>HP's HP-UX/Itanium boxes stomached a 40.2 per cent decline to $382.1m
The server market is starting to run out of steam, and there's plenty of blame to go around as to why. According to the box counters over at Gartner, the Unix market is in a slump, IBM is at the tail end of its System zEnterprise mainframe line and customers are awaiting new machines for later this year. The later-than- …
>HP's HP-UX/Itanium boxes stomached a 40.2 per cent decline to $382.1m
LOL, is that the best the Sunshiners can come up with? I can't find those old Sun slides for the projected sales of the SPARC V "Rock" servers, Sun's supposed competitor to Itanium2, but I suspect those projections were a shade more than the absolute zero sold.
If you want real failure, consider how Sun went from a market cap of $200bn down to a bargain-basement sale price of $4bn in a little over four years
Once again Matt just because I hate on stagnant clueless HP doesn't mean I like SUN and in fact I absolutely loathe Oracle. Both companies are full of fail as these stats clearly show.
But both will be around regardless because one sells databases and other sells ink and both industries are still with us unlike proprietary unix boxes.
>Oracle sold 18,860 Unix boxes in Q1, compared to HP's 5,455 machines
Wow why bother fighting over the rapidly disappearing scraps? I guess if not for pride their would be a lot less billable hours out there.
Oracle isn't trying to sell Sun Sparc. They have written it off and are trying to get all of those Oracle DB users on Itanium to move to Exa.
These Unix servers may be scraps by revenue amounts, but they are very profitable. HP makes around $2.5 billion in profits (not sales) from Itanium systems per year, not including software sales which are tied to Itanium. They make more money (in profit) selling to their little Itanium user base than the whole of their 100,000s of x86 servers. They make more profit from Itanium than their entire PC empire. It is very important to HP. The tiny BCS division produces 22% of their EBIT.
Down voters, please see Keith Block's, EVP of NA Sales and Consulting for Oracle, comments regarding legacy Sun. It is "pig with lipstick... at best", "dead dead dead", "a dog", etc.... This is the guy who is in charge of selling it, so, yes, Oracle has moved on to Exa.
I've never read so much old bollox in my life.
Who the fuck believes a bean counter, their only interest is fucking everyone for a penny.
Yes maybe q1 is bad, but by the end of q4 everyone including the bean counters are laughing, IBM,Intel,Dell,HP, and whoever else are all feeling economic impact, ergo so are their customers, it's a chain reaction. If you insist on believing Gartners for your analysis then you deserve all you get. You don't need Gartners to tell you the business is down at the moment, you just need to talk to a real person.
Try going to the pub and talking to the one regular instead of the old ten, no ones has money for extras today, not just fucking IBM.
Get your head outta your arse and into the real world for a fucking change.
Wow that rants reeks of "Hush you. This disappearing market from the 80s and 90s will be around just long enough for me to retire or else I am screwed." Retooling in your 50s and 60s would suck bad.
It's not a rant boy, servers won't go away, what runs the """ CLOUD"""" supposed replacement for servers, errrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr fucking severs.
Perhaps you just need a tool, not a retool.
Well, let's look at the figures and do a little analysis.
As has been predicted for years, the UNIX market is declining, by 15.2% in the quarter. The "others" section, which it is noted is mainly IBM mainframe, is also shrinking. The area that is still healthy? Well, that's x86 servers. Looking at the longterm, if you want to be leading in the server market, you are going to want to be leading in x86. Which brings us neatly to the next point.
Despite TPM trying to put as much lipstick on the IBM pig as possible (this is my surprised face, honest), hp's x86 bizz did more revenue than the IBM x86 and p-Series/i-Series combined. Just check the figures:
"......HP pushed out 678,874 of its ProLiant x86 machines (up two-tenths of a point) and pulled in $2.97bn in revenues.....IBM was the third biggest x86 server shipper, with its relevant System x and BladeCenter machines generating $1.33bn in sales....IBM is growing its AIX business, which was up 4.3 per cent to $1.24bn...."
So, IBM made a total of $2.57bn for x86 and AIX, whereas hp made $2.97bn just from x86. Worse still for IBM, that mainly IBM mainframe "others" section, which is IBM's golden goose, was down a staggering 40%! TPM tries to pass this off as IBM customers delaying for new mainframes due "later this year", which doesn't quite match up with a 40% drop off. A 10% drop, or even a 20% drop in mainframe sales could be explained that way, but the reality is the downturn has forced mainframe customers to look for cheaper alternatives, and once they step away from the mainframe addiction, and more and more it is to x86, IBM knows it will have lost those customers for good.
The cloud runs on x86 and perhaps soon ARM. Proprietary Unix boxes were the cloud in 1999.
