Slashdot Mirror


The Faded Sun

jlowery writes "Robert X. Cringely seems to think so. Forget the hardware side: what does this mean to the future of Java? Will there be enough incentive to continue to develop the language for whoever acquires Sun? Or will Java developers have to swallow hard and submit to the whims of the dark overlord? Maybe I'll switch to Mac development, after all."

18 of 416 comments (clear)

  1. Sounds trollish by r6144 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I know Sun is losing money, but this article sounds subjective and trollish all the same. Anyone care to confirm the facts mentioned?

    1. Re:Sounds trollish by Ulve · · Score: 5, Funny

      Yeah. And objectivity is what /. is all about =P

    2. Re:Sounds trollish by stwrtpj · · Score: 5, Informative
      I know Sun is losing money, but this article sounds subjective and trollish all the same. Anyone care to confirm the facts mentioned?

      As a current employee of Sun Microsystems, I can at least clear up one little factoid in the article that every Sun pundit likes to mention for dramatic impact without either understanding or wanting the reader to understand.

      The so-called $ 2 billion loss was a one-time writeoff that had to do with the revaluation of various companies that Sun acquired. People who bother to research their facts rather than simply spit them back verbatim for shock value would see that this is something that many companies do, and is more a sign of the bad economy than necessarily bad management at Sun. Without that write-off, Sun would have made a small profit.

      I can't really comment on the other points in the article, since a lot of it is subjective, and anything I might say on it would be inherently biased by the fact that I work for Sun.

      --
      Karma: Frotzed (mostly due to the Frobozz Magic Karma Company)
  2. Not too much in a worry by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The Java specs are done by the Java comminity process, if Sun goes down (I really hope not and I will be one of the first to jump on their desktop machines) someobody else (possibly IBM) will take over Suns role in the JCP. There is too much investement especially on IBMs side to let it go.

  3. He's right, sorta. by idiotnot · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Sun's just been overtaken by events. If anything, they ought to be an attractive buyout target for somebody (IBM, Apple). Solaris is still a good OS, Java's still a good technology.

    I will say this, I think they're in better shape than SGI -- but that's not saying much.

    I remember awhile back when those $1000 Sun workstations were released. One of the most cogent responses I saw was something to the extent of, four years ago, I'd have one on order already, now I just don't care.

    You can have an amazing *nix workstation on PC hardware. If you want polish and flash, buy a Mac (he says as he types this on the iBook he just bought....)

    1. Re:He's right, sorta. by Billly+Gates · · Score: 5, Interesting
      Not to mention 6-7 years ago you had to buy expensive compilers and desktop environments with your sun. A good c compiler cost 3 grand!

      With Linux/FreeBSD you not only have a unix based operating system for a pc but you have a free intel otpimized c/c++, pascal, fortran, and java compilers as well as free desktop environments that are supperior to CDE that solaris workstations came with.

      How much would all those improvements in 1996 for a sun workstation plus a good quality X-server would cost? Several thousand at least. Linux/BSD distro come with so much software that it makes today's pc's supperior to the old sun's. Even at 1k they would be behind the lintel pc back then unless you had serious bucks.

      Today the sparc version of gcc has improved and is more optimized so the compiler problem is gone unless your in the scientific/engineering community and still need to purchase an expensive compiler. You can download all of the linux based software packages from the linux distro's for Solaris but several years ago these software packages were not their, sucked, and high speed internet connections and large disk space was a problem back then.

      This is how linux started. Its the software. I started Linux back in 98 just because I could not afford the enterpise edition of Visual C++ and the introductory edition was crippled. I only cared about gnu c/c++. c++ was not fully supported in dos/windows with mingwin.

      Being back ontopic what benefit does Solaris have besides the server room? All the innovatiness of old unix is taken place today on Linux and Windows. Sun has been gutted out from the bottum up like some predicted back in the mid to late nineties. However it was predicted NT would do this and not another unix. Since Linux has all the benefits of Unix then Sun is no longer needed.

  4. Re:Java is dying by yjanse · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I don't think it is that abstract though.
    Purely technical, the .NET framework might not be that bad, or even very good.
    The problem is not with the technical side of Microsoft, but the contracts and legal-issues associated with licensing their software.
    Microsoft has a tendency to create contracts and agreements which bind you not only by hands and feet, but which will also "dictate" a predefined Microsoft-approved-certified-blahblah direction.

  5. Market morphology? by Oluseyi · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Perhaps the problem is that the distinctions in the computer market have altered and Sun has no place for its hardware? It used to be that there were servers/mainframes, workstations and then puny PCs. PCs have grown in capability, however, essentially absorbing the workstation definition and market, leaving Sun with little room in that segment. IBM chose to make servers the core of its business, while Microsoft and Intel dominate the PC market.

