Sun Microsystems’ flirtation with AMD continues with the ‘Java Desktop System’ set to make its way onto the Athlon 64 processor. When Sun releases the Linux-based Java Desktop software later this year, it will run on AMD’s Ahtlon 64 processor but only in 32bit mode. Sun plans to rectify this situation “over time” and create a 64bit version of the Java Desktop for AMD’s x86-64bit desktop chip.
Sun Gets Behind Athlon 64 with Linux OS
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
This might be a wierd question(And a big off-topic) but does the java desktop have anything to do with java? Is it written in java, or it is just kde/gnome with a new theme?
Martin
Just Gnome.
But it has good integration with the java runtime and development environmemt. Plus, it serves as a Java marekting too.
Cant MOST distro’s do Opteron/Athlon64 in 32bit mode? I was under the impression that the Opteron series stayed 32bit/x86 compatable.
Oh well, another useless press release.
Now if they got it to run in 64bit mode, that would be usefull. Look how much it helped Suse w/ the Opteron.
If Sun sells this chip inside a nice purple box of theirs with Java Os installed for a reasonable price, I’ll buy it.
I think it would actually be a technical accomplishment for SUN to create an X86 Linux distro that the Opteron could not run in 32-bit mode.
A 64-bit build of Solaris/x86 on a 4-way Opteron system would make for an excellent low-cost server. It seems conceivable that Sun will begin offering such systems in the near future, as opposed to its current Xeon-based x86 offerings.
AFAIK they will have finished porting solaris x86 in Feb 2004.
And Mc.Nealy has hinted that they are considering to release servers/workstations utilising the Opteron in that time period.
Then they are not really behind the Athlon 64, if the JDS only runs in 32bit mode, oh, over time they will make it work in 64bit mode….
By the way, whatever happened to Sun’s JavaOS?!?!
contrasutra,
According to some things I’ve read on Linux sites, Linux is already syupposed to be able to natively use 64bit CPUs.
A 64-bit build of Solaris/x86 on a 4-way Opteron system would make for an excellent low-cost server.
What would be the point? You’d be better running one of the enterprise Linux distros and actually have some sort of ISV support.
According to some things I’ve read on Linux sites, Linux is already syupposed to be able to natively use 64bit CPUs.
It does and has for years.
I know, but its much easier to be able to get a pre-compiled distro that can take advantage of that. Sometimes you dont have time to mess with Gentoo or even recompile your kernel.
A major player supports 64 bit Athalon and everyone rags on them.
Let’s see, MS says they have a windoz beta but won’t be ready until next year. Sun says they have 32 bit Linux with 64 bits to follow. Sun is planning full support. See any difference.
Personally I think that having a UNIX company like Sun actively supporting Linux is a big deal. Who has the largest contract in numbers of seats for Linux to date?
Why the animosity? I don’t get it.
Linux can use all the help it can get, from anywhere it can get it.
Personally I think that having a UNIX company like Sun actively supporting Linux is a big deal.
Meh. All the other UNIX companies already support Linux (we’ll ignore SCO) – IBM, HP/Compaq/DEC, SGI etc. Sun is extremely late on this bandwagon.
Why the animosity? I don’t get it.
Idiocy like http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,4149,1274623,00.asp , support for SCO (to the tune of $2.5Million) and general operational schitzophrenia means that a lot of people are extremely suspicious of Sun.
“Linux can use all the help it can get, from anywhere it can get it.”
Wouldn’t it be more appropriate to say that linux vendors need all the help they can get ? Linux in itself has been doing quite well without any marketing fuss (just take a look at Debian, Slackware, Gentoo, etc.).
The problem with Sun is that they’re guilty of drunk driving : one day, they refuse to port Solaris 9 to x86, the next day (after much noise from end users), they just do it; they have their own platform but prefer to sell AMD’s chips; they depict linux as nonexistent on the server, then they decide to make their own distro; they’re incapable of promoting Solaris/Sparc on the desktop, yet they pretend they’re going to sell Java on AMD x86-64 bit; the list goes on…
I hope they’ll get a ticket for taking decisions while under the influence of alcohol and narcotics 🙂
Sun think Linux sucks, and they think x86 sucks too.
So theyre putting an OS they publically decry on a platform they publically decry, using licensing they publically decry, and we’re expected to believe this is somehow good?
Sounds a lot like SGI’s NT-running visual workstations to me, and we all know what a stunning success that was for SGI.
A couple of weeks ago, I understood sun the Java Desktop is geared specifically towards the enterprise desktop environment and not the server. Correct me if I’m wrong, but I thought the athlon64 is a server chip. To best of my knowledge, the athlon64 FX is for the highend workstation. So why by any chance will SUN be supporting a server chip with their Linux distro?
What would be the point? You’d be better running one of the enterprise Linux distros and actually have some sort of ISV support.
