OSNews

It seems like they have a clear vision and have realistic plans. They know their place it the market and their strengths and weaknesses. I think we will soon see them get out of the current recession.

I still regret that they aren't attempting to do much with the desktop, a huge company with thousands of worker could do some amazing things for Linux and desktop Linux. Especially since their OS, Solaris has by far the most stable code and in some areas fastest. Their OS also is incredibly more powerful in a few areas where Linux is missing out. They already have Intel ports, it wouldn't be very hard to implement the code, but I understand the situation and I know this probably would show a loss of focus and would not be practical. But the gains for Linux would be great, probably not so for Sun though.

Sun has already contributed a lot to Open Source, StarOffice, Sun Grid Engine and countless other things. Certainly much more than IBM has, the 1 billion they spend wasn't on Linux, it was on porting their stuff to Linux.

BEST WISHES!

Unlike the naysayers who feel that Sun and Solaris should flame out, I though this was a good, realistic interview.

It's always clear that Sun will have to change in some way, but that's the rule for every company.

For example, they don't consider Apple a threat (and I agree), but should Apple somehow become a threat, then Sun will focus it's hot little rays in their direction and be ready to move forward.

This is a good thing as its the spirit of a competitive market. Whatever elements the Solaris brings to the table, others will try to emulate and vice-a-versa.

And equally important tidbit is that IBM is focusing on Sun (as mentioned elsewhere).

Both companies are sound companies and it should be interesting to see the battles fought out.

Where's Sun main money maker? Its enterprise servers. But somehow, I feel that Linux is slowly nibbling profits from Sun. Maybe it is just a illusion from IBM, but it is a mighty good one.

And now, Sun is spreading themselves too thin into markets they aren't sure they would get a profit. A small company like Sun should focus on its main money maker and try to extend its life till it's books get in black again.

Competition is always good

LOL, you ahve to be kidding they ahve tens of thousands of employees! They are actually a very experienced and large company.

I'm comparing with the likes of IBM, Intel and Microsoft, not Lindows.com.

I thought Scott McNealy's Comdex speech (http://www.sun.com/aboutsun/media/features/mcnealy_keynote.html) was much clearer about direction for Sun.

1980's = Workstation to allow for computing rather than glorified typewriters which were PCs back then
1990's = Servers to create genuine network services distinct from what was going on with individual desktops
2000's = Large Server to reduce corporate complexity

I think the Sun Ray demo was very powerful and offers a real paradigm shift for the corporate desktop. Its a pity that Fowler didn't expand on this. I found McNealy quite inspirational and Fowler sort of more blah blah.

If you had been following SUN for a while, they are making a gradual transition into the software space as the margins on hardware is not very high.

Software on the other hand, you can get your margins very high through good designs, code re-use and so-forth.

As for GNOME and Solaris, good move. It is about time Windows advocates stopped throwing stones in their glass house and started to see the SUN.

Funny how we are going in a 180. Thank god the aint-trendy brigard aren't going to stuff things up again.

Things were great 20years ago. Dumb terminals, mainframes, and things "just worked". Then the "ain't trendy brigade" graced the workplace spreading the "good news" of PC's. Talk about the most effective way of increasing the TCO like a rocket. The only reason why Windows has become cheaper is because the number of available MSCE's are so great, and the pay is so low, the MSCE's look at the kid at McDonalds with envy.

I said it once, and I'll say it again, removing Dumb Terminals/Thin Clients was the most stupid thing ever done.

Agreed.

A major advantage of Unix systems is that average users can download and compile their own code and share this out with coworkers. Which means that you still have the employee empowerment advantages of unmanaged PCs; with the stability and support of dumb terminals. I used a X-term setups during most of the early 90's and it was a wonderful environment; I got a hassle free high power environment.

The lockdown mainframe environment drove people to put crucial systems on PCs during the 1980s. I'm seeing the same effect today with locked down PCs driving people to put crucial company data on personal laptops and PDAs. Employees obviously need both freedom and a high quality stable environment and I don't see XP-Professional making it cost effective for business to offer this.

Someone just brought the subject up, so I'll take this chance to ask:

What's the size of Sun? A couple of weeks ago I was speaking with someone from our Personal Dept. and his point of view (and according to him, not only his but that of many) was that Microsoft could buy Sun anytime. I couldn't agree to that but it left me thinking about what's the real size of Sun Microsystems.

Anyone got a nice comparison?

Sorry

In 2001 Sun stated they had 39,000 employees worldwide.

http://www.sun.com.au/aboutsun/australia.html

"However, we believe that Java's upcoming XML, JSR and Java Language Directory capabilities will be a boost for the Sun platform."
k, so I no what XML is, and I also know that JSR = Java Specification Request, but what the hell is Java Language Directory. And why is 'JSR' upcomming?`?

