Slashdot Mirror


Most Sun Employees Own Macs

An anonymous user writes, "Most Sun Microsystems employees use Apple when they're not at work. This leaves Jonathan Schwartz, executive vice-president of Sun's software group, hinting at a Sun/Apple partnership." This comes on the heels of Pat Gelsinger, senior VP and chief technology officer of Intel, claiming Apple makes the wrong decisions about CPUs. So it figures Sun, who Intel likely thinks wouldn't know a good processor if it came up and -- um, processed something, would like Macs.

164 comments

  1. Sun Partnership? by val1s · · Score: 0, Troll

    Are they so convinced that OS X is the future that they are giving up on Solaris and Licensing OS X? :)

    1. Re:Sun Partnership? by jellomizer · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Are they so convinced that OS X is the future that they are giving up on Solaris and Licensing OS X? :)

      These are two different OS's with two different purposes. OS X is more of a desktop OS and a small server. While Solaris is almost entirely a Server OS designed to run on the big machines and it is ok for a workstation usage. Basically most Sun employees don't like the Intel platform and rather have something different. Also when they are home they are also tired of hacking computers and just want it to work and also have their command line interface.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    2. Re:Sun Partnership? by 0x0d0a · · Score: 0, Troll

      I'd suspect it's just because Solaris for x86 really sucks and most folks probably don't want to buy a SPARC for home use.

    3. Re:Sun Partnership? by defunc · · Score: 1

      As a serious question, what were they running before OSX came along (known for its stunning UI and yet give its users access to the CLI) ?

      --
      .defuncrc
  2. Oo! Oo! Apple and Sun are merging!!! by revans · · Score: 1, Funny

    I just wannted to be the first to say it on this thread. ;-)

    1. Re:Oo! Oo! Apple and Sun are merging!!! by stanley+matthews · · Score: 1

      Hmm. Interesting. July 26th Scott McNealy http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,3959,1200060,00.as p But now you also offer Linux. We offer Red Hat, and you'll see us offering another alternative very shortly.

    2. Re:Oo! Oo! Apple and Sun are merging!!! by ColdGrits · · Score: 1

      Yes, but the "other" to which he refers is Sun's new SUSe offering.

      --
      People should not be afraid of their governments - Governments should be afraid of their people.
    3. Re:Oo! Oo! Apple and Sun are merging!!! by cait56 · · Score: 1

      The companies have complimentary product lines. Of course you would have to figure out who would run a merged company in a way that took advantage of the strengths of each.

      That isn't a trivial issue.

  3. Quel Suprise! by darkov · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Apple make personal computers and Sun make mostly server machines. It's not really that suprising.

    1. Re:Quel Suprise! by larry+bagina · · Score: 1

      Apple also makes the rack mounted X-Serve, and has OS-X Server.

      --
      Do you even lift?

      These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.

    2. Re:Quel Suprise! by jdray · · Score: 1

      Yes, but where are you going to find an Apple server that scalable to 64 processors? I think Apple has a lot of headroom in their capability, but a deal with Sun would sure bootstrap them.

      OTOH, if they come out with a quad-processor G5 machine (rumor started just this minute), they would be well on the way to showing capability in the enterprise server market. Considering the small relative marketshare for large Sun servers, Apple probably wouldn't need them.

      --
      The Spoon
      Updated 6/28/2011
    3. Re:Quel Suprise! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, but where are you going to find an Apple server that scalable to 64 processors?

      In a lab in Cupertino.

      Just look at the block diagram of a G5 and fill in a few blanks.

      But I've said too much already. ;-)

    4. Re:Quel Suprise! by 0x0d0a · · Score: 1

      Which you can be quite sure is not what the Sun employees we're talking about own.

    5. Re:Quel Suprise! by AHumbleOpinion · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Apple make personal computers and Sun make mostly server machines. It's not really that suprising

      Sun makes mostly server machines because Linux PCs have taken away their workstation market. Between Linux's cost and Apple's ease of use Sun has little chance of retaking this market.

    6. Re:Quel Suprise! by kommakazi · · Score: 2, Funny

      Sorry to burst your bubble but I started the quad processor G5 rumor many months ago! I'm going to go hang myself now.

    7. Re:Quel Suprise! by TheGreek · · Score: 1

      Sorry to burst your bubble but I started the quad processor G5 rumor many months ago!

      Sorry to burst your bubble, but Ryan Meader started it three years ago.

    8. Re:Quel Suprise! by kommakazi · · Score: 1

      *POP* d'oh!

    9. Re:Quel Suprise! by good+soldier+svejk · · Score: 1

      I wouldn't be at all surprised to see them release a PP970 based blade system. There are two vendors already doing this.

      --
      It is cowardly, and a betrayal of whatever it means to be a Jew, to act as a white man

      -James Baldwin
  4. Does this mean... by ProfessionalCookie · · Score: 5, Funny

    Does this mean we're looking forward to a new brand of "Dried Apple" computers!?!!?
    >
    ...ok that was a really really bad joke, fortunatly this is slashdot so it's sure to get modded up. PS Can you find the misspelling?

    1. Re:Does this mean... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      fortunately

    2. Re:Does this mean... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You blew it. If you point out that the joke is bad and will get modded up anyway, it doesn't work. If you just say it's bad, it will work. Try again.

    3. Re:Does this mean... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I digress.
      Acknowledging it is a bad joke which will invariably get it modded up and then parelleling it with the mispelling joke enhances the humor factor.
      I feel it works very well using the two-joke system to enhance it. I give it a Funny value of 3.

    4. Re:Does this mean... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Piece of cake. - Unless you are a /. user!

      Dried should be Dryed.

      Sincerely, Miss Crabopple

    5. Re:Does this mean... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      nope - try again

  5. blast form the past by larry+bagina · · Score: 1

    4-5 years ago, there were rumors of Sun buying Apple. But then again, there were also rumors of IBM buying Apple.

    --
    Do you even lift?

    These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.

    1. Re:blast form the past by norwoodites · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Even more blast from the past the co-operation between Sun and NeXT for OpenSTEP and such.

    2. Re:blast form the past by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Whaddya get when you merge Sun with Apple? Snapple.

      Whaddya get when you merge IBM with Apple? IBM.

    3. Re:blast form the past by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Actually, that's rather telling. NeXT handed Sun a real winner: OpenStep (now Cocoa). It could have revolutionized Sun as a company. What did Sun do with it? Dump it in favor of Motif.

      Sun has in its posession the source code to the elegant Lighthouse Design application suite, including word processors, first-rate (Improv-style) spreadsheets, graphics programs, etc., all written for NeXTSTEP, and all portable to Cocoa (and GNUStep, and Sun's own non-purchasable OpenStep implementation, ahem) with some elbow grease. What have they done with it? Nothing. They won't sell the source base. They won't open the source. They won't convert the code and sell product. It's languishing on some shelf somewhere. Instead they bought and distributed the source for crap like StarOffice.

      Why hasn't this company gone under yet?

    4. Re:blast form the past by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      What did Sun do with it? Dump it in favor of Motif

      No, they dumped it in favor of Java (which has very similar goals as OpenStep, after all).

      Sun bought Lighthouse Design mostly as a favor after they changed direction on OpenStep and fucked certain people. Unfortunately, changing the strategy back will not unfuck those people, nor will it help Sun in any way. (although, I'd agree about StarOffice).

    5. Re:blast form the past by larry+bagina · · Score: 1
      I think the GNUStep folks were trying to get the lighthouse source code released, but with little progress.

      if oyu look hard enough, you can find a beta-release of Sun's OpenStep (Sparc only, though).

