Slashdot Mirror
Is IBM on a Strategic Path to Control Java?
nightspd writes "David Berlind of Cnet has written a series of articles over at ZDNet about IBM's return to market dominance, including this one titled When Will IBM Buy Sun? It's a VERY interesting read and a very interesting predition, and poses a question. With the mega-merger of Compaq and Hewlett-Packard going forward, can we expect other possible mega-mergers down the line in the tech arena? Is a IBM buyout of Sun possible and/or viable?"
I wouldn't count on that seeing as just a few days ago IBM reported that it isn't doing as good as they hoped it was. Their income came out much lower then expected.
IBM are a company that got completely screwed over by a jumped up startup, used to sing corporate songs, had a dress code that included garters, and paid their employees by th KLOC.
I think we should hope they continue to die.
As if the FTC/SEC/EU would let that happen... since HP and Compaq effectively decided to self-diminish, the "merger" of the two largest commercial Un*x server companies would probably raise a few eyebrows... something about a Parker Brothers' game, I believe...
"It's tough to be bilingual when you get hit in the head."
Besides the Windows franchise, there are a lot of things that IBM would rather not have repeat themselves. Not buying MS-DOS when it had the chance. Allowing the cloning of PCs.
Had they bought up DOS, someone else would have made an OS and did a better job marketing/monopolizing it. (Microsoft?)
Had they not allowed the cloning of PC's, Apple would still have a chance, or Amiga, or whoever..
IBM's were all over the business market with the XT, but once the clones invaded, they lowered prices, and eliminated all the other competeting architectures.
They basically made Microsoft, at least made their market.
For those who have not already checked it out, IBM's little tank simulation program for teaching java, RoboCode has hit version 1.0
http://www.kubuntu.org/
You know, just because Ziff Davis became the media giant it is because of the PC doesn't mean the world revoles around PCs.
Yes IBM does well with the Thinkpad division, and yes I'm sure there are sour grapes over OS/2, but do you think anyone is crying that they're not selling PCs at a profit of 6 cents per machine? They own Lexmark! They own Lotus! They make a fortune selling AS/400s and RS/6000s and Z/90s (if that's what they're called this week).
There is a small tug of war over Java, no denying that, but why would IBM buy Sun other than for their customers? They are two completely different companies in mindset and direction. You think HP and Compaq will be a difficult merger?
There are also Sun's partners to consider. Larry Ellison is not going to like it if Sun buys IBM, since Oracle ties itself so closely to Java these days, and IBM just bought Informix. I would rather see Oracle and Sun merge and split the software division.
Interesting conjecture on the part of the author, but I think it's pretty unlikely.
"All I ever wanted was to see Larry Wall give Bill Gates a Perl necklace."
http://www.eisenschmidt.org/jweisen
Obviously the writer does not realize how big IBM is already! A lot of those other companies are merging just to compete with IBM as it is right now! IBM is kicking everybody's ass without SUN.
And they'll open-source Java. And everyone will start coding their applications for the java virtual machine, and Microsoft will be like "shit!" and WINE will be like "okay, we can go home" and we'll be like "look, C#, it's not that I don't love you. But I'm not in love with you."
fourth-quarter 2002. You heard it here first!
If IBM buys Sun and applies its marketing 'EXPERTISE', then we're going
to see the demise of yet another product that 'could have been'. Think OS/2...
As much great technology that comes out of IBM, they always screw it up when
it comes to marketing..
..and the new Corporate name? SunBM?
This is pure speculation with no basis in reality. It is bad enough that zdnet rewards writers to fabricate this stuff, why should slashdot repeat it? All this does is reward zdnet by creating more hits for their advertising clients.
Believe nothing -- Buddha
There would be a *huge* culture clash trying to combine these two companies... much more than ever will happen with HPaq.
IBM is a long way off from all white shirts all the time days, I'd suggest that Sun is much more conservative than IBM from a business perspective these days... Sure there are pockets of IBM that are still starched *way* too much, but overall they're quite innovative and nimble.
Sun, while it pushes Java hard, it quite a proprietary company (note that Java is not open source), and IBM on the other hand, is willing to get into about any business that it feels like it can get a foothold in, and see what works out. It's services folks are often implementing all kinds of non-IBM technologies. Sun would *never* do that.
I don't see it working... even if IBM is the acquirer, the culture mishmash would be a disaster.
No man is an island, but Gary is a city in Indiana.
seems to be to just buy other companies so you get bigger in the end. Not really the way it should be IMHO. Shouldn't you try to compete with quality rather than just spend $$$$ or can no one do that against MS?
While I don't think Sun would martyr itself just to challenge Microsoft, it's a good possibility that IBM could try to buy more Java rights or buy the technology outright from Sun, if a merger isn't in the cards.
Java is a innovative (and I use this term judiciously) technology which Microsoft has not been able to successfully clone, copy, or kill, yet. It is Sun's current anchor for relevancy amongst its main competitors. I can't see Sun letting go Java without a lot of compensation or litigation.
Vos teneo officium eram periculosus ut vos recipero is.
