A recent assessment of Sun Microsystems Inc.’s enterprise Linux strategy by Boston-based analyst firm Aberdeen Inc., cautions IT managers and decision makers about Sun’s internal bias toward Solaris and the perception that Sun isn’t serious about Linux.
Analyst Firm Urges Caution on Sun’s Linux Strategy
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
21 Comments
2003-09-24 2:35 pm
2003-09-24 2:55 pm
Noone seems to know what Sun’s strategy is. Which is understandable, since Sun does not either. They change their mind every other day on what their vision is, how they will accomplish it and how they’re going to support it.
However, I think that they’re gonna whistle a different tune when they see how well the Java Desktop does (e.g. How much $$ it makes them). A corporate name like Sun backing the enterprise desktop is just the catylist that Linux needs to build some confidence among big business decision makers in that arena.
Sun may prove me wrong and change their fickle minds again. But I think the writing is on the wall. They have been a hardware company all along. With hardware not being a big seller and with the introduction of the 64 bit computing on x86, I think Sun needs to shift gears while they are still a name that merits some form of respect.
Noone seems to know what Sun’s strategy is. Which is understandable, since Sun does not either. They change their mind every other day on what their vision is, how they will accomplish it and how they’re going to support it.
It doesn’t take a genius to understand Sun’s Java Enterprise business model:
* Don’t make money by selling products, make money off service contracts. Offload a portion of the initial outlay onto your customers, and eat the rest yourself.
* Use Linux for desktops and Solaris for servers, as Linux is better suited for desktops and Solaris is better suited for servers.
Why is this so difficult for people to comprehend?
Obviously Sun is biased towards Solaris, who isn’t? It is without doubt a better platform in most aspects!
So if you have that up your sleeve, how can you talk about bias? It’s not about bias at all, it’s about just favouring the better product.
This is not supposed to be any FUD or anything against Linux, sure Linux is powerful but Solaris is simply so far a much better product.
So caution about the analyst group Aberdeen as they’re obviously biased by media focus on Linux rather than benchmarks!
They want anybody thinking of buying IT equipment, to think of Sun. Their workstation market seems to be tanking but they are still doing pretty good with servers. I think their linux strategy is to build up their workstation and low end server market. If you buy 50 or 60 workstations from HP, you will probably look at HP for servers. Now you’ll be able to get your linux workstations from Sun. You can also get your linux web servers and low end file servers from Sun. For high end machines, however, Solaris is a better choice than linux.
It’s true that they’ve been fairly inconsistent on anything non-Solaris on SPARC but if it makes them money (and their linux desktop may just do the trick for them) they will keep supporting it.
” * Use Linux for desktops and Solaris for servers, as Linux is better suited for desktops and Solaris is better suited for servers. ”
Sun has openly and officially admitted to not having any kind of strategy where Linux is concerned, whether it’s on the desktop or on the server. They don’t care one whit about Linux. They are selling a product with no intention of seeing it go anywhere in the future. THAT is BAD business and BAD customer relations. Sun doesn’t even have a clear strategy on it’s Solaris offerings. Solaris x86 is an on again, off again, gone again thing. Solaris for Sparcs doesn’t have the plethera of software for desktop application deployment that Microsoft Windows nor even x86 Linux has, not to mention the high price for a decently performing workstation.
The ONLY thing that Sun really has going other than it’s server and legacy hardware sales is Java, but even that is a questionable long term investment. There are other crossplatform languages that require less overhead than Java and are just as solidly supported by big name companies.
Sun is still mired in the commercial Unix golden years of the 80s and early 90’s. They have yet to show a cohesive long term strategy since the mid 90’s when Java became the hottest fad language and Solaris x86 was touted as a Microsoft killer, until people looked at the unreal price tag per station. Keeping all your eggs in one basket isn’t a good idea.
Use Linux for desktops and Solaris for servers, as Linux is better suited for desktops and Solaris is better suited for servers.
They will only use Linux for Mad Hatter until Solaris is capable of replacing it, and when that happens the next Mad Hatter will ship with solaris. The idea is to get everyone on to the product with the Linux buzzword, then migrate them with an upgrade to Solaris. Assuming they do this fairly cleanly people wont really notice as long as it looks and behaves the same.
Assuming they do this fairly cleanly people wont really notice as long as it looks and behaves the same
They’d notice the hefty price-hike that would probably accompany it. I don’t think they would sell Solaris at Linux prices.
they could as long as their agreement stated that you couldn’t use that box as a server and only as an end-user work-station. that way they qwouldn’t cannibalize their own market unlike what intel just did to their xeon with the p4ee
Sun only stated that they have no Linux strategy for SERVERS. They are putting alot of effort into their Linux desktop initiative….at least for two more months.
Am I the only one who wants to play paintball with an unarmed Jonathan Schwartz?
>>[analysts warned of] the perception that Sun isn’t serious about Linux.
