Sun Tries Subscription Software Pricing

Sequoia writes "According to this article, 'The company's new pricing model for its systems will be based on a company's employee count, as declared in a company's annual filings with government regulators. Sun will charge $100 an employee for a single package that includes an application server, a Web portal and security software, among other components -- all of which Sun executives say will work together in a more integrated fashion than they did previously.'" Sun's press information is a little more informative.

Comments

Free Reg, nooo!

[JM Apocalypse]

Sun to Introduce New Pricing Strategy for Its Software
By LAURIE J. FLYNN

SAN FRANCISCO, Sept. 15 -- Sun Microsystems, a supplier of network computers, will announce on Tuesday a new approach to selling its products and software. The company, whose network computers are based on proprietary technology, has been losing business in recent years to servers based on lower-priced personal computers.

Its executives hope that the new strategy -- substantially reducing the price of Sun's network software for many customers while simplifying the way it is purchased -- will help the company regain its diminishing market position.

The program is also central to Sun's effort to portray itself as a supplier of integrated software and computers that are more efficient for corporate users.

"We are a systems company, not a hardware company," said John Loiacono, vice president for operating platforms at Sun, of Santa Clara, Calif. "We're trying to build the best cars, not the best tires."

The company's new pricing model for its systems will be based on a company's employee count, as declared in a company's annual filings with government regulators. Sun will charge $100 an employee for a single package that includes an application server, a Web portal and security software, among other components -- all of which Sun executives say will work together in a more integrated fashion than they did previously.

The company's executives said their streamlined pricing could offer significant savings for large companies that in the past paid more under traditional pricing schemes.

Mr. Loiacono said Sun would continue to sell individual pieces of the server package, but that most companies would reap big savings from what he called the "happy meal" approach.

Sun's pricing strategy moves away from the common industry method that typically considers complex factors like the number of network processors, a network's storage capacity and even the size of a company's customer base. Those many variables can make it hard for any corporation to predict what its software licensing fee will be in a given quarter, Mr. Loiacono said. Sun's all-in-one pricing, he noted, gives corporate customers more predictability.

"What Sun is doing is being very open about what its pricing is, and that is very revolutionary in the high-end enterprise market," said Shawn Willett, principal analyst at Current Analysis, a technology market research company based in Sterling, Va. Mr. Willett said that quite often software pricing is the subject of negotiations conducted in secret. Sun, he said, is hoping that "putting everything together in a stack for one price will make more companies buy all of it."

As part of the business software package, Sun is also announcing new desktop software that allows employees to connect to the company's servers. The price for that software will be $50 a employee, provided the corporate purchaser is running the software on Sun's Java Enterprise Server system. Companies that want to run Sun's desktop software on a different server system will be charged $100 an employee, the company said.

Also central to Sun's repositioning strategy is a new version of its StarOffice software suite that features an easy-to-use interface resembling that of Microsoft Office, but unlike the Microsoft product, can run on many operating systems. The Sun software, which runs on Linux and Windows as well as Sun's Solaris, will allow word processing, spreadsheet and graphics programs to work more efficiently together, said Curtis Sasaki, Sun's vice president for desktop engineering software.

The idea is to make it easier for customers to switch from the Microsoft software to Sun's products. "We're trying to make it easy for enterprise customers to move without relearning much," he said.

Re:Free Reg, nooo!

[King Richard]

I found this article on CNN. I think anything that cuts in on Microsofts business is a good thing. SAN JOSE, California (AP) -- In a move aimed squarely at Microsoft Corp., Sun Microsystems Inc. on Tuesday will unveil a suite of software for businesses that want to dump -- or just can't afford -- the Windows operating system on their companies' desktop computers. The Sun Java Desktop system, which was formerly code-named Mad Hatter, runs on the open-source Linux operating system and includes a variety of programs that replace Microsoft's Internet browser, productivity suite and other parts of the Windows package. Sun officials say its system will cost as little as $50 per user per year and can be installed on any computer that can run Microsoft's Office 2000. The software also is designed to interoperate with Windows-based programs such as Exchange and Microsoft Office. "We're talking about a radical savings -- more than 75 percent over just the comparable upgrade cost for Microsoft," said Larry Singer, Sun's senior vice president of global market strategies. Seeking sales Sun, a leading maker of high-end, Unix-based servers, has been struggling since the dot-com collapse to bolster sales as systems based on inexpensive x86 microprocessors and the Linux operating system become more powerful and more viable. The company has since embraced both x86 chips and Linux in an effort to become a leader in low-cost computing. The move toward desktops is another facet of that transformation. But Tuesday's announcement also echoes a theme heard throughout Sun's nearly 20-year history: A desire to position itself as an alternative to Microsoft in desktop computing. Antitrust case pending In the late 1980s, Sun's 386i PC project flopped as the young company was then ill-prepared for the market. More recently, attempts to get support for its universal programming language Java in desktops have been hindered by Microsoft. In fact, Sun's $1 billion antitrust case over that matter is still pending in a Maryland federal court. Sun's latest attempt tries to leverage its Java brand, which is popular on a wide range of computing platforms from servers to cell phones but has contributed little directly to the company's bottom line. Less worms and viruses? Singer said because of Java's openness and integration with the new Sun desktop software, developers will have access to more components of the underlying software than they do with Microsoft's proprietary offerings. Singer said there's another key difference between Sun Java Desktop and Microsoft Windows-based systems. "Guess what? It wouldn't have blown up ... with the worms and the viruses" of recent weeks, he said. Sun also planned to announce a major upgrade to its StarOffice productivity suite. Singer said it would work better than previous versions with Microsoft's competing Office suite.

Re:Free Reg, nooo!

[rifter]

The company's new pricing model for its systems will be based on a company's employee count, as declared in a company's annual filings with government regulators.

Great. Yet another reason for companies to lay people off. Thank you, Sun, for making it ever more attractive to be a Solaris administrator. :(

Sun needs your mon

[ChaoticChaos]

Although I hate to pay another fee, it's ridiculous that Sun can't make some money from all the Java development that goes on. Heaven knows their stock needs the influx of cash.

Re:Sun needs your mon

[molarmass192]

I hate to break it to you but if Sun had imposed runtime license fees on Java, it would have died a quick death from the start. Sun does make money from Java and it's primarily from certifications to use various Java labels like "J2EE" and "Pure Java". They also make money on books and J2ME runtime licenses.

Re:Sun needs your mon

[ChaoticChaos]

It's obviously too little though. Have you seen their stock price lately?

Re:Sun needs your mon

[Zimm]

It's obviously too little though. Have you seen their stock price lately?

Or more importantly their income statement? It's awfully red.

Re:Sun needs your mon

[JamesOfTheDesert]

it's ridiculous that Sun can't make some money from all the Java development that goes on.

Sun is primarily a hardware company. I think the plan was to make money selling the big iron neded to get Java apps to run well. "Cross platform" Java(tm) would make it easier for, say, NT users to build apps and then move to new hardware better suited for the CPU and memory requirements. Sadly for Sun, such hardware has become a commodity, so there's little reason to spring for Sparcs and whatnot.

For what software Sun offers, the rise of Linux has made it hard to justify the cost of Solaris.

Think of Java(tm) as a loss-leader. Except it lead to the use of better, cheaper products such as Linux and JBoss running on AMD boxes, rather than Sparcs running SunOS under massive licensing fees.

Such is life.

Re:Sun needs your mon

[fredsie]

Well, maybe not quick. It took years for PacrPlace Smalltalk to die. But I'm convinced their VM licensing was a key factor.

OMG!

[Anonymous Coward]

This is horrible! It will never work! This is the worst thing to hap....oh wait, you said Sun, didn't you? Thought it was MS, never mind, my bad. ;)

Re:OMG!

[Schwartzboy]

Thought it was MS, never mind, my bad. ;)

Okay, okay, just RTFB (blurb) already. Not only does it refer to "Sun", which is a bringer of light and all things good and shiny, which is obviously anti-MS, but the /. blurb also claims that the licensing is $100 per employee. If it were an MS strategy, there'd be some extra zeroes...either that, or it'd be $150 per to start and $100 per "essential patch", plus complete ownership of any and all works produced by any users, authorized or not, while using the system. Duh.
Seriously, this doesn't seem like such a horrendous idea in and of itself, but I wonder if there are any companies x such that y number of users within the organization will not want to/be able to switch, or be required to run, say, Mac OSX on lime-green iThingies because they're tied to some Mac-only apps. Would companies still be charged per-employee in that case? Still a very good deal I'd argue, if said employees were in a significant minority, but some CTO out there might not like his $50K quarterly bonus being eaten into to the tune of $699...er, $700 for that handful of marketing drones. I'm sure that a question like this will pop up eventually, or not.

Re:OMG!

[JWW]

No for large companies its hundreds of dollars per machine. They just count up the PCs and send the bill. $100 per machine would be a steal (over a 50% discount) for large companies dealing with enterprise licensing from Microsoft.

Re:OMG!

[teeker]

You're kidding of course, but your comment struck a nerve with me. Not about MS-bashing or favoritism or anything....but on pricing and fees and upgrades in general.

I mean, my god. I don't want to sign up for your licensing "program", I don't want your subscription-complete-with-forced-upgrade crap. I just want to buy your software. I have X users, and this is the product I want. How much? Seems like such a simple question, yet it takes a "sales team" to fly to my site and interview me and my staff to "get a feel for your business". If I wanted a consultant, I'd hire one. I want to buy software. Why does it have to be so difficult?

Or worse yet, the weird mix of license terms that get piled on admins. If you put yourself together a network with as few a 100 desktops, 4 servers for various things, and a few remote laptop-luggers, that's already big enough to create a nightmare. Let's see, you bought that with an OEM license...so this upgrade may or may not be legal...this piece of software was on a maintenance upgrade contract, so I need to re-install the original version and then re-install every upgrade previous to this one...oops, my predecessor lost the originial certificates with the license numbers for one of them...I wonder if the BSA will audit me if I call the OEM to ask a question to make sure I am licensed properly? Now can I, or can't I image these workstations? I want to hand down this older workstation to an employee who doesn't use his PC for doing very much, but I want to put the software on this new one for this power-user...can I just uninstall it and reinstall it on the new one? Why does it take a contract lawyer on staff to answer these kinds of questions? Why is there even a market for somebody who is a "licensing consultant"?

I would happily pay Microsoft's prices for their software if I didn't have to deal with these kinds of issues. Instead, I am forced to look to Open Source software...it's not because MS (or whoever's) stuff isn't stable or secure enough (it isn't...but I test and patch regularly so whatever...that's my job) for my taste, it's that I can't deal with all that bullshit on a regular basis.