Considering how much money AOL/TW lost, and how painful the HP Compaq merger is becoming, I would think that IBM would want to stay away from mergers for a while.
Gee, IBM wants to take over the computer industry... Stop the presses!
I have news for ZDNet... It is the fiduciary duty of every publicly owned corporation to attempt to gain a monopoly in every market it enters. It is not illegal to have a monopoly, just illegal to take advantage of that monopoly to retain and extend dominance.
It should come as a surprise to no one that IBM is attempting to wring profit out of open source. What else to you expect it to do? IBM does not exist to promote free software. It exists to make money, and if free (beer or speech) software is a way to do that, so be it.
And no, IBM will not be buying Sun any time soon. They have plenty of money dedicated to continuing the improvement of the already quite fine pSeries/RS6k boxes. What do they need to buy Sun for, when they have a perfectly good UNIX box already? What a moron. Buying competition at an inflated price simply to put them out of business would be a silly and stupid move.
SirWired
try{
IBM.Try(OS2);
IBM.Try(AllowPCClones);
}catch(Exception Microsoft){
IBM.Buy(Sun.Java);
}
perlgolf: the only place where shorter is better
Microsoft has acquired *many* companies and
*many* products from other companies.
For every problem, there is at least one solution that is simple, neat, and wrong.
Monopolistic business practices are no longer unacceptable.
I had never understood what was so bad about Java not being GPL'ed... Ok it's "propriatary", but Sun has sit with Apache to settle on some points, anybody can submit request to the commity etc etc. Sure, I won't deny they want to make a few bucks out of the Java, particulary on the NAME, licensing etc etc. But all the specs are there, you can write your own compiler/VM, you can give away your code and already a lot of framework/api are free (think jakarta). So what's the problem? I am really all for openess of standards and interoperabillity. Java has open standard, and is free. If you don't like the way Sun license IS Compiler/VM, use/distribute another one! I don't want to flame, I just don't understand....
I'd rather be sailing...
Lexmark is a public company. IBM doesn't own even a substantial part of it.
So, even if IBM managed to "wrest control" of Java (not likely IMHO) from Sun, they (Sun) still lead the market in commercial Unix server sales. I am sure IBM could afford to buy Sun, but I seriously doubt Scott Mcnealy and his cronies would give in to IBM without a fight. Mcnealy SEEMS to dislike IBM almost as much as he despises Microsoft. I think the author of the article is more than a little out of touch with Sun's future in the industry, and the minds that are guiding it.
The facts expressed here belong to all, the opinions to me. The distinction between fact and opinion is yours to decide.
Yes, forget about both guys ideologies. Even Sun hardly has any. It is making Solaris non free and closing up everything, and same is IBM, it wont be long before both of then realise that it will be good to become the M$ of the unix world, then OSS will have to fight on both fronts, and as for oracle I guess they will rty and sqeeze larry ellison too, but my guess is that he wont budge he is too hard.
My Aurora : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o91ZsGwJYyg
FB : https://www.facebook.com/TanveersPhotography
unless IBM releases java under some opensource license I don't see how this would benefit anyone. I also wonder what would happen to solaris or sun's servers after the merger. IBM already has AIX and has been swimming in the Linux lake for quite a while now, and already has a reliable servers division. I don't see the point.
This is not the first time there has been talk about IBM buying Sun.
AIX (IBM's brand of Unix) has always been the red-headed step child of Unix OSes, lagging far behind Solaris and HP/UX in market share.
IBM has always wanted people to develop applications for AIX and usually resorts to paying ISVs huge sums of money to port their apps to AIX.
Buying Sun just makes sense. You get rid of AIX, which isn't that popular (outside of the scientific computing arena) anyway. You can concentrate the Power architecture R&D on its use in the iSeries 400 (AS/400). You can bring the huge resources of IBM's semiconductor business to bear on making SPARC more competitive on a performance basis.
As for IBM's control of Java, who knows? I think they have been coveting Java for quite a long time now. They would kill for an opportunity to co-opt Java to their own devices, but Sun stands in their way.
IBM would rule the commericial Unix computing market, which is why the FTC/EU would never approve the merger.
It's something to think about, but unlikely to happen.
"I'm not a journalist, but I play one on TV."
They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.
I just finished up reading a copy of Jim Carlton's book, Apple, and Sun was right there in the thick of things years ago, looking to possibly buy Apple on several occasions. A very well written book for those of you that like that kind of thing (not just for Apple fans!), and a book that portrayes Scott McNealy as the type that doesn't seem all too likely to sell.
The three major players in the Unix server market are IBM, Sun and HP, with SGI and Compaq(former DEC) and a few others having minor shares. But IBM and Sun have the two largest shares by far. If the two were to combine, this would unbalance the competitive landscape of that industry.
It would be like Coke and Pepsi merging against the tremendous competition of 7-Up and RC Cola. It just ain't gonna happen, the SEC or EU would block it. It's a lot easier to create a natural monopoly by simply selling a better product(ala Microsoft) than to create a monopoly by buying up all of your competitors. Sun should focus their efforts on that instead of wooing IBM.
