Slashdot Mirror
Sun Opens Up Enterprise Software
abscondment writes "Stating that "open source is the future" of the software industry, Sun's President and COO Jonathan Schwartz announced that Sun will be opening its enterprise software in a manner similar to Solaris 10. Sun is opening up the Java Enterprise System, Sun N1 Management software, and Sun developer tools, etc. - practically everything except Java - hoping to lure more developers and chief executive officers worldwide to use and deploy its enterprise software."
What is going on with Sun? Why do they keep opening up things all over the board but ignoring the one thing that they have received the most demand to open up?
This is a great thing Sun is doing. I wouldn't argue with that. I just wish that they would open up Java also. If only.
And maybe FP? (literally)
The new x4100 servers look pretty sweet - dual core, dual proc Opteron 252 in a 1U low-power chassis. And N1 will work with RHEL as well, so long as it's on Sun hardware. It lets you do complete bare-metal installs from the OS up over the network and remote firmware patches, as well as the usual centralized patching and management. If you have to manage a bunch of similar machines, that's pretty nifty.
-EvilMagnus
Is this a good thing, a great jesture from SUN to be part of the 'open' community, or are they panicking as they go down the proverbial tube?
---- Booth was a patriot ----
Security through obscurity, that really ought to keep computer criminals at bay. To prevent Tom, Dick and Harry (slashdot readers) finding any vulns in your logic, I suggest you keep it "closed source" and out of public internet forums.
But isn't one of the whole premises of open source that allowing everyone to look at the code is, in the long run, better than "security through obscurity?" This has always made sense to me. Also, wasn't that Nessus software everyone's been talking about open source until the current version? Besides, wouldn't Java developers have a strong incentive to keep compatibility with the installed base--let's not forget how massive that base is--even if Java did become open to change? Finally, if someone did fork Java and Java were under the GPL, all forks would be GPL also, so potential problems caused by this move would be minimal...
No, you really don't.
:-)
It's like the circus --- just 'cause they give the elephant poop away for free doesn't mean you want it.
Seriously, Sun Cluster is broken. I personally have converted many a' cluster to VCS just to get away from Sun cluster.
Sun is offering for free (as in beer) the same things that those that are going to pay for support for get with their support contracts. Sure, the free things come without timely feature patches, etc., but the barrier to using Sun software is defintely lowered. For those looking for free (libre) software from Sun, you can mostly get it too. OpenSolaris is an amazing step given the encumberances and continued business model that they had to struggle with. My guess is that most of Sun's customers will continue to pay for support even though they "don't need to." These customers tend to be the ones that believe that a Fortune 500 systems company is better prepared to deal with OS or other software problems than the outsourced IT department of a company that's core business is not software development. Those that get lured in by free beer have the option of switching to full support without changing software bits (unless they went to the libre bits).
With Red Hat, you can get for free (as in beer and freedom) almost the same bits as paying customers get. However, if you decide midstream that you need to switch from a free customer to a paying customer, you also need to change the code that you are running. This switch can be very costly because it disrupts your business.
It seems to me that this is an effort to pressure Red Hat into giving away RHEL. By reducing Red Hat's paying user base, Sun could put them on the ropes a bit. Again, those that feel that they really need support will still pay Red Hat.
Until Red Hat starts giving RHEL away for free, those that are simply going after the lowest (legal) cost of acquisition along with great ISV support and low risk have a clear choice in going with Solaris. This has the potential to at least slow the uptake of RHEL.
See the license for the new offering:
4. Your Service Provider Use is limited to a ratio of two hundred non-Employees for each Employee (200:1) accessing the Software.
If only someone from Sun would clarify the language, we'd know they're not pulling a MySQL on us.
If Sun were to GPL Java, they've have every Tom, Dick and Harry making an "improved platform independant language." They lose the marketshare, and browsers/websites have to start supporting a million little random Java-like applets.
You mean exactly like Python, Ruby, Perl and so on are suffering horribly from all their incompatible forks?
Trust the Computer. The Computer is your friend.