Sorry...just needed to rant a little bit. But to keep it just vaguely on-topic, MS is far from the only ones who do this...although they often seem to take the lead on complex pricing schemes.

Re:OMG!

[fmaxwell]

Here's a new strategy:

Stop hiding behind the license-to-use crap and admit that software is a product. Make it do what it is advertised to do and what is described in the manual. If it has bugs, fix them at no cost to the customer. Then charge a fair price for the product and provide the support necessary for people to use it.

You don't see Chrysler telling people that their minivans may crash for no reason and that Chrysler is not liable for damages. Boeing doesn't disclaim all warranties for the fitness of their planes for the purpose of transporting passengers. Trane doesn't tell you that you have to license the firmware in your setback thermostat on a yearly basis or shut down your home heating and AC system. Only the software industry has that kind of gall.

Re:OMG!

[SmallFurryCreature]

Oh and this is good that it is "only" a $100 per employee? I can only presume the press release hasn't got the full details but let me paint a horror picture here.

Say I run a labor intensive production process that somewhere runs a small sun server to keep track of some data. Now a big factory like say a food processing plant can easily have a thousand + workers. Does that make for a 100.000 license fee? Each and every year? Ouch.

You see I doubt this. And those type of setups probably will be allowed to use the existing models.

But you claiming that this is better then MS because MS charges more is missing a point. MS charges for people USING the software directly. It doesn't charge you for the cleaning lady and the night guard.

If Sun really want not to loose business to linux and windows (who else can they be talking about) they need to get cracking. They make excellent high end server solutions. I wonder if this makes it affordable for a small shop to own a sun.

Re:OMG!

[elmegil]

Keep in mind that it appears to cover more than just 'license fees'. The announce I saw mentioned service contracts as well. Go find a service quote from Sun and see how it compares to that $100,000.

Re:OMG!

[klaxor]

...MS strategy, there'd be some extra zeroes...either that, or it'd be $150 per to start and $100 per "essential patch", plus complete ownership of any and all works produced by any users... [emphasis mine]

Yes, you jest, but this is exactly how Software AG licenses their software. Not only do we pay license fees based on the amount of code we write, they have an ownership interest in the code as well. A few years ago we were offered a substantial amount of money for our software, only to find that we couldn't complete the sale without SAG's permission. Since SAG had an "ownership interest" in the software we had written, they tagged on a fee so large that the potential buyer backed out of the deal.

The worst of it is, we just signed another contract with these folks. My company pays them license fees to run the code we ourselves have written!

Re:OMG!

[dublin]

Here's a new strategy:

Stop hiding behind the license-to-use crap and admit that software is a product. Make it do what it is advertised to do and what is described in the manual. If it has bugs, fix them at no cost to the customer. Then charge a fair price for the product and provide the support necessary for people to use it.

If you'd watched the lauch today, you would know that's pretty much exactly what Sun is proposing. Scott said as much directly when he pointed out that quality of most existing software is abysmal, and it costs an order of magnitude more than it should. The whole idea behind both the enterprise and desktop initiatives announced today is exactly the flat rate scenario you outline.

Re:OMG!

[fmaxwell]

If you'd watched the lauch today, you would know that's pretty much exactly what Sun is proposing.

You are telling me that Sun will be selling the end-user a product, not a license-to-use, for a one-time fee? Sun will warrant that the product performs as advertised for some reasonable time period (say a year)? You are saying that they will put themselves under the scrutiny of the FTC by labelling their software a "product"?

Bill Gates, Scott McNealy, Steve Jobs, or any other industry big-wig could pronounce that software costs too much and isn't high enough quality and, damn it, {insert one: Microsoft, Sun, Apple} is doing something about it with a 'bold new initiative.' Talk is cheap.

Sun's move is idiotic. They are pricing the software suite at $100 per head. What does that mean? A company which employs five people with computers and 95 people to mow lawns will pay the same as one that employes 100 software engineers. A company which outsources jobs to India will get an additional $100 per American that they lay off. Great. That's your idea of fair pricing?

Re:OMG!

[babyrat]

Maybe I missed something, but I saw nothing about $100 per employee per year...it said $100 per employee.

Re:OMG!

[Skynyrd]

> What does that mean? A company which employs five people with computers and 95 people to mow lawns will pay the same as one that employes 100 software engineers.

They wouldn't really be a potential market, now would thay?

Would any non-engineering company with 5 employees need anything from Sun?

It also sounds like you can still buy whatever the hell you want, but *IF* you want happy meal proices, you can get them. In that case, your mythical lawnmowerman could continue to use their Sun hardware and software at their current prices.

The sky isn't falling.

Re:OMG!

[fmaxwell]

They wouldn't really be a potential market, now would thay[sic]?

Yes, they would. Are you even peripherally aware of what computers are used for?

Would any non-engineering company with 5 employees need anything from Sun?

Because they are a major lawn care business that has a web presence, handles payroll and benefits on their computers, provides web-based scheduling for their clients lawn care needs, and handles advertisement mailings through a database.

In that case, your mythical lawnmowerman could continue to use their Sun hardware and software at their current prices.

Don't talk down to me you smug little shit. The word it "hypothetical", not "mythical."

Re:OMG!

[Skynyrd]

> Don't talk down to me you smug little shit

Well, that's a conversation ender, isn't it.

Re:OMG!

[fmaxwell]

Well, that's a conversation ender, isn't it.

Yep -- unless you feel like apologizing.

Re:OMG!

[javamutt]

Seems like there's a pretty big difference between something that is mechanically engineered and something that is software engineered. The term "product" IMHO applies to something that can be mechanically engineered (constraining myself to the Chrysler vs. software here). If you try to apply it to SW engineering I don't see how given today's technology it could be warranted as a product.

Chrysler doesn't have to depend on compilers and virtual machines and underlying hardware in the same way that software does...

I think you have a valid point lurking in there, but the analogy is lame.

Re:OMG!

[fmaxwell]

Seems like there's a pretty big difference between something that is mechanically engineered and something that is software engineered.

Why? Because we hold mechanical engineers to higher standards? I don't think that Windows represents a significantly greater number of man-hours than, say, a modern Boeing aircraft. Why do we expect the Boeing aircraft not to fall from the sky with the aerial equivalent of a Blue Screen Of Death?

The term "product" IMHO applies to something that can be mechanically engineered (constraining myself to the Chrysler vs. software here).

That's exactly what the software industry wants you to believe. They don't want to be held to the same standards that every other industry is held to.

If you try to apply it to SW engineering I don't see how given today's technology it could be warranted as a product.

Why not? That's the reason that Microsoft continues to release bug-filled operating systems while devoting their engineering time into DRM schemes, bad video editors, substandard bundled games, and instant messaging clients.

Chrysler doesn't have to depend on compilers and virtual machines and underlying hardware in the same way that software does...

The average modern vehicle is chock-full of embedded processors. But, because the vehicle as a whole has to be warranted, they make certain that the code is rock-solid rather than being filled with unnecessary frills.

Look at a laser vision correction system. It's got extremely complex software and you don't hear a lot about those crashing while performing surgery.

I really believe, as an embedded systems engineer with over two decades of experience, that software is poor because the companies that produce it face almost no legal consequences for shoddy design and workmanship.

Re:OMG!

[javamutt]

Look at a laser vision correction system. It's got extremely complex software and you don't hear a lot about those crashing while performing surgery.

You make some good points here. I certainly don't have your experience - my only "stick time" was a college project on a RT-Vax, but I'm not entirely ready to abandon my thinking. My (revised) thought would be that most RTOS environments used for process control on things like laser vision correction and Boeing 747s were developed to much higher standards of both QA and architecture than an average PC operating system (like Windows). So, in some ways that prooves your point.

Because an RTOS will often have a human life at stake it has to bedesigned to higher standards. All that extra testing, design, and higher-skilled engineering time costs significantly more $$, and may be enough to make the costs of an OS prohibitive to a commodity PC. I would imagine that an extra $100 per PC license would have a big impact on how many Dells came loaded with Windows vs. Linux. The mere fact that an OS may have lives at stake creates a different programming atmosphere - one of responsibility than not all software engineers are up to.

Another point I would suggest is that an RTOS isn't doing as much as a regular OS. It would typically be stripped down to the essentials for its function. In contrast a modern OS is doing all kinds of things at once with combinations of software not anticipated by its designers, thus the integration is a crapshoot.

I think this lack of control is probably the biggest deterrant to OS manufacturers; If they were the only ones designing software for their OS they probably *could* warrant it. Unfortunately, who's to say what quality went into an arbitrary package loaded on their OS? You would never see a third party screen saver driver for a lasik machine (ok, bad example, but hopefully you know what I mean).

I do agree wholeheartedly that the average consumer has allowed themselves to tolerate much more sloppy coding than they should - we should hold vendors to higher standards (and hey, I work for one of those vendors!). The most obvious example of this is how many people tolerate needing to reboot their machine at least 1/day. Some people are amazed that my Linux workstation goes 100+ days without a reboot, which is sad. But I think it will take a few years of cultural inertia breaking before we could see an OS which could be warranted as a product. It would take a change to the mindset of engineers, engineering managers, marketing (who drives feature roadmaps) and executive management. That's no small feat, although definitely possible.

Re:OMG!

[fmaxwell]

Because an RTOS will often have a human life at stake it has to bedesigned to higher standards. All that extra testing, design, and higher-skilled engineering time costs significantly more $$, and may be enough to make the costs of an OS prohibitive to a commodity PC.

Surprisingly, many RTOSs have lower per-machine licensing costs than does Windows. QNX is a nice example of a Unix-like RTOS complete with a powerful, graphical front-end. It's reliable, small, and reasonably priced.

I think that engineering software for reliability does not cost any more, and, in fact probably costs less, than engineering it for unnecessary whiz-bang features. Again, I go back to my Windows example. Why, when the OS is bug-ridden and a security nightmare, is Microsoft investing money in useless bundled software like their insanely bad photo editor ("imaging"), their horrible video capture and editing package ("Microsoft Movie Maker"), MSN Messenger, and Windows Media Player?

I firmly believe that, if software were treated as a product, Windows would be much smaller, much more robust, and would be an operating system rather than a collection of bad tools and a bloated, unstable OS. You would buy Windows and if you needed a photo editor, you would choose one from the marketplace. If you didn't, the OS would not force one onto your system.

I think this lack of control is probably the biggest deterrant to OS manufacturers; If they were the only ones designing software for their OS they probably *could* warrant it.

Analogy: A kid buys a Honda Civic. He decides that he will make it a race car by the installation of a wing on the back. Because he mounts the wing behind the rear wheels, the down-force actually unweights the driven front wheels, causing the car to hydroplane at speed. Honda's not responsible. Their warranty doesn't cover that.