I don't know about IBM buying Sun, but regarding IBM and Java, something that might interest the Slashdot community is Jikes RVM, a high performance Java implementation written in Java. It's been the basis of some very interesting research, and best of all it's free software.
Sun may have created Java to make money, but that is the purpose of being in business, unless you are a non-profit. If they didn't make money, they wouldn't last long.
Although a merger between Sun and IBM may be problematic, I think if intellegently worked out it would be very successful. Currently, Sun has issues with trying to be a Software and Hardware company. As the Intel processors become more powerful, their hardware division is becomming more exposed. And, while trying to control Java which is probably its future at this point, Microsoft .NET will become a threat to its software division. Sun is basically threatened on 2 fronts.
IBM seems to be at least trying to adapt. Not only do they have a good software division, they are trying to leverage the hardware in using the Intel processor to possibly back themselves away from making their own processors (a very expensive thing to do). Also, in accepting and investing in linux, they position themselves to have their software run on many platforms. Getting Sun/Java would strengthen their position in this aspect.
IBM has been reclaiming control of its destiny since Lou took the reigns a while back. IBM's recent profit warning notwithstanding (who isn't issuing these things right now?), they've been on a road towards success that most other companies can only dream about. They have a strong business and a strong idea of the business that they are in, and I don't currently see them jumping into their longboats to embark on a campaign of Executive Hubris that is threatening the roots of Compaq and HP at this very moment.
Now they are facing a merger between Compaq and HP, and they could probably not be happier with the impending disaster that will arise from it. Sure, the merged company might rival theirs on paper, but such rearward looking statements does little to ensure the financial viability of such a company years down the road. And keen IBM Execs are sure to see this.
I struggle with the article numerous ways, not the least of which is that it is buzzy and hypey and that it utterly disregards the fact that IBM is already a massively dominant force in the industry.
Maybe the fellow is working for Sun, and hopes that some buzz and hype will inflate Sun's stock value and therefore his own.
Like Sun's stock, I ain't buying it.
IBM's Java stuff already works so much better than Sun's. Ever seen the benchmarks of their JVM vs. the original? Plus Jikes, VisualAge, etc. etc.
Why would they buy Sun when they'd have to retrain all their programmers?
Garg
Garg
Alumnus, Xavier's School for Gifted Youngsters
I thought that this article about IBM and open source was much more interesting than the IBM buying Sun article. It shows how masterfully IBM has used open source to make de facto standards out of its versions of web service protocols, like UDDI and SOAP, at least in as far as they apply to Java.
Get with the program, Slashdot. IBM buying Sun has nothing to do with hardware and operating systems, and it has everything to do with web services and Java.
What would this mean to Java? Would the linux-loving Big Blue company open up Java? What about Tomcat and JBoss? Would IBM make WebSphere and Visual Age the ultimate in J2EE enviroments?
It would be interesting to see how IBM would handle Java if it did buy Sun. It almost seems like it'd knock some part of open source (the Java source and the proprietary webcontainer and IDE IBM sells).
Good quote, too many chars. Seriously, the slashdot 120 char limit sucks!
Lagging far behind. Uh I think not. The big three (Solaris, HP/UX, AIX) are damn near head to head afa market share goes. Plus AIX has mucho respect outside the scientific community. It's regarded as a stable and performant OS. The biggest rub against AIX is how it's non "standard" about damn near everything.
IBM acquiring Sun just doesn't make any sense (see my main post).
linux-kernel.tk = goatse, you have been warned.
IBM doesn't need to merge with Sun to be bigger than MS - they already are.
... there is simply no comparison.
They earn more money than MS, they have more employees, located in more countries, sell more products
I'm not going to complain about the way that Sun manages he Java environment, they do a darn good job at involving the community in the process, however, IBM has also done great things for Java and their management of the technology would be as good or better than Suns does.
IBM has a strong loyality to the OS community, I doubt we would ever see their Eclipse platform introducing propriatary stuff into the langauge.
Troy
Would Tremendous Blue buy the SPARC line as well or do they simply want the intellectual property of the software division? Does IBM want to maintain Solaris? Do they want to cross port AIX and Solaris into each other's hardware platform? Linux for both and screw AIX and Solaris? Kill off the SPARC line altogether?
An IBM/Sun merger just doesn't make any sense. IBM has a successful Unix division using a completely different CPU and completely different OS. If Solaris/Sparc had significant advantages OR disadvantages to AIX/Power, then maybe. Don't forget that IBM is absolutely notorious for not likeing one division canabalizing the sales from another. Heck, that's one of the factors that led to the clone market and IBM's unwillingness to innovate in the pc arena for years. So what are they going to do if then acquire Sun. Which platform do you push? What do you say to customers who are trying to buy a "IBM" solution? Nope, just a big mess.
One could also imagine scenerios where Sun customers would jump ship, since Sun has long been viewed as the anti-IBM (young and spritely vs old and lethargic). If IBM bought Sun, how many potential Sun people would look elsewhere (read PC's w/ Windoze/Linux) specifically because they DON'T want to tie themselves to IBM.