    For quite a while I've been wondering exactly what Sun is up to. They calmly sat back while people kept repeating the mantra that Java is slow (even though it isn't; JIT-ted code and better GUI techniques improve performance markedly), allowing it to lose mindshare to competing products. Now Microsoft has shipped .NET and the hype machine is in full force - and still Sun has failed, to my knowledge, to respond.

    Even if Cringley's article is wildly inaccurate, it does reflect the concerns and questions of a number of people, particularly those who do not use Java as part of their job. What the hell is Sun doing?

  6. Re:The cost of Solaris by colaboy · · Score: 5, Informative

    You are right about your comments about Solaris, but are mistaken about Sun's stance regarding your other comments. Regarding the executives thinking that the future is in selling hardware alone, you're incorrect - Sun is trying to sell itself as a solutions vendor - not just hardware, but software and services as well. See http://www.sun.com/solutions/ for more info. Regarding your comment saying that Sun is ignoring high-volume low-end side of the market, again this is not correct - sun has introduced the LX50, and 1U rack mount system that runs linux or solaris (x86). See more about that at http://wwws.sun.com/servers/entry/lx50/

    Finally, a word about Robert Cringley - how many times does this guy need to be wrong before the industry starts ignoring him?

  7. Sun setting... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I must agree that Sun is really in trouble. Solaris is not the blame but the hardware price and performance is.

    I work in a semiconductors startup. Two years ago when the company was founded Sun hardware was the default when it came to choosing CAD servers. Sun even had a nice discount program for startups.

    These days we can get a fast Pentium4 or Athlon (running Linux) to do the same work for a lot less $$$. Maintenance is also much cheaper.

    All the big CAD software vendors now support i386 Linux and the platform is stable and FAST!

    In fact, the only reason Sun hardware is still worth keeping around is because it supports large (>4GB) memory. When somebody finds a way around that (AMD Hammer comes to mind) Sun will loose its last asset.

    It's a pitty, cause Sun is a good enigneering company. They invest heavily in research and are a major source of innovation.

    They just can't keep up with the falling prices of that huge i386 market. No one can (not even Intel's own Itanic!)

  8. Tell me Where by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    To get a 100 disk fiber Disk array, connected to a 8 way box. One that doesn't throw a drive or a controller or a cpu every other week. Sun Solaris sucks ass, Debian GNU/Linux is the One True OS, but the hardware works. We have tons of linux boxes, but they all suffer from running on x86 hardware. Whether we buy it part by part and build it ourselves, buy it from Dell or HP/compaq they just fall apart.

    We've got several Dells with RAID drives, 4 CPUs, never a linux crash (ala BSOD), but we get on average 1 major hardware crash every year on EACH machine due to hardware going south.

    We also have similarly equipt sun servers (that suffer from an even higher load). We're talking about 17 SUN 4500's, the ONLY failure over the last four years was due to a fiber controller failing, it was a dual controller, but a firmware mismatch caused the 2nd controller to not come on line properly. 1 outage and it was our fault anyway, if we had upgraded the firmware like we're supposed to it would have never happened.

    Sun might need to get out of the cheapo 1U, $2000 "server" market and clean house Concentrate on selling expensive, quality hardware to people who can afford them. If whatever your sever is doing generates real money buy sun you won't regret it.

  9. Doubtful! by Lysol · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You can't (well you can, but I'd rather drill a hole in my hand) script an enterprise app in PHP. Yah, PHP is great for a scripting language, but it's just that.

    I grow tired of everyone predicting or shouting for one thing over the other - there always has to be just one. Yah, right.

    PHP is great for the non-ASP/*nix programmer. ASP (and I'm choking a little here when I say this) is great for the m$ programmer. C is good. Java is good. Jeeze, they all have their strengths and weaknesses. I'd much rather have a CHOICE when using a particular technology than not.

    The Java VM exists for a reason. Just because PHP doesn't have one doesn't mean much. They're both written in C too - so what!

    In the end, sure the user wants the most responsive app. But I'll say this, get a big project and try to have multiple devlopers script it and it'll probably die on the vine. You can do just as bad of a job with JSP (and believe me, I've seen it) but there are some really great frameworks out there that help fix problems like this.

    Plus, with PHP and the like, they're tied to HTTP. It wouldn't be a very good idea to script a server app in PHP with multiple different types of clients accessing it. It's possible, but I can't see someone writing a Win or Linux native client that accesses a PHP server app. Java works well with the web, but is not build solely for it.

    Plus there are other things, if you wanna compare (I don't know even why I'm doing this). There is no PHP message queueing, no or little 'enterprise features', no 'compile PHP to a console application', no PHP 'enterprise' transactional components, etc. Anyway, anyone who's ever had to really use both knows what I'm talkin about.