If there were a software warranty and a modification that you made (e.g., a screen saver with a buggy driver) caused Windows to bomb, it would not be Microsoft's responsibility to fix it. All that Microsoft would be responsible for was assuring that the OS operated as advertised -- including claims about the system calls and the end-user functionality.

But I think it will take a few years of cultural inertia breaking before we could see an OS which could be warranted as a product. It would take a change to the mindset of engineers, engineering managers, marketing (who drives feature roadmaps) and executive management. That's no small feat, although definitely possible.

I think what it would take is the Federal Trade Commission and Congress ruling that software is a product and is covered under the same laws that cover all products. Given the power of lobbyists for the software industry, I'm not holding my breath waiting for that to happen.

Re:OMG!

[javamutt]

I think that engineering software for reliability does not cost any more, and, in fact probably costs less, than engineering it for unnecessary whiz-bang features.

I agree... I'm just not sure that the marketing organizations which are hungry for the "value add" would support that slim-down approach.

I also see where you are coming from in terms of calling software a product. With the right definitions in place your Honda analogy makes sense, but it would probably cause heart failure for most software businesses to think that way in our current litigation-crazy society.

The big point in your statement, which I think most companies wouldn't go along with, is that it costs less to design for reliability. Let me say that *I* agree with you. My supporting evidence for doubting business follows this line of thought is the emphasis on quick turnaround and time to market vs. quality. Short term gratification is what drives most businesses because they aim to please financial analysts more than consumers.

Look at the Ada programming language... It was designed to facilitate more reliable programming of large scale projects. Yert, most programmers don't like it because its "a pain in the a**". Yet, if you look at statistics, a cleanly compiled Ada program is much less likely to have bugs than a cleanly compiled C program. I know there's more to it than that, but my point is that getting engineers and businesses to look at the long term is going to be very difficult in today's hemorrhaging tech-sector.

I'm not holding my breath waiting for that to happen.

Couldn't agree more!

Great idea for schooling!

[stev3]

I think it would be great if a company would set a flat rate per-child for public and/or private schools. Ex: $300 per student for (x) amount of machines, (x) software licenses, (x) amount of time with support and upgrades.

I think a lot of school districts would jump at this idea because it will give them a total cost, instead of having to "guesstimate" at what all the hardware will cost, and the number of people they would have to hire to support systems etc.

Re:Great idea for schooling!

[IM6100]

I recently bought an auction lot of a whole bunch of boxes of 'computer stuff' so I've seen what teachers have historically gone through. One entire box was filled with thirty or so manilla folders. Each folder had a machine number on it, and there were bunches of various licenses and CDs for the software on that machine. I'm assuming the school district kept those files somewhere near the 'Computer Room' and they were forced to track and file everything for each machine each time the machines were upgraded. What a mess! I much preferred the other box from the skid lot that had all the unopened new Laser Toner cartridges in it (the whole skid was $5).

Just like Debian!

[Anonymous Coward]

'Sun will charge $100 an employee for a single package that includes an application server, a Web portal and security software, among other components -- all of which Sun executives say will work together in a more integrated fashion than they did previously.'

Well, Debian charges $0 an employee for a single package that includes an application server, a Web portal and security software, among other components -- all of which Debian 'executives' say will work together in a more integrated fashion than they did previously.

Glad to see Sun is catching up, finally. They just need to offer a better discount!

Easy solution?

[earthforce_1]

Fire everybody and hire them back as paid consultants!

Re:Easy solution?

[I am Kobayashi]

This was my initial reaction as well. Sun will have to define "employees" as users of the product or in some broad fashion to avoid this possibility.. On the other side of the coin "employees" would also include personel that would never touch a computer (janitorial staff etc...), so maybe Sun knows what it is doing....

Re:Easy solution?

[Not_Wiggins]

I think they're banking on the fact that most companies wouldn't re-organize around a pricing scheme for a product. Heck, even if they did, then that company would go through a *lot* of effort just to be a Sun customer; my guess is if someone went through that much trouble, Sun wouldn't mind if they skipped out on some fees because, obviously, they're a committed customer!

No... the "real loss" would come from start-up types who would want to have the Sun name but not pay the Sun licensing. These companies could organize a separate business unit with a "single employee," outsource all their IT hosting/whatever to that company, and avoid the fees.

But, seriously... would one ever expect a company of that size to generate big $$$ for Sun?

Re:Easy solution?

[yintercept]

Adding an extra hundred dollars on to the price of hiring employees will increase the disincentive for hiring employees. The US Tax and Workers' Comp systems are renown for heaping disincentives on hiring. By heaping all sorts of costs onto hiring people, the US economy does a great job of making the process of hiring people painful. I am surprised that companies still do it.

The pricing model will be great for companies with extremely heavy information needs. It will be lousy for companies that hire a large number of non-IT workers such as construction, transportation, food...

I've always disliked these sales that were dependent on factors not really that related to the item being sold. But it will be interesting to see how the product fairs.

The site didn't mention international pricing. A hundred dollars a seat will be a tough sell in countries with a low earnings per capita. I always hate these pricing models that are based on something different than what is being sold because they tend to create an inequity

Re:Easy solution?

[pmz]

I always hate these pricing models that are based on something different than what is being sold because they tend to create an inequity

Sun does business on every populated continent. I would hope they know how to avoid alienating foreign customers. I think Scott McNealy said half their business is international, which would be even greater incentive to not alienate them.

Re:Easy solution?

[rifter]

This was my initial reaction as well. Sun will have to define "employees" as users of the product or in some broad fashion to avoid this possibility.. On the other side of the coin "employees" would also include personel that would never touch a computer (janitorial staff etc...), so maybe Sun knows what it is doing....

RTFA. They said:

The company's new pricing model for its systems will be based on a company's employee count, as declared in a company's annual filings with government regulators.

So employees would be defined as whatever they are defined as for purposes of SEC filings and such. This is a bad idea for many reasons; a very simplistic plan that someone clearly has not thought through.

You can't make money by giving stuff away

[192939495969798999]

I think Sun may be one of the last companies to realiza that giving a product away doesn't make you any money. I work for Sun, and let me tell you, they are a great bunch of engineers. However, their ability to turn those awesome engineering projects into cash is limited at best. Perhaps if they start charging some serious money for stuff, then things will change. Let's hope that Sun can get back on track!

Re:You can't make money by giving stuff away

[tedgyz]

Ummmm. The last time we tried to buy some Sun servers, they were pretty freakin' expen$ive! If you aren't turning a profit off $1M systems, then you have too much dead-weight. That's what happened to DEC - too many chiefs and not enough rowers.

Re:You can't make money by giving stuff away

[Anonymous Coward]

Indians. Too many chiefs and not enough Indians. K thxbye.

Re:You can't make money by giving stuff away

[192939495969798999]

True, Sun appears to be making money from the "big iron". However, while there are only a few people that can get those, there are millions using JAVA, and those millions together could contribute far more to Sun's bottom line than a few really large purchases. However, I'm not the CEO, I'm just an artist/intern, so what do i know!

Re:You can't make money by giving stuff away

[override11]

Screw $100 bucks a user.... If I spend $500,000 on a server with the hardware to support 4000 users, I damn sure dont want to spend another 400,000 dollars on licensing (basically nothing, air, a slip of paper). When I have to spend 300 bucks on a frikin XP Operating system, and THEN get a license just to access the server, something there is wrong (psst.. its called GREED)

Re:You can't make money by giving stuff away

[kfg]

"Perhaps if they start charging some serious money for stuff, then things will change."

Indeed, things would change a great deal. They would be ignored completely.

Paperclips are ubiquitous because they are virtually free, as well as useful.

Ferraris? Well, there are fewer of them than paperclips and the company has teetered on the verge of financial disaster since its inception. Only Agnelli money has kept them alive at all.

Lots of Skoda shitboxes running around though.

If paperclips were gold plated and cost $100 apiece no one would have one, let alone thousands, and the paperclip companies would be constantly teetering on the edge of disaster.

Java's only value comes if it is ubiquitous. Thus it needs to be effectively without cost. Expensive Java would be ignored, and thus worthless.

Nor can a company simply set prices while ignoring its competition.

What does Linux/Apache/Python cost again?

If Sun wishes to make money the very first thing they have to do is make a true and honest assessment on the state of the market and their place in it.

For all the brilliant minds that Sun has had under their roof over the years this is the one thing that they seem completely unable to do.

KFG

Re:You can't make money by giving stuff away

[pmz]

If I spend $500,000 on a server with the hardware to support 4000 users, I damn sure dont want to spend another 400,000 dollars on licensing (basically nothing, air, a slip of paper).

Er, you just provided for a 4000 employee company with under a million dollars of hardware and software. What is your complaint, again?

Re:You can't make money by giving stuff away

[bizcoach]

However, their ability to turn those awesome engineering projects into cash is limited at best.

I don't think that is true. From a recent interview with Scott McNealy:

We have $5.7 billion of cash in the bank. We didn't have that five years ago. We have generated positive cash flow from operations for 35 straight quarters.

Still, I don't see anything inherently evil in Sun's desire to improve on their revenue-generating processes.

In fact, headcount-based pricing may be a viable pricing strategy for Free Software too. There is no reason to condemn it. Providing computer software is inherently a service, hence it makes perfect sense to charge for it in a manner that is appropriate for a service.

Re:You can't make money by giving stuff away

[override11]

Er, you just provided for a 4000 employee company with under a million dollars of hardware and software. What is your complaint, again?

No, I provided for a SERVER. Now I get the joy of spending $270 or so for a operating system for each PC...

The point is that those kind of charges are rediculous. The cost to the vendor is a whole frikin 60 cents to burn a CD and about 3 - 5 bucks worth of printed manuals (if they dont go cheap and bundle them on CD for 'easy access') It isnt costing a vendor any more to have more end users access their server once its at the customer site, so why the hell do they think they are entitled to more cash?!!?

Re:You can't make money by giving stuff away

[tedgyz]

I suspect we would see the Java equivalent of Mono - let's call it Latte.

Re:You can't make money by giving stuff away

[mlrtime]

You're about as usefull as a screen door on a battle ship!

sorry OT, had to do it :)

Re:You can't make money by giving stuff away

[pmz]

No, I provided for a SERVER. Now I get the joy of spending $270 or so for a operating system for each PC...

You forego that $270 by choosing Linux or, now, Sun's Java Desktop ($50/employee above server costs).

The whole point to what Sun is doing is removing Microsoft almost entirely from the equation while putting Sun in at a lower cost. It is actually about time for a solid competitor to come forward to put Microsoft into place.

We will know Sun was successful when Microsoft lowers their pricing to match. So, if you choose, you can still get Windows XP--but for 1/3 the price!