      --
      Do you even lift?

      These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.

    6. Re:blast form the past by fm6 · · Score: 1

      And now that Sun's market cap is back down in the 10 billion range, maybe Apple will buy Sun!

  6. More Interesting ... by kalidasa · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Is their take on SCO:

    Jonathan Schwartz, executive vice-president of Sun's software group, also said that a broad software-license deal struck with AT&T in the late 1990s allowed the company to inject whatever code it wanted into the Linux kernel. Schwartz pledged to indemnify its customers against any lawsuits by the SCO Group or another supplier.

    I'm hoping that the author of the piece confused Linux and UNIX, and not Jonathan Schwartz, as I don't see how a deal struck with AT&T could be relevant to Linux, which isn't AT&T's IP.

    I'm also wondering what form the "indemnifying" would take. Maybe just a guarantee that if Mad Hatter licenses are invalidated by the SCO lawsuit, Sun will provide an alternative UNIX operating system?

    1. Re:More Interesting ... by pmz · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I'm hoping that the author of the piece confused Linux and UNIX...

      I think the confusion may have been "late 1990s" versus early 1990s. From what I've read, Sun did outlay a buttload of money for an above-average UNIX license, where they can stand behind their claim to imdemnify Sun customers. However, my take on the whole thing was that Solaris customers and not necessarily Linux customers would be protected. But the mention of injecting code into the Linux kernel has confused me, again, on the whole matter.

      Additionally, it seems that MadHatter is more of a software stack instead of a whole platform, where MadHatter can be run on top of Solaris as well as Linux. This may mean that MadHatter customers shouldn't care what OS they get--what they are actually buying is the MadHatter environment. This could be another hedge against SCO.

    2. Re:More Interesting ... by Otter · · Score: 4, Informative
      Seemed straightforward enough -- Sun licensed the right to use Unix code from AT&T, before SCO bought it. They're asserting that their new Linux-based products are therefore OK for any Unix code that might be in there.

      No idea on the legal merits of that argument, but I don't get what your objection is.

    3. Re:More Interesting ... by kalidasa · · Score: 2, Interesting

      but I don't get what your objection is.

      The IP on Linux the kernel isn't owned by SCO, it's owned by Linus Torvalds and the contributing developers to the Linux kernel as licensed under the GPL. SCO's license doesn't cover what Sun can do with the GPL. So unless they are saying that SCO's license to Sun permits Sun to add SCO code to Linux and release that code under the GPL, Sun would have to release the product with SCO code in it under a different license, which Linux won't allow. Now if it is true that SCO's license to Sun makes it ok for them to add SCO code to Linux and rerelease under the GPL, then that code is GPLed the moment Sun releases it and anyone - including IBM - can use it. So either SCO gave away the store to Sun, or Sun - or the author of the piece - is confused about what is and isn't Linux and what the GPL stands for.

    4. Re:More Interesting ... by 2nd+Post! · · Score: 2, Informative

      You keep using the name SCO, but I thought your first post (haven't finished reading the article) mentions that Sun licensed from AT&T *before* SCO bought the rights...

      So why does SCO even matter in this arrangement, other than the enforcer of the rights that Sun bought from AT&T?

      AT&T gives Sun the right to the code
      Sun injects said code into Linux *or* has the right to
      SCO buys rights to code/IP outright
      SCO claims SCO's newfound IP has contaminated Linux and demands reparations
      Sun contends that *their* Linux product is free of contamination by definition, because they have the right to 'enhance' (rather than contaminate) Linux with AT&T code, making them immune from SCO's claim

      On the other hand, there *is* the possibility that Linux isn't contaminated at all.

    5. Re:More Interesting ... by spitzak · · Score: 1
      The point he was making is that if Sun was allowed to "enhance" the code with the AT&T code, and they were allowed to distribute the result, then they must have distributed the result under the GPL if they did not violate the IP rights of all the other contributors to the Linux kernel. This would mean this valuable code is now available under the GPL and can be used in any other copies of Linux, including ones from IBM and even from SCO.

      I was going to say this is unlikely, but in fact it is quite possible that Sun did everything legally, and for the benifit of all parties. AT&T got money for the rights and may still retain the rights for use of the code in non-GPL products. Sun paid money for the rights to use the code in their products, and by adding to the Linux code insured compatability and extensive testing of this code, and avoided the expense of supporting two different code sets. Most likely both AT&T and Sun got some other code that is valuable that did not go into Linux. And of course Linux got some useful code.

    6. Re:More Interesting ... by Alan+Partridge · · Score: 1

      a buttload?

      --
      That was classic intercourse!
    7. Re:More Interesting ... by kalidasa · · Score: 1

      Actually, I was forgetting that I was talking about AT&T. However, that is the point I was trying to make, and I'm glad that it got across despite myerror. Thanks.

    8. Re:More Interesting ... by pmz · · Score: 1


      a buttload?

      It's a perfectly cromulent word.

  7. Yeah, right by DogIsMyCoprocessor · · Score: 3, Insightful
    So it figures Sun, who Intel likely thinks wouldn't know a good processor if it came up and -- um, processed something, would like Macs.

    Quiz questions -

    Which vendor, Sun or Intel, had a 64-bit processor first? By how many years?

    Measuring a "good processor" isn't just about speed.

    --

    "And this is my boy, Sherman. Speak, Sherman." "Hello." "Good boy."

    1. Re:Yeah, right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      intel makes more than just x86s. They had 64-bit i860s and ARMs before SUN had 64-bit sparcs.

    2. Re:Yeah, right by pmz · · Score: 5, Informative

      Which vendor, Sun or Intel, had a 64-bit processor first?

      DEC? SGI?

    3. Re:Yeah, right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Technically, MIPS. The 64-bit R4000 core was first demonstrated in 1991.

    4. Re:Yeah, right by Wesley+Felter · · Score: 1

      If I ever need to go back in time and buy a processor, I'll keep that in mind. Meanwhile here in the present Sun is pretty much dead last in performance and they have no advantage in features either.

    5. Re:Yeah, right by NanoGator · · Score: 1

      "Which vendor, Sun or Intel, had a 64-bit processor first? By how many years?"

      Atari!

      --
      "Derp de derp."
    6. Re:Yeah, right by Alan+Partridge · · Score: 1

      nope

      --
      That was classic intercourse!
  8. Statement pulled out of someone's ass? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    Where the hell did they get the statement that "most Sun employees use macs at home"?

    Other than myself, I only know of three other employees that use a mac. One uses his as his primary work machine (other than his Solaris boxes), one has a powerbook that he uses as his portable and is probably not his primary machine, the other - I don't know about him and myself, I just use my powerbook here and there as a portable solution. I wouldn't use a mac as my main or desktop machine. I just wanted a sturdy, simple, reliable laptop and Mac seemed a good choice. Makes it simple for me to access almost any network environment and most services within seconds as opposed to all the trouble a windows box would give me.

    But yeah... I would say that "most employees" is incredibly off base. Not only that, but of those employees that *do* use Macs at home, few probably use them as their main machines.

    Maybe what they really meant was "most Sun *EXECUTIVES* run macs at home"?

    1. Re:Statement pulled out of someone's ass? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      Funny, the Sun-internal Macintosh users mailing list is very active often with more than 100 posts per day.

