Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sat 3rd May 2008 20:44 UTC, submitted by Moochman
Oracle and SUN Engadget got the chance to sit down with Jonathan Schwartz, the pony-tailed CEO of Sun Microsystems. Being the gadget blog that they are, Engadget asked Schwartz about the long-missing JavaFX Mobile platform Sun has promised, Java on the iPhone, and competing with Microsoft as an open source vendor.
Thread beginning with comment 312721
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Shame ...
by ciplogic on Sun 4th May 2008 01:03 UTC in reply to "Shame ..."
ciplogic
Member since:
2006-12-22

The US market from one side, the Linux and Google from other side makes Sun to lose a lot of it's strength. The Core2 CPU from Intel makes Sparc CPU not so attractive, and AMD based solutions are lower on performance that equivalent Xeon CPUs. So most software goes on outsourcing and opensourcing as Sun and Novel does.
Swartz anyway has a lot of achievements from Sun like promoting Java, make it opensource, promoting Netbeans and make Eclipse project to attach to Netbeans foundation. Mostly, looking over the windows, you can see the sun, in freedom.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[2]: Shame ...
by andrewg on Sun 4th May 2008 10:35 in reply to "RE: Shame ..."
andrewg Member since:
2005-07-06

AMD still beats Intel in the PPC market segment. But thats going to disapear soon when Intel releases chips with Quickpath.

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080430-ps3s-cell-cpu-tops-hi...

Sun has an excellent offering in a number of areas. For webservers, databases and file servers the T1000, and T2000 are ahead of anything else especially in terms of performance per Watt but in general any application where you need a lot of threads. With AMD they have a competitive HPC offering.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[3]: Shame ...
by segedunum on Sun 4th May 2008 15:02 in reply to "RE[2]: Shame ..."
segedunum Member since:
2005-07-06

For webservers, databases and file servers the T1000, and T2000 are ahead of anything else especially in terms of performance per Watt

Such metrics are pretty meaningless overall. All CPU makers now, including AMD and Intel, are talking about putting more cores on a chip and doing more in terms of parallel applications and threading (corner cases for performance improvements really) when people really want to do a task twice the size in half the time and get more through - and the x86-64 processors will still always cream SPARC there. In the seven years since I seriously looked at Linux/x86 and Solaris/SPARC head-to-head, 4370 pystones/sec on an UltraSPARC versus 17,543 pystones/sec on a 1.4GHz Athlon was a pretty big no brainer, and that's why lots of academic institutions in particular jumped off. I don't see that the situation has improved.

Backing yourself into the 'performance per watt' bracket is a very tight and expensive niche:

http://www.imorphous.com/2006/08/17/evaluating-suns-sun-fire-t1000-...
http://blogs.smugmug.com/don/2006/08/15/sun-fire-coolthreads-t1000-...
http://blogs.smugmug.com/don/2006/08/15/sun-fire-coolthreads-t1000-...

Punchline:

http://blogs.smugmug.com/don/2006/08/15/sun-fire-coolthreads-t1000-...

It's not even close. Some of the comments are the funniest thing about it.

Even worse, all of the benchmarks that Sun throws around for these things themselves require some fairly specific configuring of certain software on Solaris, and recompiling in Forte or Sun Compiler Studio (whatever it's called now) as Sun reps have been telling you for years whenever a gcc query has popped up. Quite frankly, a lot of people decided that it all wasn't worth the hassle years ago.

I don't know why Sun continues to sell SPARC in this market segment, and they've been getting burnt for some time now. It gets eaten by any x86-64 machine in terms of performance, which Sun sell anyway, it doesn't rake in any real energy savings versus the competition and it's significantly more expensive.

Edited 2008-05-04 15:17 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 1