The cost to the vendor is a whole frikin 60 cents to burn a CD

You are forgetting the R&D investment for the contents of that CD.

It isnt costing a vendor any more to have more end users access their server once its at the customer site, so why the hell do they think they are entitled to more cash?!!?

It's a licensing scheme that Sun is betting some customers will find acceptible. The key word is "bet". There is no risk-free move in business, but I think Sun is putting forth a good effort, regardless.

Re:You can't make money by giving stuff away

[LWATCDR]

Sun can and does charge for development tools for java. However Netbeans and Eclipse are very good and are free. Thanks Sun for Netbeans and OpenOffice. I would be glad to pay say $80 for netbeans with a good book tutorial.

Re:You can't make money by giving stuff away

[dublin]

If Sun wishes to make money the very first thing they have to do is make a true and honest assessment on the state of the market and their place in it.

For all the brilliant minds that Sun has had under their roof over the years this is the one thing that they seem completely unable to do.

Believe me, they have. I just finished watching the live video of MacNealy and Scwhartz describing the new setup, and let me tell you - it is compelling.

Not only is it significantly cheaper than the Microsoft alternative, but Sun is rolling up absolutely all the network services enterprises really need into the deal - no piecemeal approach, no more wondering if this app server is compatible with that version of the mail backbone or whatever version of the operating system. Everything is integrated and tested to work together as a complete integrated, secure, and reliable system - desktops and servers, Linux or Solaris - it will just work. (And yes, I actually think they can pull this off - they already have most of the pieces in place, so it really just takes focus and execution. Focus is now a given - I'll reserve judgment on execution...)

This is the way we *should* have been doing IT for years, but no, we still spend way too much of our time doing system administration and in-house integration just to get the basics running.

Sun's approach will dramatically cut the cost of providing the basic infrastructure services that are the foundation for the interesting stuff. Garden variety systems administration *should* go away - and smart companies will see the potential to cast off the expensive shackles of today's current environment for a far more affordable and open future.

Anyone who believes in the strength of the network approach to delivering services can only applaud Sun's announcement today - I wish them the best in the market. This is an idea whose time has come, and it is definitely the way that Linux will start to make inroads against Microsoft in real-world business environments. Linux alone had no chance - Linux with Solaris, a complete set of services, all for a very affordable price, can hardly lose.

Re:You can't make money by giving stuff away

[anonymous loser]

If I spend $500,000 on a server with the hardware to support 4000 users, I damn sure dont want to spend another 400,000 dollars on licensing (basically nothing, air, a slip of paper).

And that's why you're not an IT manager. You see, hardware is pretty damn useless without the appropriate software to run on it. There are 2 ways to get that software:

• Write it yourself - a great idea except you have to invest hundreds of thousands of dollars to do this, as well as pay all those developers to continue supporting the software for as long as it's being used. Oh, and while it's being initially developed, of course, you're still stuck with lumps of useless hardware even though you're shelling out tens of thousands of dollars every month to develop something that will run on it.
• Buy or lease software from a commercial vendor, like Sun. Unlike the IT manager, they have more than one customer that wants this kind of software. So, their development and support costs are amortized, and they can charge less per user than it costs you to develop and support it internally. And there's also the added benefit of having all those employees that would have been stuck developing your internal application now being free to work on more useful things, like whatever products your company actually sells.

I guess the other "option" is hoping that there is already an open source/free project that exactly matches your company's needs. There aren't too many of those that I am aware of, aside from the major OS projects (i.e. Linux), Apache, Samba, and a few development tools. And many companies do take advantage of these projects when they exist. But most of the time such a project does not exist, and you're stuck with the options I've outlined above.

Re:You can't make money by giving stuff away

[override11]

Ahh, but I am an IT manager. And We just rolled out LTSP running on a RedHat server, remote booting 40 PC's in our operations dept. Ya know what I paid for software? They are all running Mochasoft through Wine (200 bucks for a site license) to access the AS400, they use Ximian Desktop with Ximian Evolution to access email. Life is good. I guess these big software vendors are going to have to recognize that when you can get it for free, $100 aint cheap any more. :P

Re:You can't make money by giving stuff away

[heh2k]

I suspect we would see the Java equivalent of Mono - let's call it Latte.

it already exists and it's called kaffe.

Re:You can't make money by giving stuff away

[The Mayor]

Actually, just put StarOffice and MadHatter on your desktops, and you've got a supported corporate solution for both desktop & server software for $100 per employee. You still need to buy the hardware. But I think that's pretty competitive, all things considered. You can't get an MS-based solution consisting of MS Office, Windows, Exchange, and .NET for anywhere near that price.

Re:You can't make money by giving stuff away

[klaxor]

Could be worse - I know of places that pay about $5,000 per user.

Re:You can't make money by giving stuff away

[CommieOverlord]

Sun is not cheap. Any serious (non-intel) Sun workstation will set you back in th $10K range last I checked. And don't even go into the prices they're charging for server class equipment. You are getting something for the that money, but it is damn expensive

If Sun's current pricing isn't serious I'd hate to see what you think it should be.

Re:You can't make money by giving stuff away

[anonymous loser]

I guess these big software vendors are going to have to recognize that when you can get it for free, $100 aint cheap any more. :P

It's not free. The company still has to pay for training, support, and maintenence, and those costs mean you need more IT labor and more support labor (possibly even developers) than you would normally require. I'm willing to bet that you will spend way over $4000 per year in time billed supporting and maintaining your current systems, which is what Sun would charge for 40 users.

Re:You can't make money by giving stuff away

[Usagi_yo]

Not insightfull, nor informative, but neither flamebait or a troll. Lets just call it half the picture.

Million dollar big iron hardware isn't just thrown together with a bunch of off the shelf parts. It takes many skilled marketing analysts to research whats missing in the industry, then many more skilled systems engineers to try and build something that incorporates those features.

Then many skilled integration engineers to put it together in a working and commercially viable manner -- along with many skilled Software engineers to tie all the pieces together and make it work and compatible with the current roadmap.

Then, knowledgeable sales force to sell it along with superb support, because with big iron, without support, you won't be selling many.

Now, take the product design cycle of 3 years and calculate that into how many man years in engineering it takes to get that out the door -- factoring in agency compliance, benchmarking, serviceability and advertising.

Get the picture? 100's of millions of dollars in NRE and R&D and 100's of millions of dollars in salaries make for a huge overhead, and for what? For the love of the game?

Re:You can't make money by giving stuff away

[tedgyz]

I worked in the HP-UX compiler group at HP, so I have a pretty good idea of what you are talking about and can appreciate what you are saying. We were a (hefty) cost center attached to the hardware sales. Our greatest value was to deliver better benchmark scores.

I witnessed bloated organizations supporting lots of engineers that did not contribute enough work to subsidize their salaries. When I was there in the 90's, HP was famous for hiring Phd's straight out of college. Good at pontificating. Not so good at implementing.

The Phd motto: When the going gets tough, write a whitepaper. :-/

I guess my real point of the matter is, if you aren't turning a profit at what you are doing, you are either in a doomed business, or you are inefficient. My comments above speak to the inefficiencies that permeate organizations like the one you described.

Re:You can't make money by giving stuff away

[thogard]

There are two sides to this:
1) I don't buy sun hardware for the fluff (java is fluff). I buy sun hardware to run solaris and thats it. I choose sun because in the past I could get upgrades for a nominal fee and when I need more hardware, I order another box and it comes with the latest os and it plays nice with other stuff on my network. I bet you can't name 10 features of solaris 9 that I use that sunos 4.1.4 didn't have. If sun gets too out of hand, I can always run freebsd on the sun hardware but then why do I buy sun hardware if I don't get the reliability of the good mix between the os and the equipment.
2) If I get staroffice per user and all the normal crud the PC users get, then its a great deal but until I see a solid version of something to replace Act and an accounting system, the windows PCs stay.

There is no money in software. Its an art and like any art, after it stops being trendy, there is no cash in it. Just ask your local painter or sculputure author or musician if you need a clue about how much money is in arts. There is money is selling hardware and the software is just a cost of doing business. Any company that fails to understand that won't be here in 20 years. For those that are going to say "look at MS", look at where they make their money, they sell software to hardware vendors that didn't want to do that themselves.

Re:You can't make money by giving stuff away

[override11]

I see you have never used Ximian desktop before. You just have big shortcuts on the desktop called 'Internet' and 'Email' It is very very easy. Check out screenshots of Ximian Desktop 2. Based on gnome, and I love it. I use it as my desktop now, and can do anything I need with it. :)

Re:You can't make money by giving stuff away

[rifter]

You're about as usefull as a screen door on a battle ship!

Submarine. Oh, you were trying to be funny! But you can't be funny on slashdot because some pedantic geek will think you are serious and come kill the joke! Funny gets you no karma, either. Try being Informative next time. :)

Re:You can't make money by giving stuff away

[javamutt]

I think headcount makes a lot more sense than the more common per-CPU licensing we see on some enterprise software. Remember that the per desk fee includes Professional Svcs to make the transition, 60 hours/week of support, training. Also note that its per desk, so the gardeners mentioned in an ewarlier post wouldn't be counted ;)

Compare all of that priced out to what it costs to run oracle on a 20 CPU server, then imaging you have a DR site, a cluster with at least one more node... You get the picture. For a lot of sites this will be a huge reduction in cost.

It will be interesting to see if this experiment works. I agree with you - it may be viable for OSS as well.

Re:You can't make money by giving stuff away

[dublin]

until I see a solid version of something to replace Act and an accounting system, the windows PCs stay.

There is no money in software. Its an art and like any art, after it stops being trendy, there is no cash in it.

Sorry, but you're missin ghte point a bit - yes, part of Sun's announcement is about offering a lower cost alternative to the MS desktop, but the REAL news is the all for one price set of server, back office, and middleware apps that are the things eating people's lunch today. Sun's approach of offering al this for one very reasonable low price will be a wild success if it "just works" as advertised. As I said in another posting, I'll withhold final judgment until they deliver, but I think they've got a good chance of pulling this off.

not as MS-ish as it sounds

[jbellis]

We're all familiar with a certain Redmond-based company's efforts to extort more money from corporate desktop clients with a strategy like this. But, if you read the article, Sun isn't forcing you into this if you don't think it makes sense for you:

Mr. Loiacono said Sun would continue to sell individual pieces of the server package, but that most companies would reap big savings from what he called the "happy meal" approach.

Sun's pricing strategy moves away from the common industry method that typically considers complex factors like the number of network processors, a network's storage capacity and even the size of a company's customer base. Those many variables can make it hard for any corporation to predict what its software licensing fee will be in a given quarter, Mr. Loiacono said. Sun's all-in-one pricing, he noted, gives corporate customers more predictability.

