Double minded
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| cjcox Jul 12, 2004 8:35 AM EDT |
I will use Sun terminology: As a "hobbyist", as a Linux user, similar to "Solaris which is Sun's version of Linux", I build "jalopies" and I'm a "jalopyist" because I use open source software. Linux of course "is Unix" and therefore SCO has every right to persue their current legal proceedings against IBM. "Corporations cannot afford the risk" that Linux might present because and Sun is "proud that Solaris is fully indemnified with SCO". Nobody would use Linux in enterprise IT according to Sun. McNealy says, "We can indemnify our users and if anybody's nervous about [IBM Unix flavour] AIX or Linux we've got Solaris on x86 [32-bit processors] and Solaris in the data centre. We run like the wind. We're open. There are no down sides." Notice that Linux is grouped as evil IBM-ware that isn't safe for governments to use. Scott says, "To say that Linux is a threat to Solaris is like saying mySQL is a threat to Oracle 9i". McNealy is a staunch advocate of protected, patented, intellectual property... and the legal defense of those properties through frivilous lawsuits. How does Sun view companies like Red Hat, SUSE, Mandrake?? McNealy says, "We're down to three - IBM, Microsoft and Sun. The rest is collateral damage." With regards to IBM and HP's Linux involvement, he says their use of Linux is "a leapfrog to the past." Now in all fairness.. we're talking about Sun's thoughts way back in 2003. This is 2004 and quite frankly, Sun has changed it's feelings towards Linux. "Linux is our friend." ... now says Scott McNealy. Sun really, really is guarding its words with regards to Linux. They've been given strict orders to not play the typical Solaris card against Linux... it's important to gain the trust of the marketplace first, then turn them the direction where you really want them to go. However, Sun has made it very apparent that they are pro-open source only when it does NOT affect their own "intellectual property". Sun has made it clear that for Sun to "lose control" over Java would be "bad" for Java. Similar statements are used against open source by a company located in Redmond folks. Do not be deceived. So let's spin the new Sun.. ok?? 1. Sun provides Red Hat today! Why download Red Hat when you can BUY A SUN (HW) PRODUCT with it preinstalled and working. 2. Sun doesn't care what OS you run. (it's true.. they said it!!) YOU CODE EVERYTHING TO SUN ONE ($$$$$$) stack and it doesn't matter what the underlying OS is. What's Sun's true motivation here? Linux is only useful to Sun if it allows them to get their foot in the door to sell you Solaris or Sun proprietary hardware. They are banking on the long term, belieiving they'll at least be able to get the Sun ONE stack into place.. and then when the customer complains about how the Sun ONE stack runs on Linux, they can then offer to take them away from the "hobbyist" OS and back to something REAL... Solaris. Sun will use (I mean that in the bad sense of the word) Linux to create their Sun-only world vision. A world where Solaris and NOT Linux is the OS, where Sun Java and Sun ONE (not IBM, not BEA, not JBoss) provide the application "stack" for your infrastructure. Sun is free to execute their strategy, but at the end of the day, the only things Sun is concerned about is protecting Sun and it's corporate intellectual property assets. PERIOD. |
| tadelste Jul 12, 2004 10:22 AM EDT |
Chris. I can appreciate your thoughts since we're friends. I don't think other readers will realize that you say almost everything with a little tongue in cheek. Your post was funny, though. This message was edited Jul 12, 2004 1:48 PM |
| cjcox Jul 12, 2004 10:43 AM EDT |
That was giving you a break Tom. You know I could have said much worse things about Sun with regards to their "support" of Linux, open source and free software in general. I'm not saying they can't become an ally... but they certainly aren't today. Sun's current Linux motto is "Destroy after use." |
| tadelste Jul 12, 2004 10:53 AM EDT |
I edited my earlier response before I saw yours. I don't know that about Sun and I've met with plenty of the execs. I also worked with them in the old days when they had a lot to be arrogant about. None of the old guys sit in the chairs any more. It's all new, young and very committed people like Peder Ullander and Curtis Sasaki. Those two guys are committed to their the souls of their feet (spelling correct). But, that doesn't mean I really believe you're as serious as you sound. This message was edited Jul 12, 2004 3:25 PM |
| mrmdls1 Jul 12, 2004 11:17 AM EDT |
I, too at one time had little respect for Sun and their attitude toward linux and linux users, However, with the introduction of JDS I think Sun has realized they do need a real linux plan, and one that doesn't include sliding the JDS user into Solaris. And I think that's the key in Tom's open letter. Yes, they (Sun)were vicious about linux in their past, But, just like people they can change. And Sun, believe it or not, I believe has had a pretty good policy about open source, they just open sourced looking glass, and has supported both Gnome and Mozilla. |