The Compaq/DEC merger was fine since Compaq for the most part didn't play in DEC's sandbox. The HP/Compaq merger has a chance (as far as Unix goes) since PA/RISC is moribund and so is Alpha. No such situation here though.
Also, one would have to imagine that the govt would have a VERY close look at any such merger, since the combined companies would own over half the Unix market and the feds are always on IBM's *ss about any type of monopolistic activities.
IBM/Sun - Just say NO.
is a sequel to Blade Runner. Then on all the buildings we can put interactive advertisements for these hypothetical megacorporations. Bam, instant smackdown.
[o]_O
What we want is an open language standard with a simple runtime, something that people can build on without being tied to a single company. That's the way it worked for C, and that was good. Maybe ECMA C# fits the bill, if it can establish a life independent from Microsoft. Let's hope so.
That said, Sun is in the hardware business, and to a much smaller degree the services business. I think that the Java brand is worth something to Sun, but as a Sun stockholder (I also hold IBM), I don't see the Java brand as crucial to their bottom line.
I would like to the the following things change:
- Sun release Java to a sandards body
- the onslought of new Java APIs should stop!
One of the things that I like so well about Common LISP is that it is standardized and basically does not change. Java, at least on the server side, is an awesome tool, to be sure. However, I would like to see Java frozen, except for bug fixes. I find it interesting that the same guy, Guy Steele, has been so important to two languages - Java and Common Lisp. (Actually, he also wrote one of the first Scheme compilers).Anyway, I think that Sun and IBM should not merge in any way, and that Java should be standardized and frozen.
-Mark
Just an excuse to combine their letters and form a company called "Nimbus"
um micorosoft proves you dont need a better product to be a natural monopoly, its called busines strategy. We would be using betamax rather than vhs in the 80's if it were not the case.
You continually keep getting rebutted by youre stupid point. mostly because youre a fanboy, and youre knowledge of enterprise computing other than small business lans is pretty weak.
... "very interesting predition," - Did you mean "Predition" , "Predation" or "Prediction" ... Does this mean SUNW Blue it ?
IBM is hedging their bets, look at the following for full details:
Microsoft ECMA Standards... Hmmm, no wonder the latest Java has the "unsafe" class, perhaps that's one of the idea's Sun borrowed from C#....From the article:
t ories/mai n/0,14179,2860394,00.html
"When asked about the desire to own Java, IBM's Director for eBusiness Standards Strategy Bob Sutor said 'I don't know about owning it, but we'd sure like to see it open sourced.'"
I think the author's point in the article is that IBM needs to influence control over Java to gain equal footing opposite Microsoft -- the type of control that would come through a hostile takeover. The author delves into what such a fantasy takeover would entail as an extended metaphor for what kind of control [he believes] IBM could have were Java to become open sourced or a true open standard.
The author continues with this point (open source could essentially get IBM what it'd get with a buyout) in this article, in the same series:
http://techupdate.zdnet.com/techupdate/s
Very interesting!
It's all 0s and 1s. Or it's not.
This reminds me of a number of problem we had with Java API's supplied by IBM (for instance the ones you can download from their website or the ones supplied with WebSphere).
After simply including the API's on our classpath, the Java VM stopped behaving normally. Execution would suddenly jump from one class to the second(!) line of an exception handler in another class. After removing the API's things returned to normal.
I don't know if IBM is planning to buy Sun, but they certainly have their own ideas about Java.
The new name will be IBSun.....
I thought that I recalled the name David Berlind from somewhere. It was an article I read over at The Register about one of the most clueless half-witted tech articles ever written. The register article is here and the original ZDNet article is here. Both make for very amusing reading.
Doubt it. They're probably still afraid of the feds.
quite alot of them actually, Just recently you can think of visio or great plaines for their forthcoming MS-CRM.
Where did you think excel came from?
you must be a troll, you cant be THAT stupid.
If IBM buys Sun, then expect Sun to go kaput. ...
IBM has a poor record of acquiring companies.
Look at Rolm, Lotus, etc. Every company that
IBM buys goes belly up. It's just impossible
for any normal company to survive within the
massive bureaucracy of IBM. The best people
leave within a year of the acquisition because
they can't deal with the IBM bullshit
Sun and Apple merge.
Think about that for a second.
When someone yells "Stop" or goes limp, or taps out, the fight is over.
One of the most overlooked computer companies on ./ is Fujitsu. They are the second biggest computer company, behind only IBM. They have been in the Unix server market in Japan and Europe for years, and have started in North America with their Primepower SPARC servers. The Primepower 2000 is a very powerful 128 SPARC CPU (SPARC64 GP) Solaris box. Fujitsu owns a good chunk of Sun already (25-30% I think, I have no hard numbers on this). If any body were to buy Sun, its Fujitsu.
Sure IBM makes chips for Sun, so does TI, Motorola and Fujitsu. Everybody makes chips for everybody these days, its the way of business. Infineon does a lot of chips for IBM, Infineon is owned by Siemens, in turn, owned by Fujitsu. Give the market 10 more years, and there will only be 3 computer companies.
Remember one thing. IBM has always been unsuccessful with software. IBM had OS/2, but marketed it as "Warp", a term for something that has been damaged by being bent.