Re:not as MS-ish as it sounds

[Overly Critical Guy]

"Extort?"

Explain exactly how it is extortion whatsoever.

Re:not as MS-ish as it sounds

[intermodal]

he's referring to vendor lock-in, which in turn leads to screwed up policies like Licensing 6.0, which provide a meager product for outrageous prices, and saying that this new Sun strategy is quite dissimilar. I'm sure there are dozens of people on slashdot who would be glad to rattle off the reason s they despise Licensing 6.0, but I'm not one of them since I don't use Windows and as such I don't really care. Notice that this Sun plan gives a lot all together,

It figures...

[bersl2]

This ad is all over Slashdot today.

All Employees

[RazzleFrog]

What's interesting is that it is based on the number of employees per the company's annual report and not based on actual users. I would imagine that companies with large workforces that don't actually go anywhere near a computer would lose out on a deal like this. Manufacturing companies come to mind. I work for a company of 1700 employees. That means $170,000 in license fees. Anybody know what that would hav translate to under the old scheme?

Re:All Employees

[Our Man In Redmond]

Yeah, something like $1.2 million in dog dollars.

Re:All Employees

[OscarGunther]

I would imagine that companies with large workforces that don't actually go anywhere near a computer would lose out on a deal like this.

No problem. Companies in your scenario would opt to use traditional pricing instead. Sun is making a statement about its desired role in the IT food chain (as an integrator), without relinquishing its position as a parts supplier.

I can see how headcount pricing would encourage a company to move everyone onto the platform. As long as you're paying for it, why not have everyone use it and bring down the per-seat cost as close to $100 as possible? And the price point presumably undercuts Microsoft's bundle. So, IT wins by reducing the cost of infrastructure and Sun wins by increasing revenue and market share.

Anyway, that's Sun's story. It's true, as someone else noted, that a Linux integrator can offer the same stack for $100 per seat less than Sun. I imagine Sun's response would be that (1) they're stack is better integrated than the comparable Linux stack and (2) they don't have an ulterior motive in trying to sell you consulting services for support. (Those of you who deal with Sun can tell me if the latter point is accurate.)

Re:All Employees

[lordcorusa]

Does anyone know whether contract or temporary workers count as employees on these annual filings? My cousin's company recently fired virtually all of their employees, then rehired about 70 percent back as "temporary contractors" with a 10 percent raise. The company saved big-time, because they no longer had to pay benefits, insurance, and so forth for "temporary" employees. Despite the take-home pay raise, the employees lost out because they had to pay for insurance and retirement out of pocket. However, most accepted the deal because they didn't lose enough to make them want to brave today's tech job market.

So if "temporary" employees do not, in fact, count toward this annual report, it seems that companies might be able to screw Sun by firing employees and then re-hiring them as "temps".

Any accountants out there who can shed some light on this?

Re:All Employees

[RazzleFrog]

The 10-K filing regulations (see Item 101(c)(1)(xiii)), which is the government filing I assume they are referring to, only says that the narrative description of the company should include "The number of persons employed by the registrant."

To determine whether someone is an employee or independent contractor I assume they would use the IRS guidelines which includes how much specific behavior control the company has over the persons and financial controls such as benefits, unreimbursed employee expenses, etc.

So to answer your question (and yes I am a CPA) the 10-K would not include temps and contract workers because they would not qualify as employees under the IRS guidelines.

Re:All Employees

[RazzleFrog]

I KNOW that I closed that anchor tag. I knew that I should have done preview but somebody came into my office. Damn work screwing up my posts.

Re:All Employees

[dubiousdave]

Licensing fees among big, and even moderately big, companies are always negotiable. The company I used to work for did lots of negotiating under the old pricing scheme with Sun and Oracle. As long as Sun needs the business, they will probably negotiate under this or the old scheme. That company had about 2000 employees at the time.

Re:All Employees

[dubiousdave]

Sun gets quite a bit of revenue from their support contracts. IIRC, in my last job, the company paid something on the order of a quarter million dollars for platinum level support on the primary cluster and lesser levels of support on the various other machines. That's a quarter million per year on a few million dollars worth of hardware.

Re:All Employees

[bios10h]

What happens if a manufacturing company (or even a computer-related company) decides to split the "IT department" off the company to create another company that will offer IT services for that manufacturing company? If your IT department was 1/100th of your company, you just got Sun license for 1/100th of the price... maybe their "license" will cover this kind of practice but if not, it would be easy to do.

Re:All Employees

[Gunzour]

Do you really think any company that has enough employees to make "$100/employee/year" a lot of money is going to care enough about Sun's pricing to fire all of their employees? They would be more likely to just not choose Sun...

Re:All Employees

[mkc]

Manufacturing companies perhaps. The key appears to lie in the "unlimited right to use for all Intranet and Internet deployments." See http://www.sun.com/smi/Press/sunflash/2003-09/sunf lash.20030916.2.html

Let's say you're a bank implementing extranet account access, with 1700 employees but maybe 5 million customer accounts. Admittedly, paying $170K per year or whatever for internal portals and that sort of stuff seems like a lot.

But imagine that after signing up to buy a bunch of hardware the cost under the old licensing model was $0.10 account for directory entries, the portal software, etc. Maybe this is something on the order of 90% discount over list price (hoping that's a conservative estimate, but I don't have a lot of experience as a customer for order of that size). So for the 5 million customer accounts, you were agreeing to pay $500K, plus whatever all the hardware to run the software cost.

If you expect the service to grow, then this sort of pricing starts to look interesting... unless you find can do it all with GNU Enterprise and cheap PC hardware.

Re:All Employees

[IM6100]

I would imagine that companies with large workforces that don't actually go anywhere near a computer would lose out on a deal like this.

Now, we all know that the $100 figure is a figure to get the salesman in the door at companies. It's going to often be a fraction of that if Sun wants to be competetive, and signficantly less in companies that have 600 office staff and 6000 guys turning nuts out on the plant floor.

Re:All Employees

[krygny]

What if the company is privately held and they don't file with the SEC?

Re:All Employees

[lordcorusa]

All companies will do anything, ANYTHING, to cut costs. So let me rephrase my original idea. Do you think that companies which are already unscrupulous enough to have fired employees and rehired them as temps would be likely to try to screw Sun using this scheme?

Of course I know that no CEO is going to say "Hey, let's fire all of our employees and rehire them as temps just to screw Sun." But for a company which has already chosen to go the temp route, it would be icing on the cake. And for a company which is contemplating it, it could be another "pro" in favor of firing/rehiring.

Finally, what about companies which outsource a lot of their IT and development infrastructure? They could provide access to Sun's hardware and services to the outsourced employees, but since they are not "real" employees, they don't count toward licensing costs.

Well, I am sure that if I thought of this, then so did someone in Sun legal. So I suppose Sun thinks they will make more money off of this, even despite these apparent loopholes.

Re:All Employees

[RazzleFrog]

Splitting off a company is not as easy as you think. For a publicly traded company it is a HUGE undertaking that costs way more than the savings you would ever receive.

StarOffice price increase

[Animats]

What they're talking about is bunding some some other stuff with StarOffice and selling it for $100 per employee per year.

Now, how will they kill OpenOffice?

Re:StarOffice price increase

[ajiva]

They won't kill OpenOffice, people who want to use OpenOffice are free to use it. But this all in one plan IS much cheaper than what MS charges for the OS alone!

Re:StarOffice price increase

[Sylvius]

I remember reading an interview with Scott where he said giving away StarOffice was killing it. CIOs were too nervous to do company-wide transition to a free office suite because they feared that Sun could just abandon it/stop supporting it on a whim. Hence, the spin-off of OpenOffice. By charging an nominal amount (comapred to MS Office) for StarOffice, Sun has given it a "corporate legitimacy" that gives IT departments reassurance that Sun is committed to supporting it.
They are both great products, they are both far cheaper than MS Office, but they appeal to different groups with different needs, so one won't kill the other.

Re:StarOffice price increase

[4of12]

how will they kill OpenOffice?

They won't.

They'll leverage it.

The first thing people discover with OpenOffice is that it's about 95% * Office97.

There are enough remaining compatibility issues with MS' products and the problem of not having the same full suite of good work-alike fonts that Sun and other vendors like Ximian - er - Novell - have been addressing.

I sympathize with Sun. I've used their products on the desktop since the mid 1980's, but these days a Linux box is on my desktop and Suns sit back in the server room. It's only a matter of time before their role there is commoditised, because that's the direction everything is going.

Whatever computer desktop exists in the future, it's going to cost less than the desktop that exists now. That has stark implications in terms of the profit margin that companies like Sun or Microsoft can hope to drum up.

In this kind of environment it's difficult for IT companies that need to find new markets where they can truly offer a value-added product.

If I were Sun, I'd be looking into embedded devices. What were servers 10-15 years ago will soon be cheap enough to buy at Walmart in a blister pack. Perhaps Jini was before its time, but the idea is correct - software for networking devices that discover their environment easily and, hopefully, securely.

What is the "system"

[mentin]

What is the "system" described in the article? If I bought it, and found its performance is not enought, do I have to buy another one at the same $100 per employee? Now it looks more like any arbitrary number times $100 per employee pricing.

Or do Sun believe they scale infinitely?

Re:What is the "system"

[pmz]

What is the "system" described in the article?

Well, Sun is announcing their Java Desktop System (formerly Mad Hatter) today. It looks to be a $100/year deal. It includes a Linux distribution, GNOME 2, StarOffice 7, Mozilla, Evolution, J2SE 1.4.2, Acrobat Reader, browser plugins, etc. The cost also includes Sun support, it appears.

Try to get something like Java Desktop for that price from Microsoft. This is exactly what Sun is going after. One of Sun's executives said they'll undersell whatever Microsoft bids in an interview a while ago. With that attitude, they'll be sure to pick up a few customers (perhaps more than a few).

Re:What is the "system"

[Anonymous Coward]

Jeez - do none of you bother to actually go to the source and find out what the deal really is? Or do you really believe that the NYT actually gets it right?

Sun is announcing TWO software deals today. The DESKTOP system is OS plus desktop suite plus integration plus comms etc.

The ENTERPRISE system is the full enterprise software stack (ALL the Sun ONE products plus either Solaris or Linux) for $100 per employee per year

Re:What is the "system"

[IM6100]

Companies don't need Adobe Reader on the desktop, they need Adobe Acrobat (full version) on the desktop. Until Adobe comes out with that product, Acrobat alone is going to block a lot of people from wanting a Sun/Linux desktop in their departments.

