-----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Bruce Timberlake Sent: Sunday, December 22, 2002 7:23 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [cobalt-developers] XTR Kernel
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 > Then why is Sun taking the stance they are on Linux. Really outside > of the LX50 which does not have a sizable market share yet, the > Cobalt line of products is Sun's market share of the Linux server > world. First off, I have to qualify everything I say as my own opinion, based on what I saw during my tenure as a Cobalt-then-Sun employee. This is not official, nor does it necessarily represent anyone else's opinion who is still working at Sun. Sun believes in Linux as #1) a good open standards-compliant operating system that is #2) not from Redmond. Linux is gaining mindshare and support within Sun, but there is still a lot of Solaris "bigotry" from the old-school people. They are trying to figure out how to protect their place in the Grand Scheme with increasing pressure from IBM and HPAQ, while sticking it to Microsoft as much and as often as possible. The current focus is to use Linux at the "edge" of the networks, while keeping big Sun iron in the datacenter, and also to power desktop machines. > I would assume part of Sun's motivation in acquiring Cobalt would > be to have an immediate interest/involvement in Linux. That's what the folks at Cobalt assumed too... and we all know what happens when we assume... :) > So was the whole presence at Linux world, and acquisition of Cobalt > all in the name of advertising? Not at all. > Did Sun not have any plans for Cobalt? I think they did, but just as Cobalt was acquired, the market went down the toilet, and Sun had to come to grips with a cataclysmic decline in revenue almost overnight, and being the new kid on the block, and not something most people within Sun cared about, knew about, or really had any vested interest to save, resources were denied and reprioritized almost immediately. And when you take R&D dollars and manpower away from projects, they wither and die. > So what next? There is a vocal group within Sun/Cobalt trying desperately to get the powers-that-be to "get" the appliance vision. It exists at the very top -- Scott _loves_ the Qube -- but the middle "blob" of management and decision makers has a hard time getting their head around selling $1000 boxes when their smallest thing before had been in the $10-20K range. With the economy as it is these days, though, and the market slowly drying up for "hosting appliances" it's not making fiscal sense to those in charge to continue supporting the appliances. Focus is shifting to low-end servers, and the Linux-powered desktop. > I have no problem with the LX50, but it's a vastly different > direction than a server appliance? Yes, it's a "general purpose" server just like IBM, HP, Dell (and Sun) already sell... - -- Bruce Timberlake http://www.brtnet.org/ -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQE+BQYBvLA2hUZ9kgwRAg2+AJ9hRGQiPlBX7nGfkqwVT2QgMcvJQACdFjS2 sp+fljHvBgaaiJiGJ1OoZy8= =cCbZ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ cobalt-developers mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://list.cobalt.com/mailman/listinfo/cobalt-developers _______________________________________________ cobalt-developers mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://list.cobalt.com/mailman/listinfo/cobalt-developers
