72 posts • joined 29 Jun 2009
SPARC has had 16 Cores for a while, with 8 threads in each Core. Why is this a "monster" with 15?
That and the news that IBM is looking for shoppers of it's chips fabs tells you more or less what's going to happen. Power is the new Itanic.
So much fun
I remember how you treated Sun, IBM. I remember.
Looks like they finally called it quits against Oracle. Where's TPM when you want to read him?
This headline should come with the "Joke Alert!" icon.
"a micro-RAID distributed across all disks with improved re-build times" sounds awfully similar to Pillar's Distributed RAID.
It supports NFS, CIFS, iSCSI and FC... It uses Solaris' COMSTAR which supports all those protocols and more
Selling like hotcakes??... Excuse me, but maybe your hotcakes do not sell very much.
you forgot your troll face
Did you read the Nicira news?
define "Normal Linux containers"... which one??
That's their answer?... Price?
Ellison dismembered them all these days and their only answer is Oracle's price?
That's a fail in my book.
ARM... think about it
Wrong man. He's not trivializing anything. He DID say capitalism destroyed Mars.
You just don't want to accept he's nuts.
FF4 was announced to be unsupported on PPC and Mac OS tiger, it's your fault you didn't read the release notes, AC.
That said, there is a community version of FF4 for PPC here: http://www.floodgap.com/software/tenfourfox/
"ASF is home to some of the biggest and most popular open-source projects on the web, gave us the ubiquitous server, and is one of the JCP's longest serving participants.
Google? The internet's largest search and advertising company, owner of Android - the fastest growing mobile phone operating system."
Open source WEB SERVER and SEARCH COMPANY... they are definitively not Java giants, nor Java companies.
They are jealous
too bad Google took the wrong decisions while trying to skip license responsibilities
Google is evil too, never forget that... and all of you Lunix caught the bait
You don't know how much do they cost yet
Yah... RE: RE: ORLY
"Nope, all they have to do is bundle in a cheap version of Sybase's database products with SAP for now, they have plenty of time to work on a more integrated stack including mobile toys. Oracle survives on pricey database licences, whereas SAP are more interested in selling the apps on top."
That's what Exadata does exactly for Oracle, and they still have plenty of time to keep integrating. No news there.
"Oh yeah, because Oracle have that well-known, market-leading ERP/BI/CRM tool called.... oh, no they actually don't! Nothing like the SAP suite."
Actually, most of the time the problem with Oracle is not that they lack applications, but that they have too many offerings... Have you even took the time to explore oracle applications site? http://www.oracle.com/us/products/applications/index.html ... Most of those are well known and market leading, being acquisitions of already well known products... and yes, many customers I have met use them, even if most use SAP, you can't just disregard Oracle's presence.
"The partnership could prove a real competitor for Oracle, which is still busy digesting its purchase of Sun."
No, I don't think so.
SAP will now need to digest this acquisition and it still doesn't compare to what Oracle can offer.
Also, take care to notice they are targeting mobile with this acquisition, not going head to head against Oracle. OTOH, customers ask for SAP on Oracle or SAP on MSSQL (depending on their infrastructure)... They won't migrate to sybase just for the sake of it.
This will be interesting nevertheless, but not real competition.
If I was Wideanus, I would keep quiet for a while before appearing in public after all he did... maybe change my name and face too.
After his attacks on code ownership, NOW (after he is left with no other choice) he wants to be a MySQL support company... of course.
Thanks but no thanks.. Drizzle OTOH is very interesting, let's see where it gets.
You need a better one for your translations
Google de facto standards?... you mean, like the Android Linux kernel code that was rejected from being upstreamed?... they forked Harmony, itself already non-standard.. so exactly were is Google establishing standards? they are playing on their own.