IBM bought Lotus. That was the end of Lotus WordPro and Lotus 123. Have you seen an ad for either of these recently?
Look at the present-day IBM ads on Slashdot and elsewhere. The ads show dorky guys in fake spacesuits.
So, if Sun's success depends on Sun's special software, expect an IBM purchase of Sun to result in Sun's death.
IBM's support of Linux is a very smart move. That way the success of the software is not dependent on the company's low-tech top management.
I think what IBM may be seriously considering is putting up some serious amounts of money to beccome the co-developer of Java with Sun or even outright buy the technology from Sun.
I mean, look at what IBM has done with Java--not only have they produced some great applications written in Java for mainframe and AS/400 systems, but also has proven that IBM's own Java Development Kits are way better than anything Sun has done.
With IBM being at the helm of Java, it could convince Microsoft to support a pure Java implementation again. Despite the fallout over OS/2 I think Microsoft would rather deal with IBM than Sun with their big ego upper management (Scott McNealy and Bill Joy).
Raymond in Mountain View, CA
There would be no advantage whatsoever for Apple in a merger with IBM or anyone else, and it would likely be counterproductive. Apple's culture is too different from the rest of the industry. And IBM has not been successful with hardware on the desktop, nor are they very interested in it.
I understand your desire for competition to Microsoft, but another monopoly is not the answer. It is important that there are smaller companies like Apple that try different things. Computing should not be reduced to a two-party system between AIX and Windows.
Lies about crimes
Clearly this is not the first to make this interesting observation. I have heard it said other places as well; IBM is on a sub death watch.
.NET, Sun has no real way to make or reinforce core product sales thru Java. In fact, Sun as a software services company is very week, so there is no core value there either once Sparc sales take the big dive south.
.NET to leverage itself as an application services business as well as reinforce the sales of it's .NET "client" and "server" platform, by making the language standard but not the platform. This will steel potential revenue directly from IBM.
Consider, how much of a future is there really for selling sparc boxes? Unlike Microsoft with
Now IBM is the one company well positioned to take advantage of Java. If they could gain control of it, they could do the one thing Sun cannot; make it into a real standard. The problem Sun faces is that, unlike Microsoft, which choose to hang their valuable trademark on the "whole" (.NET) rather than C#, Sun trademarked the language rather than Sun NetOne,
Hence, it's painless for Microsoft to make C# a "pseudo" standard, but since Sun licensed and trandemarked on the language itself, they are stuck.
Microsoft can use
So IBM waits. The sparc business dies off, and it can pick up Sun for a mear $100 million or so. Very cheap. Then it can do the one thing Sun can't, and make sure Java is everywhere, that it is free, that everything has it. It doesn't need the revenue from Java licenses the way Sun does and will by then, but it needs to establish a platform not controlled by or redirecting revenue into Microsoft.
So if Sun goes under, the world of enterprise computing might finally be free and everyone else benefits, except Microsoft. Not a bad scenareo. Hey, Scott, do you think you can do the world a favor and pull it off soon?
Of course, if Microsoft manages to outbid IBM for the dying Sun or offer them a bridging "deal" like they did to Apple to get Java out of the marketplace, well, that is the day I leave the industry for good.
they only support jdk 1.2 on Websphere, not exactly cutting edge.
I would say it's no more than 50/50 that this merger actually goes through. In the current post-Enron climate, all allegations of corporate wrongdoing are being taken VERY seriously.
"The question of whether a computer can think is no more interesting than that of whether a submarine can swim" -EWD
Just my 0.02
today is spelling optional day.
the problem is that Java is partly free which is very frustrating. its VERY hard to produce a compiler/VM for a language that changes every sub-version. The minute you take out J2EE 1.2 sun releases J2EE 1.4 with a different syntax for the same operations (non blocking i/o anyone??)
its VERY annoying.
didn't IBm's stock just drop 17billion yesterday ?
_________________________________________________
What will be very interesting is when (if?) IBM brings the POWER4 chip down the line from the p690. This has already happened with the p670. A 1.1GHz or 1.3GHz POWER4 chip in a low-cost, lower-end machine, like a 4 or 8 way server, would put some intense pressure on Sun and stuff like their V880.
The Java angle is also interesting...would IBM need Sun to dominate Java? They already claim to have the largest group of Java developers in the world. They produce their own quality Java compiler and JVM. They have a highly competitive Java application server and framework, and a suite of GUI RAD tools to go with them. They have a strong database server that links in with the app server, and supports Java too. In some respects, IBM's Java position may be stronger than Sun's. Maybe.
Looks like the mainstream (well, ZDNet) has found the slashdot story generator
It's a VERY interesting read and a very interesting predition
Shoudn't that be prediction?
Hey, I'm just trying to improve the quality of the services we are being asked to buy.
The comparisions to Microsoft - unavoidable in any discussion on /. it seems - are very unfair. First, as mentioned in other posts, IBM is a much larger company than Microsoft, so that alone would not be a reason to merge with/buy Sun. Second, IBM has a very different business model.
