51 posts • joined 17 Jun 2008
re: Matt B.
I would like to be the first to say that Solaris will be stronger two to three years after this purchase. I will not make as bold a statement about SPARC, but I will say that it will have at least a 5-8 year life span (better than you could say for Itanium).
These are my opinions. Not statements of fact. I would not deign to be as arrogant as Matt the Bratt by saying that I know everything.
I'll be a little more Matt (read Troll) like in this statement that this purchase officially kills HP-UX and Itanium. Why would Oracle continue to give laughable multipliers to Itanium now that they hold the keys to some of the fastest single socket CPU's on the planet? Once you put SPARC and Itanium on an even playing field, Itanium falls down very fast and with it HP-UX. Again, Mr Bryant, this is opinion, so don't get your panties in a bunch.
Re: Not new news.
I couldn't agree more with everything you said. Of course, SGI usually just makes systems that fit a very small niche, so who knows if Nehalem will scale well enough to fit more generic workloads at higher CPU counts.
One other Note, Linux does not scale very well within the box. There are plenty of techniques that help it scale horizontally, but these techniques work just as well on other Os's. Perhaps IBM has the right idea in buying Sun. Solaris is already tuned to work well on many CPU's (SMP or NUMA) and it runs on X64.
Damn it bryant!!
I hate the fact that every time you mention something political, I agree with you... Go back to your Sun bashing hate speech. It tells me that everything is right with the world.
TPM writes an article not entirely complimentary to Sun nor HP, yet MB insists on whining about the HP slights and the article not being harsh enough on Sun. Typical MB FUD spreading. No technical information and he just repeats what he reads from HP's FUD pieces. Get an original thought Matt.
I don't see any Sun fanboys screaming about the unfairness of the article, yet Matt is very defensive. Very interesting... and very telling...
Re: RE: Ahhh, there it is....
You're so easy Matt... LOL
Ahhh, there it is....
and the migration from HP-UX to the Open Standard Solaris on X64 has begun. Just one more nail in the coffin that is Itanium...
Re: RE: @Macka: Itanium Struggle is Valid & Tukwilla .va. Beckton
"hp-ux on Itanium has a wie range of drivers which allows it to meet many differeing custoemr requirments - Slowaris x86 has a cripplingly poor set of drivers that limits the amount of hardware it can run on."
Wow Matt. That's a stupid comment even coming from you. I was trying to stay away from all things Matt today, but that is one stupid comment. HP-UX only runs on one vendors hardware, that being HP's. To say they have a "wie" range of drivers is just stupid. The last I saw, Solaris was certified on over 500 different servers. How many different servers does HP-UX run on?
shaking head... pause... giggle.... shaking head again...
re: Waiting for Matt Bryant...
aaaannnnddddd.... there he is!
Someone dare question Matt's view of the world! How dare they!
Matt the not so HP wannabe
Since you seem to think that Gartner is king. Let's look at what their opinion is on Sun and HP on this metric that you have brought up.
Solaris = Strong Positive for Sun
HP-UX = Positive for HP (and that's actually an increase)
Are you just making this stuff up as you go Matt or are you just a liar?
matt, matt, matt
Matt, you lack logic and consistency. Because of this, I can't help but concentrate on others that actually make sense more than 50% of the time and ignore your blathering. You are the one that is always spouting the fact that Sun has no benchmarks and then when everyone, not just me, quotes them to you, you ignore them... You can't have it both ways Matt. I've done competitive shootouts between HP, Sun and IBM. The fact is that IBM comes out on top on Oracle because of the licensing issue, Sun comes out on top for everything else, and HP never comes out on top except in some very specific microbenchmarks. Of course there are some exceptions, but in general this is how it goes. Sun scales from low-end to high-end while IBM and HP have chosen to only concentrate on the high-end. This makes HP way too expensive to even consider. IBM and Sun however are the way to go. Why anyone would ever want to deal with HP-UX is beyond me. Even HP has given up on advancing this incompetent OS and are trying with all their might to push everyone to Linux, which has it's place but does not fit all needs at the moment.
You are an oaf and a liar sir.
re: RE: Re: Little Matty
So, apparently Matty is the only "user" doing performance analysis and all of the companies buying Sun are too stupid to do shootouts. A hint for you Matty, Sun sells twice the number of Unix servers that HP does and sells more Unix servers than HP and IBM combined. That must mean that most Unix purchasers are too stupid in Matty's opinion...
