SUN/Novell combine to form MS Windows Killer

[MadRat]

Okay, I lied. SUN and Novell are not going to combine forces. In fact they aren't even remotely considering the possibility of it. But it would make sense for them to combine forces to make both Linux and Solaris a defacto *nix standard Desktop Suite. There is only one competitior to Microsoft's (.Net?) software development program right now and that is SUN's Java development program. If SUN wants Java to succeed then they best get their Java Desktop out there to the masses. As a caveat, Novell has a .NET-alike tool called Mono that would aid companies not wanting to migrate to Java.

The SUN-Novell alliance would be what Unix offshoots have been missing since the decline of Unix. A common desktop suite would make the goal of unified file structure in the Linux community even more real as a side benefit. (The current LSB - Linux Standards Base - movement in Linux is still too obscure to fix their community-wide problems.) Solaris would share that same structure, and likewise if all the other *nixes are doing it then we'd probably see BSD projects move the same direction.

The real win in a SUN-Novell alliance is that these companies would have viable products in nearly every aspect of the enterprise. Novell has the defacto standard for file directory services, eDirectory. Novell's Clustering Services is slick and works very well. Novell's netware client is already certified by the DoD and other government agencies for the highest of clearances. Novell has the ability with ZENworks to deploy entire desktop environments across an enterprise overnight. For the Nterprise customer Novell already has the GroupWise suite (add in Virtual Office and iFolder) that is equivalent to MS Exchange or IBM Domino. Throw in Border Manager and you have the firewall for the Nterprise. I think iPrint should be buried and never rear its ugly head, but thats OT.

SUN has software that drives everything from standalone servers to middle tin. (I don't know but is SUN Fire E25K considered big tin?) SUN also has a good range of Data Storage products to offer. SUN also has a more secure form of Solaris, called Trusted Solaris, that would make for a good PR bit to separate their Linux/Open Solaris and enterpise-level markets. SUN's security framework actually fits in rather nicely with the Novell philosophy of least restrictive. SUN does quite well what Novell does not, especially in the Desktop, Workstation, and small server arenas. Did I mention they make CPU's, too?

By joining forces SUN and Novell might not compete evenly with Micrososft, but perhaps they could make a run at the likes of IBM, HP, and Intel combined. And by getting momentum with their combined forces they would perhaps even take a jab at the top, Microsoft.

 

[drag]

Bah, Sun sucks.

Let Novell do their desktop thing. Mono is good, they work heavily with Gnome and are getting some decent groupware and network directory services going for Linux and they are fairly enthuisastic about the Open Source thing.

Sun on the other hand... I've used Sun's Java Desktop Linux, and it sucks. It uses old versions of programs and is fairly slow.

I don't think that they would make a good team. Both those companies are fairly in trouble and have been for a while now. Slowly loosing market share.. Novell just hasn't attracted new customers from Windows, and Solaris is steadily loosing market share to Redhat and commodity hardware. I think they would be a boat anchor around each other's neck.

 

[Sunner]

Sun is having a bigtime identity crisis these days IMO.
And they don't like Linux much, sure their servers will run it, and if you ask nicely, they'll ship Redhat with that V20z you just bought, but they'd rather put Solaris on it.

Sun is a "kinda open source friendly" company.
IBM is doing much better IMO, sure you would be naive to think that they're working with the OSS community just because they love it, but their reasons aside, they are, as ESR put it, a good citizen in the OSS community.

Solaris is their trumph card, SPARC is dying slowly, it'll last many years to come since so many shops are dependant on it, but it is dying no doubt, Sun just can't afford it anymore, and while Fujitsu's SPARC64 line will beef up the SPARC lines a bit, it won't be nearly enough to hold off the onslaught of POWER and IA-64.

But what are they gonna do with Solaris?
Trying to move it into the IA32/AMD-64 space will fail IMO, Linux has gained too much momentum, and has too many big companies behind it, especially seeing as many of those big companies are Sun competitors.
Speaking of competitors, even if Novell and Sun did like each other, IBM has alot to say about that, between their partnership with Novell and being a fairly major owner, I doubt Novell would deal too seriously with Sun.

Oh and a SunFire E25K would definitely be considered Big Iron, aside from some fairly specialized boxes(Altix, some Cray boxes, etc) you don't get much bigger than that really.

I think Sun will try to find some kind of niche to work in, like SGI has done, otherwise they'll just turn into another Intel/AMD OEM.