Microsoft is a consumer product company that has been moving into the corporate world. IBM is a business product company that have tried making consumer products. In fact, apart from Lotus, IBM do not have any products directly competing with Microsoft. Microsoft is trying to get into the high-end mission critical systems, but so far they're mostly found on webservers and on PC clients.
IBM is also a services revenue driven company, with a successful and profitable consulting organisation. IBM recently made Visual Age for Java and also Websphere Studio available for free. That is an indication that they will continue to focus on their Websphere centred approach, trying to sell and implement the large infrastructure solution with WebSphere, MQ Series etc on their own hardware.
Back on topic, Java, that will be the platform of choice for IBM for one main reason: Microsoft won't make any money from it. IBM sell hardware and software that support the use of Java applications. Microsoft has clearly shown it want to control the runtime environment as well, but we'll see who wins that race.
Oh, I can't help quoting you because everything that you said rings true
This clearly suggests that IBM is positioning itself to be Micro$oft's primary competition in the professional sector. MS gained marketshare in the 80s by pushing an OS that ran on cheap hardware (which existed because of IBM's failure to close their standard in time, thereby creating a huge wave of cheap hardware including "IBM Clones" but that's another story). Once this OS had gained ground as a desktop environment, MS integrated server behavior to make WinNT an attractive alternative to small businesses that couldn't afford large Unix systems. All on the same OS that the peons use on their desktops.
.NET. (yes, linux is already great for development with PHP, Perl, etc. but J2EE is still regarded as a more robust OO dev language I guess)
Now it appears that IBM is attempting the same thing with Linux/Java. Linux is a very flexible and robust OS which will run on anything from ASCII White to your grandmother's toaster oven. It runs equally well as a Server or Desktop environment. And the price makes it very attractive to small businesses.
With Java, IBM obtains a high-level development language to compete in the server development arena with
And it can run big accounting software that formerly only ran on Unix boxes. So the cost of the hardware and OS drops allowing companies to spend more on the software they run and the in-house development they do.
Personally, I think it would be great to see what happens when a huge company with massive wads of cash decides to support a free OS and use it as their primary engine for gaining a foothold on microsoft's monopolistic stranglehold.
Then again, we may be talking about replacing one monopoly with another. Java has become every bit as proprietary as any MS language.
just my $0.02
Sounds as though someone's portfolio needed a little stroking. Hrmm, Sun trading at a three-year low. We need to leak a takeover rumour.
illegitimii non ingravare
Please don't ever mention Oracle obtaining Sun again.
Oracle corporation employs programmers which know little-to-nothing nothing at all about the following concepts:
Source Control
Indentation/Formatting
API
Static Linking
Kernels
Filesystems
Debugging
Oracle is a fine database - but it would be worthless if the 5 programmers in the world who understand its source code suddenly died or contracted Alzheimers: which isn't really unlikely considering that they will be getting old long before they can explain that mess to anyone.
Sun saw the light: their days were numbered. Eventually Linux will surpass Solaris in the one remaining area that matters: SMP. After that Sun is in biggo trouble. They are better off grabbing Linux and coaching embrasure of their hardware, Linux software and Java for platform independance. IBM buying them makes sense for IBM because IBM already plays nice with Linux. Oracle buying them will mean that Solaris will become iexorably tangled up with Java and Oracle and turn into a very very nasty mess.
I want to see IBM buy Sun, build a kernel module JVM running at near-compiled speed, and open Java up completely.
Now that would be sweet.
My $0.02 will always be worth more than your â0.02, so
IBM made a decision a couple of years ago to put their future in two technologies: Linux and Java. The benefits were that each technology could be implemented in all of IBM's products from mainframes to PC's (or even watches).
Linux is already paying dividends for IBM. But they are worried about Java, actually Sun's control over it. If Sun screws up Java, it would have disastrous results for IBM. IBM would like to see Java opened up more. And if Sun continues to keep Java from being open, IBM will have to consider buying out Sun for their own survival.
This is just my opinion.
If IBM bought Sun and folded it underneath, that would make IBM pretty much the only serious player in the mid to high-end UNIX server market. Once that happens, the anti-trust lawyers would get pretty eager again and try to take IBM to court. Especially considering that if IBM bought Sun, it would have no interest in the hardware end since IBM makes its own hardware which directly competes with Sun's products. Either Sun's hardware group would get spun back off like they did to Lexmark, or they would simply re-design them as low-end pSeries products with Power processors instead of the Sparcs. Plus, why bother to support Solaris when you make AIX?
.02....
These lawsuits charging IBM of monopolizing a marketplace has happened before (IBM Global Services used to be a subsidiary called ISSC to help thwart anti-trust charges), and with the current Microsoft case I think others (Hitachi, Amdahl, etc.) would prob. like to get in on anti-trust lawsuits against IBM.
Just my
If the Sparc vs Power architecture were not enough, IBM's alliance with Linux is already taking huge bites out of Sun's ass in such places as Ford Motor (engineering), E-Trade, Merrill-Lynch and CSFB and many other good companies.