This might very well turn out to be a major Linux killer. Think about it... Why did Microsoft get as big as it did? "Because its products appealed to people", right, there is no question that Microsoft has scored big with their user friendlyness. But why would that affect the rest of the companies? Because in the early days it would be a little difficult to go against $manager who has seen the ease Microsoft offered and concluded "it had to be easy to setup" and "good for the company". After all; he could find his way around the product, why can't the admins ?
Now we're in a period where it turns out that many of Microsofts products are flawed. MS fault? I don't know. Yes, its more populair to say it is but IMO design and design tools are also a big part of all this. Still; it has become a better known good that MS isn't super secure. So now we admins introduce Linux. In some companies its getting a foothold but why? Because its good? Personaly I question this, I think a bigger issue is because its become better known. News reports have been targeted at Linux, bigger IT magazines have written about Linux, Expo's have dared to present Linux and as such its now a product most people know. nice.... Does that mean everyone knows & trusts it? Hmm, no. Its still programmed by (no offense intended) long haired hippies who can do whatever they want. And in a way people are right with that assumption. Just look at what a regular IT manager would say when looking at the kernel development tree: "OK, we had 2 branches (stable (even) and unstable (odd). Now we have one, and companies are to fend themselves. OK. RH has quit with their consumer product (RH9) and their RHEL is too expensive (we could just use MS). SuSE? Thats Novell and they are just trying to catch up. Any other takes? Linspire? You have got to be kidding me!" (experienced situation).
So now I can come up and say "Ok, I present a Unix environment (no, not *nix like) which can do all Linux can but is more reliable in the overal, backed up by a company called Sun and seems much more secure. I can also throw in a Directory Server, Instant Messenging server and a Java portal which can turn our developers completely crazy and all for the same price as Linux".
Sorry but I think I wouldn't be chosing for Linux anymore.
and yes; I didn't include the BSD's in my story because even though I know those are very good choices too the regular IT manager is bound to know Linux before BSD.
And you know why I cheer this? Because I think Linux was a lot more fun when it wasn't mainstream.
Java's source code is available for free. See http://java.sun.com/j2se/1.5.0/source_license.html .
"I want some software (security stuff) to stay closed-source forever"
The source isn't closed. It's not Free Software, but you can see it. I guess now this means you shouldn't use Java, seeing as all those evil hackers are gonna be rummaging through it.
And if you hadn't recalled, there already was a Java runtime from Microsoft. Wasn't compatible with Sun's Java. Doesn't exist anymore. Trademarks are sweet.
Also, it's not clear to me what they have actually opened up. They opened Solaris, JES, etc., fine. What else? Compilers? Drivers? SunRay? Is there a list somewhere?
Finally can somebody decipher their license, CDDL? http://www.crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3:mss:9125 :200412:dmcacncfamieofeochbn
Let's say I take Sun's source code, add some modification and nice packaging, etc., may I sell it to customers?
The package came, lovely yellow with the bubbly inside. "A CD-ROM!" I said aloud. "No better, I bet it's a DVD-ROM". I opened it up, popping layers of bubbles to find... a double-sided double-density 3 1/2 floppy. Confusion filled my mind as I pulled out my old 400mhz Pentium notebook.
I ran the included program, ENTSRC.EXE and up popped a window:
"Are you ready?"
"Yes!" I cried, hitting the Y key with orgasmic fervor.
"Are you truly ready for this?"
"Ohhhhh yessssss!" I moaned, banging the key again.
"Please read this EULA. Do you agree never to do anything nasty to Sun, never call it names, or mock Larry Ellison? Do you vow to besmirch .Net and Mono? Will you feed your cat only high-protein foods, and make love to your wife three times a week?"
"Anything!" I shouted, clicking Y one last time. And up it popped.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
There are companies that truly believe in open source and its philosophy and there are companies like sun. This is a hail-marry effort to stop their impending demise. Their market share has been dwindling for years and it's starting to tank even more, especially with the linux options. Let me make a prediction now, one day we will see OSX going open source when their market share drops below a percentage point. And it won't be because Apple has seen the light either...
I'm not trolling, I just think we should throw our praise behind companies that TRULY believe in the philosophy not just using it to try and prevent their demise.
Yes, having to go and click on the EULA really makes Gentoo emerges feel like they take ages!
Looks pretty open to me. I can browse the source online or I can go download it.