Nice Matty. Go back to your HP marketing drawing board...
Oh yeah Matty, one other thing. SPEC and TPC don't do the actual benchmarks on the equipment. Users and vendors do. Apparently you don't understand this stuff as much as you think you do. Apparently, if you're doing SAP, you don't think that SAP-SD is a valid benchmark? You actually think that SPEC or TPC would tell you how your actual load would work better than the actual load that you intend to do? That's very telling... You're probably the type of person that does a copy command from /tmp to a block device and uses that number as your performance comparison. Too funny! Microbenchmarks, you gotta love 'em.
Re: Little Matty
"under Sun's supervision"
That's an argument? The rest of your comments are laughable, but this one is just stupid. Are you telling me that you really think that the HP benchmarks are done by people that have nothing to do with HP? You really are gullible. No wonder you buy the HP/Intel lies so easily.
Re: another Matt B. Rant
"three coming generations of Itanium (Tukwila, Poulsen and Kitson) with dates on the roadmap"
You're joking right? Intel has code names and Poulsen is supposed to be out at the same time that Tukwila is now coming out. There are no specifics, just code names. You call that a roadmap?
Also, no one's concerned about the six month delay, it's the two year delay that Tukwila had before that. Rock has always been expected in 2008, so the one year delay is nothing compared to the constant Itanium delays. You said you wanted to see a link to the 2007 date for Tukwila? Well, a real quick search on El Reg shows:
Re:They are not full function cores
That may be true for Niagara, but it's not true for ROCK. That's the whole point of ROCK. Of course, going core to core, I bet you're right that the ROCK cores will be slower than comparable MHz Cores. However, the fact still remains that who really cares about core performance in servers, except when dealing with Oracle? Oracle's not the only game in town. All I know is that total throughput will obliterate the competition. Why do you think that Niagara is growing over 30% quarter to quarter and that's with the single thread penalty. Just think how well these boxes will sell when you get rid of that single thread penalty... The only ones that don't see the benefit of this idea are HP and IBM as they have nothing to compete against it. Even Intel's seen the light.
"Yeah, and the date for launch is.... oh, there isn't a date."
...and this is different from Itanium, how? Tukwila is two years late and running. They have no solid dates for any future releases. Tukwila was supposed to have 8-16 cores running at 4.5GHz and be released in 2007. Now it is 4 cores, 2.0GHz and to be released in 2009. At least ROCK has stayed steady and provides something new, whereas Tukwila just increases core count and uses a new PC-based interconnect (with lots of cache).
Re: Fujitsu haven't exactly waxed lyrical
Well, Matt, what I do know is that Fujitsu, as most vendors now, have lost faith is Itanium. Intel gives vague rumors of a possible successor to Tukwila, but seeing as Tukwila is almost two years late, I would bet that they are hedging their bets on that one. Fujitsu see's the writing on the wall and are pushing SPARC much harder than Itanium. SPARC has a much brighter future than Itanium as there's actually more than one vendor using it.
Also, seeing as SPARC is open, I wouldn't doubt that there is another manufacturer out there seriously thinking about coming out with a SPARC chip of their own. So much for the closed Itanium "standard". Thank god that AMD saved Intel's ass by coming out with 64-bit extensions to x86. Good think Intel was smart enough to pick up on the 64-bit extensions. Itanium's a mess.
Re: Lame answer from Pony boy
Since you reference www.sunsucks.com (a HP run site mind you), I must believe
that you think HP has the answers... Let's see:
1. ROCK is late, but Itanium is always late. Have they had on time delivery yet? Niagara was on time. Where's tukwila? Or will Tukwila even be released?
2. 500W is typical HP FUD. The numbers I've heard of aren't even close to that. See:
Even at 230Watts that's only 230/16=~15 watts per core. That will blow away Itanium.
3. Transactional memory finally works? What? It hasn't even been released and you pull that out of Matt Bryant's butt? Gimme a break. Who knows if it will work? That's for the theoreticians
to figure out. It has nothing to do with anything, however, as Intel nor IBM have anything like it, so would you rather have something that might help but doesn't hurt, or not have it at all? Pure FUD.
