intel-based systems rocked (though the margin is closing with the higher speed UltraSparc III's). Sun's also done a lot on the pricing side (take a look at the SunFire V240).
Bottom line: I still deploy plenty of Sun servers. And WinTel
Re:Sun Cheaper than Dell anyway (Score:2)
You know how sad that is? Way sad.
Sun SPARCs used to be decent machines. Now they are a sick joke. They're about 3 years behind Intel, as CPU technology goes.
And not only CPU technology. They're invariably 1-2 years behind as memory bandwidth goes. (E.g., they were still having EDO RAM when Intel or AMD boxes had SDRAM, and had SDRAM when the rest of the world had mo
Re:Sun Cheaper than Dell anyway (Score:2)
Apple Dual 2.0 GHz G5 $2,999
Sun Blade 2000 Dual 1.0 GHz UltraSPARC III Cu $13,995
Granted it has an 8MB Cache, but hell you can get 4 Apples for less $$$.
They are behind Fujitsu - SPARC compatible (Score:3, Informative)
Fujitsu PrimePOWER machines run Solaris. And they run significantly faster. Go look at spec.org. Go check out the CPU designs - if you want a SPARC processor that does > 1GHz and has out-of-order execution you don't go Sun, you go Fujitsu. They also have instruction retry done in hardware.
At the low end? There's Dell. And if AMD doesn't die there'll be Opteron servers (and these + Linux l
Re:Sun _not_ Cheaper than Dell anyway (Score:3, Insightful)
Let's take the cheapest v60x.
Sun: 1 Xeon CPU 2.8 GHz, 512 MB RAM, 36 GB SCSI HDD (10K RPM), gigabit ethernet... $2,450
Dell: _exact_ same configuration, without an OS (since I'm gonna install Linux on it too), no network switch included... $1,746
No seriously, check out the Dell PowerEdge 1600SC and set it to 2.8 GHz, "512MB DDR SDRAM,1x512 ", No OS and None in the " Dell PowerConnect Network Switches" category.
Whoops, so Sun is full of s**t again. The Dell is, in fact
Re:Sun _not_ Cheaper than Dell anyway (Score:4, Interesting)
The exact same 1 CPU Dell configuration as a rack mounted server (yes, the PE1750) ... $1,698
Still cheaper than Sun's crap, or? In fact, even cheaper than the desktop configuration.
If you had a reading comprehension above that of a 5 year old you might have been clued into the fact that they are comparing their servers to the Dell poweredge servers. Dell's 1750 server is cheaper than the Sun 60x, but the Sun65x is just several hundred off. I would bet that after corporate discounts the price diff would neg. and if Sun's servers perform better...). I can't stand Slashdot idiots making invalid comparisons.
Ah, a jolly good flame war. Count me in.
So lemme see. You can't even notice that the PE 1750 is even cheaper, and spew stuff like "If takes a lot more engineering(and money) to make a powerful server in a 1U form factor." Well, gee, Dell's price list says the exact opposite.
Or let's talk basic comprehension of numbers and economics. "is just several hundreds off". Well, guess what? The V60x is exactly $752 more expensive, or a whole 44.3% more expensive than the Dell. (752 * 100 / 1698, for the maths impaired.)
The v65x is even more expensive. It's $2,550 for the smallest config. So $852, or 50.2% more expensive than the Dell.
So you're advocating... what? Paying 50% extra for the _exact_ same machine, just to have Sun's logo on it? Lemming.
As for "if Sun's servers perform better...", that's a huge "if". I'd really like to see some benchmarks first. No, seriously. They're can use exactly the same CPU, motherboard and memory as any other Intel server manufacturer can use. So if you want me to believe that just a bit of marketing hocus pocus will make it run faster, you better show some numbers that prove that.
Support mister, support. (Score:2)
If you can't afford the kind of support that Sun provides (no idiot reading an script in the other side of the phone) it is because your business is not worth it.