And it's all under a license which is quite similar to the Mozilla Public License.
If you think this is "not very" open, could you be more specific about why and how?
Microsoft opened the Language that is C#. Java is available open as well. People are just as free to create Open Source versions of Java as they are of C#.
.Net implementation, but it does not have .Net in the name itself.
They just cannot call it Java. Thus Kaffe, and gcj.
Mono is a
The MS.Net platform is NOT open source. Java platform is more open source than MS.Net. You can download the source code for Java, and depending on what you want to do, have various options. Where is the source code for MS.Net platform?
So how is that Microsoft learning to live and let live? They are BOTH in the same pot for OPENNESS.
Scott Carr
As far as "opening up," though, as of today Sun has opened nothing new, as far as I can tell. It is just "reaffirming its commitment to open source this software," to quote the press release.
Breakfast served all day!
Huh?
Really, Sun has nothing to hide for security reasons. Your JDK already comes with the source code for all the public libraries found in the standard JRE distribution -- see src.zip in your JDK folder. And Sun doesn't try to stop you from writing your own JDK and JRE -- it is all spelled out quite clearly here.
The only problem is that writing all this in a clean-room fashion takes a lot of time and effort. You have to write your own JDK or classfile generator (which isn't too hard -- Eclipse already includes its own, so you can make class and JAR files on a system with only a JRE), your own JRE (which is substantial if you want it to have the efficiency of Sun's -- see the escape analysis they're including in Mustang), and most laborious of all: you have to write all the standard libraries that come with the JRE. That's why we haven't heard much from Harmony in awhile, and the cleanroom version that IBM produces is a version or so behind.
Sun is giving everyone, including open-source, the blueprints to Java; it just isn't giving them the assembly line.
- shadowmatter
It sounds like you are joking, but one can never tell here - you are joking, right?
sic transit gloria mundi
The open solaris license looks like a nice open source license but there seem to be some conflicts when you go to download Solaris 10 binary CDs or the DVD and must agree to additional licensing terms such as:
5(b) You may make a single archival copy of Software, but otherwise may not copy, modify, or distribute Software. However if the Sun documentation accompanying Software lists specific portions of Software, such as header files, class libraries, reference source code, and/or redistributable files, that may be handled differently, you may do so only as provided in the Sun documentation.
I guess I have to actually download the disks to know for certain what I can or can't do as the information from their website seems contradictory.
5(d) Unless enforcement is prohibited by applicable law, you may not decompile, or reverse engineer Software.
Wow, thats not very open, and what is the point if the source is available?
5(f) You may not publish or provide the results of any benchmark or comparison tests run on Software to any third party without the prior written consent of Sun.
My, a bit touchy about how people may talk about us, are we?
5(g) Software is confidential and copyrighted.
Umm, yes it is copyrighted, but is it confidential if its open source?
5(h) Unless otherwise specified, if Software is delivered with embedded or bundled software that enables functionality of Software, you may not use such software on a stand-alone basis or use any portion of such software to interoperate with any program(s) other than Software.
So its all Solaris or none of our code at all. Whatever, too bad they don't see it both ways.
5(i) Software may contain programs that perform automated collection of system data and/or automated software updating services. System data collected through such programs may be used by Sun, its subcontractors, and its service delivery partners for the purpose of providing you with remote system services and/or improving Sun's software and systems.
Oh great, I have to accept spyware if I want to run Solaris?
6 Software may contain Java technology. You may not create additional classes to, or modifications of, the Java technology, except under compatibility requirements available under a separate agreement available at www.java.net.
Geez, kinda touchy about people touching their java as well. Very strange.
The license really isn't too bad, short and sweet, and at some point I may click on the accept check box and download Solaris 10 to check it out, but I still wonder how supportive Sun is of open source. Do they only support it if they have little choice and then only if you use it in a way that will not benefit anyone else?
This makes some sense and kudos for Sun. Basically there needs to be a gateway for core modules, just like the linux kernel, but instead the JDK depends on an organization to formally keep it stable vs a community (which can be too democratic). Since Java is free to develop this is a good balance for app developers as well as most core developers.
If you look at it more, the JCP process compliments this strategy well.
EJB3.0 will give everything a run for the money.