Gonzalo -

Suns market cap is 12,895,000,000 (that is the total market value of all outstanding shares)

MS is know to have 46,000,000,000+ in the bank, so yes they could by them in a hostile take over if they could find sellers.

" Mr Fowler realizes that a lot of additional software might be needed to be downloaded and installed separately by admins, for example, multimedia software."

I think it was a Red hat 8 review, eugenia said multimedia belongs on the business desktop: marketing and sales, and design groups for example. It needs to be there out of the box, not a post-install headache.Anyone who thinks multimedia does not belong on the corporate desktop is not paying attention.Even if it's not strictly business use, say a developer who also wants a few games. Most people want one PC, not a fleet.Engineers are especially loyal to Sun, and often have to have a PC next to their Sparcs so they can have compatibility with PC users. Put it all in one box and kiss MS goodbye.

Also, Sun might say it's not interested in the home desktop, but good multimedia is key for penetration there as well, which will rebound back to business use.

There are new java capabilities based on XML, coming up. The "upcoming" is going to that, not to the JSR.

It depends on whether Sun has the option of using the poison pill. If so, not even a gorila like MS could buy them. I know, for example, that Novell has such a contingency plan, so MS couldn't touch them, even though MS salivated after Novell's NDS.

But even if MS could, would it want to buy Sun? Sun is staunchily anti-Microsoft. It's a matter of pride and corporate culture. If MS bought them, they would witness an unprecedented hemorragy of engineers, who would probably form a company that sells SPARC-based servers.

They can do that! SPARC is an open architecture, and Solaris is fully UNIX98 compliant, about the most standards-compliant and open OS.

Or they could go to Fujitsu and improve their range of SPARC-based servers.

Microsoft would gain very little, and it would cost them a lot of money. I don't think they can justify such a move, in the eyes of shareholders and BOD.

My view on if it could happen is more or less the same.

But MS could buy Sun, as in they have the money. I didn't have any figures so that's why I asked. Thanks.

Not even the Red Hat Linux version of Sun that will be available next year...

That should read

Not even the Sun version of Red hat Linux that will be available next year...

Any comments?

Michael Vinícius de Oliveira
BLueEyedOS Webmaster

I'd say that for any high technology worker, and probably most others as well, multimedia support on the desktop is vital. Increasingly training, updates and briefings are provided as .mp3/.mpg/.ra or webcasts. If your desktop doesn't support multimedia then you're sunk.

Stephen

mario asked:

> But even if MS could, would it want to buy Sun?

It could be:
But even if MS could, would it want to buy Apple?

And the response will probably be the same as mario did.

Some moves are not worth the cost.

Both SPARC and Solaris uses a lot of patents owned by Sun. With the patents, Microsoft can successfully prevent such a thing to happen (plus, they would probably sell SPARC to some other company).

Besides, you are over-estimating the engineer's reaction. THEY AREN'T ANTI-MS. The people on top may be, but the people working couldn't care less, as long it pays. And if working for Microsoft pays, so be it.

Plus, the working enviroment in Microsoft is way more better than Sun from what I heard. People rather get a low-rank, low-paying job at Microsoft than to work in some company like Sun which treats its engineers like assets.

But anyway, Microsoft have little to no reason to buy Sun. There isn't a reason to. What would they need? They aren't, for sure, interested in hardware. They have something more or less better than Java (if not, it would be easy and cheaper making it better), it is staunchly anti-UNIX since they sold Xenix, and not really the biggest fan of open standards.

I'm not sure about Java, but OpenOffice.org would be a hard puppy, unless you guys want something without a fast native UI. It requires a lot of work.

when nobody really owns SPARC?

As for the working environment in Microsoft vs Sun: I heard exactly the opposite from what you did.

Besides, what's wrong if a company treats you as an asset? Would you prefere to be a liability? Asset is good, asset means recognition, respect, it means creating useful stuff. I am sure MS regards their engineers as assets, too.

MS vs Sun:

But even if MS could, would it want to buy Sun?

The answer of course is no. Sun doesn't make money, and Microsoft is not in the business of making bad business decisions. Microsoft is very good at making money on technology, and realizes that producing your own hardware is just not the way to do that. Oh sure, MS makes keyboards, mice, game devices, and such. These are fairly cheap though and are mostly designed to enhance market presence, and specifically sell more software. XBOX is a great example. MS doesn't make money on XBOX units. In fact, they lose money. They DO make money on software titles and platform licencing though, that is the catch.

If we compare some interesting financials:
Sun:
Market Cap: 12.37B (Shares Out: 3.115B)
Earnings: -0.16 $/shr Employees: (from above) ~39K
Earnings/Emp: ~-$12.8K/yr

MS:
Market Cap: 303.1B (Shares Out: 5.346 B)
Earnings: 1.68 $/shr Employees: ~55K
Earnings/Emp: ~$163K/yr

Microsoft is not so much a bohemith as an ultra efficient capitalist machine. You'll notice that by total employee count MS is not much bigger than Sun. The trick is that they understand the business of making money on computers better.