NO, BAD MATT, BAD
""To help you on your ignorance - It is spelled Solaris...." As we've discussed before, the moniker Slowaris was coined many years ago by dissatisfied Sun customers. "
Obviously, "many years ago" means it's not up to date with the times. Would you care to update your information now that at least you have admitted it's something past?... Please, try the latests releases of Solaris and explain where is it slow. And no, I don't care how fast it boots, Solaris is not meant to be rebooted constantly as Windows, it's meant to work.
"Even if I had a fab plant I wouldn't be burning SPARC as that seems to be a sure way to burn your company. "
Typical Matt response, avoid the question.
You said there was nothing open about OpenSPARC, and were proven wrong. So you answer with something completely unrelated. Be honest and admit you are wrong.
The fact is, there is no other architecture more open than SPARC/Solaris. SPARC International is the organization behind the architecture and it was founded nearly two decades ago, and keeps the architecture fully open and non proprietary, licensing the "SPARC" trademark (much like the "UNIX" trademark's case) to the interested parties, like Sun, Fujitsu and others.
Not only that, Sun has released it's SPARC v9 implementation (OpenSPARC T1 and T2) as open source, mostly under the GPL and there are other open source implementations, such a LEON (SPARC v8).
On top of that, Solaris is also open source in the form of OpenSolaris, with which you can take full advantage of the SPARC architecture with no strings attached... or you could go for the supported linux distros, such as Debian, WindRiver Linux and others... or if you are a BSD person, you can go with FreeBSD, OpenBSD or NetBSD... it's up to you.
Exactly were is it proprietary??
AIX, HP-UX, Power, Itanium and x86/x64 do not match up to this level of openness. All of those are fully proprietary architectures and systems where no standardization body exists (unlike SPARC international) and tightly controlled by their owners.
Matt, if you are going to reply, please do so within the context of the information contained in my post and not some random thought on how much you hate Sun and anything related to it.
This means that even after IBM and HP supposedly were savaging Sun's customers, customers didn't want to buy from Sun until after the acquisition and the whole economical turmoil, Sun still sells more RISC than the rest? (even if it was less than the previous period)
That should tell you something TPM, imagine what can Oracle do with SPARC and Solaris now that they own it. x64 systems are good up to a point. Talk about critical systems and RAS and you can forget about x64.
"I don't understand what's going to happen" of course you don't Mr Muglia... There, there.
With these software and SpringSource's Hyperic, VMware can now manage and monitor both hardware and software. Nice move by EMC, leaving the software to the software company, this will be nice.
Compare it to Oracle's Enterprise Manager + Sun Ops Center, HP's Insight + Microsoft's System Center and you get a trend... and the motivation behind EMC's move.
Now, my question is, how far down the line can VMware continue to be agnostic?
You do know it's Microsoft we are talking about here, don't you?
It's in their best interest to keep Linux and any other non-Windows platform crippled and behind the official version... On the desktop side, Windows is already dominant, they don't need other platforms to work.
Sorry, but looks like you didn't understand the plan on x64.
Oracle will continue to invest heavily on UltraSPARC, SPARC64 (at least until they can go solo with UltraSPARC) and x64 in a particular case. Clustered x64. Like Exadata and the other soon-to-come Oracle appliances.
Oracle won't target volume markets.
For more information, watch the webcast video and presentations.
fscking knew it... I saw this coming since about a year now... the next moves should be surrounding Citrix/Novell and SAP... what will they do now that vendors are targeting entire stacks and not only parts of it?... What about Dell?
With this, seems like Monty's/MS plan to create FUD around MySQL and Oracle has come to fruition... How convenient isn't it? after all the noise generated by Monty, here comes the messiah ballmer to save you...
Are people really going to jump from the frying pan into the fire?
they see me trolling, they hatin'...
Nope, OS/2 was never Windows NT.
Windows was a cheap answer to OS/2 (co-developed by MS and IBM) as a DOS front-end, and Windows NT was a new, more portable system MS developed that up to a point had a OS/2 compatibility subsytem (alongside a UNIX subsytem and the current Win32/Win64), but was later scraped.