Re:Support mister, support. (Score:2)
Chris
Re:Sun _not_ Cheaper than Dell anyway (Score:3, Interesting)
Where did you get that idea? 1U form factor servers are about the same price these days. Well, perhaps not from Sun, but in the commodity Intel market.. (dell)
Agreed, 1U has been a commodity for years (Score:2)
Re:Sun _not_ Cheaper than Dell anyway (Score:2)
Sun has relied on a commercial Unix variant for way too long. Less expensive (free) software is doing the same things today that Sun did a few years ago, on less expensive hardware.
Sun should be finding new avenues for income. They are being destroyed by the changing times and the changing needs of companies, if anything. They've got a big name in the server world. How about
Re:Sun _not_ Cheaper than Dell anyway (Score:2)
The SPARC processor is slow, much slower than the Pentium line. Sun cannot possibly afford to spend what it takes to keep up with Intel.
The only way Sun has been able to keep competitive is to throw more porcessors into the same box. That is an old trick and a game that two can (and do) play.
As soon as Linux arrived there was no future for Solaris at the low end. Universitie
Re:-1 Troll (Score:2)
Evil? No.
Yet another has-been? Yes. Most definitely.
Re:Not surprising (Score:2)
Well, that's kind of the point? (Score:2)
For some jobs, (like lots of simple comparisons) the MHz is the single most important factor..
Re:Well, that's kind of the point? (Score:2)
Re:Well, that's kind of the point? (Score:2)
We tend to get our systems fully loaded, but we also get a pretty good discount (from both Intel and *nix vendors).
Further, the backplane on Sun helps out if you're doing any intensive disk activity. Bear in mind, I'm _not_ advocating Sun. At best, they are competive in price/performance under certian circumstances. In reality, for
Re:Well, that's kind of the point? (Score:4)
It's McNealy (Score:2, Interesting)
One, they started with Unix because it was open. Among the unix licensees the scene has the bazaar atmosphere. They should have jumped on Linux.
Also they are a hardware company and not all their hardware is great anymore. The Ultra 10's seem to crash like flies (this mixed metaphor is anecdotal and maybe you think different).
Does Java make them money?
Re:It's McNealy (Score:2)
Sun was once a company that housed a lot of heavy talent. But now the Bill Joy and Ed Zander types have all moved on to other things, and while McNealy remains the public face of Sun, he no longer has the powerhouse of talented inovators to back him up.
Sun still has a lot of valuble IP, and they'd probably be an attractive acquisition tar
Well they deserve it (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Well they deserve it (Score:2)
Not just Linux. Java too, and that's their own fricking invention. The where handed an ungodly amount of positive publicity/hype when Java came out, and then they just seemed to p*ss it away.
And StarOffice? Now, I love OpenOffice and all that, but let's not let that blind ourselves to the fact that Sun's strategy with regards to making a profit off it with StarOffice isn't actually very good.
Re:Well they deserve it (Score:3)
Indeed. What's particularly pathetic is that currently Sun are in an ideal position to make money with StarOffice -- MSOffice remains ridiculously expensive, and SOffice has finally reached a high level of usability. Its fast to start up, imports MS formats perfectly, etc. But they have to do it *now*. If they wait 6 months, OOo's speed problems will go away (the devs have already announced that start up time is going to be a top priority) and then star office will become irrelevant. Linux PCs with OOo wil
Re:Well they deserve it (Score:2)
Re:Well they deserve it (Score:2)
i don't think they're so much pissing it away. i think that it just took a little time for businesses to realize that java wasn't living up to the hype.
but let's not let that blind ourselves to the fact that Sun's strategy with regards to making a profit off it with StarOffice isn't actually very good.
what part of their strategy is failing? they are certainly doing more develop
Re:Well they deserve it (Score:2)
Seems like something they are really, *really* afraid of. Their sponsoring of SCO really removed all the doubt of where Sun stands at the moment.
However, companies can change strategies and once some of the Schwarzes and Scotts are kicked out, we could evidence a friendier, less evil SUNW.
Re:Well they deserve it (Score:2)
Clear signs of multiple personality disorder at Sun's side. While they fear Linux instead of embracing it, they are with the Mozilla and OpenOffice.org projects, which are vitally important for the Open Source movement (and for Sun).
This position makes no sense, and it does not help Sun's case at all. Sun must learn to live with Linux and embrace it
Re:Well they deserve it (Score:2)
It's not a Linux distro. It's a GNU/Linux distro.