A question for you HP boy. Since HP has outsource all of their family jewels... what will you do when Intel junks Itanium? You'll only have three choices... IBM/X64/SPARC.
All in all, ROCK looks very interesting and no one else has anything even close. Also, since SPARC is open, even if Sun screws up, someone else (Fujitsu) can come along and help out. Pretty nice protection for SPARC users. HP has no such protection as they have to rely on another company with completely different goals for everything as they have no real IP.
Re: How much was he paid to change his mind?
Perhaps you're right that he changed his mind based upon bribery, though I doubt it very much... However, the skeptics are not saying that global warming does not exist, they are saying that human caused global warming does not exist. You anecdotal evidence does not, therefore, conclude anything.
The fact is that the Armageddon evangelists (Gore and Hansen) are making tons of money on the ignorance of the public and real scientists are afraid of being shouted down for not agreeing. First we were told that "of course man caused global warming exists" because " the majority of the scientists agree it does." Now that scientists are popping up everywhere stating that they doubt man caused global warming, we are told that these scientists are bribed. What a joke.
Skull and crossbones 'cuz we're all being robbed by this junk science. Al Gore should be humiliated and the buffoons that support him should be disgraced.
re: Murdock, you need to read up on Sun history.
OK, it may be hip to pile on Sun lately, but this comment cannot go unanswered:
"...and "The network is the computer" ... I'm sure I missed a couple in there, but the idea is pretty much the same across the board. It didn't sell, at least not in any numbers in the real world"
So you're telling me that Internet computing did not sell "at least not in any numbers in the real world"?
What world are you living in? Sun was the dot in dot com and got the revenues to show for it. at least at that time. Of course they were also the dot in dot bomb as well... However, to say that Sun never made any money in any meaningful way from the network is laughable. Now, the other ideas, I have to agree were ill formed, though the Sun Ray is pretty cool and if marketed properly might actually sell well.
Matt, you're so funny...
"...printer bizz again, where HP makes more money in a quarter than Sun's server sales did in the whole year." Wow! You pulled out printing as your example of where HP has innovated. OK, Matt, you're right. HP has innovated on printers. You win! LOL!
"HP designed the original Itanium" First off, HP gave away their family jewels when they did that, so I would not use that as an example of where HP innovated. PA-RISC was years ahead of where Itanic came out and put HP behind the curve for years. They barely caught up and now are falling behind again. Itanic is a nightmare and will soon (measured in years) be dead and you will be forced to use a X64 chip set that will barely scale and will leave you with unrecoverable errors that require whole frame replacements to resolve.
Even Intel understands the inevitable.
Sun Microsystems is the future!
Re: RE: Re: Matt the HP Marketing Droid
OK. Now hell has frozen over. I actually agree with something that Matty has to say. I tend to ignore Matty's technical arguments as they are based in a HP fanboism that you cannot assuage. In this case, however, I think he has a point:
"there are plenty of you Sunshiners at the techie level grimly holding on, but Sun have lost mindshare in the mid-level and above, and those are the people with the buying power."
I used to laugh at the higher ups saying that Sun was a workstation company, and then they were the same ones that later called Sun a tier 1 server vendor. What changed? Nothing, just their minds. That's the point really... The higher ups make decisions based upon where they perceive the market going. I can't say I blame them in this regard, since you have to make decisions based upon the longevity of the solution. However, it doesn't take much for that mind set to change the other direction.
Sun's technology is as good if not better than ever. All they need is one solution to catch and then the mind set changes. OpenSolaris - regardless of what Matty's opinion - is catching on. The Sun Storage 7000 is getting rave reviews from every major journal and it beats all the other comparable platforms on price. Sun makes twice as much revenue on software as RedHat, yet RedHat is seen as a power... No sour grapes, I'm just trying to make the point that not all opinions are based in reality. Matty's constant rants against Sun are a case in point.
Re: Matt the HP Marketing Droid
Matt, Matt, Matt,
"I’d enjoy hearing your views on Goldman Sachs rating Sun as a sell stock, but only for the comedy value."