    And besides that, for me, *nix and network programming are still like wide open spaces to me. There are still plenty of things to discover out on the Montana plains and I'm not gonna get all bent outta shape about a rock not being a tree and a tree not being a clear blue sky. :)

  10. $2B is the paper loss, $10M operational profit! by Biolo · · Score: 5, Informative
    Sun lost $2 billion last year and will probably lose another $2 billion this year

    What a load of nonescense! On paper yes Sun did come out $2 billion down last year. Want to know why? Four(?) companies it had previously bought which it had to write down its valuations of. Take a look at its accounts, it took a charge of $2.125 billion for "Impairment of goodwill and other intangable assets". Read this to mean "some accountancy stuff that doesn't mean diddly to the companies operations". Thats it, period. It was a brave, forthright financial disclosure it could have put off for a couple of years, or dripped out, but it wanted to do a clear-out, get all the bad news out in a one-er and be able to post figures uncontaminated by that stuff from now on. The actual operations made money, I think it was around $10 million. Granted for a company of its size this isn't much, but this is the figure to look at. They increased cash reserves, its only the companies paper valuation that dropped $2 billion, they didn't actually loose any money. According to the basis of Cringely prediction, Sun continuing on exactly the same path, the market doesn't get any better, etc, etc, in 5 years time it will only have $50 million more in the bank than today. Does someone want to explain to me how this means its going to fold? IANAFA (I am not a financial analyst) but that sounds like bullshit.

    Sun has a huge cash reserve, $1.5 billion, another $1 billion in stocks and short term securities, and other bits and pieces. Add all the assets together, excluding plant, 'intangables' and the like and its got $8.3 billion it could pull together if necessary. Oh, and it has no debt at all, period.

    Cringley strikes me as a very poor journalist, he didn't even take the time to look into the basic details of the recent accounts, or if he did he was incapable of understanding them. Why does anyone bother reading this cretins opinions, he does seem to have a track record of being unnecessarily sensationalist and outstandingly wrong.

    Disclaimer - I work for Sun as an engineer. Whilst I can't say too much on this topic I would say this year is looking pretty good thank you very much. The views expressed here are my personal opinions.

    --
    Stealing a rhinoceros should not be attempted lightly.
  11. Re:I agree; sounds nothing but trollish. by Zeinfeld · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Just to name a few... Billy Joy? James Gosling? John Gage? Aren't they three of greatest leaders in IT (and science in general) in our generation?

    What have they done for the company recently?

    Seriously, Gosling has been involved in a lot of visionary technology before Java, but none of it got anywhere. NeWs was squished by X-Windows. Gage did net day, but what has he done for the company recently? Come to that what does Whitt Diffie do for Sun beyond consume cafe latte?

    Unfortunately there is a major difference between technological firepower and technological leadership. The problem isn't with the technologists, it is with the management. They have simply failled to construct a business plan or environment that can utilise the firepower they have.

    In that sense, Sun invented workstation.

    My DEC Alpha was far superior to anything sun had to offer. Come to that SGI provided better firepower and a slicker integration package. Sun invented the cheap engineering workstation, mainly for the education market. Real engineers used VAXen. Now VMS didn't survive too well but it was the DEC/MIT X-Windows system that defined the workstation interface in the end.

    As the author claims, Sun might be gone; on the other hand, Sun might be ruling the world by then.

    I doubt it. IBM is rulling the commercial java space and OSS is rulling the freeware space. There is not much of a gap between the two.

    The apple/Sun issue is key here. Apple is very well positioned to take huge bites out of Sun's core server market. They simply don't need Sun technology at this point. All they need is a hot processor - which sun notably lacks.

    For Sun to survive it has to start focussing on its business, not Microsoft. Meetings with Sun engineers are painful, you get a 45 minute whinge about Microsoft. Which is pretty sad when they know you are one of Microsoft's closest allies in the industry. Even if Sun makes a billion in the lawsuit they will lose big, the suit is costing them far more than that in lost business and lost opportunities.

    The first step to save Sun is to sack McNealy. Unfortunately Sun does not have a Steve Jobs figure waiting in the wings.

    --
    Looking for an Information Security student project suggestion?
    Try http://dotcrimeManifesto.com/
  12. it is VERY trollish by CrudPuppy · · Score: 5, Informative

    let's start with the facts.

    He says the battle will be lost to cheap stations that use AMD and Intel hardware.

    No sane company at this point is going to put mission critical applications on Intel hardware unless it scales horizontally amazingly well. weblayers - yes. application servers - yes. big databases that are read-write? NO.