Well, that's different.
KFG
Re:Well they deserve it (Score:2)
I'm guessing you are a troll, but anyways...
All I said was that for a company to succeed it must have a consistent strategy. If they say they'll never get involved with linux, and follow that, then that's fine. Or if they feel linux is inevitable and rebrand themselves as a linux company, that's fine too. But if they change their strategy e
Re:Well they deserve it (Score:2)
On
Netcraft confirms it... (Score:2, Funny)
...this joke is dying.
Its SGI over again (Score:2)
R.
Re:Its SGI over again (Score:2)
Re:Its SGI over again (Score:2)
If it's not careful, it will do exactly what it will end up doing? Gee, let's hope they avoid that by doing something different than what they will do.
beleaguered (Score:4, Interesting)
Executives (Score:2)
Rus
Re:beleaguered (Score:2)
> to pull yr company back from the brink:
iSPARCS, now in 5 fruit flavours.
Re:beleaguered (Score:2)
Err, can't quite see that happening.
advertise! not to try and convert new customers, but to your existing core market. "think different" was all about consolidation.
Different target markets. You will find Sun marketing material in professional IT journals, at trade shows etc. They don't, in general advertise to the general public, because only a tiny proportion of the general public are in the position to sign PO's. Brand awareness is being built through corporate spons
One or the Other, not Both! (Score:4, Insightful)
But I'm afraid they'll make up with Microsoft and not us.
Much as they have exhibited a multiple-personality disorder where we are concerned, I'll not forget the good they've done us.
Bruce
Re:One or the Other, not Both! (Score:3, Insightful)
Linux isn't the enemy. Linux is disease and death for Sun.
Look at it this way. Think of Sun as being besieged in a fort by Microsoft. Sun has a good fort. A supply chain that MS hasn't been able to cut. Fresh water wells inside the walls. Allies that occaisionally make harrassing raids against the besiegers.
But cholera breaks out.
You can't ignore it. You
Re:One or the Other, not Both! (Score:2)
But on the same note, while Linux is a disease to Sun, they could certainly spread the pain to Microsoft as well.
It certainly seems to be IBM's approach. They embraced Linux, even though it was eating their AIX sales for lunch. Now IBM is seen as one of the largest
Re:One or the Other, not Both! (Score:4, Interesting)
Pretty wierd attitude if true, when Sun was founded Microsoft was a little itty bitty software house that made most of its money from selling applications software for the Mac. The MSDOS business was about as important as the BIOS industry is today - cash cow with little growth.
The hardware industry has always been subject to the iron law that there is no high end. To find out why read 'the innovator's dilema'. It is much easier to move upmarket than downmarket. Dell know how to build large numbers of machines with tiny margins. It is not a huge step to move from there to building large machines with lots of processors.
The talk about high bandwidth, R&D etc is pretty specious. If Dell wanted to get into the real high end they could buy the same knowledge and expertise for a pitance from SGI which trod the same path Sun is now on five to ten years earlier.
Before very long Sun won't be in the workstation and low cost server market at all. They will continue to make big iron for a while but they will always be under attack from PC makers moving upmarket.
The basic problem that Sun faces is that Intel's annual R&D budget is larger than Sun's market cap. Intel will always have access to a better fab process, better design technology, more people.
Sun's original breakthrough came because it moved to RISC at exactly the right time. At the time CPU designs were usually created by small teams of four or five lead designers and a small number of assistants. The big advantage of RISC was that you optimized the CPU design to the compiler rather than the assembly coder. RISC designs started without any legacy to support, that meant that you could complete your design faster and get to market with a cuting edge fab process a year before CISC rivals.
That advantage is long gone. At this point there is no real difference between designing the next generation SPARC and designing the next generation Pentium. Both are now decades old architectures with mountains of legacy code to support.
Even Intel finds it difficult to keep up with the development of the Pentium. Their problems with Merced are largely due to the fact that the Pentium team have a big enough resouce advantage to overcome their legacy architectural constraints.
Sun is simply playing a poker game that is too rich for its purse.