    2. Re:Statement pulled out of someone's ass? by Transfan76 · · Score: 2, Funny

      And about 50% of those posts we're bashing Microsoft. So it's kind of a slashdot friendly place

    3. Re:Statement pulled out of someone's ass? by Sepper · · Score: 5, Funny

      To quote Scott Adams on this:
      "Analysis comes from 2 words:
      -Anal
      and
      -Isis which is a latin word meaning 'to pull numbers from' "

      Or something like that... I don't have the book near me. (I'm working right now... )

      --
      I live in Soviet Canuckistan you insensitive clod!
    4. Re:Statement pulled out of someone's ass? by MohammedNiyalSayeed · · Score: 2, Funny

      Except you all have jobs, and probably don't live in your mothers' basements...

      --
      /*- Mohammed -*/
    5. Re:Statement pulled out of someone's ass? by valkraider · · Score: 3, Funny

      After 12 years of supporting myself, and a family - I am more than eager to return to mom's basement. It wasn't such a bad place after all...

    6. Re:Statement pulled out of someone's ass? by Apiakun · · Score: 1

      From the article: As for the Apple connection, Schwartz said that the practically every Sun employee owns an Apple desktop at home. "We would love to partner with Apple,' he said. "They're everyone's favorite company, and iTunes is really cool."

    7. Re:Statement pulled out of someone's ass? by NanoGator · · Score: 2, Funny

      "Funny, the Sun-internal Macintosh users mailing list is very active often with more than 100 posts per day."

      That doesn't say a whole lot. Ever heard a Mac fanatic ramble?

      --
      "Derp de derp."
    8. Re:Statement pulled out of someone's ass? by Lars+T. · · Score: 1

      So you think the Wintrolls at Sun constantly write "MAC sucks" messages to the list?

      --

      Lars T.

      To the guy who modded me down from perfect to terrible Karma - Apple haters still suck

    9. Re:Statement pulled out of someone's ass? by adam872 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      We have had at least a couple of Sun representatives come and present to us with PowerBook's, so I wouldn't doubt that plenty of Sun employees have Apple systems. Makes sense when you think about it: they're not running Windows and have Unix underneath. I would think they'd integrate pretty nicely with the Sun internal systems and allow them to do cool things like run Keynote, and Photoshop (for the marketing group) etc etc

      If only OpenOffice/Staroffice would run in Aqua mode under OSX, everything would be just perfect :)

    10. Re:Statement pulled out of someone's ass? by Anonvmous+Coward · · Score: 1

      "So you think the Wintrolls at Sun constantly write "MAC sucks" messages to the list"

      I personally don't. That's so... 1995.

    11. Re:Statement pulled out of someone's ass? by crmartin · · Score: 4, Informative

      When I worke at Sun (a couple of eyars ago now) it was absolutely forbidden to hook Windows boxes to Sun's network.

      (Unless, of course, you had permission: we were in consulting, our customers wanted Office documents, wqe eventually got permission to dual-boot our laptops with Solaris and Windows. Which meant, in practice, most people used Windows.)

      In any case, it does not require special permission to put a Mac on the internal network, so I see real advantages there. It's entirely possible Macs are more and more widely used within Sun.

      (Another point: James Gosling said he was going Mac some years ago because he didn't want to cope with MS's license policy, and I wouldn't be surprised if many followed his lead.)

    12. Re:Statement pulled out of someone's ass? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Indeed. However, when I'm rich I'm going to buy a Powerbook to replace my Palm m100.

    13. Re:Statement pulled out of someone's ass? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      when I'm rich I'm going to buy a Powerbook to replace my Palm m100.

      That's nice. When I'm rich I'm going to buy a girl to replace my palm.

  9. Not much of a hint by adso · · Score: 1

    "We would love to partner with Apple,' he said. "They're everyone's favorite company, and iTunes is really cool."

    That sounds less like a hint of a possible Apple/Sun alliance and more like fanboy-ish daydreaming.

  10. I know why... by josepha48 · · Score: 1
    ... its so they can run quicktime and not have to screw with windows.

    Truth is it would give them the ability to do all the java and most of the UNIX stuff they do on their Sun boxes at work, only with BSD, yet still allow them to do things like watch quicktime and use IE or Safari. Besides Mac has a way better gui than Sun.

    --

    Only 'flamers' flame!
    Does slashdot hate my posts?

    1. Re:I know why... by .@. · · Score: 1, Funny

      No, truth is that there's a policy that disallows connecting Windows machines to the Sun network from home.

      --
      .@.
    2. Re:I know why... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not strictly true, although there are some fairly tight rules about doing so. I know quite a few people who connect from home using PCs.

    3. Re:I know why... by 4of12 · · Score: 1

      policy that disallows connecting Windows machines to the Sun network from home.

      Not at all surprising.

      Most internal corporate networks are, compared to folks that endure the raw net, relatively relaxed (years old vulnerabilities available) behind their firewalls.

      They sure as hell don't want Joe Manager logging in from his home Windows box onto the internal network right after his teenage daughter has been viewing email attachments from all her new "friends".

      --
      "Provided by the management for your protection."
    4. Re:I know why... by I8TheWorm · · Score: 1

      Wouldn't that only apply if she were to hit a Windows network with a Windows virus?

      Maybe everyone's corporate policy should be to force users at home to VPN only with a different OS than the company's servers.

      --
      Saying Android is a family of phones is akin to saying Linux is a family of PCs.
  11. Gelsinger's vision for future technology? by madcoder47 · · Score: 4, Funny
    Q. Does the word "profit" play in what technologies you push in Intel?

    A. If technology can do it we will embrace it, even if it means eating our own children.


    Apparently Intel follows an all-to-common business model, which has been scientifically proven to inevitably lead to cannibalism:

    1. Eat children
    2. ? (something about processors)
    3. Profit!
    1. Re:Gelsinger's vision for future technology? by Llywelyn · · Score: 2, Funny

      >1. Eat children
      >2. ? (something about processors)
      >3. Profit!

      You know you have been staring at code too long when you read the first line as "Eat chicken".

      Sigh.

      --
      Integrate Keynote and LaTeX
    2. Re:Gelsinger's vision for future technology? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Step one: Steal underpants.
      Step two:...
      Step three: Profit!!

  12. I'll believe it when I see it by BortQ · · Score: 4, Informative
    There have been rumors of this ilk popping around forever. They don't seem to mirror reality though. If you look at the actual relations between sun and apple they are a tortured affair. Witness apple's non-licensing of sun technologies like Java3D or JAI.

    If you look into it, you'll just find sun blaming apple and apple blaming sun. So while a 'partnership' would probably be very cool, I just don't see it happening without some drastic changes taking place first.

    --

    A Multiplayer Strategy Game for Mac OS X, Windows, and Linux
    1. Re:I'll believe it when I see it by pavon · · Score: 5, Funny

      If you look into it, you'll just find sun blaming apple and apple blaming sun.

      So what you're saying is that they skipped the "being in bed together" part and went straight to marriage.

    2. Re:I'll believe it when I see it by atlasheavy · · Score: 1

      yeah, you would say that... damned canadians.

      (cheers! aaron from wwdc)

      --

      iRooster, the Mac OS X a
    3. Re:I'll believe it when I see it by BortQ · · Score: 1
      You made me laugh at the canadian crack. That was before I saw your name there.

      A piece of advice: put a link to your shareware website into your slashdot signature and/or as your personal homepage link. It can be a big boost to your google rank. As I am mainly a lurker by nature it also gives me an incentive to post things.

      --

      A Multiplayer Strategy Game for Mac OS X, Windows, and Linux
    4. Re:I'll believe it when I see it by atlasheavy · · Score: 1

      that is a fabulous idea. goooooooooooooooogle 10 kajillion results found.