    And who is going to provide the 1-hour onsite response time that comes with Sun's Platinum service for those flocking to cheap hardware?

    Sun's legacy servers (4500, 6500, e10k) were pretty amazing, but had some faults (Ecache failures, lack of true power redundancy, etc). But Sun's new line of servers is truly amazing. The 4800, 6800, and e15k all support true partitioning, including FULL separation of power circuitry between partitions! as with the last line, they are very interchangeable with each other. now add solaris, an OS that is stable, and scales extremely well up to 106 processors and 512 GB of RAM in one machine (read again, that is 512 GIGS of RAM). did I mention hot-swappable CPUs? did I mention that Sun's partnership with Hitachi lead to Sun's offering of 75 Terabyte SAN-attached arrays?

    So, Mr. Cringely, who exactly is going to fill this gap for Enterprise servers for mission critical apps if Sun tanks?

    But yet he claims that Sun has "no real technical leadership". how about that. so they dont. most companies with "real technical leadership" sit on the sidelines and daydream about marketing products with this kind of quality.

    I guess if Sun tanked, people could still buy IBM or HP hardware and run (gasp) AIX or HPUX. I've been responsible for AIX in my life, and it's not really pretty. And IBM's linux offering on mainframes seems as absurd to me as spending the money for a twin-turbo porsche and then asking for vinyl seats because you don't like the feel of real leather.

    In a sense, I'm biased because I have built my career around being an expert in Sun hardware, Solaris, Veritas tools, and Perl. But then, this is exactly why I am able to know how big corporations think. CTO's aren't wandering from big UNIX machines for awhile when it comes to anything important...

    --
    A year spent in artificial intelligence is enough to make one believe in God.
    1. Re:it is VERY trollish by haus · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Well Oracle may opt to disagree with you. All you have to do is go to their home page [no link, if you can not find it you need help]. They are pushing running Oracle on Linux in a big way. When it comes to corporate databases there is Oracle and a bunch of companies that no one cares about.

      Or if you would like another example, how about the Enhanced Traffic Management System (ETMS). This is a Air Traffic Control (ATC) system used by the FAA to handle flow control, redirecting traffic around severe weather and other fun things along those lines. Currently the system is running mostly on HP-UX servers. But people have realized that they are paying far to much for what they get, so they have started replacing these HP Servers with cheap Intel boxes running Red Hat. No one seems to care about the fast response time for on-site maintenance, because HP NEVER meets their contracted maintenance time to begin with. [The FAA pays for 4 hour response time on the HP machines and I can not recall a single instance in the last two years that HP has made the time slot at any site in the nation, occasionally taking MULTIPLE DAYS]. With the cheaper boxes you can simple keep extra spares lying around and swap out as needed, still saving large amounts of money.

      Sure SUN can take the lion's share of the really big boxes, but there is not enough demand to justify a company anywhere near SUN's current size. And even that will not go uncontested, IBM wants their share of that market so does HP. But if that is all that is left for SUN, they will starve to death.

      Although I wish them the best, I do agree that they need to do something and do it quickly.

    2. Re:it is VERY trollish by CrudPuppy · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Sure, oracle isn't dumb. They are pushing Oracle on Linux because they realize that Linux is a segment they cannot afford to ignore at this point.

      You are certainly correct that Sun needs to change, I wasn't even trying to argue that. Linux is undeniably poised to overtake much of the UNIX market share in the next 5 years.

      My point about big applications on cheap hardware may have been too vague.

      Any application that can be easily spread across lots of machines without the use of expensive options or 3rd party software (oracle parallel server, veritas cluster, etc) is a good candidate for linux on cheap hardware.

      The weblayer at my company is a perfect example. I can buy 10+ of my 2-way Intel machines for the price of one big Sun box. So we buy more than we need, and toss em into the spare parts bin when they fail. sit those puppies behind a load director and you're set.

      The database layer is another story entirely. They require a large amount of horsepower, and the whole operation dies if they go down. This means it *must* sit on big, reliable hardware with a support contract

      --
      A year spent in artificial intelligence is enough to make one believe in God.
    3. Re:it is VERY trollish by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful
      And who is going to provide the 1-hour onsite response time that comes with Sun's Platinum service for those flocking to cheap hardware?


      Who cares?

      I believe that one of the causes of the dot-com implosion is that many companies discovered that their customers will actually put up with pretty crappy service. And therefore the market for co-location services and monster data centers never actually appeared and companies like Exodus were doomed. 24/7 uptime just isn't needed by that many companies.

      Why pay big bucks for hardware support on a box from Sun when you can buy 5 cheapo boxes for the same price and have your own in-house monkeys do the board swapping within one hour rather than waiting for board-swapping monkeys from Sun that might not actually show up within an hour anyway?