It's just one personality disorder (Score:2)
Re:One or the Other, not Both! (Score:2)
I guess I have difficulty understanding the hatred the general Linux community displays towards Sun when they have contributed so much in the way of open standards (NFS anyone) and open source software (OpenOffice anyone) to the Linux community.
It seems that they have also been fairly generous with source code, even with Solaris via the Community Source license.
I'd be interested to kn
Re:One or the Other, not Both! (Score:3, Informative)
Personally, I like Sun for their hardware and service. Solaris is not the selling point for me. Mind you I only have a dozen 4-way Suns under my wing, things might differ if I had 64-way E10000s to take care of. I think Sun *must* play the Linux game at this point, critical mass has been reached and the game is now Linux for low and mid ra
Re:One or the Other, not Both! (Score:2)
wworkstation marketshare...
It is not as direct as what you are looking for, but the worse sun does the harder it will be for them to compete in the workstation market.
Unfortunatly my employeer is in the middle of switching all of it's engineers (~10000) to win2000 from solaris.
Hrm... (Score:2)
I mean besides comic relief of course.
Re:Hrm... (Score:2)
Maybe one day a company will build an AMD64/Linux machine that can compete (I won't even bother comparing the OSNeXT desktop machines), but until that day Sun and IBM are kings of the big iron boxes.
Re:Hrm... (Score:2)
Trends aren't the issue. Banks are amongst the richest companies in the world and they like Sun hardware. This provides a good market for Sun. I was at the Manchester (UK) Sun Performance Centre last year - companies represented included a major financial software company, three banks, and a massive telecoms firm. All existing Sun customers, all looking to buy more machines.
I personally don't trust Merrill Lynch (Score:5, Insightful)
I've been talking to a senior financial trader early this year, he said SUN's stock price is sky-rocketed to a point that they have to produce at $0 cost and sells for ten years to make up for the hyped value. Which is, of course, almost impossible.
Until recently I do believe SUN has already stuck one foot into its doom. As I speak we've already ruled out Solaris in several enterprise projects in favour of Linux. The cost of ownership is one factor, and the full-range maintenance supports from IBM, HP and Oracle is indeed a killer.
It's true that(don't flame) Linux has much to catch up with Solaris in enterprise deployment, but the market demand for Linux will only cause Linux to catch up fast and thus SUN's products will soon lose their market competitiveness very soon.
Solaris cost of ownership? It's free! (Score:2)
While you have to pay for the media kit, you can load Solaris on as many machines as you want (as long as they are not SMP). Don't confuse the OS with the maintenance costs for an e10k.
While I have criticised Solaris before [slashdot.org], one would be hard-pressed to find another UNIX98 compliant system for x86. Technically, Solaris wins on x86 in several areas.
Re:I personally don't trust Merrill Lynch (Score:2)
Uh-hu.
5 years ago, price was round $6.
Now, price is around $4.
Yup, that looks like rocketed to me...
(Yeah, they peaked much higher in between, but guess what? So did every other tech stock around.)
Face facts - Sun's stock is not "very over-inflated" these days.
Merrill likes Linux (Score:2)
At the bank where I currently work, lets just say somewhat larger than Merrills, they see a future of Microsoft and Linux. They do not see other Unixes like Solaris, AIX or whatever.
Banking used be very big for Sun and they still do those E10Ks, but I dons't see many
Sad, nothing to laugh or joke about (Score:2)
Now, we can only hope and pray that Linux has gained enough commercial credibility to stand on its own feet (together with AIX and HPUX as 2 other remaining serious representatives in the UNIX world). As for the "big iron", that is almost mainframe class
Re:Sad, nothing to laugh or joke about (Score:2)
Even if UNIX was closed and Windows was open and free I would not touch it.
Windows is ugly and unestetical (from an internal and API point of view), whereas UNIX is elegant and beautiful. That is what matters.
They definitely have problems (Score:4, Interesting)
They really have to decide where they are going, and find a new way to earn money. I think Java is their best bet. I HOPE they will do something like IBM, and jump on the Linux bandwagon as the main platform for Java. Still, finding a steady and large revenue stream from that could be difficult. I suspect they get some from Websphere and the other one (forget what its called), and maybe some from selling courses in Java, but that can't be enough. If they started charging money for using Java I think they would discover that their customer loyalty would evaporate pretty quickly.