      --

      iRooster, the Mac OS X a
    5. Re:I'll believe it when I see it by BortQ · · Score: 1
      I used to have a link to my other website sillytech.com. Now I have the #1 result on google for skit comedy. I was delightfully surprised when I found that out.

      It turns out that vastly more people on the web use the term sketch comedy, but still, I have always used skit comedy, and I stuck it in the title tag, which I think google uses intensly. Hmm... thinking of this just now I realize that I should put 'Mac OS X Risk' or something into the title of Lux's webpage.

      --

      A Multiplayer Strategy Game for Mac OS X, Windows, and Linux
  13. Re:Oo! Oo! Apple and Sun are mergeing!!! by ProfessionalCookie · · Score: 5, Funny

    Sun Apple... SunApple... Snapple?

    Well it is a different industry.

  14. Fusion by numbski · · Score: 2, Funny

    Feeew......Shun.....Ha!

    Does it come complete with a silly dance?

    (Stupid DBZ reference, back to your normal programming.)

    --

    Karma: Chameleon (mostly due to the fact that you come and go).

    1. Re:Fusion by Alan+Partridge · · Score: 1

      Are you 4 years old?

      Seriously.

      --
      That was classic intercourse!
  15. hey! by Tumbleweed · · Score: 1

    Please to be leaving the obvious jokes to me, thanks. :)

    1. Re:hey! by ProfessionalCookie · · Score: 1

      Sorry I actually admire your comments I see the name Tumbleweed a lot. You're kind of like a role model.

      Then again, in all fairness I beat the next Sun-Apple joke by more than 3 hours. But hey what can ya do.

      P.S. I like your site.
      PPS Check out mine
      PPPS Ummm... Profit!!!

    2. Re:hey! by Golias · · Score: 1
      I gotta agree with Prof. Cookie. Your posts are frequently funny... and anybody who quotes "robot Buffy" in their sig can't be all bad!

      Not that I'm putting you on my "Friends" list or anything... I stopped monkeying with that /. feature months ago.

      --

      Information wants to be anthropomorphized.

  16. Well, when you have an eye for quality... by pmz · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This doesn't suprise me. Really, the only reason UltraSPARC III isn't blasting away everyone else, I believe, is due to manufacturing constraints. Excusing Sun's very low-end equipment, such as the Ultra 5 workstation, their products are generally very solid, very well engineered, very practical, and not totally off-base on cost (when you do an apples-to-apples comparison (was that a pun?)).

    It is very understandable why they would prefer Mac OS over Windows, and Macintosh computers over white-box PCs.

    1. Re:Well, when you have an eye for quality... by 4of12 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      the only reason UltraSPARC III isn't blasting away everyone else, I believe, is due to manufacturing constraints.

      UltraSPARC III would have been a great chip if it were released when Sun originally planned, instead of two years later.

      Makers of superior CPU technology are probably hitting themselves in the stomach because Intel, with huge money for fabs, was able to get enough performance per dollar to dominate the industry, merely to fritter it all away on the Itanic.

      Ah, if only the designers of Alpha, UltraSPARC, MIPS, PA-RISC and Power had had that kind of development budget and Fab facility!

      If DEC had had Intel's money, or if Alpha had been absorbed early into Intel and they invested in it as if it were Invented Here, we'd have much a much better leading edge chip than we do now.

      --
      "Provided by the management for your protection."
    2. Re:Well, when you have an eye for quality... by pmz · · Score: 1

      UltraSPARC III would have been a great chip if it were released when Sun originally planned, instead of two years later.

      Agreed. However, even today, if they could sell a 2GHz UltraSPARC III instead of a 1.2GHz one, Sun undebatably would be giving the POWER and the Alpha a run for their money. Also, I figured a while ago that a 2GHz UltraSPARC III blow away any Xeon on the market in SPEC (the 1.2GHz model already matches 3GHz Xeon in FP scores).

    3. Re:Well, when you have an eye for quality... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Comicbook Guy would use PCs whereas the Scientist would use a Mac.

  17. MadHatter by pmz · · Score: 1

    From the EWeek article: "Whatever Microsoft's last quote is, we'll be half that," Schwartz said.

    This is awesome. Sun is using Open Source to its fullest, here, where packaging, branding, and support are used to take a figurative 2x4 to the back of Microsoft's figurative head. Even if there is only luke-warm adoption of MadHatter, the impact on pricing industry-wide will be a win for everyone.

  18. Re:Oo! Oo! Apple and Sun are mergeing!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Sun Apple... SunApple... Snapple?

    Well it is a different industry.


    Apple Sun... AppleSun... Epson?

    -- james
  19. This is no suprise. by nortcele · · Score: 4, Insightful
    - Take home Sun Blade
    - Install Solaris 9
    - Realize that getting the box to halfway resemble the functionality of your Sun box at work would take two onsite admins...
    - Take the Sun Blade back
    - Buy an Apple (cause its Unix and media capable)
    - Profit$$

    Remember, there's a reason that your local Sun admin doesn't have a Sun box at his house... (s)he's worked darn hard at getting the applications working off the network at work. Why would they want have to duplicate their efforts at home on the hardware and network they can afford? For what? It's just cheaper and easier to go Apple with the same satisfaction. Of course, if Linux and OSX did not exist and Windows was the only option... Sun employees would have Sun boxes at home. Even if it was just a Sparc2 running SunOS 4.1.1.

    1. Re:This is no suprise. by duffbeer703 · · Score: 0, Insightful

      You forgot the "Realize the Sparc IIi chip is slower than you PPro 300 Linux box" part.

      --
      Conformity is the jailer of freedom and enemy of growth. -JFK
    2. Re:This is no suprise. by sunbane · · Score: 1

      I'm an admin and I have a 2 Sun boxes at home (well, okay, one is a Cobalt Qube, but the other is a Sun pancake box). Depends what you want to use it for... do I use the suns for a desktop? No. Do I use them to serve webpages and do email and such. Yup. Solaris has never been targeted at the consumer desktop. I administer 100+ suns at work and I don't even use one as my desktop there (use Linux)... the engineers of course, are stuck. :)

    3. Re:This is no suprise. by v_1matst · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I totally agree with this. Being a Solaris admin I have to say that last thing I want to do when I get home is sit in front of another Sun box and do my job all over again. I do own a Powerbook (running OSX) as my primary home computer and love it. Everything 'just works' which is exactly what I want to have happen after screwing with some LDAP problem or something all day.

    4. Re:This is no suprise. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I also have a Sun box at home.

      Runs debian just fine. :-)

    5. Re:This is no suprise. by Polo · · Score: 4, Funny

      What if you sat at a Mac all day...

      Would you crave the excitement of configuring a sun box or some obscure linux distribution? ;)

    6. Re:This is no suprise. by elmegil · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Actually it is a huge surprise. I work for Sun in the field. Maybe the folks back in corporate are all mac heads, but I'm one of only two or three of the several dozen field folks in my major metro that I know owns a mac. And I know many others who have PC's like so many other people, both here and around the country.

      Sounds to me like this is just spin to try and push towards that nebulous partnership with Apple by giving them some good press. Oh, and did I mention I own more PCs than macs still?

      With regard to running SPARCs at home, that's just silliness. You don't run much quicken, unreal tournament, etc. on Solaris. It has nothing to do with "how hard" it is to get applications working on Solaris, it's that I have no need to run Oracle or Pro/E or a major webservice at home.