The difference between having a 'dummy' reader and a tool to manipulate, edit, and create documents isn't any different with PDF files than it would be if companies started putting 'MS Word Reader' on their employee's desktops instead of full MS Word. Invariably people who detest PDF files (aside from Open Standard Documents folks, who are a significant minority) are people who have no ability to edit them.

Re:What is the "system"

[pmz]

Companies don't need Adobe Reader on the desktop, they need Adobe Acrobat (full version) on the desktop.

StarOffice has solid PDF output capabilities via Ghostscript. Is this insufficient relative to the Adobe-branded product?

Here I come!

[pegr__]

You mean I can get a personal copy of all Sun goodies for a mere $100? Here I come!

Re:Here I come!

[stu_coates]

This seems to be perfectly true... unless there is a minimum licensing deal somewhere in the small print, a single employee company can get the whole lot for $100/year

Even more of a bargin if that single employee is a developer as for $5 more they give you the Java Enterprise Studio (development tools).

I can just see large hosting companies spinning off new organisations with just a single employee but then serving 1000s of clients through that company.... surely Sun have thought about that sort of loophole!

JBoss and Redhat

[linuxislandsucks]

JBOss and RedHat charge zero..just fees fro support services..

Look at Frod they did not choose Sun, why?

Re:JBoss and Redhat

[twoslice]

Look at Frod they did not choose Sun, why?

Frod? I gesus you raed the atrlice on smcarbeld ltters too!

Re:JBoss and Redhat

[pmonje]

come on, go out and see a movie once in a while. He's talking about Frodo, duh. Everybody knows that The Lord of the Rings is nothing but pro-linux propaganda.

Re:JBoss and Redhat

[I am Kobayashi]

Frod=Ford Ford just announced they were switching to linux... http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/4/32837.html

Re:JBoss and Redhat

[FireDoctor]

I'm tired of hearing this. Redhat charges up $2500 for Red Hat Enterprise Edition Advanced Server, and they charge $179 for the workstation edition.

Big companies don't download ISOs and deploy them on the desktop or for mission critical apps. They buy prepackaged solutions so they have vendors to support them when they get in trouble.

Re:JBoss and Redhat

[Brandybuck]

Huh? I can't download Redhat software from the Redhat site without subscribing at $60 a year.

Re:JBoss and Redhat

[Brandybuck]

Then Redhat can't make up their minds, because this page says, "Subscribe to Red Hat Network (subscriptions start as low as $60 USD/year). As a paid subscriber, you'll be able to download the latest Red Hat Linux ISOs" and "Subscribe to Red Hat Network, get instant access to Red Hat Linux 9."

They're sure making it sounds like you have to subscribe.

Will make it hard for Sun to get in the door

[bartash]

What happens in an enterprise when a department wants to try out SunONE App Server? They have to pay for their whole company? Easier to get JBOSS/Weblogic/Websphere.

Of course when Sun has got in the door it is easy for departments to choose SunONE App Server becasue it is essentially free.

Re:Will make it hard for Sun to get in the door

[pmz]

What happens in an enterprise when a department wants to try out SunONE App Server? They have to pay for their whole company?

No. You download the software you want to try for free from Sun. You only pay when you want to deploy in a profit-generating or enterprise scheme. Usually, Sun's freebie software is the real deal but perhaps with some artificial limits (like 200,000 LDAP entries).

For example, in Sun's $100 Solaris 9 media kit, they provide the full-blown Sun ONE app server along with their messaging server along with an Oracle 9 single-user license along with a full-blown WebLogic demo, etc. Not a bad deal at all. You can play as much as you want and defer the real licensing costs until deployment.

Re:Will make it hard for Sun to get in the door

[bartash]

Sure, nowadays you can try anything you like for free. But the first department that wants to deploy has to pay for the whole enterprse's headcount (unless I am missing something).

Re:Will make it hard for Sun to get in the door

[JonnyCalcutta]

You are missing something. You can still buy the pieces individually under a 'regular' license.

Mr. Loiacono said Sun would continue to sell individual pieces of the server package, but that most companies would reap big savings from what he called the "happy meal" approach.

For once it _doesn't_ look like a cash cow inflation con.

Sun Linux supports 3D Desktop a'la QuartzExtreme

[Anonymous Coward]

OSNews has a preview of Sun Linux and the info about the 3D desktop.

And I quote,

[EdMack]

"would reap big savings from what he called the "happy meal" approach."

Does this mean a free toy for every third employee? Yay!

Re:And I quote,

[pavon]

Does this mean a free toy for every third employee? Yay!
Yes, a copy of linux!
/me ducks

$100 per employee?

[imadork]

That's $100 per employee? Even for the Manager and the Secretary who have PC's on their desk and never need any of the advanced server features?

Perhaps Scott is smoking some of the same crack that Darl is smoking...

Re:$100 per employee?

[donutz]

That's $100 per employee? Even for the Manager and the Secretary who have PC's on their desk and never need any of the advanced server features?

Not to mention janitors. Unless they got some fancy new mopping equipment since I last did that kind of work 5 years ago...

Perhaps Scott is smoking some of the same crack that Darl is smoking...

And apparently California's legislature partakes of the crack too...

Re:$100 per employee?

[jjohnson]

Do you mean "advanced server features like the payroll system that correctly calculates their pay and benefits"? Or "advanced server features like the data warehouse that results in a nice, neat sales report the manager looks at"? Or "advanced server features like data replication and redundant applications that ensure continuity of operations"? 'Cause, goodness knows, managers and secretaries and janitors never benefit from any of those things.

Re:$100 per employee?

[MidKnight]

Sigh.

if (mood.isSarcastic()) {

Congratulations. Your knee-jerk reactions are top-notch! Maybe there should be some form of an Olympic
competition for this sort of comment. We could time the read-summary-to-post-uninformed-remark cycle.

} else {

This pricing model is just one option. If you still want to pay the old fashioned way, you're more than welcome to do it. From the article: Sun would continue to sell individual pieces of the server package, but [they feel] that most companies would reap big savings from ... the "happy meal" approach.

Regardless, that manager & secretary will still use the features of the server plenty. For instance, when they access their work calendar & email from home via the secure web server, or change their overall benefits package via the HR department's internal webpage, or watch the CEO's most recent town hall meeting at another corporate location via an internal webcast.

Plus, Sun's new pricing model allows the corporation to have a very predictable price for the licensing fees. If you try doing that with WebSphere, the IBM salespeople will have to show you numerous graphs, charts, and "example use cases" before they even guesstimate the cost. With Sun, you get a dollar figure.

}

--Mid

Subscribe to the Sun...

[Kedisar]

Sounds like a newspaper to me.

Only and underdog could use this pricing strategy

[gojomo]

If Sun were ever to be in a dominant market position, this sort of "bundling" would likely be considered actionably anticompetitive, like the MS OEM licenses which charged PC makers for every PC shipped, whether it had an MS OS or not.

hmmmmm,

[Anonymous Coward]

I bet tehy hvae a tebilre tmie manikg tihs wrok.

GPL'ed Version vs. Sun's Package

[reporter]

The announcement by Sun almost begs the following question. Does anyone have a comparison of the new Sun package and the equivalent software under GPL (GNU Public License)? The latter is free, but the former is not. Is the former a sufficiently big improvement over the latter to justify a charge of $100 per employee.

Most Web servers run Apache. You can get a more expensive web server from Sun, but does it have a significant advantage over Apache?

... from the desk of the reporter

Re:GPL'ed Version vs. Sun's Package

[kfg]

To Sun, or not to Sun. That is the question.
Whether tis nobler of the budget to suffer the bogosity and "RTFM!"s of outrageous Linux zealots, or, by taking contract for a sea of packages, have them supported.

KFG

What about students?

[ImNotThatSmart]

Will they be charging individual students 100 bucks to work on their apps? How about universities in general? This could equal a lot of money for Sun. Sun's products will be suddenly hot downloads on Kazaa :)

Re:What about students?

[Klanglor]

Not that i approve piracry, but your absolutly right! What is hot on kazaa is hot twice as hot in the business world. ;)

Let me direct you to picture of "The Laws of Demand and Supply 101" paragraph of Powershift - Oil, Money, & War. (it is basic financial economic knowledge i want to point out, although the article is interesting ;) )

The theorie is that people willing to pay at price is equal to Q -- P=Q (Price=Quantity). Also a portion of below P or a Quantiy P will be found in the "black Market".

Unlike traditional goods, software can be produced in unlimited quantity at near zero cost. therefore the entire triangle beyond (P,Q) is furfilled. The Good news is that you have twice as much customer (2x triagle or a full box from (0,0) to (P,Q). In other world, your sales are more that the double of what you find on kazaa. ;)

The ultimate proof is that M$ product are on kazaa as RIAA product are, but neither are broke.

$100 for all that

[onyxruby]

Wohoo! I can get all that for $100 for the whole danged company! Ever since they went outsource crazy, we haven't got any employees left. Of course the CEO couldn't be outsourced to India... yet.

Too late too little ..... from the closet Bill Gat

[leoaugust]

I think this strategy of a "predictable" pricing is not going to work for software, esp. this late in the game of the battle of the Operating systems for desktops and severs.

In software, there are many factors that have to be considered before you buy it. And software is not individualistic like music, but has to work with the software of others in and out of your ecosystem. Therein lies the biggest hurdle for getting enough traction.

Simplistic pricing is just one factor to be considered in the evaluation. Sun is essentially betting that there is a segment of the market that is so perturbed by the M$ pricing that they will switch to Sun - even though the fact is that Sun may turn out to be more monopolistic that M$ if given a chance. Look at all the song and dance, and smoke and mirrors, Sun did when Java was young and had tremendous potential .....

My gut feeling is that people would see Superman McNealy for who he is .. just another closet Bill Gates.

Far out!

[r_j_prahad]

This could be great news for my 501(c)(3) non-profit customer who technically has zero employees; there is nobody on the payroll, they are all volunteers by definition. I haven't read the whole of the offer yet, so I do not know if they are giving Solaris away for free or not. And anyway my non-profit site is happy with Linux, so free Solaris is not going to save them an appreciable amount of money. But when your revenue stream is primarily pocket change, every penny counts.

Re:Far out!

[linzeal]

Stick with linux, solaris on an x86 is a dog.

So let me get this straight....

[Lord_Dweomer]

If I had a company with a janitor on the payroll....I'd have to pony up $100 to Sun for him because he's an employee? No thanks. At least they're not shooting themselves in the foot because they're still offering their old pricing plan.

Re:So let me get this straight....

[pmz]

I'd have to pony up $100 to Sun for him because he's an employee? No thanks.

For server software, that janitor uses it indirectly through HR, Payroll, and Management and directly if he uses a web browser to pull up his latest benefits information. Sun's pricing doesn't sound so nefarious after all.

Re:So let me get this straight....