I suspect some people here on Slashdot will crow about the problems Sun is going through, but consider that Sun has actually been good for the Open Source world. If it wasn't for the fact that it is a cheap Java platform, Linux would not be as widespread as it is in the business world. Also, they gave us Open Office, and participates and even sponsors a number of Open Source projects [sunsource.net]. Ant, GNOME, Tomcat, GNUlpr, Open Office... Sure, most projects are Java related, but that is understandable and it is still more than most of the big companies have given us.
Well, if they die, it will be interesting to see what happens with Java. Perhaps they will Open Source it completely, if not out of the goodness of their hearts, then at least as a poison pill against Microsoft...
I never know (Score:3, Interesting)
1) Does Sun support x86 for Solaris?
2) Does Sun support Linux on Sparc?
3) Is Linux good, or bad?
4) Why can't you run multple Linux VMs on a single Solaris O/S?
Simple stuff. Basic stuff. But it changes with the hour of the day and the latest "Marketing Announcement" at Sun. Why would I work with Sun as a reseller of anything if I don't know from minute to minute what they want me to pitch?
Sun provides many things that are *good* - such as Java, and Open Office. It just really, truly blows to see this power blown in such an incredible display of marketing ineptitude...
Re:I never know (Score:2)
Yes, but why would you want to, when you can have the real thing on SPARC.
2) Does Sun support Linux on Sparc?
No, why would you want to. Where are the applications? (I mean Enterprise applications, not desktop stuff).
3) Is Linux good, or bad?
Good for the low-end, good for annoying Microsoft.
4) Why can't you run multple Linux VMs on a single Solaris O/S?
Why would you want to. What benefit does that give you over say, linux on blades.
Top tip. Ignore the market
Re:I never know (Score:2)
Yes, but why would you want to, when you can have the real thing on SPARC.
Because x86 outperforms sparc, unless I buy a really expensive piece of hardware with a lot of processors, but if I'm in that market why should I buy from you when I can buy from IBM and get the better thing?
2) Does Sun support Linux on Sparc?
No, why would you want to. Where are the applications? (I mean Enterprise applications, not desktop stuff).
Because I'm the customer and that's what
Re:I never know (Score:2)
Solaris has better resource management than anything this side of MVS (SRM is pretty nice); User-Mode-Linux on top of Solaris would be pretty darn cool.
What does this all mean for Java? (Score:2)
Re:What does this all mean for Java? (Score:2)
The OSS folks should BUY Java! (Score:2)
I'd imagine that Apple, IBM, and the OSS community could produce a JVM for Windows as well.
It's better than M$ buying it just to kill it.
More slashdot wishful thinking (Score:3, Insightful)
http://news.com.com/2009-7339_3-5087245.html?ta
"But even in the face of this barrage, industry veterans say the company is hardly on the verge of collapse."
"Industry veterans say although Sun has warned of a hefty loss and analysts are calling for drastic changes, the company has viable plans for the future."
Dont worry, Sun has a cunning plan.. (Score:2)
You may be aware that the version of Linux you are using has some sections of UNIX code developed by Sun. We are not at liberty to disclose the code just yet, but rest assured you can believe us that this is the case. To continue using Linux you need to pay SUN a runtime license of $699 per user. Please send the aforementioned amount in used notes in a plain brown envolope to:
Darl McBride (no connection with SCO),
New CEO of Sun Microsystems
California
USA
McNealy's real problem (Score:2)
Sun's hardware strategy is increasingly problematic: the cost of incredible computing power is lower than ever. Linux has also taken away a lot of the reliability advantage over Wintel and offers Sun-like
yah (Score:3, Funny)
What are these people smoking?
Sun still have $5.5Bn in cash (Score:3, Interesting)
Interestingly, a high-light of the quarter was Sun's sales of low-end servers - their 1-2 way UltraSPARC systems as well as their low-end x86 systems.
Re:Sun still have $5.5Bn in cash (Score:2)
However, in this case don't have a clue what you are talking about. HP's SuperDome sales have been growing like gangbusters for the past two years.