      As for Sun not knowing CPUs, if that's really what Intel thinks, they're stupider than their history makes them out to be. Sun "inherited" a bunch of talented CPU people from other companies that have joined the dustbin of history, and have had a few of our own along the way as well. How much longer than Intel have we had a working 64 bit architecture?

      --
      7 November 2006: The day Americans realized corruption and incompetence weren't addressing 11 September 2001
    7. Re:This is no suprise. by pmz · · Score: 3, Informative

      Would you crave the excitement of configuring a sun box or some obscure linux distribution? ;)

      Buying a used Sun workstation and the media kit/RTU license for Solaris 9 is a great way to learn UNIX. The bundled documentation is thorough, and there is a strong on-line Sun community (fan sites, newsgroups, news sites, etc.).

      Actually, the software and documentation that comes in the Solaris box set is sufficient for a motivated person to get Sun Certified with no outside help, such as training classes. However, I would recommend buying a book for the Sun Certified Network Admin exam (it's much less clear-cut than the System Admin exams).

    8. Re:This is no suprise. by pmz · · Score: 2, Interesting

      With regard to running SPARCs at home, that's just silliness.

      Eh? Solaris 9 + StarOffice + Netscape 7 makes a very viable home computer for people who don't mind tinkering a bit. It's really no worse than Linux, other than GNUCash won't link on Solaris 9 for some very obscure reason (stupid libtool).

      Add a used SunPCi card (AMD K6 PC on a PCI card), and you can also run Windows or, with a little work, Linux x86 simultaneously with Solaris.

      Add a PlayStation for gaming.

      It works for me :)

    9. Re:This is no suprise. by cbenesch · · Score: 2, Informative

      Occasionally... if you give me a SPARC I will feel the urge to configure it :-) but to answer the question: Nothing can tempt you very far away from OSX, you get spoilt baaadly. Nice *consistent* GUI, BSD shell to configures&&make all&&make install to your hearts content, what more do you need?(My X11 nostaligia is limited)

    10. Re:This is no suprise. by elmegil · · Score: 3, Interesting

      For those that wants it, more power to ya. But the criticism was about the claim that the average Sun admin/employee wouldn't want to come home and do "even more work" on a Sun box at home. Most of us who don't run Solaris at home (well I do, but only for work at home purposes) are not avoiding it because it's "too much work" but because it's not optimal. If you *want* to tinker all the time, hey that's great, but I wouldn't expect the majority of Sun employees to want to do that tinkering. In fact, reality is, the majority of Sun employees aren't techies--Sun employs a bunch of sales people, managers, administrative workers of all sorts, none of whom are expected to be techies, most of whom aren't in reality techies, so why would they do techie things at home?

      --
      7 November 2006: The day Americans realized corruption and incompetence weren't addressing 11 September 2001
    11. Re:This is no suprise. by Senjaz · · Score: 3, Funny

      I used to sit behind a mac all day as a sys admin. Chatted a lot, drank way too much coffee and played games most of the time. I'd go home and do something else on and odd occasion tinker with my mac for a bit.

      Then I made the mistake of taking a job with PCs which paid more money. One of my home macs now lives on my work desk and is the only thing there keeping me sane. There's been talk about disallowing me use of my own machine at work. If this actually happens I'll think i'll start looking for another job.

      Incidentally I do have an Ultra Sparc 30 at home also, which if I have the urge to tinker with something gets switched on. Mostly though it along with the PCs at work serves to remind me why I'll never buy anything that isn't at least as good as an Apple.

      --
      Don't blame me - this .sig had steal me written all over it.
    12. Re:This is no suprise. by Mr.+Piddle · · Score: 1

      ...most of whom aren't in reality techies, so why would they do techie things at home?

      Perhaps the psychology of fetishes and fantasies might apply. A seemingly techno-ignorant administrative assistant by day...steamy-hot Solaris administrator by night...er, maybe not.

      --
      Vote in November. You won't regret it.
    13. Re:This is no suprise. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The sun blade 100 and 150 run the US IIe processor. Its even shittier than the IIi. It only has 256k of cache. However with enough memory (768MB in my case) it runs fine as a desktop box especially since Gnome is now available instead of that crappy CDE.

    14. Re:This is no suprise. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How would you run linux on your sunpci card? I have one and would love to be able to do this but i thought it was impossible do to a lack of drivers.

    15. Re:This is no suprise. by billyhoward · · Score: 1

      Or they could spent $200 on PC and install FreeBSD, double the performance, learn Unix and even have a great online community.

    16. Re:This is no suprise. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Perhaps the psychology of fetishes and fantasies might apply. A seemingly techno-ignorant administrative assistant by day...steamy-hot Solaris administrator by night...er, maybe not.

      Don't knock it until you've tried it ;-)

    17. Re:This is no suprise. by jub · · Score: 1

      actually, yeah.

      I've been working on Macs all day for years. A while back, when i didn't need my home box for real work, i'd play around installing Be, LinuxPPC, netBSD, etc. Troubleshooting a sendmail config problem can be interesting (for a while) when you've been tweaking pixels all day.

      Now, that same box is running YDL, mail & web server for a handful of sites... remotely admin'd from my iBook.

    18. Re:This is no suprise. by pmz · · Score: 1

      I have one and would love to be able to do this but i thought it was impossible do to a lack of drivers.

      I haven't tried it myself, but I saw a description of how to do it a while back. A Google search for "sunpci linux" returns a HOWTO near the top of the results (it looks like it has to be a diskless setup). Booting non-Solaris diskless systems from Solaris is certainly possible, as I've done it for OpenBSD on a SPARCstation (though, it just might work on the SunPCi card, too).

      The SunPCi cards must be one of the coolest products Sun has (Solaris, Windows, Linux, and BSD all in one box)! If Sun had a business case for it, a PowerPC-based card would also be very nifty.

    19. Re:This is no suprise. by greygent · · Score: 1

      Actually, I've been in the situation and the answer is "Yes". Now that the Mac is at home and the big, complex network is at work, when I come home I want nothing to do with dicking with anything after a day's work.

    20. Re:This is no suprise. by jerk · · Score: 1

      I also work for Sun in the field (FE) and I use my iBook exclusively. As I'm sure you know, they recently took laptops away from a lot of FE's and other folks within the company. I gladly gave up that POS Toshiba and went out and got a decent laptop (my iBook). I've had to go onsite to rescue an SSE more than once that couldn't get their Hyperterm to work ("it worked the other day") as a console. I know of at least one FE in Denver that's a Machead and I've heard that certain managers in Denver are pushing for Apple laptops in the field.

    21. Re:This is no suprise. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      I'll take the documentation, you keep the community.

    22. Re:This is no suprise. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I feel your pain. After three years admining a bunch of POS windows boxes I took a pay cut to get back to Macs (and the ad agency culture).

    23. Re:This is no suprise. by Vengeful+weenie · · Score: 1
      I do Solaris admin. as well, and I run Linux as both my primary WS at work, and at home. I do use a Mac OS laptop, but I find it's underlining Unix a real bear to deal with. Apple sliced and diced just enough to make it a pain in the butt to use.

      What I wish Sun would do is start shipping all units out w/ dual processors min. The SPARC is designed around multiprocessor, you pay a price for that in a single chip config. The should set their price points to push the fact that you should have more than one chip.

  20. Gelsinger's Slip is showing by KJSwartz · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Here are two exerpts from the article. I guess MSFT'ites must suffer with CPU upgrades to get the bennies from their ongoing hardware improvements. Another prime example of an "Apple Peeler".

