After a Lull, Sun Server Business Grows Under Oracle 84
itwbennett writes "For the first time since the 3rd quarter of 2007, IDC is reporting an increase in sales of Sun hardware. Oracle logged $773 million in server sales during the quarter, up from $681 million the year before, according to IDC's estimates."
Re: (Score:2)
I just don't understand you then... I guess my question is: What are the advantages of a Sun workstation over a PC - on the desktop?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Sun not really had been pursuing the Workstation business actively the last 10 years before the Oracle merger. It was all about servers.
Re: (Score:2)
Uh no. Some no name PC running Linux is way cooler than some Sun workstation because A) it's probably faster, B) it will certainly do more units of work per dollar spent, and now C) it has nothing to do with Oracle. Sun's good name was lost when Oracle bought them. They will forever after be known as that company that was in its death throes and was cannibalized by Oracle.
Re: (Score:2)
Sun would probably still be around if Schwartz hadn't run it into the ground by trying to give away a whole bunch of stuff for free in hopes that someone was going to want to license a proprietary version of their software (which was never going to happen). McNealy was a fucking idiot for putting The Schwartz in command.
Sun would probably still be around if they had recognized Linux for what it was and embraced it earlier. They could have become a top-tier Linux vendor with Solaris as the step-up niche. Instead, Linux chipped away at their market driving Solaris in to a niche anyway. Eventually, Sun began to give away (more) things with strings attached - neither committed to being entirely proprietary or open. And they produced hardware that COULD have made them competitive in the Linux market if they had only market
Re: (Score:2)
Depends. I need to write code that works on SPARC so it would make sense for me :P
Re: (Score:2)
Shouldn't that just be a compiler option? Of course the only cross platform developing I've done has been for microcontrollers, but still.. if you developed on OpenSolaris then I'm guessing there wouldn't be that much, if anything that needed to change to build for a SPARC server?
Re: (Score:2)
Shouldn't that just be a compiler option?
I haven't programmed SPARC in a decade, but one of the differences I remember between SPARC and x86 is that SPARC was big-endian; that didn't matter in most cases but if you had some manky C code doing weird things with pointers it could be a problem. It did cause a few issues when I was working on a mix of SPARC and Sun 386 workstations years before that.
Re: (Score:2)
SPARC is big endian, x86 is little endian. Misaligned loads / stores on x86 incur a performance penalty, they crash on SPARC. SPARC64 is 64-bit and often has different type sizes to x86 and x86-64. SPARC has register windows and passes parameters in them, so some tricks with va_list that work on x86 won't work on SPARC (on x86, va_list is usually just a pointer into the call frame on the stack, on SPARC it may reference some registers). SPARC will generate an illegal instruction trap if you call a funct
Re: (Score:2)
That actually was a joke at a place I once worked, "did you even check if the code you gave me worked? *shrug* "it compiled ok". Assumption is the mother of all fuck-ups.
Re: (Score:2)
What is this "Sun workstation" of which you speak? There is no such thing. Sun hasn't made or sold desktop SPARC for a couple of years, now.
Re: (Score:1)
What is this "Sun workstation" of which you speak? There is no such thing. Sun hasn't made or sold desktop SPARC for a couple of years, now.
I thought it was the amount of registers on the Sun processor. With the amount of registers available, more primitive variables didn't need to be swapped into memory and function calls would need to store the outer scope in memory as frequently.
Double the Price, Half the Servers? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Double the Price, Half the Servers? (Score:5, Informative)
In other words, IDC is reporting that Oracle raised prices. That strategy works for a quarter or two, maybe. But it's a going out of business strategy.
Where did you read this? Nothing about the price is mentioned in the article, apart from that sales of pricier servers have increased in general. Oracle sales are more or less matching overall market growth, so neither a higher market share nor higher price is necessary for Oracle's revenue to go up.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Actually the hardware support contract for our 10 year old E450 and A1000 dropped slightly this year. No changes in coverage.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Well, other than replacing some drives in the A1000 and the keyboard and mouse when the bathroom above our server room backed up (since fixed) we've never had any problems with it. We are running an old ERP (MK) system that we'll never upgrade so it works for us. Running Solaris 7 and Oracle 8i on it. We seldom put a serious load on it. In a few years we'll transfer to the ERP system our parent company runs which is Oracle Financials on some big Sun servers halfway across the country.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3)
Oracle cleaned up ship and mandated that you charge for the products and you don't give out free support (that's what the CONTRACTS that companies like mine pay money to have with Sun/oracle are for).