Trackpoints are terrible and should go away once and for all! Kill it with fire!
Interesting if true
VMware knows it's virtualization lead will soon be commodity with Microsoft's, FOSS XenServer and Oracle's offerings, hence they will have to direct efforts in building up a complete stack to stay competitive.. which they have been doing so very effectively so far.
Together with EMC and Cisco, they cover hardware, vSphere for virtualization needs, Spring Source as the (Java EE) application framework, Hyperic for monitoring and Zimbra would fit as an app offering... Maybe the first of many?
Truly interesting to see these developments, this year will be full with competition between VMware/Cisco/EMC, Oracle/Sun, Microsoft and IBM... Wonder what will happen with the likes of Red Hat, SAP and Novell.. buy or be bought...
Out of the millions of users of MySQL, he only got 15000 to support him?
I want to start a petition "Go away Mr Wideanus", who's with me?...
it's funny how Mr. Wideanus selfishness is effectively discrediting the GPL and OpenSource... keep up the good work, at this rate nobody will ever want to try GPL FOSS for their business again...
Re: Oracle has no case
Dude, your post has no logic at all.
MySQL is no competitor to Oracle DB. That's exactly why they don't want to spin it off.
They both target different markets, meaning Oracle can get revenue from new sources without touching the old ones.
Why would they want to spin it off??
Re: Qualifications, &c.
I agree with you cptn. Thyr.
I'll just leave this here: http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20091204095942328 for people whose arguments is over qualifications and that stuff... Surely, they are all over qualified on the matter to talk with such property.
RE: RE: @Matt
Dude, seriously... Think about what you are writing
>"Your statemtent is wrong, in many levels...." Your statements are just
>the usual Sunshiner bleating - "Sun is always right, Sun is never wrong,
>everyone better do as Sun says or they're stupid".
YOU are saying that, no one else.. If YOU hate Sun, that's your problem.. more than that, that's your issue, get over it.
> ".....First, in the sense that most of those apache Apache webserver
>don't pay for support from anyone. They use opensource, they don't
>care about TCK or anything like it....." Really? I'm guessing those
>Sunshiner blinkers meant you missed the Reg article on how well
>Redhat is doing in the recession. They made something called a
> profit - look it up, then look up the last time Sun made one. All that
>through companies paying for subscriptions and support for "open
>source". And believe me, as a corporate customer of Redhat and a
>user of several Apache Org tools, we care a lot about standards -
>the more the better.
WRONG. Red Hat sells an operating system support (among other things). Sun sells Solaris support too, and it comes with Apache Web Server too. But most people using the LAMP stack don't pay for support, they don't care about it. Nobody said anything about Red Hat or the recession, you talked about "the most common webserver on the web by a massive margin"... but one thing are the users and other are paying users. That's open source for you, in case you didn't notice.
>"....Second, Apache webserver has NOTHING to do with Java...." Lol,
>the funniest one yet! Where do you think all those Java apps will be
>running, on printservers alone? Get a clue, think before you bleat,
>then try posting again. Apache has the webserving market sown up,
>Linux is a lot more relevant than Slowaris for Java in the long run,
>and so Oracle needs to make peace with the ASF to get the Linux
>community putting standardised Java apps on those Apache
>webservers. Otherwise, who knows - maybe the Linux crowd will
just tire of Sun's Java and make their own alternative, and then what
>value will be left for Larry from Sun's carcass?
You really must refrain your self from commenting on stuff you have no idea about.
Your "Java apps" run on an application server... like glassfish or tomcat (donated by Sun to the ASF in 1999). Web servers are for web sites.
Linux and standards... hehehe that will be funny.
Linux is open source... but open source does not mean linux... try to understand that.
>"....Apache is not Linux...." Correct, but the two go hand in hand.
