Slashdot Mirror


Oracle Won't Abandon SPARC, Says Ellison

fm6 writes "When the Oracle acquisition of Sun Microsystems was announced, it was widely assumed that Oracle was interested only in Sun's software technology, and would sell or discontinue all its hardware businesses. Larry Ellison, in an interview just posted on the Oracle web site, says that's not what's going to happen. In particular, SPARC isn't going anywhere (PDF): 'Once we own Sun we're going to increase the investment in SPARC. We think designing our own chips is very, very important. Even Apple is designing its own chips these days.'"

16 of 280 comments (clear)

  1. Are You Really Prepared for the Hardware Market? by eldavojohn · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I mean, how are you going to mitigate the blitzkrieg campaign IBM has launched against SPARC while you're busy with the merger details?

    --
    My work here is dung.
  2. Designing chips by flaming+error · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "Even Apple is designing its own chips these days."

    Unlike Oracle, I think Apple is traditionally a hardware company.

    I wish them the best carrying on the Sun baton.

    1. Re:Designing chips by mabinogi · · Score: 5, Insightful

      that's not traditionally, that's lately.

      Would you really consider an Apple II to be a fashion accessory?

      --
      Advanced users are users too!
    2. Re:Designing chips by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Would you really consider an Apple II to be a fashion accessory?

      *dons sunglasses*

      Ohhhhh yeah.

  3. mmmmm chips by McGiraf · · Score: 5, Funny

    hell, even doritos make their own chips

    1. Re:mmmmm chips by MBCook · · Score: 5, Funny

      No, they don't!

      It's the big secret of the snack-food world. People have been killed for revealing it. They are actually made by *loud crash*

      Oh crud, they found me! HELP M#*%(&#*# NO CARRIER

      --
      Comment forecast: Bits of genius surrounded by a sea of mediocrity.
    2. Re:mmmmm chips by jollyreaper · · Score: 5, Funny

      hell, even doritos make their own chips

      Yeah, but their performance makes even Cyrix look good.

      --
      Kwisatz Haderach
      Sell the spice to CHOAM
      This Mahdi took Shaddam's Throne
  4. Change in the wind.... by phantomfive · · Score: 5, Insightful

    For many years, there were a multitude of different architectures, and all of them were supported by major software developers. Over time the number has gotten smaller and smaller, the only one used in typical desktop computers anymore is the x86 (mainly thanks to Intel investing mountains of money into the manufacturing process). Unfortunately for Intel, manufacturing isn't the advantage it once was: AMD is still able to compete with them moderately well even when they've been a generation behind in manufacturing. Other things are coming into play besides raw processing power, things like power consumption and battery life.

    Intel is going to have trouble competing on battery life with ARM, or even PowerPC. Going into the future, we are going to see more ARM based netbooks (and they are going to be more usable), and the already common ARM handheld device is going to become more powerful. Suddenly there is going to be a need for software that runs on more than one architecture again. This is a good thing, in my opinion: it means x86 will not necessarily be the dominant processor forever into the future.

    --
    Qxe4
  5. Re:Are You Really Prepared for the Hardware Market by phantomfive · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Sun makes (made) awesome technology. They built things no one else could build. They also built things no one wanted. In fact, they had a really hard time figuring out what people wanted, this was their weakness.

    Oracle, on the other hand, is extremely good and marketing. They are especially good at marketing to business. They are also good at knowing what businesses want (or alternately, making business people want what they have). I don't like Oracle, but I have to say this may be the best thing that's happened for Sparc in a long time.

    --
    Qxe4
  6. Re:Of course by larry+bagina · · Score: 5, Informative

    The last year or so, Apple has been putting some serious effort into custom chip design, purchasing P.A. Semi and hiring key design guys from IBM and AMD/ATI.

    --
    Do you even lift?

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

  7. Re:My theory why: multiprocessors by Unoti · · Score: 5, Interesting

    People have been saying for years that we're about to reach the end of the line in terms of Moore's law. So far they've all been proven wrong, and scaling continues unabated.

    I don't know about unabated. It's been progressing, but we hit a bump, and all the sudden it was all about multicore and such rather than just continuing to double the clock speed every year or two.