| cjcox Jul 12, 2004 1:52 PM EDT |
Tom.. I certainly do believe in a leopard changing its spots... I know that people can have a radical, 180 degree change in their life. Are you saying that's what has happened at Sun?? I'll admit, I haven't seen it at too many companies. I feel I have every right to be very wary of anything Sun says. It's sort of like Osama Bin Laden coming to my house and saying he's had a change of heart and would really like to babysit my daughter. Trust me, it's probably going take more than one evening's worth of discussions before I'll let him in the door! If Sun truly has undergone a radical change (from top to bottom), fantastic!! To be honest, I guess I can't truly say that such a conversion has happened or not. I can only speak based on the rhetoric that Sun has issued publically in the past. About the only apology we've seen is that Sun now says that giving up on 32bit was a mistake (but arguably they said it in a way like "We shouldn't have given up on that old antiquated 32bit junk".. meaning x86 btw and Solaris on x86). Sun has already spoken on open source Java... and they are totally against it. Yet.. they seem (I cannot validate this) to say they are for open source Solaris... but their Java IP arguments seem to indicate that they'll open source only when then can retain full control. Of course it could be that Sun will just consider any community Solaris as a fork, and continue to just move with their head down. This could work... that way, they just keep doing what they are doing and ignore any of the non-Sun elements. With Java, they don't want to see any other alternative application stacks developed... so they can't afford to use that strategy with Java (and the rest of Sun ONE). What are your thoughts on this? Do you feel that Sun is going to GPL Java and the rest of the Sun ONE "stack" (or at least several pieces of it)?? That, IMHO, would definitely be a good sign that the leopard is changing its spots. I don't think Sun necessarily has any real problem with contributing to open source projects, especially when the primary victim is that company based in Redmond. But they still seem a bit stingy with any "intellectual property" that they believe has REAL value. For example, they did open source Looking Glass, but in all fairness, Sun never marketed it for sale did they?? I didn't mean to sound like I was joking. I really don't trust Sun at all as a pro-Linux company. They'll pretty much say anything right now IMHO. But I certainly don't mind eating Humble Pie if I'm wrong... and I truly want to be wrong. |
| tbogart Jul 12, 2004 5:17 PM EDT |
I have to weigh in on the side of being rather nervous about anything from Sun, and anything Linux/x86 related in particular. As I have said elsewhere, Sun surely has done some wonderful things, but they have more than balanced that by their psychotic behavior (as a corp, and McNealy in particular). The OP is brilliant in illustrating this. They are going to have to re-establish a track record, perhaps under new management. |
| tadelste Jul 12, 2004 6:07 PM EDT |
Chris, back in 1998 I developed a mail and calendaring client that ran on Solaris and connected to Exchange. I did it for Ericsson because some person talked them into implementing Microsoft Exchange while 30% of their users ran Solaris. I got no support from Sun. None. Ultimately it turned into an IBM solution and it ran on Linux. I also worked with Sun on other projects when I worked for Cap Gemini. We shared a floor with them in Dallas. I thought they had some really nice people, but I strongly disliked some of the people in their management. Also, their sales people were often arrogant. Those people are long gone. The President is a long haired guy who gets misquoted all the time. I know a media bias exists because every time I talk to someone about Sun, I get this kick back. But, I have worked closely with people at Sun who now have a lot of influence on the direction of the company. These folks are left over from StarOffice Division, from Cobalt and from the Educational group. And I'll say they do have an influence on the direction of the company. The person in charge of the education - which is a big part of Sun's business - is one of the most committed open-soruce people I know. Sun has recently open sourced many parts of Java under GPL. The most important one is Looking Glass - a desktop component that will work on Linux and make it the best desktop in the world. I've seen it live on two occassion and it's remarkable. It's 100% GPL'd open source. https://lg3d.dev.java.net/ Sun announced they were going to open source Solaris and SCO issued them a warning. Sun's reply - go butt a stump. Sun owns an outright UNIX license from 1986. Other parts of Java have already been open-sourced like the java desktop components. But some pieces are still held back. The rest of the stack is under consideration and pressure to be open-sourced internally. But unless you knew the politics of what IBM wants to