Give me a break. Now you're quoting Goldman Sachs? You've really sunk low... Of course, I bet you would ignore the other "buy" signals from other analysts. How about the fact that Sanford C. Bernstein & Co. raised Sun's target price to $7 (from the then current $4)? How about the fact that Illuminata is singing Sun's praises? Oh yeah, you only rely on El Reg and HP's FUD site for your Sun information, right?
Of course all analysts are full of hot air, but you're the one that actually takes them seriously Matt.
Go find a mirror, point at the image in it, and then start laughing Matt...
Re: RE: Bill - still four weeks behind.
Matt, let me learn ya' on basic reading skills. My post was about your inability to reason and your complete and total hypocrisy. I think, if you read closely, or at least with the level of a high school freshman, that my post did this most clearly. To make it more clear for you, a hypocrite is defined as:
1. a person who pretends to have virtues, moral or religious beliefs, principles, etc., that he or she does not actually possess, esp. a person whose actions belie stated beliefs.
2. a person who feigns some desirable or publicly approved attitude, esp. one whose private life, opinions, or statements belie his or her public statements.
To Matt Bryant
Matt, you are the blackest kettle I've ever seen.
1. You scream about Sun canceling US-V, but Intel has canceled at least two Itanium chips that I
can think of.
2. You froth at the mouth about Rock being late, yet Tukwila is at last count two years late and
many of the promised features missing.
3. You comment on "name calling", yet you resort to "simply tossing around insults" as a matter
of course. Here are some of the "insults" that you used in just this one article:
- Blind idiot
These are just the ones in this one post from you. You resort to "simply tossing around
insults" in most of your posts so based upon your definition this makes you a "blind idiot".
A quick search on Sun and looking at your posts on all things Sun, I quickly find the following
"tossing around insults" from you Matt:
- smelly brown stuff
Also, since I know that you make money from doing research into Sun as a HP Marketing Droid, I must clarify a few points for you so you can go back to your bosses with some facts:
1. Sun is the No 1 Unix vendor with more that 46% of the market, which is why there are double
the number of applications on Solaris than HPUX (heck, there are more Apps on AIX than
2. Solaris is the only Unix to grow market share last quarter, while HPUX stayed flat and AIX lost
share. Yes, yes, I know HPUX grew in the High-End, but I'm talking about total Unix, not just
one niche. Besides, HPUX mostly grew from cannibalizing their own PA-RISC/Alpha/MIPS
3. Look at Sun's Balance sheet. Just because Sun loses money on a GAAP basis, does not
mean that they are not generating cash. Their cash increased to $3.3 Billion and debt is almost
non-existent. All of the information is available on Suns Shareholder site.
Again, how can they go bankrupt with little to no debt and generating cash?
You must not make much money as a HP Marketing Droid, since you obviously don't do your research very well... Of course you are very good at FUD, so perhaps that is where you earn your money...
Blah blah blah
Come on now Reg... and in today's breaking new's "Sun is doing poorly according to Wall Street."
How about some news that has not already been discussed 50 times.
HP's problem is relying on Itanium
HP has a problem in this new market condition... Intel has consistently been late to market with every Itanium to date and in general the capabilities have been less than promised.
Case in point Tukwila was promised at 8-16 Cores with a 65nm process in 2005. It was expected in 2007. Tukwila is still not out and is only expected to have 4 cores. Montvale was supposed to come out at 2.8GHz, but only came out at 1.66GHz and two years late.
Intel has a history of being late with Itanium and there's no reason to believe this won't continue. Perhaps it's because Itanium is way too complex and difficult to advance. They took their own route rather than RISC and X64, Power and even SPARC are going to kill Itanium (which has met no ones expectations thus far).
HP's in trouble in the enterprise market.
To Simon and AC
"It's pickin' up bad vibrations"
- Come now Simon... Who works all day in the lab? That's what remote access is for. Of
course it's possible that this guy does, but I doubt it. Your other comment on reducing the
level of noise in a lab... Have you ever been in a "real" data center? They are loud! The air
conditioning alone is loud, but then when you add a ton of spinning disks and server fans to
the mix it's incredibly loud. The lab shown in this video is not any louder than the average
DC (try putting a mic in your data center and see how loud it sounds). Ear protection is a good
idea though. I know many old mainframe guys that are now deaf because of data center
noise. I often spend countless hours in data centers without hearing protection and I doubt
that I am alone in that regard.
