More hardware loveliness

First the bad news: despite their purchase of MySQL, Sun has just officially been downgraded to "sell" by Goldman Sachs ( http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/01/08/sun_downgraded_to_sell/ ) "Sun has been on a lot of sell lists in recent years, of course, as it has struggled to even maintain sales, much less get profits, in cut-throat server hardware and operating system software markets. Despite respectable engineering and pricing on x64 hardware and the open sourcing of its Solaris operating system - and some would say because of this - growth and profits have eluded Sun, and Wall Street and the company's key investors have lost patience. "According to a report from the Associated Press, analyst David Bailey has added Sun to its Americas Sell List - not a contest that any publicly traded company wants to win. Because Sun is heavily concentrated on the financial services, telecommunications, and manufacturing industries, Bailey reckons - as do many of us out here on the other side of the Sun firewall - that the company can be disproportionately and more severely hit by a recession like the one we are having now. "To that end, Bailey told Goldman Sachs customers in a research note that he expected a low-double digit revenue drop for Sun in fiscal 2009 ending in June year" Personally, I am not hugely surprised, as I think Moore's Law has pushed bottom-end tin up into the computing stratosphere. I mean running a 200-user database on a single-CPU Linux box is by no means impossible if your application is well behaved. Yet when I started in computing, there were (relatively) very few systems out there which even had 200 users. So it's not surprising that "mini / midi" computer manufacturers are feeling the pain. Which leads on to this ( http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/01/08/apple_needs_servers/ ) "It's always been something of a mystery that Apple hasn't been more of a force in servers. Back in the 1980s when Apple was dependent on Motorola 68K processors, it was understandable that the company would focus on desktops, and then laptops. But as Apple transitioned to PowerPC chips from IBM and Motorola in the early 1990s, and IBM delivered capable PowerPC servers of its own, Apple had a chance to deliver a scalable and broad server lineup running its own Mac OS operating system to a class of customers who didn't want NetWare, Windows, proprietary midrange boxes, or Unix servers. And yet, Apple never really tried to create a commercial server business." And I think they should. People in small businesses would love the idea of an effortless "white box" server platform. Come on Apple, think inside the box! :o) -- Cheers, Obnoxio The Clown http://obotheclown.blogspot.com

> But as Apple transitioned to > PowerPC chips from IBM and Motorola in the early 1990s, and IBM > delivered capable PowerPC servers of its own, Apple had a chance to > deliver a scalable and broad server lineup running its own Mac OS > operating system to a class of customers who didn't want NetWare, > Windows, proprietary midrange boxes, or Unix servers. And yet, Apple > never really tried to create a commercial server business." > > And I think they should. People in small businesses would love the idea > of an effortless "white box" server platform. Come on Apple, think > inside the box! :o) Apple have clearly made a decision to focus on the consumer end of the market, and on content provision. They are being successful in this, and it shifts an awful lot of units. They are also starting to dabble in the business end-user space, as part of a continued convergence play from a loyal consumer base. But from what I can see, they simply have no interest in becoming an IT platform. As much as I would like to see XServers everywhere, I think they are more likely to bring out a TV than a Server.

Mark Townsend wrote: > > But as Apple transitioned to >> PowerPC chips from IBM and Motorola in the early 1990s, and IBM >> delivered capable PowerPC servers of its own, Apple had a chance to >> deliver a scalable and broad server lineup running its own Mac OS >> operating system to a class of customers who didn't want NetWare, >> Windows, proprietary midrange boxes, or Unix servers. And yet, Apple >> never really tried to create a commercial server business." >> >> And I think they should. People in small businesses would love the >> idea of an effortless "white box" server platform. Come on Apple, >> think inside the box! :o) > > > Apple have clearly made a decision to focus on the consumer end of the > market, and on content provision. They are being successful in this, and > it shifts an awful lot of units. They are also starting to dabble in the > business end-user space, as part of a continued convergence play from a > loyal consumer base. But from what I can see, they simply have no > interest in becoming an IT platform. As much as I would like to see > XServers everywhere, I think they are more likely to bring out a TV than > a Server. I agree with you and also think it's a pity. Mind you, I suppose the need to cope with heterogeniety would be an enormous pain in the testicles for them. -- Cheers, Obnoxio The Clown http://obotheclown.blogspot.com