I can’t imagine Sun releasing an AMD64 build of Solaris without releasing an Opteron counterpart to the V60x/V65x. The caliber of support offered by Sun for this hardware greatly exceeds any support offered by Linux ISVs… the same could be said of purchasers of Java Enterprise
Solaris will be available for x86-64 either at the end of this year or the beginning of next year. You can now choose, Solaris for SPARC or Solaris for x86-64. Who said you can’t have a cake (Solaris 64bit) and eat it (run it on x86-64).
What would be the point? You’d be better running one of the enterprise Linux distros and actually have some sort of ISV support.
So you don’t consider the completely SUN One software stack plus Oracle as “enterprise software”?
As for you SCO-SUN conspiracy theories. Take a hint and see a shrink. Thats as sad as saying that HP is in bed with SCO because they refuse to SUE SCO, sell HP-UX and they offer indeminty for their Linux customers.
As for SUN being late to the Linux party, need I remind you that since September 19, 2000, when they purchased Cobalt, they have been selling Linux servers. The only thing they haven’t been doing is selling Linux desktops, but neither has HP, IBM or Dell. They simply hype, bundle and tell people who need support (for products bought off them) to piss-off.
RE: Steven (IP: —.82-131-66.nowhere.mc.videotron.ca) – Posted on 2003-09-25 01:02:17
The problem with Sun is that they’re guilty of drunk driving : one day, they refuse to port Solaris 9 to x86
Solaris 9 was already available for x86, they decided that they were going to concerntrate on finalising the SPARC version before the x86 one, which they have admited was a stupid decision. Considering that Solaris 9 is cheaper than UnixWare and OpenServer and offeres compatibility with them, I can’t see why people would want to stick with SCO products.
As for the direction, it is pretty bloody simply. Linux on the Desktop, Solaris x86 and SPARC on the server. Is it really that hard for you to comprehend?
So I guess the 100,000 desktops they’ve populated with Java Desktop System is a failure? I’d love to know what multi-billion dollar company you have run before because it appears that you have a comment on every bloody thing.
Sun are plain stupid. As someone said above they can’t make up their minds what their future direction is.
They should simply buy out AMD and start selling all their servers with Opteron chips. Athlon64 desktops.
They hate Intel so this would allow them to ged rid of their Xeon offerings.
On the software side they should forget about Solaris and concentrate on Linux. As most of their sales are enterprise sales they are getting there $$$ from support contracts, so the underlying OS shouldn’t matter (as they like to say). With Linux they get all the improvements made by others for free. Why bother with Solaris????
If they remain on their Sparc processors selling Solaris they will end up like DEC eventually within 15 years.
I can’t imagine Sun releasing an AMD64 build of Solaris without releasing an Opteron counterpart to the V60x/V65x.
That doesn’t answer my question. As a consumer of enterprise solutions, why would I use AMD64 Solaris?
The caliber of support offered by Sun for this hardware greatly exceeds any support offered by Linux ISVs…
Perhaps the ISV’s, but then I don’t purchase hardware from ISV’s.
So you don’t consider the completely SUN One software stack plus Oracle as “enterprise software”?
Sun’s application stack is fairly mediocre IME. Oracle I concede is “enterprise software”, but Oracle is available on Linux as well (which is Oracles prefered platform now).
Still no reason to use AMD64 Solaris.
As for you SCO-SUN conspiracy theories. Take a hint and see a shrink. Thats as sad as saying that HP is in bed with SCO because they refuse to SUE SCO, sell HP-UX and they offer indeminty for their Linux customers.
The conspiracy “theories” are true. Read SCO’s damn 10Q.
As for the direction, it is pretty bloody simply. Linux on the Desktop, Solaris x86 and SPARC on the server. Is it really that hard for you to comprehend?
So, uh, why are they selling Linux powerd servers?
So, uh, why are they selling Linux powerd servers?
What do you think rocket scientist. Customers are demanding it. Is it so hard for you to comprehend that SUN is a hardware company and if a customer asks for Linux to be pre-installed that they just might pre-install it for them?
Sun’s application stack is fairly mediocre IME. Oracle I concede is “enterprise software”, but Oracle is available on Linux as well (which is Oracles prefered platform now).
Nice to see you’ve tagged some evidence to this “CLAIM” you have just made. So I guess telstra, which as around 34,000 employees must be a *REAL* moron because they’ve decided to go completely Solaris for the servers and Linux for the desktops.
I don’t see any reason to run out and buy the opteron just yet. Maybe when the 64-bit software is completed.
Also, If linux on the desktop is scox’s strategy, then why is java-desktop being developed for x86-solaris first? Why would sun prefer end-users to run linux instead of x86-solaris?
Besides, wouldn’t it make more sense to expect that msft will dominate the desktop for the next few years at least? I don’t like msft – but let’s be realistic. That being the case, wouldn’t it make more sense to plan to have windows on the desktop for now?
I have no problem with sun’s products/services, but I think sun is confused about it’s long term strategy.
“I don’t see any reason to run out and buy the opteron just yet”
I disagree. It makes perfect sense for clustering a large amount of systems for stuff like molecular, mathematical, and nuclear research. In addition, it could be used for providing services such as Google and Hotmail.
