[rescue] rescue Digest, Vol 124, Issue 3

Mon Mar 4 12:21:07 CST 2013

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.
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
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> 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
> **************************************