Live data from Hacker News

The Dawn and Dusk of Sun Microsystems [video]

youtube.com

91–100 of 112 posts

Re: The Dawn and Dusk of Sun Microsystems [video]

#91
post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Didn't also raise of Linux sped Sun's demise. In early 2000's the private compute farm of the org I was working had a mix of Solaris and Linux machines, with Solaris hosts outnumbering Linux hosts. Within couple of years with aim of uniformization all hosts were standardized to Linux.

Not as i recall. Linux at that time was seen as an interesting project, but not yet suitable for the typical workloads ascociated with a Sun workstation.

Strongly disagree. I posted elsewhere in this thread but the semiconductor ran on Sun / Solaris / SPARC. We switched to Linux x86 practically overnight in 2002. Sun was slightly relevant for a few jobs requiring 64-bit >4GB memory. When AMD released the 64-bit Opteron that was the exact moment that Sun died and was completely irrelevant to the semiconductor industry. 99% of our software was text based and could be recompiled for Linux by typing "make"

Re: The Dawn and Dusk of Sun Microsystems [video]

#92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Radioactive cache? Sun shipped radioactive parts to customers?

Static RAM they bought from IBM; they trusted it too much, didn't include ECC in its path to CPUs, and completely torched any chance at becoming an enterprise vendor by blaming their customers, making them sign NDAs before Sun would "help" etc. You really don't want customers to describe an "enterprise" experience as "They treated the whole thing like a cover-up" https://www.computerworld.com/article/2596346/more-use…

IIRC They had ECC on them - the ECC catching the error resulted in machine check exception, iirc, severe enough it led to reboot of the machine

Re: The Dawn and Dusk of Sun Microsystems [video]

#93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IBM bought Red Hat fairly recently, long after SUN was bought by Oracle.

My bad, maybe they were investing in it and pushing to their customers? I recall some ibm connection

According to [1] IBM declared support for Linux in 2000 [I thought it was around '97], that was a signal for many that Linux was good enough for business.

[1] https://www.ibm.com/ibm/history/ibm100/us/en/icons/linux/

Re: The Dawn and Dusk of Sun Microsystems [video]

#94
post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Was it because of customers already using VMS, Certainly. Vaguely in the 80s VAX was massively popular with universities and the government. Today you'd think the twenty grand price of the first PDP-11 (in 1977 dollars, too) was very high but when you compared it to an IBM machine of similar capabilities and there was no one else to compare to, that was pocket change. And then it was pretty much a given there is a…

https://donhopkins.medium.com/the-x-windows-disaster-128d398... >The X-Windows Disaster >[...] The color situation is a total flying circus. The X approach to device independence is to treat everything like a MicroVAX framebuffer on acid. [...] >[...] My super 3D graphics, then, runs only on /dev/crt1, and X windows runs only on /dev/crt0. Of course, this means I cannot move my mouse over to the 3d graphics display,…

No one ever accused X Windows of being a user friendly or hardware friendly or basically having any attribute even vaguely synonymous of positive. It's even more backwards compatible than Microsoft Windows and there's a very heavy emphasis on backwards. I doubt say, XLFD have seen much use in this century but hey! it worked in 1985 so we can't possibly not support it.

Re: The Dawn and Dusk of Sun Microsystems [video]

#95
post #70
post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IBM was the other offer on the table. Scott managed to scuttle the deal but his ability to do so was far from a certainty since he was already out as CEO. Google was pretty much incompatible, they had no interest in workstations or paying for quality as their focus was redundant arrays on inexpensive machines. Fujitsu was the best actual option for commercial compatibility, but everyone felt it would be a waste of ti…

Although Sun and Fujitsu had a long-standing business and development relationship, I think it would also have been problematic from a strategy and cultural perspective. My observation with the 3 big Japanese computer companies (NEC and Hitachi being the others) in the 2000s is that they aspired to be major global computer system suppliers--but weren't willing to actually make the investments to make such a thing pos…

[deleted]

Re: The Dawn and Dusk of Sun Microsystems [video]

#96
post #75

Anyone know who designed the SUN logo. It is a very clever arrangement of the characters S U and N. You can see SUN from any angle; and it also looks like electronic circuit. Very clever design.

https://1000logos.net/sun-microsystems-logo/ The emblem was created in 1982 by Vaughan Pratt, professor of computer science.

