Decius wrote:

] Honestly, Linux and cheap Intel hardware do not make a
] scalable server farm by themselves. Sun is building technology
] that makes linux server farms more manageable. They are in a
] good position to translate their position with Solaris into a
] dominate position in the emerging linux based server world, if
] they continue to provide really good hardware platforms for
] linux with lots of automated management technology that
] reduces administration costs. I don't think they really have
] to worry about Microsoft. Linux is winning server battles. I
] think they can give HP a run for its money here. I like HP's
] security technology but I think that automated server
] management is a more compelling proposition.

The problem is that Sun is the target for Microsoft, IBM and HPaq, all at the same time. You could say that HP and IBM are fighting against Microsoft, but they sell Windows platform systems along side their own, so they're all ganging up on Sun at once. The N1 strategy is huge within Sun today and we in marketing are being told that everything has to include and revolve around two key strategies - SunONE and N1. What we're doing now is finally delivering on what we said Java would do 5 years ago.

] If you need more or less power then what they
] offer you are out of luck with them. I do, however, think
] Solaris is dead, along with HP-UX, AIX, and the other UNIX
] variants. I don't see a compelling reason to run them over
] Linux or BSD, and they cost money.

The OS is going to become inconsequential because the app server platform is really what will matter, and it's going to be integrated into both Solaris and Linux (a la Mad Hatter). However, Solaris can't go away because we've got lots and lots of customers with lots and lots of hardware running Solaris. It's proven and stable. It's not the choice if you want the latest and greatest protocols, but it's going to run for a long time without glitches. From a business standpoint, it's better to have a slow box that never goes down than to have a fast box that may or may not crash during execution of business logic.

] However, if Sun puts too much real energy into Solaris it will
] cost them. Marketing spin in one thing (you want customers to
] beleive you are committed to the platform) but reality is
] something else.

See if you feel the same way after Solaris 10 comes out. It's a radical change along the lines of N1 strategy. The argument from the article I don't agree with is a statement that Solaris costs too much. If you bought your hardware from Sun, Solaris is free. If you have maintenance with Sun, upgrades are shipped every quarter. It's only if you want to buy a box from the grey market and get a license that you're going to have problems and honestly I have no sympathy for that situation - you bought a box as-is but want it customized without paying for it.

Dolemite

P.S. - This post does not reflect the official views of Sun Microsystems, Inc., just one of its employees.

RE: no SnApple