"I wonder what the device is above the array in question?"
- That's the actual 7440 NAS Head. Then above that is another JBOD hooked up to another
7440 NAS Head. You can check them out on Sun's website.
I for one am very impressed with the level of detail shown by the analytics of this box. Very impressive! EMC, HDS, and NetAPP don't even provide this level of detail in such an easy format for fee.
Re: Re: David Halko
Wow Matt, I can't imagine that a mere HP Sales Grunt would do the level of research on the competitions web site that you appear to do. You must actually be in HP marketing. That would explain your complete and utter fear and distaste for anything Sun. I could understand your constant trolling on Sun related Register articles, but to spend the rest of your obviously busy admin life (that's sarcasm if you missed it) you mist be in HP marketing... I'm not sure how the industry as a whole would take the ethics of one vendor putting out such obvious FUD on public forums, but perhaps you're doing it without your employers permission.
Re: RE: Re: Re: Bill
HP Sales Grunt, HP Sales Grunt, HP Sales Grunt... Oracle used the same legalize that they put in all white papers of the sort. The same wording is in papers that they put out for IBM, Dell, and HP. It does not make it any less important. Even IBM states that SPEC is worthless, but there are enough ignorant users that use it that they continue to use it (besides, it is extremely easy to design for). Also, there were a lot of benchmarks that were released other than this one.
The fact that you only believe in SPEC and TPC says a lot about you Matt the HP Sales Grunt. They only test very specific parts of the architecture and are not very specific to the actual end product such as web, java, peoplesoft, sap, etc. As a matter of fact SPEC and TPC say exactly nothing about how a system will work with these industry benchmarks. No I am starting to question whether you really are a Sales Grunt and perhaps you are a pointy haired manager type. That would explain your reliance on such benchmarks as SPEC and TPC to tell you what will best run your specific application. Maybe I'll change your nickname to Matt the Pointy Haired HP Manager.
Re: Re: Bill
"Well, apart from the fact HP has a very long and established relationships with Veritas (the reason the AdvFS got dumped) and Oracle (number one Oracle RAC and grid partner) and so doesn't need GPFS, HP also have the PolyServe people and could probably produce a better UNIX grid product if need be."
Is that why HP uses Lustre for all of their Linux HPC Clusters? Because they "could probably produce a better UNIX grid product if need be."
I will try to control the urge to resort to the name calling that Matt seems inclined to do when he has no logical or valid points. Matt, please use some logic, it makes these discussions much more interesting. You say that Solaris is slow, but when the FACTS are given, you say they are just marketing. Then you show up on another thread saying that another Sun product must be slow because it has not shown any benchmarks which HP has shown. Then when someone shows you the benchmarks again, you say that they are just benchmarketing.
Your antics are too consistent and repetitive. Get some new shtick Matt. No one takes you seriously as you find a false premise and even when everyone proves you wrong, you stick to it.
If HP is such a great company and can do no wrong then why do you find it so necessary to attack the competition so much (namely Sun)?
Of course there's no announced support for HPUX
HPUX, so there must really be no demand for HPUX, using Matt the HP Sales Grunts reasoning... IBM must be having a really easing time convincing all those HPUX users to move over even without ever announcing even the intent to port GPFS... What a meat-head.
Re: www.sun.com/rock is also gone
I'm sure it's only feeding into your FUD, but that page never existed. Why do you insist on spreading this FUD? Probably just more of Matt the HP Sales Grunt spreading FUD under an AC cover.
Working for a company that gets NDA presentations from Sun regularly, as I would expect Matt the HP Sales Grunt would also get if he was really in IT, Rock is alive and well if not a bit late.
Re: Not unexpected.
OK, now this is really upsetting me having to agree with Matt the HP Sales Grunt. As far as Sun going after the wrong market in this case, I 100% agree... By going after the enterprise market Sun was aimed right into IBM's wheel house. Sun was one of the first major vendor with a "Cloud" computing solution like this, so I give them a little bit of wiggle room here, but they really missed the boat.
Sun's stated goal has been to go after the "Web 2.0" companies, so they then target Enterprise Companies with their hosting solution. It makes no sense. I don't think it's too late to come up with a solution and re-enter the market, but with Sun's recently announced "downsizing" I doubt they will want to go too hard charging into a market that has already denied them.
