Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 26th Aug 2009 18:08 UTC
Oracle and SUN "Sun Microsystems' product plans are up in the air pending its acquisition by Oracle, but the company's chip engineers continue to present new designs in the hope they'll see the light of day. At the Hot Chips conference at Stanford University on Tuesday, Sun presented plans for a security accelerator chip that it said would reduce encryption costs for applications such as VoIP calls and online banking Web sites. The chip, known as a coprocessor, will be included on the same silicon as Rainbow Falls, the code name for the follow-on to Sun's multithreaded Ultrasparc T2 processor."
Thread beginning with comment 380846
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: Again and again...
by jwwf on Thu 27th Aug 2009 04:40 UTC in reply to "RE: Again and again..."
jwwf
Member since:
2006-01-19

What I think is also interesting is how Sun has removed UltraSPARC-AT10 related code from OpenSolaris - so one really wonders where Sun's future is, in regards to hardware design. I simply don't see Sun being in the SPARC business for much longer as Fujitsu are having less of an interest in that area as well.


It's a pretty unambiguously bad sign I'd say. But then again, Sun has been in a bad spot regarding processor design for probably half of the time they've been making processors. If it was all about processors, Alpha and MIPS would be alive and SPARC and x86 would be dead already.

I can't see anybody exiting the high-end Solaris business yet--I'd expect HP to drop HP-UX first. But I find it fascinating how IBM bought Transitive, and then completely buried them after the failed Sun merger (website doesn't even exist anymore). So maybe the brains at IBM figured they could keep the high end Solaris market without SPARC.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[3]: Again and again...
by kaiwai on Thu 27th Aug 2009 05:47 in reply to "RE[2]: Again and again..."
kaiwai Member since:
2005-07-06

It's a pretty unambiguously bad sign I'd say. But then again, Sun has been in a bad spot regarding processor design for probably half of the time they've been making processors. If it was all about processors, Alpha and MIPS would be alive and SPARC and x86 would be dead already.


Things started going backwards when their UltraSPARC III delivery started to slip; if it were delivered on time and there was a quick transition to Fujitsu SPARC64 processor - Sun would have remained competitive and profitable. The problem is that that they take too long to make any decisions - decisions that need to be made within days not weeks or months as what happen with Sun. Every decision Sun made seemed to be long, laborious and management never willing to stand up and say, "this is our vision and by hell or high water - if you as an employee are going to undermine it, we'll boot you out".

One only needs to look at the forces within Sun who undermined open sourcing Solaris, undermined getting Solaris on x86 as a first class citizen, the undermining of open sourcing Java. If management at Sun had a backbone - those involved would be kicked out.

I can't see anybody exiting the high-end Solaris business yet--I'd expect HP to drop HP-UX first. But I find it fascinating how IBM bought Transitive, and then completely buried them after the failed Sun merger (website doesn't even exist anymore). So maybe the brains at IBM figured they could keep the high end Solaris market without SPARC.


Solaris has a future without SPARC but it would involve Sun accepting that reality instead of pushing products that aren't pulling their weight - when I mean pulling their weight, I mean bringing in the cash not only to make a cash profit but to also cover the investment required on all the components that make up the product. Sun would be better off developing high end chipsets and associated hardware and adopting Intel's processor. There is no reason why Sun couldn't put together a 32 way Xeon big iron running Solaris with all the same level of reliability as their SPARC hardware but without the massively uncompetitive price tag.

Edited 2009-08-27 06:00 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[4]: Again and again...
by etherealsoul on Thu 27th Aug 2009 07:58 in reply to "RE[3]: Again and again..."
etherealsoul Member since:
2009-07-01

Well I don't see why it's a bad sign, after all Sun business for quite a long time was HW based. True that they should have take less time to make decisions, but again their purpose was all about over-engineering. Still today, costumers have Sun systems running for over 5 years in a row and they worry is if the data center needs electrical maintenance and they go "I won't be able to show the uptime anymore".
Anyway, the CMT design is quite good for multi-thread apps check "http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Sun-CMT-Servers-Set-New-World-bw-1913... though for data warehousing it's best the Sparc64.

Just my though's ;)

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[4]: Again and again...
by dvzt on Thu 27th Aug 2009 18:12 in reply to "RE[3]: Again and again..."
dvzt Member since:
2008-10-23

There is no reason why Sun couldn't put together a 32 way Xeon big iron running Solaris with all the same level of reliability as their SPARC hardware but without the massively uncompetitive price tag.


Can you hot-plug CPU/memory boards with Xeon (or Opteron) servers like you can with mid-range and high-end SPARC systems? A lot of customers want this functionality and still buy RISC servers because of that.

Reply Parent Score: 1