Sun's culture, reliance on proprietary software (Solaris, Java) and their view that they are competing with the IBM of old (also with proprietary software) will sink Sun by 2004 or so. IBM can pick up the pieces they want in the Chapter 7 proceedings then.
note that Java is not open source
Funny...I wonder what that source I downloaded from Sun was...sure looked like Java. Java might not be GPL, but it *is* open source.
I think what you're referring to is that Java is still a very proprietary entity. The JCP is pretty much a sham for Sun to control the Java specification. Basically, anyone's free to look all they want, just don't touch.
It's a good example to illustrate Stallman's Open Source != Free Software distinction.
"Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos!"
I agree here. Acquiring Sun would be a disater that would kill any value/talent that Sun would bring to IBM other then the rights to Java. McNealy is far too strong willed to let it happen without a fight to the death. I think the likelyhood that BEA and Sun would merge are far greater. I'd put a Sun Oracle merger ahead of IBM also.
I think those who are wishing for IBM to aquire Sun just to make Java "open source" or whatever need to get a clue and think about business and not technology when it comes industry matters like these.
IBM is less a single company than a banner under which a whole group of companies operates. Each division has a different culture and different goals. They sometimes even compete with each other.
IBM is the only company that would make a microprocessor (the PowerPC) and then build desktops using the rival's processors (Intel). This is why it sometimes seems they support Linux, and sometimes not. Sun would be just another division in the mix.
Not that I like the idea of a buyout. Diversity is good. And Sun standing alone is more independent and more likely to act differently.
Lies about crimes
They own Lexmark!
No, they don't. Lexmark is a publicly-traded company with some close business links to IBM.
"Never bullshit a bullshitter" All That Jazz
One thing is clear: this guy (the writer) is clueless about the technical implications. The UK article is most interesting, thanks for the link. But it's really obvious from this piece, too.
Then, I wonder what IBM owning Java instead of Sun would change about the fact that Java sucks, from a performance, a memory and in many people's opinion from a language design standpoint? And will IBM's ownership magically repair Java in all the browsers?
Wouldn't SPARC in your scenario interfere with PowerPC development? The way I see it, IBM would be much better off concentrating on 64bit PowerPC than SPARC.
Was I the only one that saw the hysterically funny unintentional pun in the line "Will IBM Buy Sun? It's a VERY interesting read and a very interesting predition, and poses a question." at the preface of this news item?
Considering the nature of predition in the current state of this industry, I'm laughing at the absolute perfection of this little freudian slip. Personally, I can hardly wait until "MEGACORP" buys the last free standing small company, and we're left with one great big business that owns everyone and everything.
Then of course it'll be every man's moral obligation to burn down the company, and murder the fascist dictators, and once the smoke clears we can start all over again!!! Death to the Slave Holders!!!
Genda Bendte
- Any idea that can be put in a nutshell in all likelihood belongs in one...
SUN developed the architechture but doesn't own the SPARC trademarks etcetera anymore. Check out SPARC International for details.
IBM could take over Java in some sense without having to buy Sun. They already produce a superior JVM for Linux, probably the best out there...
Problem is, Sun still tries to tightly control the specs. And I seriously doubt that JBM would buy out Sun in the next five years.
OK, OK, the articles are over at ZDnet, which should be the first clue (I mean, when was the last time you read an incisive, researched, and intelligent article over there?)
Get this folks: IBM is a SERVICES company. Lou made the right transition in the early 90s: IBM makes its money on selling expertise and consulting, not in pushing hardware. Even the more lucrative hardware divisions (Lexmark, the Mainframe group) pale in compare to the money raked in by IBM Global Services and the other custom software/solutions groups. IBM sells services and knowledge; they incidentally sell hardware to promote the sale of the services, but it's not their primary focus.
Sun, on the other hand, is in the business of pushing boxes. The vast majority of Sun's revenue derives from sales of hardware. Sun has a software division whose purpose it is to promote the sales of hardware. Java is there so that Sun will sell more servers.
IBM has no incentive to buy Sun. IBM already sells a boatload of consulting and services contracts to people who have Sun equipment, so they wouldn't gain much additional revenue by owning Sun. In addition, since IBM makes hardware which competes with Sun's stuff, guess who gets the software contract when a client needs to integrate IBM equipment with Sun? That's right, clients go to IBM, not Sun. If IBM eliminated its UNIX hardware (which, if they acquired Sun, would slowly happen), well, all these nice integration contracts would dry up.
IBM and Sun will never merge - there is absolutely no reason for IBM to be interested in Sun - in fact, they gain MORE by having Sun be a competitor on hardware. Sun and IBM really play in different spaces, and there is little if any synergy or logic behind a merger.
-Erik
There are always four sides to every story: your side, their side, the truth, and what really happened.
Try thinking what will BillG say about it.
The reason Sun can afford owning Java is that they are totally MS-free. As for IBM, they are seriously in bed with BillG because of their PC/PC Servers division (even though they don't really like it), and owning Java will create a lot of strain in this already unhealthy relationship.
Tigers respect lions, elephants and hippos. Maggots respect no one. (C) S. Dovlatov
I'd say the dinosaurs are mating... (check the jargon file)
Guy Steele invented Scheme, actually. Also, while he co-wrote the language specification for Java, he has said that his role was really just documenting the language, not inventing it.
