Slashdot Mirror
Sun May Use Opteron Chips
Runnin_Rob writes "CNET Nets.com is reporting that Sun is likely (not definite, but likely) to start using AMD's Opteron in the near future. The article also discusses how Linux is pushing for greater acceptability of Solaris x86 because 'All of the sudden it is OK to (put) something other than Windows.'"
Has anyone heard of commodity motherboards for this chip/chipset? :)
It's great that Sun and AMD are together on this, but I'm itching to build a box myself
that's fine for n-way servers, but the high-end workstation market may benefit from a 64bit cpu.
there are already plenty of dual Itanium 'stations available for $10k and up.
I bet AMD will undercut Intel's price for 64bit CPU by a lot.
Sun is *likely* (*not definite*, *but likely*) to *start* using AMD's Opteron in the *near future* Did an accountant write this?
I don't know if Solaris wants to be Microsoft but, Sun might.
Not at my workplace. We're mostly a Solaris shop, but it's not buying us much. We have to load new boxen chock full of GNU software to make them comfortable to work on.
Much of our software is Java, C or Perl-based. The Solaris JavaVM sucks donkey dicks (it's no better than linux, anyway), we use GCC (not Forte), and our Perl is portable to linux with a single scp.
Solaris buys us performance on machines with more than 16 CPUs. But we don't have any! Anything that needs serious cycles goes on the S/390 or AS/400s.
When the leases come up, it will be interesting to see how many Solaris boxes go out, and linux boxes come in.
Ya, I guess all these guys that finally quit CompUSA and get real tech jobs are seeing a whole new world. Honestly, did they think the entire world was living with the same misconception?
Im not going to go MS bashing, because quite honestly Im pro-MS, but really, thats a truly stupid statement to make, especially if you have worked in real data centers.
Manipulate the moderator system! Mod someone as "overrated" today.
Many pointy hairs are also awakening to the fact that Linux is evolving way faster then any previous OS in history. This realization is forcing many of them to position themselves in order to benefit from Linux. They are starting by replacing all of their low to medium-level extremely expensive UNIX solutions with Linux implementations, and waiting for Linux to overtake UNIX on the top tier. This saves them tons "in the meantime" and prepares them for the eventual replacement of their high-end solutions. Sun has to know that this scenario is inevitable and play along. Pride will only get you but so far.
McNealy has been fighting Linux for far too long, calling it "just another tool". I got news for you, all OS's are tools. Only this tool here can save your ass a ton while doing everything that every other tool promises to do on the low and medium ends.
Right now, Linux is "it" - and it shows no signs of slowing up. Microsoft makes their money off desktops and their office suite. UNIX makes money off stability and power. Stability and power is what the open source developers aim to improve. UNIX beware - evolve or perish, because you're next..
mean that Sun would probably phase out Intel chips in the next 1-2 years in its lower end Linux systems. They will move entirely to AMD for their 32 bit lower end Linux and 64-32 bit mid level systems.
Given that so many companies: Sun, IBM, Dell want to increase their 64 bit x86 offerings, Microsoft *will* have to work double time to speed up their version of 64 bit Windows.
Already 5 varities of Linux, 3 BSD's, IBM's DB2, CA Ingres and Oracle have confirmed firm support for Opteron. Delaying Windows for this segment will mean that as Opteron becomes popular in the coming months, Linux will become the dominant operating system. This will mean a further boost to Linux.
A few months back Sandia National labs signed up to put 10,000 Opteron's in a supercomputer named Red storm which is supposed to become operational in 2004.
Sun is losing market share and fast
= cnet)
. asp)
Oh, really? Who'd you ask to learn this erroneous fact? Maybe your office uber geek or whoever fed you this line of crap can fix your mouse driver, but apparently he's a bit behind on the industry. You (or whoever you're parroting) obviously have no idea what you're talking about.
The latest research showed a surge in Sun's market share between the last quarter of 2001 and the first quarter of 2002.
(http://www.newsfactor.com/perl/story/17758.html)
The overall Unix server market grew 11 percent, from $5.9 billion in the first quarter of 1999 to $6.6 billion in the same period in 2000, according to research firm International Data Corp. Of that, Sun kept the top spot, increasing its share from 28 percent to 32 percent, with revenue of $2.1 billion in the first quarter of 2000.
(http://news.com.com/2100-1001-242350.html?legacy
Oh, maybe you meant internationally -- no wait, that doesn't work either:
Sun Microsystems has increased its market share in the RISC/UNIX server market in India in Q1 2002, according to IDC. Sun's RISC/UNIX server revenue market share in India grew to 48.4% in Q1 of 2002 from the 34.6% achieved in the full year 2001.
(http://www.ciol.com/content/news/repts/102070105
Before you try to complain about the dates, show me more recent data. (I have some, and it's even better for Sun that what you can find on the web right now, but I can't share my Peddie report legally -- go buy your own : http://www.jonpeddie.com/index.shtml ).