do, it doesn't make sense. If an OBL exists, he's dressed in a Blue Suit. I even know the guy and I don't trust him. And I don't blame Sun for not trusting him either. If IBM would sign a non-aggression something, then I think Sun would open-source the rest of Java. Here's the rub - IBM with regard to Linux worries me and plenty of other people. So, I think Sun is justified in being cautious. I'm still a little unnerved by your comparison to Osama and Sun. Even when they were really arrogant, they were a good company. They had plenty of good people working there. They gave lots of money away to educational institutions and they have always been the biggest financial contributor to Gnome, the LDP and all those Sunsites where we downloaded 16 floppy disks worth of Linux. One other issue exists. Like IBM, Sun has a huge customer base to support. IBM doesn't sell as much Linux as people think. The big OS at IBM is OS/400 - iSeries and AS/400s. I was working on a project in Mississippi tying all the law enforcement databases together for a DHS initiative. Every county used AS/400s. So, like IBM, Sun has these very loyal E650 users. They can't just say - no more Solaris. Sun has been a big investor in Linux companies - something you may or may not know. But look at the financing rounds and you'll see Sun in there. But, the Linux companies (2 in particular) have been aggressively difficult. It's hard to get things done when your two major partners don't play fair. Remember RH Sparc. Why was that discontinued? I used it to extend the life of a lot of Sparc boxes. Solaris won't go away, but it's positioned as a server product. Sun will sell the x86 version to traditional Sun customers. But that doesn't mean this huge Linux division they have built under Peder Ullander ( who came from Cobalt BTW) will disappear. They also have a large customer base with JDS. I'm sorry if you thought I didn't take you seriously. But you have to own up to that somewhat. You have a very dry sense of humor. Also, I've seen you reverse positions before, especially if you get the right data. And I don't think I'm revealing too much if people also know besides being a great technologist that you teach CS. This message was edited Jul 12, 2004 9:09 PM |
| cjcox Jul 13, 2004 7:07 AM EDT |
Thanks for your insight on this Tom. I'm certainly not anti-Sun. I just never figured them as a pro-Linux advocate. However, I don't fear IBM either on this. They've certainly made many a contribution to Linux as well. Both financially and code wise. You just never heard about Sun's contributions. All you heard was how Linux was a "toy" OS strictly for "hobbyists" and how open source was designed to destroy Sun's "intellectual property" rights. Like I said, I definitely want to be wrong... hope JDS succeeds. Hope that Sun does more to place Linux into their enterprise platforms. Sure, they view Solaris as a key asset, but in reality... it's dead-ware (with no apologies to Sun.. they sat on their high horse and they blew it). And I think that scares them. Obviously IBM and HP deal with the same kind of issues on that. At first, I figured IBM would be the first to go all Linux... but now, oddly enough, it might be HP (talking about HPUX). HP, a company who in the mid-nineties promised everyone that all computers would be running NT in the future. |
| tadelste Jul 13, 2004 12:07 PM EDT |
Chris, I recently did two articles for Forbes - one on Open Source Software and the other on JBOSS. During the course of the project, I heard from outsiders that a media bias existed against Sun that was left over from Microsoft's attempt to trample UNIX. I know that misquotes are rampant in the media. The distinction that the people at Sun - and now Novell and Red Hat - make is between Enterprise quality and development quality. They make the same distinctions about Java. So, I never got the "hobbyist" thing from them. I did get a definite worry about the confusion between developers' Linux and Professional Linux. I heard those same words come out of the spokesperson for Red Hat when I interviewed her for an article about what was going to be called "the Red Hat Project". Of course, it became the Fedora Project. They wanted everyone to know that Linux Projects were worthwhle - but not for business. I also acknowledge your comments about IBM. But, I don't agree about their commitment to Linux. Some people have a commitment but the guys at the top of the software group dislike Linux. Save that for another day. In my experience with the Open Source Software Institute, I saw who supported the validation effort for OpenSSL getting "source code" validated. It was HP. And you're right -- they do support open-source. My only concern at the moment is JDS and getting people straight about it. The JDSHelp site got launched yesterday. So, I got to see the response. I can tell you that people in Asia, Europe and South America have high praise for Sun. That was interesting to watch. |
Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [ForumMods, SITEADMINS, MEMBERS.]
Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!