[rescue] rescue Digest, Vol 124, Issue 3
Cory Smelosky
b4 at gewt.net
Mon Mar 4 12:31:46 CST 2013
--
Cory Smelosky
Sent from a mobile device
On 4 Mar 2013, at 13:21, Gary Sloane <gksloane at hotmail.com> wrote:
> Years ago Larry Ellison approached Sun to have them build a Sun box to act
as
> a dedicated turn-key Oracle server. Sun asked him for the specifications
that
> the machine would have. He provided them and Sun's response was that there
> wasn't anything in his specs that an off-the-shelf Sun server didn't
already
> do - they didn't understand the need for a 'special' machine. From what
I've
> heard it left a bad taste in Ellison's mouth - part of his reason for
> purchasing Sun is to finally get that box, part is probably to get even. If
> Oracle ends up shedding most of Sun, there will still be a SPARC-based
> dedicated Oracle server. Ellison took advantage of Sun's reaction to the
> dot-com crash, namely the move into 'edge computing' or the Linux/Opteron
> market - it trashed Sun, legitimizing competetive architectures over Sun's
> proprietary products, and resulted in a decline in value that made the
Oracle
> acquisition of Sun possible. It is absolutely no surprise that Oracle has
> tried to wipe the Sun brand recognition off the map. Within minutes of the
Sun
> purchase they changed the Java headers to remove the Sun name, and
> discontinued all teh free IHV/ISV developer programs that Sun had offered.
I
> refused to join the Oracle developer groups on principle - they wanted to
> charge me for access to information that would allow me to generate 3rd
party
> products that would keep the Oracle/Sun marketplace healthy. Most 3rd party
> developers severely reduced or eliminated Sun aftermarket product
development.
> Oracle has made and continues to make money on the Sun acquisition; but
they
> are also losing the Sun customer base (and engineers!) in droves. I was a
> develoepr of Sun aftermarket products (hardware, mostly PCI and SBus
> products). When Sun endorsed the Linux/Opteron market, I wrote a letter to
Sun
> stating that it would be the downfall of Sun. If Sun made it look like the
> Linux/Opteron combination was a valid replacement for Solaris/SPARC then
> people would quicly realize it was cheaper to purchase the hardware at
Fry's
> rather than from Sun. I remember going to Sun's website and being appalled
> that the majority of hardware offerings were Opteron based and that finding
> SPARC hardware was getting difficult. Worse, the developer offerings were
> almost exlusively Opteron; so Sun wasn't courting Solaris/SPARC IHV/ISV
> relationships. To me this was the single most significant flagpost that Sun
> was going to lose their market. I no longer develop Solaris/SPARC products
for
> a living. I'd like to; but the lack of respect that Ellison/Oracle has
showed
> to Sun's customers and the Sun brand makes that unlikely in the future.
Yeah...people I know cal them "deplOracle" for a reason. ;)
> Personally, I'd love to see some (non-Oracle) 3rd party purchase the Sun
> desktop/server/Solaris/SPARC unit from Oracle and resurrect Sun. That too
> seems unlikely. --gks
I'd love to see that as well.
>>
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 1
>> Date: Mon, 4 Mar 2013 11:24:26 -0500
>> From: Rich Kulawiec <rsk at gsp.org>
>> To: The Rescue List <rescue at sunhelp.org>
>> Subject: Re: [rescue] Transplanting a Sun Fire V210 motherboard - PSU
>> requirements?`
>> Message-ID: <20130304162426.GB1884 at gsp.org>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>>
>> On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 11:38:13AM -0500, Mouse wrote:
>>> I think the people who have abandoned the market in droves are the
>>> commercial users who, with Oracle's predatory pricing, are suddenly
>>> finding it economic to replace whole systems rather than replace
>>> failing hardware underneath a Solaris-based setup.
>>
>> Indeed.
>>
>> I'm in the process of replacing a data center which was Sun/Solaris
>> since forever with commodity hardware/Linux/BSD. [1] By summer,
>> Solaris will be gone and any remaining Sun hardware will either be
>> running Linux or also gone. This was not my first (sentimental) choice,
>> but it's pretty much my only (professional) choice.
>>
>> When I informed my Oracle contacts that I was doing this, the result was
>> total silence. It doesn't seem to have made any impression on them at
>> all that they've lost a 30-year Sun customer. They didn't even ask why.
>>
>> ---rsk
>>
>> [1] Let me give a plug for Red Barn Computers, redbarncomputers.com.