    Q. Did Steve Jobs make the right chip decision, choosing IBM for his upcoming G5 processor, or will Apple be missing out on some pretty hot Intel technology.

    A. I think Steve Jobs has made the wrong CPU choice for 20 years, he just added a few more years to the life of his bad decisions. Steve's not an illogical guy, he's passionate and opinionated about the directions he wants is a poor path for the company as well as a poor path for the users.

    Q. Let's talk a little bit about Transmetta. They are a small competing company, that designed a small and battery efficient CPU that is getting into more small computing devices, especially in the far East. Their premise is to throw away hardware legacy from the CPU, running it if needed in software mode.

    A. You can't ignore backward compatibility. People still run applications in corporate environments that were developed 15-20 years ago, in fact many of those applications, the people who wrote those applications are now dead and their children have no idea what they did. You're just not going to change those compatibility requirements, and that's just a flawed, it sounds good, it feels compelling, but it's wrong. Secondly, when they've looked at the implementation the benefits that it brings, yes initially there were some benefits, their chips had lower power at a certain performance level than Intel did. That was because we were asleep at the wheel.

    1. Re:Gelsinger's Slip is showing by RatPh!nk · · Score: 4, Interesting

      This goes without saying but......"You can't ignore backward compatibility."

      This coming from the VP of a company that makes a 64 bit processor that has zero 32-bit backward compatibility?


      -pH1nk

      --
      Argh. The laws of science be a harsh mistress.
    2. Re:Gelsinger's Slip is showing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      [Intel] makes a 64 bit processor that has zero 32-bit backward compatibility

      Did you mean 'zero' as in:
      - 'emulates 32bits and 64bits HP-UX PA-RISC executables' (via HP's Aries [*])
      - or 'dedicates a portion of the chip to provide full hardware support for x86'
      - or 'provides full support for x86 binaries via a binary translation software' (Intel's BTrans) ?

      Mmm, you probably meant zero for a very large value of zero.

      Before you criticize Itanium you may want to learn a thing or two about it.

      [*] As for compatibility I have seen an Itanium machine run an Oracle DB server compiled for PA-RISC, serving queries faster than the PA machine being replaced. Of course this was just for fun/test purposes, we installed the native version of Oracle shortly after.

    3. Re:Gelsinger's Slip is showing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      looks to me like Apple has made at least a few good processor decisions lately.

  21. Miss Pelling? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    I can't find her. In fact, I haven't seen her in weeks. If you do find her, tell her I said "Hi."

  22. Duh... by analog_line · · Score: 4, Insightful

    So, the senior VP and chief technology officer of Intel, a company that Apple has refused to use the flaship processor from for years, thinks Apple not using the chips they make money on is a bad idea?

    And this is supposed to be at all surprising or interesting?

  23. 80286 vs. 68000 and Intel by Llywelyn · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Let's see... the senior VP and CTO of /Intel/ announced that they made the wrong processor choice for the Mac 20 years ago... ...and in other news, Microsoft has announced that no-one in their right mind uses Linux and that Windows is far superior at everything.

    Seriously, I would love to see his /technical/ reasons for his statement. Comparing the two, head to head:

    68000:
    32-bit instruction set (minimum 16-bit instructions).
    32-bit registers.
    16-bit ALU.
    8 MHz in 1984.
    8 general purpose registers, 8 address registers.

    80286:
    16-bit ALU.
    4 16-bit general purpose registers, could be used as 8 8-bit registers.
    6-8 MHz in 1984.

    I'm not seeing the appeal.

    When the 601 came out it also had more than an edge on the Pentium and I sincerely doubt that the Pentium could have emmulated (with its speed, instruction set, and number of registers) the 68k instruction set anywhere close to the speed of the first PowerPCs...

    Where exactly is the /Intel Representative/ getting this idea?

    --
    Integrate Keynote and LaTeX
    1. Re:80286 vs. 68000 and Intel by killmeplease · · Score: 1, Informative

      I agree that the 68k was a better processor and at the time my Mac was a dream to use in lieu of the damned 80286. I did some programming on the PowerPC 601 and the systems that ran the 601 were so slow that I nearly threw them out of the computer lab every day. We ran Codewarrior on some 601 PowerPCs and it took minutes to compile a simple program that just showed a single dialog panel. The reason the PEntium beat the PowerPC had nothing to do with the PowerPC and everything to do with Windows 95 being lightyears ahead of MacOs 6.x/7.x being unusable or mind numbingly slow to work with.

      --
      - Kill Yourself, spare us all! -
    2. Re:80286 vs. 68000 and Intel by LWATCDR · · Score: 1

      If you look back then everyone that had a choice did not use the Intel x86 chips. Only people that had to have PC compatability used them. The 68k was found in everything from Laser printers to Sun workstations. Intel lives because of WinTel PCs. One wonders what kind of systems we would have if as much money could be thrown at the PowerPC, ARM, Alpha, or even the Sparc.

      --
      See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
    3. Re:80286 vs. 68000 and Intel by NixLuver · · Score: 1

      No doubt the 68k was a better chip before the Intel crowd got flat memory space - working with the segmented memory models of the X86 chips was a pain in the @$$. 'tiny, medium, large, huge, and supersize'... sheesh.

      Not to mention the fact that my 8 Mhz (Maybe 7.65? can't remember for certain) Amiga ran CIRCLES around my dad's hot-stuff 14 Mhz 286. And his 20 Mhz 386. In fact, his first 486DX w/ a VGA card was *almost* as fast.

      If *anyone* had understood marketing the way M$ and Intel did, we'd be running 68k based machines today.

  24. Commodore 64 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Funny

    I've got Mac OS/X running on my Commodore C64 now. I is really k00l. Since it is Commodore hardware, I can eject the disk by flipping a lever instead of jamming a bent paperclip in a hole like on the Mac.

    And, when I run regular C-64 software on the thing, I have about 50 times as many software titles as are available for mac os/x.

    You haven't lived until you have heard Macintosh Ensoniq outputting MIDI files as Commdore "Drivemusic" gronk'n'.groan sound.

  25. Partner with Apple? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If Schwartz wants to partner with Apple, he could start by bringing the Lighthouse apps to OS X.

    Everyone in the NeXT community wants to know why he buried them in the first place.

  26. Isn't it sad when the drugs take over? by douglasq · · Score: 1

    n/t

    --
    "Form should follow function...unless it's just plain ugly."
  27. Re:Oo! Oo! Apple and Sun are mergeing!!! by Jon+Abbott · · Score: 1

    Snapple used to have an ad campaign where they said, "We're happy to be number 3." (with #1 and #2 being Coke and Pepsi, respectively)... It seems that with an Apple/Sun merger, the same statement may hold true. :^)

  28. Source please... by $exyNerdie · · Score: 0

    Most Sun Employees Own Macs
    Posted by pudge on Wednesday August 06, @12:12PM
    from the give-all-apple-users-suns-and-we'll-call-it-even dept.
    An anonymous user writes, "Most Sun Microsystems employees use Apple when they're not at work ....

    Where is the source of this statement ? Did pudge even verify it before posting it or I am missing something?

    1. Re:Source please... by george399 · · Score: 2, Informative
      Perhaps, the article?

      And I quote:

      As for the Apple connection, Schwartz said that the practically every Sun employee owns an Apple desktop at home.

      --
      Patience is a virtue, but I don't have the time - TH
  29. Evidence of NO Sun/Apple partnership by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The Java3D debacle.