Just waiting your our friendly neighborhood Matt the HP Sales Grunt to chime in with his usual FUD.
Re: Rock is coming...?
You still waiting on Whitefield? Here's a hint... It was canceled.
How 'bout the fact that Tukwila was promised to be ready in 2007? Hmm, how's your memory doing there little Matty. Still waiting for Tukwila? You may have been drinking too much of the HP and Intel Coolaid. Support for Itanium is dropping faster than little Matty can write a 1000 word essay on why Sun sucks.
Montvale was a year late as well, by the way, with several "important" features dropped and initial speed lower than originally promised (about 20% less).
Come now little Matty. Even you have a better memory than that. Anyone espousing the perfection of HP and Intel cannot throw stones about canceling projects or being late.
No need to point and laugh at little Matty, though... I have sympathy for the memory impaired. Besides, I feel bad for Little Matty as he will be spending a lot of time pretty soon porting everything over to Xeon when Itanium is canceled all together. Or will Intel play the name change game again and rename Xeon to Itanium? Those crafty marketing geniuses...
IT? because I doubt more and more every day that little Matty even works in the IT field... and I don't count HP sales as working in the IT field...
Re: Twatt Bryant is a HP girly girl
Twatt... I mean Matt... is just sticking up for his chosen god, HP. He is a HP fanboy, so you can't really blame him for not being very open minded or logical really... He has biases just like anyone else. I'm sure there were actually Irix fanboys at one time or another... I know, I know, comparing Irix to HPUX is an insult to Irix.
Of course he may just work for HP, which would explain his lack of logic and constant inability to think critically.
Matt's a HP wannabe but...
Matt may be a HP wannabe and he may be a hypocrite by calling everyone else a fanboi, when he is the biggest fanboi I've ever seen. The only difference is that Matt is a HP fanboi, which is quite different indeed. At least he's original. You don't see too many HP fanboi's really... Anyway, he's kinda right in this regard. The IBM Mainframe is good, but dieing. There are many reasons to get off of it, least of all to get away from IBM GS constantly increasing the cost over the life of every project.
You are quite correct Jesper. IBM's use of SPLPAR's is really why Sun went to Containers and LPARS (especially Containers). The problem with IBM's SPLPAR's is they have horrendous overhead. I've heard that 10% is not uncommon, but even more has been seen. Containers on the other hand hover around 0-2% at the most. I'm not an expert on SPLPAR's, but my understanding is that all of the issues, such as single points of failure that could be attributed to Containers also affect SPLPARS. The nice thing is that unlike HP, IBM actually tells you about the actual amount of overhead (even if it takes a little digging and complining).
Re: "radically simple"?
Matt, Matt, Matt... Has Sun really worried you with your HP customers? It's an appliance as everyone has stated already, so no OpenSolaris knowledge needed.
To the other FUD spreader commenting on the NetApp/ZFS lawsuit. Since Sun got that lawsuit taken out of Texas, and put into California (where both vendors actually reside), the lawsuit has been steadily going Sun's way. If you say "don't buy Sun storage until the lawsuit is decided" then you sure as hell should say "don't buy NetApp until the lawsuit is decided" as it appears to be a much bigger issue for NetApp than it has ever been for Sun.
The point is that you get all of these features for pennies on the dollar when compared to IBM, HP, Dell, EMC, or even NetApp. They're all expensive to start with, and expensive to add all of the features that Sun just throws in.
Compare a base model 7110 costing $10,995 for 2TB. You get all of the goodies of the other vendors, but they are all included for free. From what I can see, it appears that Analytics is the biggest killer app of these boxes.
I don't think it was hidden. If you listened to the Earnings Announcement, they were very vocal about this addition and many of the press on the call commented on it's inclusion.
"As for patch management then AIX have always been good at that. I mean I accidental patched some key libs that a running Oracle database used many years ago, now that is bad. But after just doing a rollback of the patches I could actually close down what should be closed down and repatch the system."
This is way too simplistic. Everything you talk about here has also been in Solaris for ages... You don't understand what Liveupgrade and ZFS bring to the table. They work in conjunction, you can use Liveupgrade to create an alternate boot environment on a ZFS snapshot. Patch the alternate boot environment. Wait for a convenient time to reboot and make it active (yes, boot a snapshot). Your only down time for patching is the reboot. If the new patches cause a problem reboot back into the original environment. If you like the new patched environment, then mark it as good and your good to go.