HP's partitioning and management technology blows away anything Sun has on the market. Above all, HP gives customers what they want - the Integrity SuperDomes can run HP-UX, Windows, Linux and soon OpenVMS - all on the same machine at the same time. That's
Sun: DEC Jr.? (Score:2)
Linux disparagement (Score:2)
Return to core competency (Score:3, Insightful)
I'm sure Sun can turn themselves around (they make _really_ nice hardware, for example) but it will take a return to core competency.
I agree with Merrill Lynch's assessment [yahoo.com] of Sun:
I think the ML analyst has it. In an article I read a while back, McNealy said that Dell wasn't a competitor because they didn't sell a complete solution and only sold systems. He said Dell had a terrific parts-distribution business. Unfortunately, he's missed that Dell's distribution is a major driver of their business, and a key reason Dell is successful today (I'd rate Dell hardware at medium-to-high, for example.)
Three words... (Score:2)
No shit (Score:2)
That said, our school just got a lab full of Sun boxes in the CS building. They replaced a bunch of Linux machines. Everyone was shocked, and no one uses them.
I wanted to use them for some remote desktoppin' using VNC's built in webserver+java applet, and the browser on the sun machines (Netscape 4) didn't even hava java support!
Dear Scott: (Score:3, Funny)
Many people have complained about the experience of using Solaris from the desktop environment [slashdot.org] to the compiler (originally none) to the editor [slashdot.org]. In each case you've chosen to fix the problem by bundling the best-of-breed open source option thereby increasing compatibility while decreasing cost. It's time to go all the way.
The Debian project has been working [debian.org] on abstracting the GNU/ from the Linux by porting the distribution to other kernels. It's time for the Solaris kernel to toss off its ugly Unix wrappings and become the apex of the open source world: GNU/Solaris. With one exception: it shouldn't be free.
PC hardware is largely commodity junk and the Linux kernel still has trouble scaling to massive architectures. Consider this scenario: a small company uses PCs running Linux; as the company grows, so does its server requirements, but all its applications are running on GNU/Linux. This is where Sun steps in: all their applications can be easily, even seamlessly, ported to massive SPARC servers running GNU/Solaris. Both Sun and the open source community concentrate on their strengths, and the customers have an upgrade path: everybody wins!
Or you could stick with your administrator-hostile Unix distribution and your overpriced workstations until Bill and Linus fight over who gets to eat your sweetbread. It's all up to you.
Re:Well at least they are trying (Score:2, Informative)
I think the reason some believe Sun in on SCO's side is because they used some pretty harsh language towards IBM regarding the licensing issues. Check out the Newsforge history, and see for yourself.
Re:Well at least they are trying (Score:2)
What kind of proof would you need, apart from them being one of the two main sponsors of the lawsuit?
What SUN needs: Linux and Python (Score:2, Interesting)
Speaking about Java - just admit that Java has failed. Java in general and EJB specifically are not scalable down, in terms of memory usage, process startup and small project development time. That is bad for really distributed applications. Admit also that a lo
Java "failed"?? (Score:2)
If being the most widely used programming language, and one of the most demanded skills in the software industry is failure, how would you define success?
Re:Java "failed"?? (Score:2)
Re:Java "failed"?? (Score:2)
Re:What SUN needs: Linux and Python (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:What We All Know (Score:2)
No you can't. That only works on stateless protocols with simple client software. Try 'simulating' a payroll, SCM, risk analysis, ERP system - or indeed any other application which does real work on a medium to large data set. It's not possible to achieve high availability on a non-trivial database without using big iron, industrial strength storage arrays, matur
Re:They better do something soon. (Score:2)
Re:We know where Sun is going (Score:2)
Yup, I agree... hmmm.. IBM/Sun vs. Compaq/Digital/HP vs. Dell..
Re:Remember, Linux is a kernel (Score:2)
Re:Sun getting beaten on every front (Score:2)
Linux on the high-end Sparc has never been a good idea from a technical point of view. Solaris and Sparc sell each other. People want Solaris, they buy Sparc hardware. They want Sparc hardware, they don't want to run anything but Solaris on it. Outside the realm of the desktop land, this is how thin