Sun is the most significant Unix company in existence, which no one who knows anything about the Unix market and it's history can deny. What true Unix company still exists and is as true to Unix more than Sun? None. IBM, HP, DEC, SCO, SGI, etc. all lost to Sun during the dot com years. HP has HPUX on life support, no new innovation and no will left to survive. IBM talks up Linux because AIX is breathing its last breath. The rest are not even worth mentioning because they are either completely dead or will be any minute. How did things get to this point? Because Unix and the hardware designed to run Unix has been Sun's primary focus for which it has continued to develop, improve and campaign for relentlessly.
I am perplexed by the number of people posting FUD about Sun on slashdot. Who by their comments, clearly know nothing of Sun's financial situation or products. Sun is not going away anytime soon, even if they didn't sell a single new support contract or single new hardware device ever again, they would continue to exist. But that's just it, Sun has not given up (unlike its rivals), it is raising the bar and delivering on commitments.
I am getting really excited about the latest moves by Sun. Afterall, I only got involved with Linux because I couldn't afford to run a Solaris box for personal use. Do you think Linus would have ever been inspired to start working on Linux if he was able to run Solaris for free and it ran on his PC? I think not. And yes, much has changed since 1991 and Linux has certainly grown up. But what many fail to see is that Solaris has not been standing still. The gap certainly started closing rapidly around 2003 with the release of the 2.6 kernel. However, with Solaris 10, Sun leaped even further ahead. And I'm not talking about speed, reliability and scalability improvements, which it certainly had much of. Solaris 10 has features like DTrace, predictive self-healing, containers/zones, ZFS and more. These are completely new technologies. And unlike Linux, Sun's code comes out solid from the day it is released. If you're a developer, I urge you to go look at the source code and compare it to the typical Open Source project's code. I think you will see that the difference is like comparing a donkey to stallion.
Hopefully these words are not interpreted as being anti-Linux. I have dedicated a huge portion of my life during the last decade to Linux, its development and support. I feel ashamed to be part of a community that sees anything different as the enemy or a threat. The Linux community should not feel threatened by Sun or anyone else for that matter. The commercial entities that feed off our community however (IBM, HP, Red Hat, Novell, etc.) should be afraid, very afraid...
It's a good thing.
They've finally realized that they are a hardware company, and the software is just the icing that drives the hardware sales.
Their hardware really is phenomenal, especially from the V880 on up (anything that can handle hot-swapping CPUs is damned impressive!).
What I'm personally excited about is the opening of Sun Ray Server Software... the software is useless without the hardware, so charging extra for it was counter-productive.
The fact that it's being opened means support on current Linux distros will improve quickly (currently, you're stuck with 2.4 kernels or insane amounts of botching and pasting). People will be able to put together a hotrod Linux box and pick up dozens of Sun Rays for a super-cheap bunch of desktops.
Sun may not make licensing fees from the people who can't afford it, but they'll sell more hardware. This has a cascade effect, considering the word of mouth advertizing that will come from all of the people seeing these devices and asking "what's that?" followed by "oh, we could use something like that too!".
http://sun-rays.org/ is a decent discussion forum for Sun Rays - in case anyone is interested.
- Preferences: Solaris 10 (servers), Ubuntu (desktops), Solaris 11 (personal servers) -
Who are they following? When did HP open the source to HP/UX, True 64 (Digital) Unix, and Openview? Or did IBM open AIX, Tivoli,and the Rational tools?
much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
Question: Why are Quake/Quake II clients compiled from source distrusted by most of the communities that still play those games, including the competitive scene?
Answer: Because the open sourced code increased the number of cheats exponentially.
When I try to download I get greeted by a fatal exception :(
And based on the download link to Sun studio, I found that the URL parameter "LMArea=nsx" was missing from the links to Java studio Creator and Enterprise. Add that to the end of the query string, and you will be fine.
Well, don't forget that Java has been forked: J++. The fork was incompatible. The technology in the fork was re-skinned as C# and dot Net, which is specifically intended to compete -- that is to say to slow or reverse the adoption -- of Java.
The difference between Java and the languages you mention is its strategic importance. That this stems in part from historical reasons and is not entirely (or even at all depending on your POV) due to technical superiority is irrelevant.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.