SPARC, Alpha, PA-RISC and MIPS are hardly desktop chips. They don't really compete directly with chips in desktop boxes. IBM divisions really do compete with each other on /everything/, and are pretty antonomous.
Lies about crimes
If there is a buyout, will Java survive as long as OS/2?
Microsoft would still be a pissant-noname software company in New Mexico right now if it hadn't been for IBM. Let's face it: there are only two reasons Microsoft is successful: 1) They got lucky with the license agreement with IBM 2) They have used anti-competitive business practices to wipe out all competition.
I personally believe that any company which grosses more than a billion dollars a year should automatically be forced to split into two separate companies. The benefits of doing this would be tremendous. Acerbic comments to the side - we would not have to deal with monopolies as they would automatically take care of themselves.
David Berlind has yet again displayed his ignorance in the technical world. if he took 2 minutes to research the java matter, he would have found kaffe.org. an open source implimentation of the jvm. kaffe is distributed with linux, which ibm seems to have embraced. i see no reason for ibm not to contribute to or modify kafee to compete with java if ibm felt the need.
I can't believe what I am hearing. "If Sun dies off, computing will be freed." "IBM will make Java free"
Perhaps Java should be open source, but I would much rather see Tomcat and JBoss succeed, that than WebSphere dominate.
IBM is not some kind of philanthropy foundation. It is a for profit company. A large portion of their "$1 Billion investment in Linux" has been spent in marketing budgets so far.
And we should never forget IBM's profit motive was so strong in the 1940s that they knowing sold their "tabulating machines" to the Nazis to assist them in implementing the "final solution".
Seems many people on /. are very short-sighted in criticizing the (theoretical) idea of IBM buying Sun. Firstly, all "culture clash" theories go out the window as David already asserted it would need to be a hostile takeover. This means they would invade to get all the IP and brands, all relevant management would be canned. Now, why would this be so great for IBM?
Sorry kids, but this type of hostile takeover would make perfect sense. IBM would profit immensely (those who question IBM's ability to pull off a successful takeover need to look at Lotus) and would catapult into the top spot in several markets. The author of this article was one smart cookie...
They own Lotus!
I recall that IBM was hoping, at the time, that Lotus Notes would become the defacto directory server and groupware program, and Domino would become the defacto web server.
The article should have thrown the $3B Lotus purchase into the swings IBM took at trying to regain the dominant position in the personal computer market.
Of course, an IBM/Sun Merger would put Lotus 123 into an office package with WordStar...which could give us all flash backs to the early 80s when WS and 123 were the coolest things on the PC.
It's all about platforms.
IBM = Servers + OSes + Database + Development Tools + Middleware
Microsoft = OS + Database + Development Tools + Middleware
HP/Compaq = Servers + OSes + Middleware
Sun = Servers + OS + Development Tools + Middleware
Oracle = Database + ERP Applications
I wouldn't be surprised to see either Sun or HP/Compaq buy Oracle in a few years and become the triumverate with MS and IBM.
It will mean another language that can do everything but one with documentation so arcane that no one will ever use it again.
"time is an illusion, lunchtime even more so"
No.
"Time is an illusion. Lunchtime doubly so."
Remember, Douglas Adams was British, and the British like using the word "doubly."
Computer Science is no more about computers than astronomy is about telescopes. --E. W. Dijkstra
Lexmark was formerly part of IBM. They were IBM's desktop laser printer division and were sold off in 1991 and later taken public.
All movements for social change begin as missions, evolve into businesses, and end up as rackets.
Bill Gates reads Slashdot, then it's a sentiment that bears repeating, yes.
Well, I understand that, but is it not good in a sense that the language/platform evolves? It's certainly hard to catch up, I work with Java/J2EE every days and I find myself to constantly learn new "features" or API. But my guess is that once it is complete, once it does what people wants, it won't change that much anymore. Well, it's just a guess. But my question is, would it not change as much if it was GPL'ed? And if not, would it not hurt Java? Change which are made are necessary. And I don't talk about the logging api, i use Log4J. But the non-blocking IO is an extremely good addition to Java, and it was about time! So, if it was under the GPL, would it evolve and grow as much? Don't misinterpret me, I am all for the GPL when it makes sense. But first, I am for interoperability, not for a license. I don't mind at all if a product is closed source, even if I prefere open sources one, I just want to be able to work with it, to plug to it etc etc. I hate windows not because it is crappy etc etc, I hate it because nothing is open on it! It could be closed source and have public standards, that would be ok for me. Open DirectX and open your api, then it will be much easier for people to code one game/app for say both windows AND Linux. I know MS wont do that, but I think that's what Java is all about. Yes it's propriatary, but it doesn't limit me in my choices as do MS. Everything is not perfet with Sun, but nothing is. Just my 2 cents!
I'd rather be sailing...
Female Prison Rape in NY
"Except for Global Services"
GS is a joke. The only people who do business with them are CIO's who still remember 1973 like it was yesterday.
GS is expensive and incompetent.