You can't do that in AIX or HP for that matter.
Re: You may laugh but...
I agree. Sun is the largest FOSS company... PERIOD. It's not even close. Move over RH...
Re: RE: Oh bugger....
Comparing core to core is a waste of time. It's about the system, no? HP can't scale as high as Sun, let alone IBM. The Sun systems are cheaper/perf. Get an Oracle site license, like we have, and you don't have to worry about core licensing. Also, when you buy SAP it comes with the Oracle license, which is not licensed per core! The per core argument is for those that are still working on a single core Intel laptop.
Turn that finger around and point it at yourself Mr. "I'm so smart I can't stand it" Bryant.
Also, as has been pointed out before, what makes you think that Tukwila will ever come out? Intel's canceled better chips before. My guess is that Itanic is Xeon bound, which will reduce HP's scalability even more, and cause another porting effort for all the HP faithful. Will HP port HPUX over to X86? I doubt it. Then what will they do? Linux maybe? Perhaps Solaris? If I were a HPUX user, I would start converting over to Linux or Solaris now. Why stay on an obviously dead OS like HPUX?
RE: RE: No really...
Why would anyone accuse Jesper of anything. He's commenting on a pretty impressive IBM product. It's his opinion... You just seem to think that HP can do no wrong, while constantly forgetting that Itanic is a dead CPU. When you are forced to port your applications to yet another CPU, will you come on here and admit that HP has no clue when it comes to high end computing?
Why do you always attack Sun for their CPU track record, yet never say a word about HP's horrendous record?
To Jonathan Schwatrz
That's actually pretty funny Matt. Good on ya'. I didn't think you had it in you.
Re: Share repurchases
"1) New Niagara chips need to come out on time and work well, or Intel will beat it"
So far so good. They can at least get Niagara out within a reasonable timeframe.
Rock on the other hand...
"2) AMD's Shanghai chips need to push Sun's X4600 and X4540 boxes"
Well, if they don't, then the X4450 should do the trick. Though the X4600's are pretty
damn impressive, and the x4450's are just "me too's"
"3) MySQL 6 with the Falcon storage engine needs to win rave reviews"
"4) If Rock doesn't beat Power and Itanium then it should be canned"
Rock doesn't have to beat Itanium, but I agree that it has to beat Power. Of course it all
depends on what you mean by beat. In the same size chassis, with less power, and less
money, then yes I think Rock will handily beat Power. If you mean with the same number
of cores, then no, I don't think that Rock will beat Power core to core. Hell, Niagara already
beats Power on most benchmarks in the same size chassis, with less power, and less money
"5) They need to learn how to sell via the web (their site sucks)"
ZFS for root is the killer feature
amanfromMars, you're making about as much sense as a certain Matty these days...
On another subject, the ZFS for root is awesome! You can create a liveupgrade ABE in seconds using a snapshot. Patch or upgrade the ABE without taking the system down. Boot into the new ABE. If you like it then make it active. If you don't or run into trouble, then boot off the original BE.
HP! Crap, no no no!
I can't blame 'em really. HP has decent enough gear, but their service has been mediocre at best in the past. Also, they are the definition of standard when it comes to performance and capabilities. They have all the check marks, but when you really look at the features closely you see they really don't cut it, or work for that matter. HP will try to push their mistake hardware (SuperDumb anybody?) on GM and tell them that they can support their junk better than they can support the other guys stuff (like Solaris or AIX).
Re: "No one else can do this ... "
I think what they mean is that no one else can do binary compatibility across this scale of servers (from volume to enterprise). IBM certainly can't, HP definitely can't (and who would want to with HPUX or Windows anyway?). The point is binary compatibility. No one else does it as well as Sun.
- Tricked by satire? Get all your news from Facebook? You're in luck, dummy
- Feature TV transport tech, part 1: From server to sofa at the touch of a button
- Google straps on Jetpac: An app to find hipsters, women in foreign cities
- Updated Microsoft Azure goes TITSUP (Total Inability To Support Usual Performance)
- The Return of BSOD: Does ANYONE trust Microsoft patches?