>Just go check all those Apache servers and you'll see the majority
>of them are running on Linux of one form or another. It's been over
>a decade since Slowaris had any share worth mentioning in the
>webserving market. Sun need to get over their ego and actually try
>working with others. Sorry, I should have said Oracle should - it's
>too late for Sun, they fought the open source wave and lost big time!
Wrong. A lot of them also run on solaris and freebsd... and many others. And once again:
1) Web server =! Java, and, Java =! Web server.
2) Java SE != Java EE... Harmony is Java SE-like (OpenJDK), your "java apps" are Java EE... you obviously do not know nor understand the difference between those, so please, before embarrassing yourself further, do some research.
3) Open Source != Linux
Your statemtent is wrong, in many levels.
First, in the sense that most of those apache Apache webserver don't pay for support from anyone. They use opensource, they don't care about TCK or anything like it.
Second, Apache webserver has NOTHING to do with Java. Harmony is a completely different project than Apache web server.
Sun is on the negative on the noisy minority of Linux zealots. It's very much on the positive on the vast majority of it's users and developers.
Apache is not Linux. So, I don't know were do you get your comparison from.
No one has made it Sun vs ASF, but the ASF. And it smells a lot like IBM's work from behind the stage.
Your Sun bashing has taken you into talking absolute non-sense, please stop before you hurt yourself.
IBM and Microsoft (both competition to Sun... and Oracle) put big money in ASF, but they are totally neutral. Not only that, but even when Sun showed interest in joining the ASF, they rejected them... So, really, pollitically, what do you expect?...
Red Hat already certified their version of Java with the TCK, so I see no issue there.
I think ASF should try to solve the issue from their side, instead of insisting on attacking Sun... They are a minority in the JCP, so treying to force their way through it is not going to work.
Funny words coming from Microsoft!
At least, they should check their facts... as a previous commenter said, Exadata has nothing to do with Solaris or SPARC... and even if it would, both OpenSolaris and OpenSPARC are Open Source, SPARC is also an open standard, managed by the SPARC organization, and Solaris runs in both SPARC and x86/x64 architectures.
Who is getting locked by whom?
The NetApp issue had nothing to do with Apple dropping ZFS, it was about Apple and Sun not reaching a licensing agreement.
And the project is not death, there are at least three sources were the code and information were cloned, one of which is http://github.com/dustin/mac-zfs .
Development will continue in the community.
In other news, a ZFS port to Linux has been announced: http://kqinfotech.wordpress.com/2009/10/23/hello-world/
Why is it that TheRegister people are biased towards those opposing Oracle?
Why don't you comment on articles that are pro Oracle's acquisition? You know, like Carlo Piana's blog entry http://www.piana.eu/it/sun_ how has REAL grounds behind his position?
Would be interesting if the reports were less biased, and more objective.
Monty Widenius sounds a little crazy these days...
If he loved MySQL so much, why did he sell it?
Sun didn't do anything to harm MySQL, he complained a lot about Sun's first release, but that release was planned by MySQL AB 'AND' Monty Widenius himself, before Sun did anything to it...
Sounds a lot to me like he wanted to sell it, get the money, but still keep benefiting from it by attacking Sun and establishing his own fork as the new best thing.
Surely, he will propose that MySQL should be sold to his company and that he will take care of it... I wouldn't trust a person with so many conflicting actions on their shoulders. Better off with Oracle.
Only if you want to mirror the whole unit. You can separate the same unit up to 16 domains and one domain can mirror another.
Except that MySQL does not compete with Oracle DB... it's aimed at a different target and it's one that Oracle can benefit from too, so it makes no sense to think they want it dead
- Fee fie Firefox: Mozilla's lawyers probe Dell over browser install charge
- Did Apple's iOS make you physically SICK? Try swallowing version 7.1
- Pics Indestructible Death Stars blow up planets using glowing KILL RAY
- Video Snowden: You can't trust SPOOKS with your DATA
- Review Distro diaspora: Four flavours of Ubuntu unpacked