Sun to follow SGI

Posted Apr 28, 2006 14:00 UTC (Fri) by jmansion (guest, #36515)
In reply to: Sun to follow SGI by man_ls
Parent article: Scott McNealy steps down as Sun CEO (Mercury News)

> you confused IBM with Sun

What was confusing? If Sun withdraw their Linux JVM, customers wanting a real JVM can turn to IBM. But I don't think we would except in the short term, even though the IBM JVM is pretty good.

> Linux with Solaris

Well, I'm confused by you! No, Linux and Solaris are both operating systems that can run on x86 in 32 and 64 bit mode, and also which run on SPARC hardware.

Sun publish free software: yes. But why? If it becomes too hard to make revenue, why would they continue?

You say 'Niche, specialty markets are surrending (sic) all the time' but I don't see ATI and nVidia surrendering, and they are hardly niche players. What's your point?

If Sun make Solaris on x86 work better with closed source ATI and nVidia drivers than the Linux kernel developers *are prepared to* then why would Solaris not be *potentially* attractive as a kernel while retaining the same software stack cf Nexenta? (I'm assuming that they fix the other hardware issues they face on generic kit too, of course)

Linux does not have much volume on the desktop. In order to win it against Apple and Microsoft, does it need top notch support for the grahics cards people actually have?

What do you think will happen?
a) nVidia or ATI opens up their technology (and the other follows)
b) the kernel devs give in and stabilise to help nVidia and ATI deliver closed technology
c) Sun catch up to a usable extent with Solaris11 support for crappy whitebox hardware, which has been woeful, *and* they leverage their customer relationship with ATI and nVidia for the Ultra 20 workstation.
d) open graphics hardware magically evolves to compete with ATI and nVidia
e) none of the above: Apple and Microsoft are sitting pretty

The question really is: could Sun achieve c)? If they do, is there a market for the result *on the desktop*? If not, is there a market for any other UNIX on the desktop, except where its sold specifically to run on Apple hardware?

If you don't think Sun will achieve c) because they've shown monumental inability to deliver that sort of thing before, then I'd have to agree with you. I'd like them to though, because I'd like a nice solid UNIX environment with GUI bells and whistles out of the box on my desk without having to pay the Apple Tax, or bothering myself with the ongoing open/closed driver debate.

I don't know why you mention JDS. Who cares? Sun is important for running Sybase and Oracle and Java server applications in financial institutions, not JDS and other pointless forays.

Sun to follow SGI

Posted May 2, 2006 12:54 UTC (Tue) by man_ls (guest, #15091) [Link]

Sun publish free software: yes. But why? If it becomes too hard to make revenue, why would they continue?

Because they make their money selling hardware? And because they want software that runs flawlessly on their machines. And because they need to give their customers what they want.

You say 'Niche, specialty markets are surrending (sic) all the time' but I don't see ATI and nVidia surrendering, and they are hardly niche players. What's your point?

My point is that niche, specialty markets are surrendering all the time. ATI and nVidia are not niche players, so they are not surrendering (or if they do, it has nothing to do with my statement). Let us reformulate it: closed hardware providers tend to disappear while open alternatives flourish. ATI and nVidia are not in that game; they follow a set of public specifications (like VGA, OpenGL and many others) and other companies can play and compete with them, like Intel, SiS... so ATI and nVidia have nothing to do with our little problem.

Hardware providers all tend to go the standard route. If Sun is going to go into the business of making hardware only they can use, like the TCP/IP offload engines you mentioned, then they will have less chances to survive, not more.

ATI and nVidia support is not as important as you picture it, either for Linux or for Solaris. For Linux, if you want to have binary drivers you can install them; they are only really necessary to play games. For Solaris, there is hardly a market on the desktop because nobody needs it. JDS is just an example of why a Solaris desktop is a "pointless foray", as you put it, and ATI and nVidia support is definitely not needed for (in your words) "running Sybase and Oracle and Java server applications". So we may conclude (again) that your mentioning ATI and nVidia was a red herring. Sigh.