What Sun Should Do (by a Sun employee)
tbray.org
tbray.org
I download NetBeans 6.5 (ruby only version) and the installer tells me it needs to use 145 MB for the install. I tell it ok and it asks for my root password and I give it and away it goes. The install gleefully tells me at some point it is installing "GlassFish v3 Prelude". WTF!!! Stop doing things like this!!!
About a year or so ago, I seriously took into consideration adopting Solaris 10. I read the basic install docs and tried to get a clean and basic install of Solaris. No such luck. I wanted a server OS and the default install gives me not 1 but 3 desktop solutions, multiple Sun products like a directory and mail server and yes, 3 versions of Java setup in a "great" multi-java install method. This was done to enable the multiple other stuff to work as sun's various products it was jamming down my throat had different Java requirements. So what would I need to get a "slimmed down Solaris install"? I would need to read through a thousand pages of docs and write install scripts. So what did I do instead? I switched to ubuntu server. Why is ubuntu server great? Because it does not have other products it is trying to "up-sell" me.
Sun thinks that because it is giving you some free tech that it spent lots of money creating that they have the user's permission to shove more stuff on the user. This is a big problem. If I want GlassFish, I'll install it. If I want any form of X-windows or Java on my server, I'll ask for it.
I agree the documentation is confusing. That is because (1) Sun documents everything so there is a lot of it to weed through, (2) most installs of Solaris are done over networks using install scripts to ensure every installation is identical, (3) Solaris can do things like install a new OS on a remote system that doesn't have any OS on it, and the documentation for those things drowns out the smaller, simpler documentation for the simpler installation methods.
And that's the problem with recovery plans like this one: they're full of fine ideas, and you could imagine the company picking a few and doing well at them. But could they even match the efficiency and hard work of their scrappy Asian competitors? They're gonna need some major inspiration to flip around a multi-year trajectory of slow failure. The bus just doesn't have that kind of turning radius, I'm afraid.
It's worse than that. All the kit that Sun sold in the 90s is still perfectly usable. Why buy new even if you want Sun?
I agree with the software folks trying to become the best deployment platform for web software. There's a window of opportunity while the JVM is ahead of other VMs where Sun could pull this off if they can produce a super stable, scalable, easy to deploy runtime that runs everything from PHP to Python, Ruby and Groovy and make it a snap to deploy and manage. The catch is that I don't think there's any chance they will achieve this if they try and tie it to either Solaris or Sun hardware. That ship has sailed - hosting these days is either linux or windows for all but the highest top tier. They need to completely get over it and aggressively push themselves on linux.
Unless they move into the cloud domain - in which case, their expertise in both areas (software/hardware) will be complimentary and useful.
Not really - the one piece of the puzzle that Sun doesn't really have is services (aside from support).
It's hard to see exactly what Linux gets Sun apart from "me too" points. They don't want to be Dell.
No - this is where I think the worlds collide. You're basically saying they should commoditize their own hardware to the point where its at parity with Intel. I'm saying they need to do the opposite - they need to increase (or at least maintain) their margins and focus on selling it to the people who really need it - enterprises and top end institutions that value the incredible robustness and scalability you can only get with that kind of hardware. I think trying to do both ends of the spectrum on the same platform is just going to ensure they do neither effectively.
Right now, for most applications, AMD64 beats SPARC. I would love to run Solaris on AMD in production. I can't tho' because Solaris x86 doesn't get tier-1 support from a couple of vendors I rely on. The choices are SPARC/Solaris or Intel/Redhat, and despite the fact that Red Hat is a complete pain in the arse, I can't justify SPARC/Solaris on grounds of better manageability and I can't do AMD/Solaris either. That is where Sun could make some quick wins.
They need to borrow a page from Apple's book and build a SPARC-based "Sun mini" that's cool, desirable and cheap. It should also be the obvious choice for a desktop platform for anyone who wants do develop for Java, Solaris or whatever Sun thinks is strategic.
Getting CMT chips in the hands of maverick developers is vital if they want people to develop for them. Parallel stuff is seen as cool and sexy and their CMT SPARCs are built for it. I would buy a desktop Sun to "test the water", but I wouldn't do the same with a rackmount server. If they have rackmount servers going for USD 2700, they sure can do desktops for about USD 1000. If they can make Ruby or Python do great threading with them, all the better as I have no real desire to program in Java.
Back in the OpenWindows or CDE days, Solaris wasn't a terribly nice desktop environment but today, with Gnome, it is every bit as good as, say, Ubuntu. The right people should start seeing the Sun logo more and the huge userland Unix-like OSs have is key.
And, while they are at it, the JAVA ticker was a stupid idea. Sun is, and should be perceived as much more than that. SUNW was not a brilliant one (as workstations were no longer relevant)
I especially loved this point - "Will buyers accept a certain amount of lock-in, or will they insist on zero barriers to exit?" Sun acts like it still owns the market.
And so do all the other cloud providers.
I'm not convinced about being a deployment platform. Sun's repeatedly been eaten from below by "cheaper" alternatives of arguably lower quality (whether Wintel, Linux, etc.). I'm not sure I buy that focusing on incremental quality/performance improvements is going to be a winner now either.
Wasn't Patrick Naughton asked what Sun should do when he resigned?
Seems to be the new black - winning the mind share, losing the battle.
I do hope some of these technologies keep moving forward. I do not see a great way for Sun to profit from them.
the changes that the writer suggests are bold and do require a new team and a lot of capital. looking at sun's balance sheet <http://finance.google.com/finance?q=java>, it doesn't look like they will be able to do much of anything. i think sun is sitting around and barely making do because they just really want someone else to come in and take over. they've been slowly cutting jobs for years in order to reduce OP EX.
Except that Sun is (as far as I can tell) failing at everything they are spreading their peanut butter on.