[dublin]

If I had a company with a janitor on the payroll....I'd have to pony up $100 to Sun for him because he's an employee? No thanks.

It's still *way* cheaper than any other alternatives (even the build-it-yourself option, in all liklihood, unless you're already a software company and can make a case for this sort of develpoment being a core competency (yeah, right...)), so paying a flat cost per employee is quite fair.

BTW, Jonathan Schwartz related a story during the launch event about the only customer he talked to that had serious reservations about the pricing: The Indian National Railroad, which has 15 MILLION employees - 1.5 Billion a year was a bit too rich for them... Perhaps, though, this is our golden chance to avenge all those jobs going to Bangalore... :-)

What happened?

[ad0gg]

This is slashdot, people are supposed to mod when people say anything about charging for software. Everything should be free, we'll all suppose make our living doing support for the software.

Re:What happened?

[192939495969798999]

Required response: That would work, except I don't want to support software, I just want to write it and then run far, far away. :)

Re:What happened?

[.com b4 .storm]

This is slashdot, people are supposed to mod when people say anything about charging for software. Everything should be free, we'll all suppose make our living doing support for the software.

Case in point :)

Moderation +2
100% Funny

Re:What happened?

[dublin]

This is slashdot, people are supposed to mod when people say anything about charging for software. Everything should be free, we'll all suppose make our living doing support for the software.

[flame]No, actually, according to Stallman's stated position, we're supposed to all work for tips as waiters and give software away. It's not clear if even charging for support is permissible in the FSF's thinking, since that would involve putting money and software in the same context, something that apparently must never be done...[/flame]

Re:What happened?

[rifter]

[flame]No, actually, according to Stallman's stated position, we're supposed to all work for tips as waiters and give software away. It's not clear if even charging for support is permissible in the FSF's thinking, since that would involve putting money and software in the same context, something that apparently must never be done...[/flame]

No, that is not Stallman's stated position, it is SCO's stated beliefe of Stallman's position. Stallman's stated position is that it is okay to charge for software, and in fact he gets paid to write software. What he wants people to do is share the code so everyone's software is better. That sounds good to me. Software Libre!

Re:What happened?

[dublin]

[flame]No, actually, according to Stallman's stated position, we're supposed to all work for tips as waiters and give software away. It's not clear if even charging for support is permissible in the FSF's thinking, since that would involve putting money and software in the same context, something that apparently must never be done...[/flame]

No, that is not Stallman's stated position, it is SCO's stated beliefe of Stallman's position. Stallman's stated position is that it is okay to charge for software, and in fact he gets paid to write software. What he wants people to do is share the code so everyone's software is better. That sounds good to me. Software Libre!

Funny, since Stallman's comments about how programmers should give away their software and work as waiters to pay the rent is well-known and documented all over the net. (I will confess I haven't tracked down the original source of the quote - Stallman bores me to tears, is flat wrong (wooly thinking and careless adherence to discredited eastern bloc dogmas always produces wrong results), and I have better things to do with my time...)

If RIAA ran tech licensing

[computerlady]

Everyone is quick to say "won't work" about Sun's proposal. But just think what the world would be like if RIAA ran things - if there were a "Technology Industry Association" (TIA) levying fees on behalf of all the tech companies.

Every living human would be assessed $500 a year for tech use. Then charged a royalty everytime he turned on a machine of any type, opened any software, printed, etc. Of that, somewhere between 1% and 5% would be divided up amongst all the software companies and the rest would be used by TIA to sue people who looked over someone's shoulder to read a website or xeroxed a printout.

Enough to give one a small stroke, eh?

Just like Debian's 24/7 support!

[nurb432]

Oh, and their hardware server platforms.. and their workstations....

Sure that is a bit sarcastic, but I think I made my point.

Not detracting from what Debian is, they are just different.. for a different audience..

Sitting in the presentation

[Multics]

I'm sitting in the presentation that is announcing the $100/employee/yr. Pretty much it is the whole stack.

They used Google as an example. 1000 people, $100/employee/yr yields $100,000/yr for the whole software stack. So wearing my manager hat that is just 2 FTE.

The alternatives (like IIS and Websphere) are interested in licensing by connected person.

So this is yet one more way to license the products sun sells. This also is a major feeder to startups. Near zero software costs for small firms.

-- Multics

Sounds like a gold mine to me...

[cybrthng]

Coming from a sysadmin trying to manage an infrastructure, a turn-key solution like this from sun is a HUGE bargain.

We pay more in PER USER fees for a standard Application server environment than what Sun wants for the entire "shebang".

For small businesses who focus on unix solutions i couldn't imagine a better way to "enterprise" your business.

Pushing this will push java, will push sun hardware, will push sun certified solutions, will push logo branding, will push certifications and that will push the company forward.

PS, I do have a few V880's, 280r's, Netra X1's, V240's and lots of other sun equipment. So this is good news :)

Re:Sounds like a gold mine to me...

[pmz]

I do have a few V880's

With so many, you'd hardly be set back by giving me one of them, right?

Sounds good

[Erwos]

This is how it's supposed to work: the business says, "you can have it all for X price, or you can have the individual components for Y and Z prices individually." The consumer picks what's best. Everyone's happy.

It's not often that I praise Sun, but if they do what they're saying, they've given everyone a good deal. Nice job!

-Erwos

Re:Sounds good

[Cyno]

I prefer this new alternative over here: "you can have this software for free, and this generic hardware costs N price, which is lower than our competitor's X, Y or Z and offers the same functionality. And no more per-seat licenses, ever."

What I find so interesting is how companies like Microsoft and Sun are like immovable objects while Linux seems to be an unstoppable force. Sooner or later one of them has to give in. Who will it be?

Personally I think both Sun and Microsoft have been giving in lately, trying to make their pricing structure more appealing to their customers who are starting to hear about the alternatives.

Re:Going to be huge

[jtheory]

..and showing that they can deliver and I welcome their leadership

You, for one, welcome... ah, christ. I thought this was a real post.

Anyway, why are they calling this the "Java" Desktop, anyway? It seems like the major components are all open source software, none of which are written in Java.

I kinda like the idea of the product, and I'm curious to see how the licensing concept will work out (my guess: it'll need some changes), but I don't understand why putting in a few extra hooks and an autoupdate feature around a pre-installed JVM makes this a "Java" desktop.

Re:Only and underdog could use this pricing strate

[pmz]

If Sun were ever to be in a dominant market position, this sort of "bundling" would likely be considered actionably anticompetitive, like the MS OEM licenses which charged PC makers for every PC shipped, whether it had an MS OS or not.

But they aren't, so it doesn't matter. Sun is a competitive company with real competition from a number of companies. Microsoft's biggest competitor is themselves.

I think this is great

[Anonymous Coward]

For my office this will be great being small (only about 100 people) we couldn't afford to buy things like the portal server, even at the educational pricing. With this new pricing we get the everything for only a couple grand more then what we currently pay for Sun One calendar / mail server.

what about contractors?

[rumpledstiltskin]

Anyone who's worked for Dell knows that anyone in a grunt position (tech support, sales, customer support, etc.) starts out as an employee of a contracting company (these days it's Spherion). do these employees count? they're not employees of dell (for example).

Re:what about contractors?

[IM6100]

I wasn't aware that Dell was a good example of a potential big Sun customer.

Re:what about contractors?

[dublin]

I wasn't aware that Dell was a good example of a potential big Sun customer.

Not just potential, actual. The big iron magic that runs Dell behind the scenes, especially their marketing/datawarehouse/OLAP systems were 100% Sun as recently as just a few years ago. How do I know? I was a Program Manager for Dell at the time and considered taking the job of running their "secret" Sun data center, where all the Sun gear went that was moved out of the glass customer showcase data center when it got too embarassing...

I expect that Dell has finally figured out how to wean themselves from Tandem and Sun now, but it had to be enormously expensive for them, especially on the Tandem/Compaq/HP side, which was even more vital than the Sun side since the Tandem was the heart of Dell's vaunted manufacturing process, and no one was left who even knew how the code worked, even for the parts of the source that they still had. (It was something goofy - a variant of Prolog or some other weird AI language...)

Debian?

[autopr0n]

It sounds like this thing is basicaly a well-put together Linux distro with a little bit of Sun stuff (like java, obviously) designed to be easy to deploy.

Re:Bring back "extract here" in file roller!

[TheRaven64]

Please boycot software. A software developer did something bad today, so you shouldn't support them.

Please switch to pen, paper and a hard-wired calculating device for all of your computing needs.

Here is an unrelated link

Allow me to amend!!

[192939495969798999]

Allow me to amend my previous comment. I meant no disrespect to Sun, but I was referring specifically to Sun's giving away of the JAVA JVM, as well as StarOffice, as missed revenue opportunities. While I see the huge opportunity to gain adoption by many users, I believe personally that charging some money for those things would have been a good idea.
Thanks for understanding

Re:Allow me to amend!!

[IM6100]

Sun isn't giving away StarOffice. I was at Staples a few weeks ago and I was happy to see Sun-branded StarOffice boxes on the shelf below the OfficeXP boxes.

The StarOffice was $70 and we all know how expensive the OfficeXP is. I think it's excellent for there to be an alternative Office Suite on the shelf competing with MS Office that is from a big reputable firm like Sun, not just the usual wobbly 'Better Working Office' knockoff that's common in those spots on the shelf.

Re:Allow me to amend!!

[IM6100]

If you want to see something truly revolting, though, look at how this sleaze outfit is rebranding and selling OpenOffice.org on eBay.

Re:Allow me to amend!!

[ccp]

Sorry for intruding, but the guy's point stands: had Sun tried charging for the JAVA JVM, it would have died in the cradle.
They did the sensible thing giving it away.

Cheers,

Re:Allow me to amend!!

[secolactico]

If you want to see something truly revolting, though, look at how this sleaze outfit is rebranding and selling OpenOffice.org on eBay

This *has got* to be a joke. LUXURIOUSITYOFFICE??? But the best part is this quote:

The City Council of Munich, Germany's third-largest city, has recently decided to get rid of Microsoft Office and switch 14,000 desktop and laptop computers to this product! The city sees it not only as a cost savings over costly, proprietary software but also as the best tool for the job. An absolutely, positively, true replacement for Microsoft Office now finally does exist!

So long as they distribute the source, is this violating the GPL? Is OpenOffice GPL, anyway?

Re:Allow me to amend!!

[SkunkPussy]

he gives the game away (if its not obvious already), there is one point where he calls it open writer or something, the rest of the time luxuriosity! ha. good way to make some cash though

Re:Too late too little ..... from the closet Bill

[pmz]

Sun may turn out to be more monopolistic that M$ if given a chance.