So you were paying Sun for a contract that you didn't need because they were giving away support for free? How generous of your company!
By charging for your product instead of giving it away like a whore...
I do not think it means what you think it means.
Bullshit! (Score:4, Insightful)
IDC can say what they want, but the only way Sun hardware sales are growing is because Oracle bumped up the price on the hardware, and companies are buying their last Sun gear to give a two-year buffer to migrate away from.
I don't know of a single company ANYWHERE that is actively growing their Sun server farm. Everyone is running away screaming as fast as they can from Sun/Oracle.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't know of a single company ANYWHERE that is actively growing their Sun server farm. Everyone but the U.S. Government is running away screaming as fast as they can from Sun/Oracle.
FTFY.
Seriously. The federal government still thinks there's some advantage to running Solaris on Sparc. My project tosses a few million of government money at Sun/Oracle every 1-2 years for "support" and new hardware.
Comment removed (Score:4)
Re:Bullshit! (Score:4)
Agreed. In my experience, the US Government has increasingly shifted away from Sun toward either IBM humongous iron (pSeries or zSeries) or Dell commodity x64 stuff. The middle ground is where most of Sun's catalog could have been, but it's too easy to set up server partitions or VMs on the big boxen to cover those needs, or else a few x64 blades.
Now, the US Government would be happy to keep shoveling money at Oracle, but that's for their RDBMS product and its associated bells, whistles, licenses, and maintenance.
Re: (Score:2)
I might argue that the US government is running away screaming as fast as they can too. Governments are notorious for their momentum, and I can't imagine that they're capable of turning on a dime. Honestly if it weren't for the government demands and requirements, I suspect that HP would have killed off HP-UX almost a decade ago. Similarly, they'll probably keep Solaris/Sparc alive for another decade or so, before they can migrate away.
But looking at our case as an example, the first thing we did to elimina
Re:Bullshit! (Score:4, Informative)
Since most high end servers last in service at least 6 years, I guess that most sales come from the fact that Oracle touts the Oracle DB/Sparc combo as the fastest combination for running Oracle DB. That coupled with the fact that migration is "relatively" easy with Solaris 10 containers, for customers used to a system that only want it to be faster, that makes sense. Fujitsu, the fourth largest server seller, also manufactures a lot of Sparc equipment under its own brand and for Oracle itself.
Sun's still alive? (Score:1)
I have to say, Sun had the best logo in IT that I've ever seen.
Re: (Score:2)
I have to say, Sun had the best logo in IT that I've ever seen.
*googles* looks like a bunch of worms to me. Sure, it spells Sun from a few angles, but yuck.. to be typically contrary, I'd say it's worse than the other big IT players.. various Linux distros, Apple, even MS, Dell etc have nicer logos..
Re: (Score:2)
The SGI logo was cooler: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nqf6TjE49N8 [youtube.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Well, if they did that, someone else could come along and sell Sun servers, right? I mean, they have to actively use a mark in trade (hence trade-mark) to be able to claim it.
support to expensive (Score:2)
If they would have other support options then 24/7 premier support we would at least consider to continue buying Sun.
For our HPC we only need something like next-business hardware-only.
Re:support to expensive (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
How to say "penis" in five languages:
1. English: Larry Ellison
2. Spanish: Larry Ellison
3. French: Larry Ellison
4. German: Larry Ellison
5: Chinese: Rally Errison
And Oracle/Sun Down from Previous Quarter (Score:3)
According to IDC, in the 4th quarter of 2010 [idc.com] Oracle/Sun had $883 million in server hardware revenue. Thus, on a quarter-to-quarter basis, Oracle was down substantially in the 1st quarter of 2011 [idc.com] (to $773 million). Oracle had what's called an "easy compare" -- very easy. I'd really like to see the unit shipment numbers, though, because I strongly suspect Oracle had to raise unit prices substantially to even make that $773M.
IDC also reports that IBM's System z mainframe hardware (only) revenue was $1.0 billion in the first quarter of 2011. From IDC's report it seems that counts only the z/OS machines and not the mainframes running other operating systems (e.g. Linux). Year over year, the IBM mainframe grew the fastest of any server type, up 41.1%. In other words, IBM's mainframe hardware business alone was about one third larger than Oracle's entire hardware business. Impressive and not impressive, respectively. I think IBM is more or less the Apple of the server industry, the only one left doing any substantial R&D and concentrating on qualities of service, which helps to explain why IBM mainframes contain 5.2 GHz CPUs, for example, when nobody else can get into the 4's. (Mainframe folks used to have to explain clock speed discrepancies, with justification. Now they don't even need to do that.) Sun used to be a big innovator, but, very sadly, that was long, long ago.