Better yet, try to explain to me what Sun does and exactly which market share they are interested in. Knowing the SPARC acronym is a simple google click away -- that demonstrates nothing, but I guess it is getting you a bit of karma; no respect from the clueful, though.
It says a lot when you take the top of the line sparc chip, and put it up against a chip a quarter of the price that kicks its butt.
I'm sorry, what machine kicks a Sun SPARC's butt in the apps they give a damn about? I don't think Sun cares if your Intel box gets more fps in Quake3 than a SPARC. You do realize Sun's are 64-bit machines, right? Do you know what that means? Or why so many corporations with deep pockets care? No, you don't. When's the last time this phantom butt-kicking CPU worked on 16GB of RAM or more?
not every case calls for a 24 cpu machine
And not every garage calls for (or can afford) a Ferrari. Duh. But the really profitable ones do. DO you have any idea what the difference in profit between a 1-CPU (or 2!) server and an enterprise server? No, of course you don't.
Get a clue or STFU.
everything in moderation
You apparently intend your post as a warning to Sun that it should give up on its existing technologies (sparc,solaris) and join what you perceive as the "linux pack" of IBM, HP, etc. But if you look at your own arguments and reconsider them, the case is far from clear that what you suggest is in fact wise.
Consider IBM. Sure, IBM is selling hardware with Linux loaded on it. But they haven't given up on their Power chips as you seem to imply that Sun should its Sparc series. Why aren't you wagging your tongue at IBM for that? And AIX? What of that? IBM certainly hasn't abandonded it, and I wouldn't expect it to any time soon. So all that IBM is really offering is yet another operating system choice, in this case Linux, and it meets your approval. It doesn't necessarily do anything unique there.
And what of HP? You say that HP has proven that they can sell Linux servers in the absence of huge corporate support. What on earth are you talking about? HP is one of the largest computer companies on the planet. If they can't make a go of selling Linux boxes, who can? I will also point out that HP hasn't dumped RISC for X86, but instead went to expensive Itanium, and has a long roadmap for HP/UX. Sure they will sell you a Linux box, but they would prefer to sell you something else.
You assert that Linux is evolving way faster then any previous OS in history. The only reason that is possible is because it has had so far to go to catch up. To catch up it has generally traveled trails blazed by others, and relied upon the kindness of volunteers and donations from kinfolk (JFS,XFS,etc.). Sure Linux is causing the traditional Unix vendors to react and jump a bit.... just like BSD did to AT&T Unix, GNU did to Unix, the various Unix groups and companies did to each other over time. But big unix companies are still here and adapting.
Cost? I've got Sun equipment that cheaper than my Dells, and suits my particular needs better. Cost/performance? Depending upon the day and the metric you've got a better argument. But it doesn't matter how cheap it is, or what the price/performance is if it doesn't cut the mustard. PC and linux aren't even close to being a universal solution. Check back in 3 years after Opteron is well entrenched, Linux gets some more time in the rock polisher, and companies have figured out which direction Linux on X86 is heading: Intel vs AMD. Till then, confusion reigns.
I also wouldn't count on Linux staying cheap. All of the major Linux commercial vendors are putting plans into place or releasing enterprise or professional releases that are both much more expensive, and have a much lower change rate. What else do you expect? Linux companies have been going broke left and right for years, and only a few now are starting to make a profit. There have to be profitable Linux vendors if linux is going to be a commercial success, and that means money, lots more money. And that money will come from their customers for license and support costs. I pay less for Sun support than what is in my budget for Red Hat support. It will be interesting to watch what happens to the Linux marketplace once that becomes more common.
The change rate for commercial linux is starting to drop for the professional releases. This has to happen since if you need something reliable that you are going to bet your business on, you can't afford the overhead of the constant release churning that has marked the Linux world to date. Testing, certification, and quality assurance take time. I wonder how that will effect Linux in the marketplace?
Its kind of ironic, but many of the things that you list as big advantages for Linux are really disadvantages to those with deep pockets. Rapid change is bad. Cheap is irrelevant. Almost as stable isn't stable. Those cost of the application, its implementation and maintenance is king. But the Linux commercial marketplace is heading toward those opportunities. I wonder what the outcome will be?
Linux
If he booted off the 'Install' CD and got mired in Webstart, he had already lost. That appears to be something the Sun engineers tricked up for marketing to keep them safe and out of the way. To install Solaris properly you boot off CD1, which is also bootable, and it gives you a regular unkludged Solaris install.
Stuff like that is detailed in a valuable 'short cut' document from Sun, the wonderful Solaris 80/20 Guide, officially 'Solaris OE Guide for New System Administrators: The 20% of Solaris knowledge that solves 80% of your needs'.
If there is any chance of you ever wanting to explore Solaris, download and archive this document now . It's a real hassle, I just found out, to locate it on the docs.sun website, so bookmark this. It's one hell of a good cribsheet.