How would this be possible when their server software uses open standards to communicate and their Java Desktop is almost entirely made up of free software?

Sun is much less evil than most people try to make them out to be. So what if Sun turns evil one day, customers can just switch to Red Hat/GNOME/Evolution/Mozilla/OpenOffice.org.

Where is the lock in? Where is it?

my comments are not Sun-endorsed opinions

[192939495969798999]

Statement to make sure I don't get sued: My opinion does not reflect the views and opinions of Sun, or of other Sun employees.

Re:my comments are not Sun-endorsed opinions

[kfg]

That's ok. I am not my job, nor am I my employer (well, ok, I am, but you get the point).

I take it for granted that the same applies to you.

KFG

Re:my comments are not Sun-endorsed opinions

[mlrtime]

I thought thats what sigs were for? I guess on /. they are for making funny sig related jokes like 'insert sig here'

Re:my comments are not Sun-endorsed opinions

[Tony-A]

This is Slashdot.
With or without disclaimers, only the postings of astroturfers connote any expression of the views of anyone else. This is a discussion forum. That I express a view does not necessarily even imply that I hold that view. It certainly does not imply that anyone else holds that view. I am not speaking for Slashdot, but I've been hanging around for a while and the above is my considered opinion based on what I have observed.

Re:Bullshit

[JonnyCalcutta]

Woah! Take a chill pill. You can still buy the seperate parts under the old licensing scheme. RTFA

Re:Cool

[thorgil]

hmmm but per employee the cost would be infinite.
even if the total sum is zero.

dont forget: zero divided by zero is infinity.

this opens oppurtunity for stock price manipulation.

If I hire a guy I save an infinite number of $$$ (per employee.. but it sounds good in press communiqe),
" By hiring guy X The company saves more than
1 000 000 (insert more zeroes if you like) per employee yearly."

Nasdaq would buy like crazy.

When the price rises to the sky, SELL FAST!!! ......
Did I mention that I am broke?!

Cool pricing for low headcount startups

[ubeans]

Say I want to start up a new company with two of my friends (all Java developers), and let's suppose we want to innovate and build the next killer app. First we need to write a proof of concept in order to show it to venture capitalists in order to secure an initial round of funding for the project; we need development tools, an application server, etc. but we're living off a shoestring budget.

Sun proposes a full suite of enterprise apps and development tools including limited support for 300$ per year? Wow, I'll jump on this offer, thank you very much. And when we'll sell the solution to our customers, we'll be happy to sell it along with some Sun hardware to match.

D'oooooh!

[GeneralEmergency]

Been so lnog wtihuot an SCO sorty, I cna't tihnk sriathgt!

Figured it out!

[bs_02_06_02]

I've already figured out a way around the user licensing. Start a company with a minimum number of employees. Use this company as an IT shell for dozens of other businesses. Put out a separate annual report.
I'm going to patent this process. Anyone using open source software will not need to pay anything to use my idea. Everyone else will have to pay me $50 per employee to copy my methods.

I think the real problem here is that Sun is hurting for money. The dotcom "I wanna sell dogfood on the internet" is over. No one is buying new servers. No one needs new software. Wall Street expects good earnings reports. Sun isn't thinking clearly, they're grasping at straws.

I work for a company w/ 50K+ employees. I'd guess that less than 1% would ever have an active session on a Sun machine. I can't imagine the next IT meeting in which someone needs a new server, or an upgrade, and they get stuck with the $5 million additional bill.

Re:This could mean the end of Sun!

[IM6100]

Psst! Unless you're running Solaris-x86, you're still buying and maintaining Sun hardware.

Re:Bullshit

[IM6100]

Do you think McDonalds would be paying $100 a head for every zit faced teenager asking "da ja' want fries wit' that?" in every company owned location if they want one Sun system?

McDonalds is a franchise-based system. McDonalds Corporation itself is mostly people who work in offices or warehouses. The people working at the actual hamburger stands are employees of whatever small/medium-sized company has a franchise with McDonalds.

Re:Cool

[mcpkaaos]

The same logic still applies in that case - just swap out the small business for Enron and sell, sell, SELL!

Re:Too late too little ..... from the closet Bill

[ccp]

>
Sun is much less evil than most people try to make them out to be.
>

I agree, but they have to thank themselves for the animosity of OSS people.

If they could make Scott McNealy shut his big mouth for six months, they woud be amazed at the results.

Nevertheless, I reckon this is not going to happen, because the guy seems to be a pathological attention beggar.

Cheers,

Sun MMORPG

[CHaN_316]

Wow..... Sun is announcing a pay to play scheme. This is great! It's a MMORPG right? This MMORPG is only charging $100/year per player, which is a pretty good deal, that's only $8.33 a month!

I hear this MMORPG is also skills based and they have many classes of character you could become. You can be tech-support, end user, programmer, system administrator, clueless user, and many more! This is going to be great!

Cheap way to do it

[SnarfQuest]

Say you have a company with 10,001 employees.

Create a new company with one employee, its sole business is to provide your company with internet access. All his expenses are charged to the larger company. He buys his license ($100.00), saving your 10,001 employee company ((10,001 - 1) * 100) = $1,000,000 per year.

The only additional fees would be for handling the accounting work for the tiny company, which should be extremely simple, and easily covered by your savings.

OT: Its die die DIE my darling....

[laddhebert]

sorry to nitpick...but the "die die my darling" was messing it up in my head...

-L

Re:Cool

[Apagador-Man]

Can't resist this... Actually, stricly speaking, 0/0 is conventionally undefined. Thus your statement makes even less sense than myself on a good day. Now, if we talk about CONVERGING values, you may have something there. But the way you put it... NASDAQ wouldnt buy like crazy... damned thing would go berserk, most likely as well as a bunch of systems connected to "theirs";). Run for the hills... new Dark Ages loom ahead! Mirth aside, I'd recommend this, a nice light reading on division by zero. Interesting, as well as bordering on amusing, mostly due to reader comments. ___________________________________

a bit of Sun trivia...

[sczimme]

Mr. Loiacono said Sun would continue to sell individual pieces of the server package, but that most companies would reap big savings from what he called the "happy meal" approach.[emphasis mine]

Several years ago, Sun's incarnation of the 100Mb Ethernet adapter was called hme, which - depending who you asked - stood for "hundred meg[abit] ethernet" or "happy meal ethernet". :-)

I wonder if Mr. Loiacono knew that and was making a subtle allusion, or if his choice of words was just a coincidence. Hmmm.

Re:a bit of Sun trivia...

[PygmySurfer]

Several years ago, Sun's incarnation of the 100Mb Ethernet adapter was called hme, which - depending who you asked - stood for "hundred meg[abit] ethernet" or "happy meal ethernet". :-)

I'd ever heard it referred to as hundred meg ethernet, always just Happy Meal Ethernet.

Also, Sun also had a bme interface - which stood for Big Mac Ethernet. :)

I seem to recall some actual Sun documentation even referring to these devices by these names.

Re:a bit of Sun trivia...

[rifter]

I seem to recall some actual Sun documentation even referring to these devices by these names.

As does the Linux kernel documentation. :)

Stop litigating and start selling then

[Fastball]

I agree with what you said, but apparently McNealy and crew aren't focused enough on Sun. SUNW has spent too much time in court trying to subvert MSFT; granted MSFT deserves a swift kick in the butt, but I'd rather Sun and similar companies stick to what they do best: engineer.

that's not true.

[Kunta Kinte]

If Sun were ever to be in a dominant market position, this sort of "bundling" would likely be considered actionably anticompetitive,...

How is this difficult from my school that pays MS $40k/year for site licenses? Staff, faculty, and students get to use a almost all MS software for either free ( faculty and staff ) or a very small fee ( students in some cases).

Sun's stragedy is not much different from many old old site-licenses pricing stragedies. The only thing is that they mandate that the site license be verified with official documentation.

So how do I try this?

[DJDaveET]

This may seem like a silly question, but what do I need to try this out? As one who does Small Business IT, it's a solution I could be very interested in offering customers.

But what does it really take to do this? If it takes a big hoss Sun Server, and new Sun workstations to make this happen, it's unlikely I can get them to break into the arena.

But if the cost is right... thus my questions.

Press release more informative?

[richmaine]

If that press release was more informative than the free reg (yada, yada) article, the article must have been pretty bad. The press release reads like...well..a press release.

I fell asleep trying to get through all the usual blurbs about how great this is, before the part where it says exactly what it is that is so great...if it ever did get to that. :-)

You can't make money by making a crap

[axxackall]

Tell me about it. But they are not just expensive - they are completely unreliable. In my prev/empl company they have bought about 50 Sun computers, from Ultra-10 to E450 to E4500. 80% of them had a hardware failure at least once within two years. Not HDD, but motherboard or one of controllers. As fo HDD - there is something seriusly wrong with Sun disk arrays - two many failurs, even with IBM HDDs which work much more stable in non-Sun arrays.

I asked my friends in other companies and people in mail-lists - the situation is always the same. And it's sad to compare IBM RS6K and HPPA equipment - people working with it are surpised hearing our statistics and complains.

It doesn't have to be THAT expensive if it's not more reliable than Intel same-performance servers. Or it doesn't have to be THAT unreliable for THAT price ans speed. Hmm, i am not sure if I need faster, but still expensive and THAT unreliable servers.

Sun software would be overkill

[GunFodder]

Sounds like your needs would be met by 40 VT100s and Pine, which are all free. Instead you spent a truckload of cash on hardware.

Re:Sun software would be overkill

[override11]

Actually we found re-furb IBM 400mhz systems with 128 megs of ram and 8 gig HDD's, with 17" refurb monitor, for $199 each (monitor + cpu)

We had need for a large number of people to access web based applications, and this was the least expensive way, as Wyse terminals still run about 350+ for one with decene internet access on it. We retired all of our green-screen's, but they are still upstairs if we ever need em. :)

Re:So much for "Free Software"

[IM6100]

Someone listened to you clowns and actually followed through on your ideology, and guess what? Now they're sleaze.

Naw, here we are talking about someone who has gone out of their way to make no mention of the fact that anybody can download the 'product' they're selling. One that they've done nothing but slap a bitmap on the front of and global search/replace the name of. They're parasites. They've gone out of their way to 'fork' the code and keep their captive band of 'customers.'

Re:So much for "Free Software"

[rifter]

Someone listened to you clowns and actually followed through on your ideology, and guess what? Now they're sleaze.

No they didn't, unless you believe SCO's line that our ideology is to steal other people's work. This person is lying about their product which is a closed-source version of a free software product. They stand in violation of the licenses under which the code was released.

Our ideolology is diametrically opposed to such things. We believe code should be shared and that when people work hard to produce something they deserve to be paid for it. Get it straight.