One thing I did find very peculiar is that Sun seems to be interested in x86-64 but not at all with Itanium. Seems like they are threatened by one and not the other.
What do you think rocket scientist. Customers are demanding it. Is it so hard for you to comprehend that SUN is a hardware company and if a customer asks for Linux to be pre-installed that they just might pre-install it for them?
This is exactly why Sun seem to lack direction. One moment a senior executive is slamming Linux as worthless on the server, the next moment they’re announcing new Linux products.
Why anybody would buy a Sun Linux server is beyond me. I’d certainly not buy a product the company publically rubbished.
Nice to see you’ve tagged some evidence to this “CLAIM” you have just made.
Doctor, heal thyself.
they’ve decided to go completely Solaris for the servers and Linux for the desktops.
They haven’t. Most of their web services run on Linux and they’re migrating their SAP system to Linux.
That still doesn’t explain why I should buy an AMD64 Solaris system over an AMD64 Linux system.
That doesn’t answer my question. As a consumer of enterprise solutions, why would I use AMD64 Solaris?
The Opteron has as much cache as an UltraSPARC IIIi, it can address as much RAM and it’s 64-bit.
Why Solaris? How about the scheduling control? Does Linux offer a Fair Share Scheduler? Does Linux offer anything but its single Time Share scheduler? Can you load multiple schedulers at once? Can you move processes between schedulers? If you can’t do any of this, is Linux really enterprise ready?
How about RBAC? I suppose you can have it on Linux… if you install SELinux, but can you get an AMD64 build of SELinux? Is this really a maintainable solution in the long term?
Perhaps the ISV’s, but then I don’t purchase hardware from ISV’s.
And who does support for your hardware, yourself? Do you see no advantage to having a single vendor for both hardware and software who can help you troubleshoot any problem you may be experiencing on the system?
Do the words “mission critical system” ever play into your life at all?
If the answer to these questions is no, then you probably don’t need Sun, but please don’t make it out to sound as if any Linux ISV offers the level of support you receive from Sun, and don’t try to downplay Solaris when Linux still lacks many important Solaris features.
Honestly, the Linux trolls get worse and worse with each passing day…
With Linux they get all the improvements made by others for free. Why bother with Solaris????
Because Solaris is so much better for servers, than Linux.
One thing that needs to be pointed out about 64bit systems is that most of an OS that is 64bit capable is often times only using a subset of the data size (8/16/32/64). Linux has had native AMD-64 support for a good while in the kernel source tree. Technically, for a 64bit capable OS, all you need is the kernel and the toolchain to function in 64 bit mode. Often times it’s not desireable, and possibly even counter-productive, to run all of the apps in full 64 bit mode. Many issues go into the final analysis of whether to code an application as a 64bit variable/register. Memory useage, performance, accuracy of calculations needed, all figure into whether you want an application to be fully utilizing all 64bits of the path. Generally, the only reason to need a full 64bit integer/float/pointer is in cases of accessing extremely large chunks of memory, extremely large numbers, or extremely small numbers. In general, only a miniscule part of any “64bit OS” is actually fully 64bits. Do not confuse platform instruction optimization with size of the data/command path utilized.
The point is somewhat moot tho. The prices on the Athlon 64 CPUs by themselves are currently more than a good majority of desktop users are going to be willing to pay. The Athlon 64 FX are even further out of reach at ~ $760 for the CPU alone. Sun has already publicly stated that Linux as a server OS has no place in their already haphazard Linux strategy, so I don’t see a push for Opteron/Linux options from Sun on the horizon.
>>Do you see no advantage to having a single vendor for both hardware and software who can help you troubleshoot any problem you may be experiencing on the system? <<
I see advantages to that, but I also see disadvantages. As McNealy said, with sunw, “you only have one throat to choke.”
But, if you have everything from the same vendor, I wonder just who has who by the throat. It seems to me that, once you are commited to one vendor like that, you are essentially a slave to that one vendor. You upgrade when your vendor says “upgrade” you pay whatever service fees that vendor decides to charge.
Sunw provides great support for a high price. But, couldn’t you get great support for a lower price with Linux? I think there are a lot more linux experts, than solaris experts.
Also, I have to wonder about sun being able to troubleshoot “any problem” for example, what if you are using a cisco router? Or some other non-sun hardware or software on your network?
>>It makes perfect sense for clustering a large amount of systems for stuff like molecular, mathematical, and nuclear research. In addition, it could be used for providing services such as Google and Hotmail.<<
But why an opteron? Can’t that stuff be done with other 64-bit processors? Processors which are already have software that can take advantage of their 64-bit features?
>>One thing I did find very peculiar is that Sun seems to be interested in x86-64 but not at all with Itanium. Seems like they are threatened by one and not the other.<<
You can be sure that Dell will go with the Itanium. My guess is that a dell itanium linux server, would be cheaper than a sun itanium linux server. Just a guess.