>> My experience with them over the past several years has been somewhere
>> between "excellent" and "outstanding".
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 2
>> Date: Mon, 4 Mar 2013 11:39:15 -0500
>> From: Cory Smelosky <b4 at gewt.net>
>> To: The Rescue List <rescue at sunhelp.org>
>> Cc: The Rescue List <rescue at sunhelp.org>
>> Subject: Re: [rescue] Transplanting a Sun Fire V210 motherboard - PSU
>> requirements?`
>> Message-ID: <B2180A7E-6ED3-492A-877F-53C3D5003563 at gewt.net>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>>
>> --
>> Cory Smelosky
>> Sent from a mobile device
>>
>> On 4 Mar 2013, at 11:24, Rich Kulawiec <rsk at gsp.org> wrote:
>>
>>> On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 11:38:13AM -0500, Mouse wrote:
>>>> I think the people who have abandoned the market in droves are the
>>>> commercial users who, with Oracle's predatory pricing, are suddenly
>>>> finding it economic to replace whole systems rather than replace
>>>> failing hardware underneath a Solaris-based setup.
>>>
>>> Indeed.
>>>
>>> I'm in the process of replacing a data center which was Sun/Solaris
>>> since forever with commodity hardware/Linux/BSD. [1] By summer,
>>> Solaris will be gone and any remaining Sun hardware will either be
>>> running Linux or also gone. This was not my first (sentimental) choice,
>>> but it's pretty much my only (professional) choice.
>>>
>>> When I informed my Oracle contacts that I was doing this, the result was
>>> total silence. It doesn't seem to have made any impression on them at
>>> all that they've lost a 30-year Sun customer. They didn't even ask why.
>>
>> Definitely think they wanted Sun for the patents...not the products or the
>> customer base.
>>
>>>
>>> ---rsk
>>>
>>> [1] Let me give a plug for Red Barn Computers, redbarncomputers.com.
>>> My experience with them over the past several years has been somewhere
>>> between "excellent" and "outstanding".
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> rescue list - http://www.sunhelp.org/mailman/listinfo/rescue
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 3
>> Date: Mon, 4 Mar 2013 11:40:12 -0500 (EST)
>> From: adh at an.bradford.ma.us (Sandwich Maker)
>> To: rescue at sunhelp.org
>> Subject: Re: [rescue] Transplanting a Sun Fire V210 motherboard - PSU
>> requirements?`
>> Message-ID: <201303041640.r24GeCx16594 at an.bradford.ma.us>
>>
>> " From: Rich Kulawiec <rsk at gsp.org>
>> "
>> " []
>> "
>> " When I informed my Oracle contacts that I was doing this, the result was
>> " total silence. It doesn't seem to have made any impression on them at
>> " all that they've lost a 30-year Sun customer. They didn't even ask why.
>>
>> maybe they know why and it's happening a lot, and they can't do
>> anything about it b/c they have their orders from hindquarters.
>> ________________________________________________________________________
>> Andrew Hay the genius nature
>> internet rambler is to see what all have seen
>> adh at an.bradford.ma.us and think what none thought
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 4
>> Date: Mon, 04 Mar 2013 12:10:34 -0500
>> From: Andrew Jones <andrew at jones.ec>
>> To: The Rescue List <rescue at sunhelp.org>
>> Subject: Re: [rescue] Transplanting a Sun Fire V210 motherboard - PSU
>> requirements?`
>> Message-ID: <5134D58A.6010207 at jones.ec>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>>
>> On 03/04/2013 11:39 AM, Cory Smelosky wrote:
>>>
>>> Definitely think they wanted Sun for the patents...not the products or
> the
>>> customer base.
>>
>> When they bought Sun, the firm had a pile of cash and assets but had
>> been losing money every year.
>>
>> Oracle swore they would make 3+ billion in profits off Sun in the first
>> year. The press guffawed. Oracle did it. However we scorn their
>> policies, it seems to be working.
>>
>> Lastly: Oracle only paid 7.5 billion for Sun. They probably paid for
>> the entire deal in the first two years. Even if they lost 90% of Sun's
>> customers afterwards, they still come out way ahead on cost-of-capital.
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> rescue maillist - rescue at sunhelp.org
>> http://www.sunhelp.org/mailman/listinfo/rescue
>>
>>
>> End of rescue Digest, Vol 124, Issue 3
>> **************************************
> _______________________________________________
> rescue list - http://www.sunhelp.org/mailman/listinfo/rescue
More information about the rescue
mailing list