    Look at the palpable hump in this graph.

  8. Why abandon SPARC? by makinsky · · Score: 5, Interesting
    During their initial press release Larry Ellison said: "Oracle will be the only company that can engineer an integrated system - applications to disk - where all the pieces fit and work together so customers do not have to do it themselves..."

    Doesn't that sound like they did actually want to keep all the Sun's hardware business including SPARC from the very beginning?

  9. Re:Are You Really Prepared for the Hardware Market by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    WOw, I didnt know oracle was buying Sun.

    I wonder will this increase oracles usage on Solaris

    I'm going to bookmark this thread and reference whenever someone says "there's no such thing as a stupid question."

    1. If you scrolled down this far, you would have seen the link to the story about Oracle buying Sun titled "Oracle buys Sun" or any of the dozen related stories on slashdot or other sites including mainstream news.

    2. Solaris on SPARC is already the largest base for deployment of Oracle.

    I kindly request you change your handle from t3chn0n3rd to something that doesn't imply a familiarity with the technology world.

    If you have recently been in a coma I apologize for being so blunt.

  10. You guys aren't getting it. by juuri · · Score: 5, Interesting

    "Oh you want support for a database product on commodity hardware? Well we have this little MySQL thing you can use.

    Oh you want to continue to run Oracle? Well that is now only supported on our new line of SPARC hardware."

    Oracle can now (and will) sell you the entire database from sand to sql results at whatever price they deem acceptable to themselves this quarter. You thought license costs were crazy before? Well now they come with official hardware and support contracts for the box.

    --
    --- I do not moderate.
  11. Re:Are You Really Prepared for the Hardware Market by rackserverdeals · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I mean, how are you going to mitigate the blitzkrieg campaign IBM has launched against SPARC while you're busy with the merger details?

    Interesting choice of the word blitzkrieg to characterize the marketing campaign. I think it's very appropriate.

    Blitzkrieg was a tactic to concentrate a large fast assault on the weakest part of the enemy, disregarding the flanks and trying to avoid the strong points.

    It had success early on for the Germans, it was not something that could easily be maintained and after a year or so the allies were able to adapt to counter those types of attacks.

    Lets not forget who won the war.

    IBM is trying to take advantage of the uncertainty some people have with the merger to grab some of Sun's hardware business.

    --
    Dual Opteron < $600
  12. Re:My theory why: multiprocessors by jcnnghm · · Score: 5, Insightful

    People have been saying for years that we're about to reach the end of the line in terms of Moore's law. So far they've all been proven wrong, and scaling continues unabated.

    Unless you know something I don't, you can't make a silicon wire smaller than the width of a single atom, so there is definitely a physical limit that we aren't that far away from. I've read that practically, the limit is 4nm for silicon nanowires. That means that if we're at 45nm today (Intel's 32nm chips are slated for 2009), and we're assuming size shrinks 50% every 18 months, in less than 72 months we'll have reached the practical lower limit for silicon features. Even assuming that you can make silicon chips with wires the width of a single atom, given that the atomic radius of Silicon is 110 pm, that only gives 144 months.

    In addition to that, at 3.2GHz, light in a vacuum can only travel about 9.36 centimeters per cycle. Given a dialetric constant for the Si02 used in chip manufacturing of 3.9, you can calculate the velocity of propagation of the electromagnetic waves through the Silicon as about 50.6% of C. Therefore, at 3.2 GHz, the electromagnetic waves inside the chip can only propagate about 4.7 centimeters per cycle. You also can lose a bit depending on the switching speed of the transistors, but they actually become faster the smaller they are, so the real limiter is the propagation speed.

    You've probably noticed that we haven't had any really major jumps in the clock speeds of consumer processors since about 2002. Intel originally thought they'd be able to scale the Pentium 4 Netburst architecture to about 10GHz, bu they ran into a frequency ceiling at about 4GHz.

    In short, unless there is a major materials breakthrough, or materials change, I would expect Moore's law to hold for the next five years or so, but not much longer after that. We're rapidly approaching the physical limits.

    --
    You don't make the poor richer by making the rich poorer. - Winston Churchill