Slashdot Mirror


Sun's Last Stand

non writes "Wired has an article by Gary Revlin in the July edition about the current state of affairs at Sun. He attributes half of Sun's problems to failure to recognize the emergence of Linux, and the other half to their failure to make up with Microsoft, and finishes up with a server price comparison. An interesting read."

6 of 553 comments (clear)

  1. Scalability and cost by _Sharp'r_ · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Sun's current "low-end" tactic of trying to replace Linux with Sun on x86 is going to win a lot of converts. There are a lot of applications out there and companies that are used to Solaris and that installed base isn't going to just go away peacefully.

    The biggest argument for converting servers to smaller x86 boxes has been scalability and cost. Linux is a popular way to do that, but many companies have been using various BSD variants as well because they are more comfortable with server vs. desktop oriented software. Sun will do very well in those areas with their new emphasis.

    For a company that wants to keep their big hardware on Solaris for some stuff, it makes a lot of sense to standardize on Solaris for their cheap x86 servers as well.

    --
    The party of stupid and the party of evil get together and do something both stupid and evil, then call it bipartisan.
  2. Re:Sun Doesn't appeal to me by bmj · · Score: 5, Interesting

    well, obviously it's easier for someone to cut their teeth on linux, since anyone can download a distro and install it. not so easy with sun/solaris.

    but, you're still not going to convince a large, lumbering manufacturing company running decidely unsexy applications to switch to linux. i've worked with a number of clients that couldn't switch from solaris even if they wanted to, because their apps just don't exist for linux (think erp/mrp systems).

    plus, if you need lots of processing power, you can certainly set up a cluster of cheap lintel boxes, but why spend the time/money on that when you could just throw an enterprise server in there, and just have it work?

    --
    Whereof we cannot speak, thereof we must be silent. --Ludwig Wittgenstein
  3. What reality do these people live in? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    We have got Suns and Linux machines in the datacenter.

    Where is really matters (big database engines, 4+ CPUs, a lot of external storage) Linux/Intel is just not capable of the task. Sun plainly does not have much competition there. At least not from Linux. HP-UX, AIX -- may be (though not here).

    What are these whacky analysts talking about? What Linux? 8-CPU, 64bit, fibre storage attached and Linux? Have you ever tried it? I have, I know what a pain it is. It DOES NOT FLY. Period.

    What REALLY hurts Sun is Windows on the low end. Not the hardware, not the price, but all these litty-bitty apps, that do not work anywhere but on Windows. Espetially Web apps. All these moronic developers with only Windows experience and mantra "does not work -- reboot it!", "open MS-DOS command prompt window and type c:".

    There is Sun's biggest problem. They are lacking in the software, not the hardware.

  4. Re:Sun Doesn't appeal to me by presearch · · Score: 5, Interesting

    ...because it is what I know.

    You might be doing yourself a disservice, and maybe selling yourself short.
    File structures may be different, configuring stuff in /etc might be moved around,
    but the diff between Solaris (or IRIX, or OS X, or AIX) and Linux isn't any wider
    than variants in Linux distributions. Just running an unfamiliar shell on a Linux
    box could make it seem like a foreign machine if that's not what you're used to.

    What's easiest for you also might be blinding you to choosing the best box for
    the task at hand. I think Solaris tends to have more "torque" under load than
    Linux, OS X is better at interoperability with other systems, and IRIX...well, no comment.

    There's also the factor of uptime and service contract support. If you spend the bucks,
    when a Sun box breaks, they'll get things back in order quickly. Sure you could run
    down to Best Buy and get parts for your Linux box, but some places feel uncomfortable
    with that, as they should.

    Not that I like Sun all that much. They could use some of the modern polish that
    Apple has put into OS X. Sun maintenance and installation feels very dated to me.
    But they do run and run and run and most anything Linux can do, in the server world,
    can be done (often better) with Solaris.

  5. Apple Needs a Little Sun To Grow by adzoox · · Score: 5, Interesting
    I've always thought that an Apple / Sun merger would be a good idea. McNealy and Jobs are friends. Apple could use the Sun "know how to build a quality server" and integrate that into the XServe.

    Apple would also gain Java as an Apple supported program and language. It would help better, faster Java come to Linux and OSX. Java could be more tightly integrated into Quicktime and thus into mobile phones where Apple is implementing it's latest builds of Quicktime.

    --
    Yell & scream & rant & rave... it's no use... you need a shaaaave ~ Bugs Bunny
  6. the problem isn't attracting them -- by bob+dobalina · · Score: 5, Interesting

    -- it's keeping them. I went to work for Sun my first job out of school. Our lab had largely Sun workstations and I really cut my unix teeth with Solaris, so the opportunity to go work for them was huge for me. When I went to work there, only 3 people in my group were over 30.

    I went to interview at their brand new (at the time) Burlington, MA facility and I was simply amazed at the place; the facilities, the people and the atmosphere was so key in my going to work there (as was the salary they offered). I still think it's a great place to work, especially for people in my age group (I'm 25) who grew up getting used to flex time. That I could take a long lunch, play a few rounds of foosball and go to the gym at 4 in the afternoon made me a happy camper.

    The problems began when I started sensing I ought to be moving up (or at least, around) in the company. I started in a position I liked but didn't want to stay in for more than a year or so, and as I started to make pushes to move around I was met with stiff resistance. Management claimed it was because of the economy, but I knew people who moved around and they weren't exactly examples of people who were going to save the company.

    The key to this issue was that while Sun was publicly making overtures towards attracting the younger developers, the first and second level managers were only advertising positions for senior engineers and were being very inflexible in "stretching" the job prereq's for younger engineers. I often think the only reason I got a job in the first place was because I came in during one of the last "conscription"-type expansions the company did before the IT sector did its nosedive.

    To this day they still have that problem; I often consider going back to Sun because the corporate culture is fast moving, fun and flexible, and I doubt I'll find that in any other company of that size. But the jobs and the people they're hiring now are all mid- or senior-level engineers.

    So actually, now that I think about it, maybe it's more apt to say their problem isn't attracting young engineers -- the culture is almost geared towards them (why else would you put foosball tables and a Starbucks in your engineering centers?). The problem is that once they've attracted the young people, they have to get their managers to hire them.

    --

    B

    "I'm payin' taxes, but what am I buyin'?" -- James Brown