Nonsense, just because of mainframe is down 40% in YoY revenue doesn't necessarily mean they lost a single install. It is just a result of the refresh cycle. In 2010, System z was up 250%. That didn't mean that the number of z installs has more than doubled either. zEnterprise is past the major refreshes, so it is bound to be down YoY unless people are refreshing the mainframes every year. The only way to judge mainframe market share is with the global MIPS count.
I notice you have given up arguing about HP Unix - Itanium and are focused on HP x86. Are you just conceding the Unix market to IBM?
Re: x86 servers. HP and Dell compete in a bunch of totally undifferentiated commodity server areas which IBM and Oracle are not interested in because they are technology companies not assemblers of technology. HP sells a ton of x86 servers but they are basically PCs with PC margins.
Btw, System i would fall into the "others" category, not the Unix category.
"Nonsense...." Oh, I think we hit a raw nerve there! :) So, according to Wunderburp, all IBM mainframe buyers only buy on the same day, every three years, when new mainframe models are released.... Yeah, right!
"....I notice you have given up arguing about HP Unix ...." But Wunderburp, wasn't it you assuring us that no-one would buy ANY Integirty servers after the first Oracle announcement, yet us customers are STILL buying them? Gee, could it be that you were just talking male bovine manure?
"....HP and Dell compete in a bunch of totally undifferentiated commodity server areas which IBM and Oracle are not interested in...." What a silly thing to say, considering IBM put so much effort into scraping into the third slot on x86 sales. It's even sillier if you follow the projections - in fifteen-odd years the UNIX market will have shrunk to nothing, probably not soon after the mainframe has gone the way of the dodo, and if IBM really do think (I use the term losely) like you then they'll be exiting the server bizz completely! Maybe they'll sell the mainframe lines to Lenovo, like they already have most of their x86 ones.
"The cloud runs on x86 and perhaps soon ARM......" OK, so which vendors are leading in x86 and also have ARM offerings going forward? The leader in x86 servers is hp, who have an ARM HPC server offering already on the market, and a cloud offering. Dell follow close behind, having just released an ARM server offering. Snoreacle have virtually zero presence in x86 and no ARM offering, are only just looking at cloud, and are too busy polishing the turd of CMT. CISCO have slightly larger x86 bizz than Snoreacle but no ARM offering either. IBM are lagging hp and Dell in x86 and have no ARM offering, probably being too busy worrying about the drop in their mainframe extrotion racket.
"So, according to Wunderburp, all IBM mainframe buyers only buy on the same day, every three years, when new mainframe models are released.... Yeah, right!"
You know that is not what I wrote. When a new system is released, a bunch of people buy it, then less the next year, then less the third year as people are not refreshing systems, especially mainframes, every year or every two years. If you are Large Bank Co XYZ and refreshed your z environment in 2010 or 2011, you are not refreshing it again in 2012. If IBM just released a new system and the numbers were down, then you would have a point, but the drop off in z at this point in the technology cycle is exactly what you would expect to see. It doesn't say anything about the viability or usage of System z. I says that people do not refresh their servers every year.
"But Wunderburp, wasn't it you assuring us that no-one would buy ANY Integirty servers after the first Oracle announcement, yet us customers are STILL buying them? Gee, could it be that you were just talking male bovine manure?"
Yes, people that have large HP-UX environments and need to add capacity until they figure out a migration plan are still buying them. Close to zero new installs are happening. As Oracle 12g is not out for another six-nine months, Oracle is still supported on the current releases. The numbers will continue to tank over the next few years as people consider upgrades to the new WebLogic, DB and Apps... even HP admits it.
"What a silly thing to say, considering IBM put so much effort into scraping into the third slot on x86 sales" etc, etc
IBM is very interested in high end x86, their eX5 chip set gear. They have not been as strong or as interested in working with the PC VARs to push out a million pizza box 1U x86, towers, and other low end PC server stuff. IBM works primarily in the higher end of x86 servers. Revenues will be lower, profits will be higher as technology value add is higher. Higher end x86 is an area worth investing in whereas the low end of x86 servers is exactly like the PC market.... who can push as many shoddy servers out the door at the lowest price. Pure commodity.... Also, measuring value by revenue is very strange. By that measure, HP as a company should be worth over three times as much as Oracle instead of 1/3rd as much. HP has larger revenues than Apple, but the company is worth less than 1/11th the value. Walmart should be the most highly value company in the world if all people cared about was revenue.
Unix and mainframe will not be the primary platforms in IT environments in the future, no doubt. There will still be a place for high-end Unix, albeit a smaller place, in the future. Just as people have been talking about the end of mainframe for the past 30 years and it has stayed relatively stable in the high end.
