Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 4th Sep 2017 22:16 UTC
Oracle and SUN

Remember, back in December 2016, when there were rumours Oracle was killing Solaris? And how a month later, Solaris effectively switched to maintenance mode, and then to a "continuous deliver model"?

The news from the ex-Sun community jungle drums is that the January rumours were true and Oracle laid off the core talent of the Solaris and SPARC teams on Friday. That surely has to mean a maintenance-only future for the product range, especially with Solaris 12 cancelled. A classic Oracle "silent EOL", no matter what they claim.

With the hardware deprecated, my guess is that's the last of the Sun assets Oracle acquired written off. Just how good were Oracle's decisions on buying Sun?

Sun's Solaris is dead.

Bryan Cantrill on this news (this Bryan Cantrill):

As had been rumored for a while, Oracle effectively killed Solaris on Friday. When I first saw this, I had assumed that this was merely a deep cut, but in talking to Solaris engineers still at Oracle, it is clearly much more than that. It is a cut so deep as to be fatal: the core Solaris engineering organization lost on the order of 90% of its people, including essentially all management.


Judging merely by its tombstone, the life of Solaris can be viewed as tragic: born out of wedlock between Sun and AT&T and dying at the hands of a remorseless corporate sociopath a quarter century later. And even that may be overstating its longevity: Solaris may not have been truly born until it was made open source, and - certainly to me, anyway - it died the moment it was again made proprietary. But in that shorter life, Solaris achieved the singular: immortality for its revolutionary technologies. So while we can mourn the loss of the proprietary embodiment of Solaris (and we can certainly lament the coarse way in which its technologists were treated!), we can rejoice in the eternal life of its technologies - in illumos and beyond!

Thread beginning with comment 648623
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Load balancers
by tony on Tue 5th Sep 2017 21:25 UTC
Member since:

I think it was load balancers that killed Sun (or rather, gave it a wound that it never sought appropriate action for). Back in the late 90s/Early 2000s, web sites were what pushed the server buying for the most part. You could do it with x86 or you could do it with Unix/RISC, the later being far more expensive.

Sun's idea of a web server, even after the dot-com crash, was a $25,000 server (E280R, for example). Dell would sell you a pizza-box for around $2K. The E280R was faster, but not nearly 10x faster. It was more reliable, but behind a load balancer it didn't much matter. You could scale out as you needed.

Sun didn't get that it couldn't sell a $25K web server anymore until it was far too late.

There was also its dumb-ass battle with Linux.

Edited 2017-09-05 21:26 UTC

Reply Score: 5