Re: (Score:2)
I think IBM is more or less the Apple of the server industry, the only one left doing any substantial R&D
Check out the Cisco UCS, while my company is an IBM shop, the integration of the networking stack and something called service profiles (like a profile that controls what the hardware on the blade is) are interesting innovations in recent years. I have to admit tho HP and IBM have been doing the same things int he x86 (rackable and bladecenter) for many years (more CPU, RAM etc..)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
All true and agreeable, except that in the real world, or the vast majority of it where cost IS an object, all of this doesn't matter. What good is 5 or 10GHz when it costs many times more than 3GHz? IBM's gear costs so much more than Sun gear which costs so much more than HP gear (initial purchase + support) that for anything but tech startups rolling in VC dough or Fortune500 giants don't usually give much consideration to IBM.
Nevermind that Oracle with its draconian license terms (e.g. have to license
Re: (Score:2)
I think IBM is more or less the Apple of the server industry,...
That comparison seems so bizarre, considering that IBM had overwhelming market dominance for business computers of any sort (which were mostly servers of one kind or another at the time) when Apple was founded.
IBM is the antitheses of Apple (Score:2)
I think IBM is more or less the Apple of the server industry, the only one left doing any substantial R&D and concentrating on qualities of service,
It's really sad that you think that.
You've been taken in by the marketing, Apple develop very little themselves (Thunderbolt == Intel, Retina == LG) and their customer service is crap (_I_ have to go to a an apple store where they might look at it... some time next week). Seriously, MS and Red Hat do a lot more R&D then Apple does. Not even considering the amount of stuff that comes out of Google, the difference being Google, Red Hat or even MS wont patent the crap out of everything they invent, let
smoke and mirrors (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Prices went up, sortof (Score:4)
Having recently had a hand in buying new Sun/Oracle hardware, I can attest that prices did not directly go up, BUT the discounts offered to corporations have gone down. For example (using fake numbers) we used to get a 20% discount on hardware purchases, but now only get 10%.
Re: (Score:1)
For us the Sun/Oracle's prices (hardware, software) has gone up from 50% to 1000%. No more new hardware and software from Sun/Oracle.
Re: (Score:1)
In the EDU sector all 'published' discounts have been gone for 15 months. Subsequently 99.99% of my customers are also gone. The Oracle sales reps are eating themselves and pooping on the partner channel. The only HW sales Oracle makes are on the golf course with people that do not know any better. Thanks Larry!
Re: (Score:2)
easy, with the few servers they were selling (Score:1)
Agressive marketing is another reason (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Hudson
OpenOffice
OpenSolaris
MySQL (I admit I only expect them to kill it.)
Solaris updates no longer free
I'd believe increased prices (Score:2)
Having wasted over a *month* in getting support on a less-than-one-year-old server the beginning of this year, and that included being handed off to an engineer in Chile for two weeks, whose manager kept putting him on other jobs, so that frequently it was a day or two or three before he could respond to my emails, I would NEVER advise buying Oracle/Sun to anyone... and I've joined my manager and my co-worker in that attitude.
Wait till Oracle dumps Sun, the way they've dumped some of Sun's OSS projects.
Re: (Score:2)
Wouldn't it be great if Oracle let SUN go, and SUN was then acquired by a UNIX/OSS-friendly company? After all, SUN used to be cool blue, now it's a red herring^WOracle. Imagine SUN being acquired by big blue IBM, or maybe by Google. I'm afraid it won't happen. Oracle's Larry won't let his SUN people go. *sigh*
IBM Bid for Sun (Score:2)
Just a better economy (Score:1)
The title is misleading. People are not switching because they love Oracle. I bet you the majority of customers are those who cut back on I.T. from 2007 and just tried to squeeze the existing equipments' life until 2011. This is just pent up demand as Oracle and Sun customers had 2002 era machines that need to be upgraded that are dying. So they purchase newer Oracle servers and maybe update their Java 1.3 software with a java 6 while they are at it too while the companies have cash to burn. IBM, Intel, and
To Larry: (Score:1)
Zounds! (Score:2)