".....When a new system is released, a bunch of people buy it, then less the next year, then less the third year...." Strange, but that doesn't seem to happen with other IBM product lines like x-Series or p-Series. Oh, I forgot - mainframe is "different", it's "special - no doubt just as "special" as the mainframe fanbois.
"....Yes, people that have large HP-UX environments and need to add capacity until they figure out a migration plan are still buying them. Close to zero new installs are happening...." The Gartner figure is for server sales, not add-ons, and you have no way of saying which are new installs or replacing old hp-ux servers or even competitive wins against AIX kit. It would help if you read the article before shaking your IBM pompoms.
"....IBM is very interested in high end x86, their eX5 chip set gear....." Strange, first you say "....HP and Dell compete in a bunch of totally undifferentiated commodity server areas which IBM and Oracle are not interested in...", then you backtrack desperately with ".....IBM works primarily in the higher end of x86 servers....." when I point out how hard IBM are trying (and losing) in the x86 server racket. Well, if what you said was true, and IBM only sell top-end x86 gear whilst Dell and hp only sell towers and desktops, why is hp still caning IBM in the two-socket and four-socket rack arena and in the blades market, all key x86 enterprise, as it has been for years? Why are IBM so scared of producing a match for the hp Proliant DL980, beacuse it would take sales away from p-Series? Try again, only this time please keep one foot in reality.
"....Unix and mainframe will not be the primary platforms in IT environments in the future, no doubt...." I think that's kind of an admission that what I said about IBM being stuck with no escape route from the dwindling server areas is right. It's knida hard to tell through all the weasel words and FUD.
".....mainframe for the past 30 years and it has stayed relatively stable in the high end." Except for that 40% decline in the quarter, right? Or how about Q4 of 2009, IBM's System z hardware revenues decreased by 27% year over year. You did notice that the title of the article was "Unix, mainframes drag down servers in Q1", or is that asking a bit much? What the heck, you won't believe me, so why not listen to some IBM marketing:
".....the democratization of IT, as delivered by both the PC platform and many midtier environments, has resulted in a proliferation of computing choices. These options have come predominately at the expense of the mainframe platform....."
Oops! That sounds like an admission of decline to me! Why else do you think IBM are paying people to port Linux to the mainframe if it isn't because their golden goose is choking.
The Fujitsu comparison to Oracle is a bit misleading as all the M-series boxes sold by Oracle, are in fact made by Fujitsu are they not?
Not for much longer, Oracle is dropping Fujitsu M-Series and using their own T-Sparc, which should make for an even angrier group of Sun users.
We are in the biggest ever global recession. Everything is slumping, from rockets to pencil sharpeners. Economies are sick around the globe. Greece could soon be starving.
And now shock news from Gartner: "...Unix market is in a slump..." and revenues are down at IBM.
asdf --- But both [oracle and hp] will be around regardless because one sells databases and other sells ink and both industries are still with us unlike proprietary unix boxes.
duhhh... proprietary unix boxes are exploding!!!
they are called linux (non-posix compliant), closed source os's (google makes changes all the time and keeps the code hidden), proprietary file sharing (cifs/smb is still being backwards-engineered), proprietary file systems (dos still on flash cards), on proprietary firmware (bios anyone?), on proprietary cpu vendor (intel/amd), on proprietary instruction sets (each vendor makes their own), on proprietary cpu interconnects (remember intel suing amd to get them on a different socket?)
the open platforms have been dying at the vine, with proprietary vendors taking off!
posix complient os's (hpux, solaris, etc.), open-sourced os (open solaris was not deemed as successful and was shut down by oracle), nfs was adopted for file sharing by all vendors (except one), ufs was adopted by all vendors (with the exception of a few), open firmware (created by sun, adopted by the industry), sparc cpu (anyone could and did build them), vendor made socket-compatible chips (without getting sued by players like sun)
the irony is so thick - it makes me laugh!
unix vendors are rolling their own distributions now, can implement their own firmware, can burn their own sparc chips - while the rest of the market are tied to proprietary and whims of a few odd dictators on a single kernel and gnu land!
True, it is hard to understand why everyone is getting so excited about the wave of the future/30 year old x86 CISC based chip set from proprietary Intel. RISC was developed by Big Blue as a way of getting off the older CISC stuff back in 1970 something. Even Intel admitted that x86 CISC blows, that was the whole reason for Itanic. Lets all run a bunch of PC servers that get 20% utilized with a gazillion Cisco switches (also open, I guess) that cost more than their weight gold. Maybe this is some kind of IT jobs plan? Hire 25 people to manage an x86 environment instead of 10 to manage the Unix environment or 5 to manage the mainframe environment. Great plan. TCA goes down, TCO goes way up.
Wow, this is certainly The Joke of The Day. And all this goodness started with MOS producing their 6501 to be socket-compatible with Motorola 6800 and Motorola not suing them afterwards.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2017