Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 6th Apr 2009 00:04 UTC, submitted by google_ninja
In the News We've been following the recent news about IBM potentially buying Sun, and the internet had more or less accepted that big blue was going to be the new owners of Sun Microsystems. However, the omnipresent "people close to the matter" have told the New York Times that IBM has withdrawn its offer, and that the deal is now off.
Thread beginning with comment 357280
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Synergy between Apple and Sun...
by _yc_ on Mon 6th Apr 2009 09:11 UTC
_yc_
Member since:
2007-04-03

I can't help thinking that there is a pretty good complementary fit and potential for synergy between Apple and Sun Microsystems if Steve wanted to go into the high end server market. Considering that Sun is dirt cheap right now with a market cap under 7 Billion and Apple has 25 Billion in the bank. Sun's technology alone is worth that money not to mention their high end customer base which is difficult for Apple to crack alone.

1. Both companies have great software and hardware.
2. Both companies have a processor design group.
3. Sun does high end servers while Apple does everything else.
4. Apple already plans to integrate Sun's ZFS.
5. NeXT Step ran on on Sun OS at one point.

Who knows, may be Eric Schmidt can advise Steve and help pull it off.

The question is: Is there money to be made by Apple in the high end server market? I think the answer is yes. Apple could invest and enhance all of Sun's products and become a force in the high end server market. Apple is very well positioned in the industry to weather the recession and perhaps it is time for Apple to seize the moment and be bold.

Just imagine "powerful and reliable high end servers that are easy to use" from Apple/Sun. Imagine Cocoa/WebObjects running on top of enhanced version of OS X / Solaris with Java integrated for application development or imagine Sun server technologies trickling down to OS X servers.

Apple would be the only company that truly covers all scales of computing with it's own hardware and software. From wearable iPods, to handhelds, laptops, desktops, low end and high end servers.

Time will tell.

Reply Score: 6

tyrione Member since:
2005-11-21

I can't help thinking that there is a pretty good complementary fit and potential for synergy between Apple and Sun Microsystems if Steve wanted to go into the high end server market. Considering that Sun is dirt cheap right now with a market cap under 7 Billion and Apple has 25 Billion in the bank. Sun's technology alone is worth that money not to mention their high end customer base which is difficult for Apple to crack alone.

1. Both companies have great software and hardware.
2. Both companies have a processor design group.
3. Sun does high end servers while Apple does everything else.
4. Apple already plans to integrate Sun's ZFS.
5. NeXT Step ran on on Sun OS at one point.

Who knows, may be Eric Schmidt can advise Steve and help pull it off.

The question is: Is there money to be made by Apple in the high end server market? I think the answer is yes. Apple could invest and enhance all of Sun's products and become a force in the high end server market. Apple is very well positioned in the industry to weather the recession and perhaps it is time for Apple to seize the moment and be bold.

Just imagine "powerful and reliable high end servers that are easy to use" from Apple/Sun. Imagine Cocoa/WebObjects running on top of enhanced version of OS X / Solaris with Java integrated for application development or imagine Sun server technologies trickling down to OS X servers.

Apple would be the only company that truly covers all scales of computing with it's own hardware and software. From wearable iPods, to handhelds, laptops, desktops, low end and high end servers.

Time will tell.


Openstep did run on top of the Solaris Kernel/Filesystem. NeXTSTEP 3.2 ran on top of IBM hardware but was faster than AIX so they put an emulation layer for NS 3.2 to run on top of IBM hardware thus making sure IBM didn't license NS and effectively kill AIX. That was one piece of company [NeXT] history I always found truly pathetic on IBM's part.

Openstep was ported to Solaris to be thee Desktop/Development Environment. Even Terminal.app was Openstep certified in ObjC/Cocoa [today's terms]. The political squabbling over who gets what percentage of sale for Hardware/OS and which drove the sale [Hardware or OS] destroyed that relationship.

Both camps sabotaged the Openstep future between respective companies.

If there were a merger I highly doubt Schwartz would survive. He was not well liked at NeXT while he ran Lighthouse Design.

Reply Parent Score: 3

tylerdurden Member since:
2009-03-17

Can you provide some links to where NS was running natively on IBM HW faster than AIX?

Reply Parent Score: 1

puenktchen Member since:
2007-07-27

that's not the way apple works. they'll probably try to hire suns engineers and grow organically instead of buying a dying company. apple doesn't really need sun, their enterprise strategy doesn't look like they are hell bound to get into that market anyway and enterprise isn't the place to make a good profit by selling hardware. ibm learned that lesson, sold most of their hardware business and moved on to services.

on the other hand, maybe apple is just to successful to go on with it's rather conservative strategy and should use their war chest and expand more aggressively.

Reply Parent Score: 1

tylerdurden Member since:
2009-03-17

Huh? Enterprise is the best place to make money off HW since vendors can afford higher profit margins.

IBM got out of the commodity/personal computer business. They still make plenty of servers and mainframes, where they have higher profit margins. In fact IBM, depending on the quarter, has sometimes surpassed HP's volume in the datacenter/server segment.

Seriously, do some of the posters in this site even know what they are talking about? Or is this just a massive center where kiddies can play arm chair CEO from their parents' basement?

Reply Parent Score: 2

_yc_ Member since:
2007-04-03

You're probably right. There is always the not-invented-here-syndrome. Also, while Solaris has enterprise features that Apple could use, they have a lot of extra baggage that Apple would not be interested in.

Apple will likely continue to enhance its platform in house. ZFS was a big win for Apple. Steady as she goes.

Time will tell.

Reply Parent Score: 1

MikeekiM Member since:
2005-11-16

Plus Sun has developed the Most Advanced Enterprise software stack:
J2EE 5:

- Server Side Components
- Distributed Objects
- Asynchronous Messaging
- Web Services
- Persistence
- Security
- Resource Pooling
- Concurrency
- Transactional Integrity

And easy to code, that's the breakthrough.

Reply Parent Score: 2

JeffS Member since:
2005-07-12

Amen to that. People underestimate how powerful and useful the full JEE 5 Stack really is. And with EJB3 and JPA, it became really easy to write code for it, in spite of what the Spring crowd rants about. ;-)

But the good news is, regardless of who acquires Sun (likely IBM or Oracle (Software),HP (Hardware), we're talking about huge vendors that make huge amounts of money with their respective JEE 5 App servers (WebSphere, WebLogic, OAS), so the full JEE 5 stack will around, and continually supported and improved, for a very long time.

Reply Parent Score: 2