That's right: Vaughan Pratt designed the original square Sun logo.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vaughan_Pratt

And Sun Science Officer and Nixon Enemy John Gage is the genius who rotated it 45 degrees.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Gage

Nixon Enemies List entry for John B. Gage:

https://www.enemieslist.info/enemy.php?ID=463

Another one of the greatest logos of all time is the SGI logo, designed by none other than Scott Kim!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scott_Kim

http://xahlee.info/UnixResource_dir/sgi_logo.html

https://www.amazon.com/Inversions-Scott-Kim/dp/1559532807

https://scottkim.com/

Re: The Dawn and Dusk of Sun Microsystems [video]

#97
post #64

Everyone has good things to say about Sun, but let's not forget that they tried to monetize Java (even trying to take money from open-source communities like FreeBSD) long before they were acquired by Oracle.

It's not just that they tried to monetize Java. That's one thing that's debatably good or bad, but not the worst thing that's objectively terrible: Sun tried to MILITARIZE Java DEVELOPERS as disposable mercenaries in Scott McNealy's personal war against Bill Gates and Microsoft.

See me other post:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34125284

>You're right, it was Slowlaris that killed Sun, and Java was meant to be a "Microsoft Killer", not a programming language. [...]

>Sun could never measure up to Microsoft, and McNealy was totally obsessed with fighting them, to the point that Java was not actually a programming language for solving developer's problems per se, but primarily a weapon in his personal vendetta against Microsoft, and Java developers were considered expendable mercenaries in that war, above all else. Everything they did with Java was measured by how much it would harm Microsoft, not help developers. [...]

Re: The Dawn and Dusk of Sun Microsystems [video]

#98
Sun was done in by the following mistakes from around 2002:

- Failure to license Solaris to Google (reportedly Sun wanted to have a license count, while Google considered the number of systems they ran a secret).

- The "termination" of Solaris on x86, which was really (or became) a pause in development for six months -- whichever the case, it was a disaster as it gave Linux a huge boost.

- The closing down of Sun Professional Services (presumably in order to preserve R&D). Compare to IBM, which did the opposite, and whose professional services division became hugely valuable to IBM. Professional services organizations sell their services and their parent companies other products and services. Losing the professional services organization meant losing sales.

That was all in 2002. Many more mistakes were made later (and before), but these are the ones that really killed Sun.

Other mistakes after 2002:

- Treating J2ME as a cash cow and thus failing to get it on competitors' handsets when iPhones came about. This failure being one of limited R&D and mispricing the product. Compare to Android essentially adopting Java not that much later.

- In general treating x86 as a second class citizen to protect SPARC. Now, this one is not very fair because after the cancellation of Solaris on x86 was reverse, internally x86 was a first class citizen, and Sun built a great systems group around x86, but Sun was quite the cash cow milker and put too much effort to keep SPARC from falling too far behind x86, and from the outside it probably looked like Sun just didn't really mean x86 support until around the time of the Oracle acquisition (at which time Sun had great x86 systems for its storage appliance). You have to know when the cash cow is dying and when it's beyond rebuilding, and Sun just didn't.

- The MySQL acquisition. $1bn out the window. There were others, like Cobalt.

Oracle too made mistakes, chiefly killing OpenSolaris in response to Greenbytes' shipping non-release OpenSolaris ZFS dedup code before Oracle. There were other ways to handle this. Oracle is a company built on mindshare, but it didn't understand that Solaris was now the underdog and needed to build mindshare, and the way to do it was to loss-lead. Friends of mine immediately told me they'd no longer run any new Solaris systems and would migrate from existing ones ASAP because of shades of the 2002 cancellation of Solaris on x86 -- they felt they could not trust Oracle.

This could be my bias because 2002 is when I joined Sun. Clearly there were other mistakes made before 2001. But the Solaris team at Sun did incredible things in the 00s with a smaller team than in the 90s.

The Sun culture that created ZFS, SMF, FMA, and other things in the 00s doesn't exist anywhere now. It was a culture of internal openness and skunkworks projects that paid off.

Re: The Dawn and Dusk of Sun Microsystems [video]

#100
post #80

I worked for Sun in the early 1990s when they were widely seen as an unstoppable force. It was wild. Even around 2000, I felt as if they were leading the Web into the future. But after the dot com bubble burst, it was sad to see how quickly they declined and how Solaris and SPARC faded into obscurity. I still have a lot of old Sun machines in my basement as a reminder of those amazing times. I can't get rid of them,…

I worked at a company in about 2002-5 that was selling software to mobile phone carriers. They were still exclusively Sun hardware. And that was probably the last time I used Sun hardware. I have no recollection of why McNealy left, but I’m not sure Schwartz was the right person for the job. He did some good work for forwarding the case for FOSS, but it always seemed to come at the expense of Sun.

I don't see how Sun's could have successfully navigated the Linux on commodity x86 onslaught without becoming a services company. Google and Facebook would have been huge Sun customers pre-dotcom-bust, before Linux/x86 got a solid foothold. Both server hardware and software got commoditized, leaving Sun no complement to monetize.
Post reply on HN