Well, Sun’s executive vice president of software, Jonathan Schwartz, said last week: “Also, let me really clear about our Linux strategy. We don’t have one. We don’t at all.”
So, duh, be wary of buying your Linux products and services from this company. I wonder if McNealy is spanking Schwartz for this comment as we speak.
>>A corporate name like Sun backing the enterprise desktop is just the catylist that Linux needs to build some confidence among big business decision makers in that arena. <<
1) Is this “java desktop” really that big a deal? I use XP and Linux with openoffice. No problems with either. I have no need for sun’s “java desktop.” I doubt anybody else needs it either.
2) Sun is not backing linux. Quite the opposite. Sun wants x86 on the desktop – not linux.
Sun ships linux on intel server, it has a linux based desktop, it provides support to customers who buy them. what more do you want? I think this company does more than anyone out there for linux. Just because they dont vocally tout that linux is the only way to go, it doesn’t mean they would leave their linux customers behind. The things to look for when you buy an equipment from any company is whether you buy support and if they would stick to providing support for the software/hardware.
I personally think that such a large company like Sun would not leave users in the dark and it would not make sense to leave users in the dark and they very well know it. So, dont go by what certain executives say at various interviews.
Think if the solution/bill would really fit your business. Not what the company’s one executive said in some random interview. Come on, why would a company spend so much money delivering products on linux out the door when they are not going to support it in a few months ??
So, I personally think the analyst has made a really bad judgement here and should really think before making statements on any company
Aberdeen Inc would be VERY happy.
It is very dishonest for them to completely dismiss SUN when they have said over and over again that they see Linux on the desktop and workstation and Solaris on the x86/x86-64 (via their Opteron port) and SPARC.
They have a two way stratergy. 64bit Solaris for x86-64 and SPARC. Just because they don’t support Itanium, doesn’t mean that they are exclusively SPARC.
However, what really gave me kicks was their assertion that “Itanium will be a sucessful 64bit platform”, interesting, and how much as Intel made out of their Itanium line? do I hear the sound of accountants screaming over the loses?
Lets look at the workstation front. I can get a Blade 1500 from SUN for US$2995 or I could get a HP Workstation with an Itanium for US$3376. For US$400 more you get a workstation that has no software, limited hardware support and worse still, lack luster performance.
These are some of the moments when leaders said one of those silliest thing that will reflect on them in the future such as when Bill Gates said 640K should be enough for everyone.
Ofcourse SUN has a strategy. The stratedy is to put linux on the desktop and Solaris on the back-end. Why would SUN work so hard to develop the mad hatter project if they don’t intend to capitalize on it ????
Either Jonathan is totally confused about it or he was misquoted. For SUN sake, I hope it was the latter
A better way of putting it is this. They don’t develop Linux, the distros do, they mearly license it and bundle it on the server. The distributions map the stratergy for Linux, all SUN does it provide the hardware.
Why should SUN spend millions developing a distribution simply to say, “look, we have a Linux distro and for some reason that means we have a stratergy”.
As for some person saying that they want to move people from Linux to Solaris on the desktop. Are you dense? please, Solaris is atleast 2 years away in terms of feature, in regards to matching Linux in desktop capabilities.
As for the other person who said, “I don’t think they would sell Solaris at Linux prices”, yes they would, $50 per user. If you want to use Solaris on the desktop instead of Linux, there is nothing stopping you from deploying it now.
Oh, and Anonymous (IP: —.59.22.42.Dial1.Denver1.Level3.net), SUN doesn’t care what you run. You are of $0 value to them. They care about the corporation with 1000+ users, not Joe-Smo from some backwater town with 1 pub, 2 toilets and 5 residents.
How hard is it for people like you to comprehend. You don’t represent the masses and you certainly don’t represent what big business want in regards to their IT precurement policy.
If a company like SUN offers $50 per user for the desktop, $100 per user for server, companies will be diving over each other for it, and it has worked. They have already signed up over 100,000 users, thats not including the 100 or so businesses sitting on the waiting list.
I personally think the board of directors employ’s people with the same make up as the CEO and as long as they all agree with the CEO their fine. I was just wondering how many weeks will this business plan last for?
they could as long as their agreement stated that you couldn’t use that box as a server and only as an end-user work-station. that way they qwouldn’t cannibalize their own market unlike what intel just did to their xeon with the p4ee
The truth is, Sun makes very little income on Solaris itself. And it doesn’t care whether you’ll use that workstation as a server, or not. Solaris for sparc is free for up to 4 CPU systems. Whether you use those systems as a workstation or server, they don’t care. Sun never had a “server license” strategy.
Haven’t the Aberdeen Group been discredited as MS lap dog reasearch department because of a few extremely dodgy reports. Including the MS commisioned report about how Windows is more secure than Linux because they counted the amount of bugs in the entire OSS community and compared them to the amount of XP? http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/archive/28118.html
Say say they’re going to indemnify their customers who use their Linux solution for the desktop. There is an absolute uproar.
Oh, what do we have here:
HP to indemnify Linux customers