    Sun wants Apple to license Java3D. Apple won't: it's distributed free for Linux, Windows, and Solaris, so why should it cost money for MacOS? So while they bicker over Sun's quixotic, Java3D languishes as a platform where apps can't be deployed on Macs. Given how important Macs are to the graphics industry, Sun has just shot itself in the foot over almost nothing.

    This fight has been going on for well over two years now.

    1. Re:Evidence of NO Sun/Apple partnership by Wesley+Felter · · Score: 1

      And don't forget JMF.

    2. Re:Evidence of NO Sun/Apple partnership by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh yeah, JMF's fun too. At least there's a "generic" JMF which will run on the Mac; but there's no customized Mac implementation of JMF.

      Apple even just dumped Quicktime for Java, a superior system to the JMF (but proprietary) to make Sun happy. No avail.

      And Java Advanced Imaging languishes for similar dumb Sun Reasons. Amazing.

    3. Re:Evidence of NO Sun/Apple partnership by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sun wants Apple to license Java3D. Apple won't: it's distributed free for Linux, Windows, and Solaris, so why should it cost money for MacOS?

      Not only that, it's crap. For 3d apps, what matters most is performance. Java's not about performance.

      Java 3D is like a dog walking on its hind legs. You don't even ask whether he does it well, it's just so amazing that he even attemtps it.

    4. Re:Evidence of NO Sun/Apple partnership by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Apple even just dumped Quicktime for Java
      Only for a very short time, you can now download a new (beta) version from ADC compatible with JDK 1.3 and JDK 1.4 (it's been there for several months already).
  30. Different tone from 2000 by poemtree · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I was in Palo Alto doing a job at Stanford back in mid 2000. Went out to eat at a little Italian place just down from the Cardinal Hotel (who was doing 802.11b in the hotel way back then), and overheard some engineers from Sun talking shop (blah blah Sparc blahblah Solaris blah). I went over and asked them what they thought of Mac OS X. They pooh-poohed it saying Mach was a crappy kernel, the PowerPC was a dead-end, blah blah Objective-C bad blah, and other things. I'm just a lowly Network Admin for whom all things silicon are magic, so I was roundly "put in my place."

    With G5s and Panther nigh, it's safe to say those engineers were wrong. Maybe Apple should just buy its way into the Enterprise by snapping up Sun, but then again Solaris is a "dead-end" compared to Linux and the Sparc III is "stuck" back at 1.2GHz blah blah blah....

    --
    Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from Macintosh...
  31. No, Sun employees hoping for work by AHumbleOpinion · · Score: 4, Funny

    No merger, but Sun employees are looking towards the future and want to be familiar with Mac OS X when they apply for jobs at Apple. They would prefer to stay in the Unix world than have to do Windows. :-)

  32. Uh Oh Sun Employees by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    I guess if you don't have a Mac at home you can expect your pink slip tommorow.

  33. Schwartzland by fm6 · · Score: 2, Insightful
    Some history on Jonathan Schwartz is semi-relevent. He was the CEO of Lighthouse Design a company that made NextStep apps. When that platform went away, LD got swallowed by Sun, which wanted LD to rewrite its apps in Java so they'd run on Network Devices. When that platform went away, LD got dispersed throughout Sun, and Schwartz somehow managed to survive the death match that is Sun upper management.

    I can understand his fondness for Macs, since OS X is more or less a successor to NextStep. But very few programmers, even at Apple, are fans of the NextStep API. And I'm skeptical as to whether there are as many Mac fans at Sun as he says, or whether this translates into any kind of Sun/Apple synnergy.

    Besides, this sort of thing has been tried before. That's why JavaSoft and Taligent were headquartered accross the street from Apple. The clash of egos was always fatal.

    1. Re:Schwartzland by wchin · · Score: 3, Interesting

      fm6 wrote:

      But very few programmers, even at Apple, are fans of the NextStep API.

      That's simply not true. At this year's WWDC, Cocoa was everywhere and developers, both inside and 3rd party were definitely digging in. Most code examples were given in both Cocoa and Carbon (where relevant). Now, Carbon isn't going away, and there are many other choices, but Cocoa has definitely caught on. iPhoto, iMovie, iCal, AddressBook, iSync (and large portions of the Bluetooth stack), iChat, Safari, Quicktime Broadcaster, Keynote, Mail, System Preferences, and so on were done originally in Cocoa or have been ported to Cocoa recently.

      There have been many instances of anecdotal evidence that traditional Carbon Mac developers are looking at Cocoa, especially now that Mac OS 9 compatibility is not as important as it used to be last year and even less so for new projects that won't be delivered this year.

    2. Re:Schwartzland by jcr · · Score: 1

      But very few programmers, even at Apple, are fans of the NextStep API.

      I don't know where you're getting that impression. If you'd attended WWDC this year, I doubt you'd think so.

      -jcr

      --
      The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
    3. Re:Schwartzland by fm6 · · Score: 1
      Aside from Apple people I've talked to (and except for the old Rhapsody team, they're pretty negative), I go by the history of the API. First it was the native API for the NextStep cube. When that product failed, it became the native API for the NextStep OS. When that product failed, it became an API layer on Solaris. And when that product failed, the NextStep CEO and the Apple CEO (who happened to be the same person) agreed that Apple should buy NextStep and use the OS to restart its moribund OS effort. Not a history to inspire confidence.

      In refutation of this, you offer me enthusiasm at the D&P show. Unconvincing, to say the least!

    4. Re:Schwartzland by Graymalkin · · Score: 4, Informative

      Your history is a little off unfortunately. Before the NeXT acquisition Apple had been working on the successor to MacOS 7, called Copland. The idea behind Copland was to get rid of all the cruft that no one used or no one was supposed to be using anymore. Copland was intended to run classic Mac applications in an emulation environment akin to Classic on OSX. Copland-aware apps were going to be the equivilent of Carbon apps in OSX now. They would be preemptive and have protected memory spaces. They would also be allowed to create real threads.

      After about two years Apple finally killed the Copland project. It was horribly overdue and many of the components were going nowhere. Late in 96 Apple bought NeXT for ?$430m. In January of 97 Steve Jobs was an "advisor" to Apple from the NeXT deal. He was not then actually CEO. Basing Rhapsody (OSX) on NeXTSTEP had been the contingency plan after Copland washed out.

      Basing your opinion of the Cocoa/OpenStep API based on the commercial failure of NeXT hardware is a bit ridiculous. The API is not the reason NeXT hardware sold poorly. NeXTStations were expensive, moreso even than the egregiously overpriced Macs of the time. Breaking into a populated market is difficult at best and impossible at worst. NeXT sold expensive computers with remarkable hardware quality and an awesome OS but no killer app.

      That has nothing to do with the quality of the OpenStep API however. The OpenStep, now Cocoa, API is well designed and very robust. Play around in GNUStep or Cocoa for a little while sometime. The API is easy to work with and very verbose which requires a lot of typing but in the end makes for very easily understood code. Designed to run inside of a host OS, OpenStep is extraordinarily portable and abstracts as much as possible from the developer. The source code in Building Cocoa Applications: A Step by Step Guide by Simson Garfinkle and Michael Mahoney is nearly identical in every way to the code in NeXTSTEP Programming: Step One written by Simson Garfinkle. A lot of the text of the book regarding the applications themselves is also similar if not identical. The only real changes between the two books are OSX or NeXTSTEP specific topics and explanations. Those same examples will Sun's OpenStep implemantation and GNUStep. How the history of the API somehow invalidates those facts I don't seem to understand. Nor does the history show in any way that developers hate working with it.