Sun vs Apple:

I found it a little disheartening that Mr. Fowler dismissed Apple in such an out-of-hand way. The price point for these Xserve servers is really not at all outrageous. From my standpoint as an admin, I would rather have a fully supported corporate UNIX server on which my users can run Word, Excel, and PowerPoint, as well as any multimedia apps they are interested in. Apple's remote desktop seems a grand solution to me. Also, since Apple is practically in bed with MS, they've done a good deal of work to integrate with Windows networks. I just don't see myself with a bunch of PCs and Macs on people's desktops and a Solaris server behind it all. I would definitely buy an Xserve before I'd buy a Solaris server box.

"MS is know to have 46,000,000,000+ in the bank, so yes they could by them in a hostile take over if they could find sellers."

And assuming the government would approve the sale, which they probably wouldn't given Microsoft's current status in the eyes of the government. I'm sure the government would step in on this one and prevent the sale.

At now the Solaris operating system is the best Unix variant and it is more better than Linux.
Sun Microsystems will release in next year Sun Desktop Linux operating system and it becomes the best and I think will be in the first place in the world.

Sun Microsystems is company that will have the best Linux operating systems and tehnologies.

At now there is best Linux operating systems to use:
SuSE 8.1, Mandrake 9.0, Slackware 8.1, Red Hat 8.0.

rajan, how can Sun sell SPARC to another company when nobody really owns SPARC?

Sun owns a lot of SPARC related patents (presumely), plus it is the most important member of SPARC (the non-profit corp).

As for the working environment in Microsoft vs Sun: I heard exactly the opposite from what you did.

Wow, what a suprise. Well, I heard from a lot of people. One of the best software companies to be a engineer in is Microsoft, they practically respect you, and not treat you like an asset or rather liablity. I know a retired ex-Sun ex-Microsoft engineer. Guess where he prefer to work? Althouh the pay is the same, fringe benefits almost the same, he still prefered Microsoft.

Besides, what's wrong if a company treats you as an asset? Would you prefere to be a liability?

Engineers are humans, not assets. Assets, BTW, can become liablity, that's why Microsoft didn't have huge massive layoffs, while Sun everytime they go into the red do. (In the early days, Microsoft did have many brushes with the red in their books).

----

Mystic TaCo: Microsoft is not so much a bohemith as an ultra efficient capitalist machine. You'll notice that by total employee count MS is not much bigger than Sun. The trick is that they understand the business of making money on computers better.

Yeah, I have to agree. Sun normally follows the hype (dotcom, remember?), while Microsoft normally makes the hype. That's the difference. But one thing about Microsoft is that they never make business decissions just to piss their competitors off. StarOffice 5.x for example was a big huge waste of money and effort, all just to piss Microsoft off.

Mystic TaCo: I would definitely buy an Xserve before I'd buy a Solaris server box.

From what I have read, you are totally not in Sun's target market. You are in Microsoft Windows 2000 Server's target market.

Sun Microsystems will release in next year Sun Desktop Linux operating system and it becomes the best and I think will be in the first place in the world.

I recently saw screenshots of Solaris' GNOME, and if anyone wants to use them, they are in for a lot of eye torture. Anyway, msot people associate Linux with Red Hat, and Solaris would have to spend a lot of money to promote its version of Linux over Red Hat, and that would have hefty cost over Solaris.

I doubt Sun would be #1 in the Linux scene. Heck, even IDC and Gartner agrees with me.

At now there is best Linux operating systems to use:
SuSE 8.1, Mandrake 9.0, Slackware 8.1, Red Hat 8.0.

I would slash out Mandrake 9.0. Red Hat 8.0 also would be slashed out, as much as I like it, it is clearly a rough .0 release.

I think you are wrong there. The way I see it making Start Office / Open Office available was a stroke of genious. Microsoft dominate the desktop primarilly because of the lock-in effect of "Defacto Document exchange formats". Most of the worlds documents are written in Word 97 compatible formats and until recently no alternative application read these documents well enough. Any that did were also Windows applications (EG Lotus WordPro). The existance of OpenOffice on Unix for the first time allows the specification of a corporate desktop environment NOT based on Windows. The other lynch-pins are the Evolution plug-in for Microsoft Exchange Servers and Netscape Navigator.

I work for a company with 35000 workers 75% of which can now be serviced adequately with PCs NOT based on Windows.... Microsoft knows this, beware the next lock-in technology !

Bob

1. I'm a former Sun employee, just laid off a few weeks ago. There is indeed a poison pill provision to deter a hostile takeover. Besides, as others have pointed out, the gov't would most likely get involved anyway if HP, IBM, or MS tried it.