      --
      I'm a loner Dottie, a Rebel.
    5. Re:Schwartzland by Halo1 · · Score: 1
      In refutation of this, you offer me enthusiasm at the D&P show.
      I'm not sure what a D&P show means (Desktop & Publishing?), but WWDC stands for WorldWide Developer Conference. I.e. it's a gathering geared at everyone that programs for the Mac OS. That's quite relevant imho.
      --
      Donate free food here
    6. Re:Schwartzland by fm6 · · Score: 1
      Dog and Pony.

      It's funny -- I got two different responses saying the same thing: "I was at wWDC and everybody there says Cocoa is going to conquer the world!" So you both got blasted by big glossy sales presentations that did exactly what they were supposed to do. That has precisely nothing to do with the quality or acceptance level of an API.

    7. Re:Schwartzland by Halo1 · · Score: 1

      I wasn't at WWDC, I simply (wrongly) thought you didn't know what kind of conference it was.

      --
      Donate free food here
    8. Re:Schwartzland by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Schwartz somehow managed to survive the death match that is Sun upper management.

      And the only thing preventing him from being CEO of Sun is that fact that there's... THREE... FRAGS... LEFT!!!

  34. We're #3 by rjung2k · · Score: 1

    Isn't Linux using that already? ;-)

  35. Sun should have stuck with OPENStep by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    A Sun-Apple partnership could've been so cool if:

    1. Apple had chosen SPARC back when they switch from 68K

    2. NeXT had chosen SunOS as it's base instead of BSD/Mach

    3. Sun had continued their partnership with NeXT and supported OPENStep on Solaris.

    Solaris and OS X could have been ONE! That would've been way cool! Server to desktop ... everything covered.

    Sigh ...

    -j

    1. Re:Sun should have stuck with OPENStep by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sun's implementation of OpenStep was thoroughly botched.

  36. Newton by yroJJory · · Score: 1

    There were even rumors of Sun buying the Newton division from Apple!

    --
    Jory
  37. Why not, with a discount like this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Well, at prices like these I can see why.

    Now if only they'd just collaborate on StarOffice and do something other then discounting...

  38. Apple partnership with... by anothy · · Score: 1

    for everyone running around yelling "Apple + Sun would be so cool!" i want to suggest that maybe you're looking at the wrong company. sure Solaris is my personal favorite of the "Big Iron" unix systems who're still even remotely relevant (Solaris, Irix, AIX, HP-UX). but can anyone see one of the others in that list being a better fit?

    Apple just anounced their G5 chip, based very strongly on IBM's Power 4 architecture. like Sun, IBM makes some damn serious hardware for the high-end market.

    imagine: no issues of anyone converting architectures or emulating old ones. one architecture from entry level (future iMacs or eMacs) to workstation (PowerMac G5) through workgroup server (xServe) through IBM's offerings up to the ASCI Purple project. Sun's a good company and all, and Solaris has way more to offer than AIX, but where's Sun on the Top 500 supercomputer list? their first offering comes in at 211. IMB's got 9 of the top 20 spots already. i want Mac OS X on those.

    that's even leaving aside the fact that this comment is more of a "gee, that'd be cool" than "it's something we're persuing" (as has been noted).

    --

    i speak for myself and those who like what i say.
    1. Re:Apple partnership with... by NixLuver · · Score: 1
      Good point, but IBM's got a pretty heavy commitment to Linux. Not that OSX and Linux are incompatible platforms, but since they've spent so much money on Linux and Linux development and told the world that Linux was their chosen product to oppose M$ in the midrange market, they'd look pretty silly rolling up YANIX plaform to further attenuate their support dollars.

      I can't wait to see how these things (G5s) run with apps written specifically for them!

  39. Crack Smokers... by NixLuver · · Score: 1
    Good grief... "the 1.2GHz model already matches 3GHz Xeon in FP scores"? Buddy, you're high. First, the best scores of the 2.8 Ghz Xeon are in the high 1100s, whilst the suns barely squeak into four digit land - this is not matching performance in these days when 5% is considered 'spanking' someone.

    You're also comparing apples and... well... ok, 64 bit processors to 32 bit processors. If we roll out the Intel 64 bit Itanic, we discover that a 1.3Ghz Itanic puts up 1770 or so, which is 70% better than the UIII at a slightly slower 1.2 Ghz.

    I'm not religious about processors or operating systems, but such a blatantly misguided statement cannot just get ignored. I'm not familiar enough with the IBM offerings to spot the Power 4s, but maybe someone else can look at this list (www.spec.org(scores)) and let us know whether or not they're within shouting distance of the other chips.

    The new Mac is awesome. Sun servers are not. Period. No glamour, no speed, and not particularly more dependable than our Compaq boxen.

    In fact, in simple userspace terms, I can tell you that a dual P4 Xeon 2.8 compiles the open-source toolkits we use an about half the time required by a V880 with eight processors and 8 GB RAM. Both using make -j.

  40. Just a couple of things... by CooCooCaChoo · · Score: 1

    1) Scott McNealy a while back spent a good 5minutes of an interview praising Steve Jobs and Apple. Also, in the same interview he "shocked" the audience that he too has an Apple Mac at home.

    2) A merger between Apple and SUN wouldn't be too far off. A great server, awsome desktop and sell the lot in a bundle including a support contract. It would enable them to get into the desktop market alot quicker.

    --

    "The difference between pornography and erotica is the lighting" - Woody Allen

  41. Classic comment.... by JelloG3 · · Score: 1

    "As for the Apple connection, Schwartz said that the practically every Sun employee owns an Apple desktop at home. "We would love to partner with Apple,' he said. "They're everyone's favorite company, and iTunes is really cool." " quote from the Sun Article...

    that is just an awsome commment for apple

  42. If she the same as a duck... by derubergeek · · Score: 1

    Come off it. Motorola uses Wintel boxes, but me thinks a Moto/Intel parternership isn't exactly around the corner (not that Moto is exactly thriving at the moment).

    --
    Trust me. This is an inactive account. Regardless of what the /. bean counters might report.
    1. Re:If she the same as a duck... by derubergeek · · Score: 1

      Oh criminy - I can't even get a simple Subject line right. That'll teach me to hit submit without preview...[insert 'weighs' between 'she' and 'the']

      --
      Trust me. This is an inactive account. Regardless of what the /. bean counters might report.
  43. Re:Oo! Oo! Apple and Sun are mergeing!!! by tbone1 · · Score: 1
    Well, Windows is certainly #2. A big, steaming pile of #2.

    (Obvious, yes, but it had to be said.)

    --

    The Independent: Reverend Spooner Arrested in Friar Tuck Incident - ISIHAC, Historical Headlines
  44. Intel and Apple's 20 years of wrong decisions by The+Lynxpro · · Score: 1

    I laughed so hard when I read that statement. Coming from the Atari world, I laughed probably more than most. I remember quite clearly our platform *spanking* the Intel-based world when we only had 16/33mhz Motorola 68030s vs. Intel 486s running at 66mhz. Intel's philosophy has always been to crank up the CPU and damn any other co-processors or custom chips (outside their failed graphics chips foray), which was the antithesis of the Atari/Amiga and Mac worlds... Of course, my laughter transforms into tears thinking how far Motorola has fallen since then, not to mention the failure of the Atari and Amiga platforms...

    --
    "Right now, somewhere in this world, Scott Baio is plowing a woman he doesn't love," - Peter Griffin, *Family Guy*