 

[Nothinman]

By joining forces SUN and Novell might not compete evenly with Micrososft, but perhaps they could make a run at the likes of IBM, HP, and Intel combined. And by getting momentum with their combined forces they would perhaps even take a jab at the top, Microsoft.

I'd rather have IBM, HP and Intell kill off Sun and Novell.

 

[kamper]

Originally posted by: MadRat
If SUN wants Java to succeed then they best get their Java Desktop out there to the masses.

There's another space where java competes (far more effectively) with .NET. Desktop competition would be nice but java doesn't need it.

 

[drag]

Originally posted by: kamper

Originally posted by: MadRat
If SUN wants Java to succeed then they best get their Java Desktop out there to the masses.

There's another space where java competes (far more effectively) with .NET. Desktop competition would be nice but java doesn't need it.

Unless Sun releases a licensed and open source version of their Java runtime enviroment then it's going to be completely useless for the majority of people's desktops.

If you use Java for GUI apps in Linux you'd have to require your users to seperately go and download Sun's runtime before they can even use the computer. It's asinine.

Sun had the opertunity to make Java a mainstay of desktop applications in Linux, but they screwed their own technology over. Now Linux geeks have Mono and .NET instead of Java and it's Sun's own fault.

This is the type of crap that Sun does.

They do good by openning up Star Office and making OpenOffice.org. They do good by creating a fairly advanced computer language in Java. They say they are going to open Solaris up.

Then they do bad by having restrictive licensing of Java. They do bad by still keeping their patents for Solaris-related technology a threat to non-solaris based OSS software. while being fairly deceitfull about it. They do bad by only using fairly obsolete software in their own aborted version of the 'java desktop'.

Sun is very weird about crap, dual natured thing. And people are never sure were they stand.

Novell on the other hand seems to be embracing Linux and OSS whole-heartedly. They have most of their staff switched over to Linux desktops, they are releasing OSS software and supporting OSS software left and right. They have ported most of their propriatory software to run on Linux and seem to be openning up what they can.

IBM is similar. They released some of their Patents for all OSS software, not just OSS software that they are incharge of . They are financing developement, releasing code, and selling OSS-based software.

Maybe IBM and Novell are just better a PR, which is a distinct possiblity, but Sun's behavior is unsettling sometimes.

 

[n0cmonkey]

IBM barely released those patents and shouldn't be commended for it. It isn't free.

 

[kamper]

drag, I see your point about how it's a pain that you can't distribute a sun jvm with an operating system. I hadn't thought about it that way and that is definitely a hindrance to the adoption of java on the desktop. I can understand why sun wants to control the source of the jvm but it would be nice if they allowed binary distribution, even if they restricted any ability to modify it.

Otoh, there is a frightening number of people who install java simply because they think their browsers need it to run javascript so lots of people do have it installed. Although I guess most of those people are windows types

 

[MadRat]

Originally posted by: Nothinman
I'd rather have IBM, HP and Intell kill off Sun and Novell.

How about an elaboration as to why?

 

[R3MF]

this is why i'm not keen on all the integration of java into 0.0.o.2

 

[Nothinman]

How about an elaboration as to why?

Sun has no idea what they want, they want to say they support Linux to get the brownie points with the community and to be able to use the buzzwords but they don't want to actually do anything with it and they still want everyone to buy Solaris on Sparc. Novell hasn't done anything stupid yet, I would rather they didn't die, I just grouped them with Sun because you did.

HP is a big Linux supporter. They run Debian internally, they employ several Debian developers and they provide hardware for Debian. IBM doesn't need any explanation. Intel has released GPL'd drivers for most of their hardware, the only major thing they won't do is release the firmware for their wireless crap.

 

[MadRat]

Perhaps Novell's management could give SUN the direction it needs to make Java, SPARC, and Solaris 10 work. If its SUN's ambiguity to OSS then Novell's direction would certainly steer it where it needs to be. Novell and Solaris share a common "least restrictive" direction that fits hand in glove with the other. And the mighty "Trusted Solaris" OS gives Novell the Workstation desktop they so badly need that sets a community-wide standard file structure. Solaris and Java share a nice neat directory structure that is common to both. As it is, you don't simply run SuSE 9.x/10 and OSS applications unless they've been retailored for the task.

 

[Nothinman]

Solaris and Java should die.

 

[Sunner]

Sun isn't too bad in itself, it's their "Today we're open, but we still hate RedHat, and we still won't open source this or that" attitude that's annoying IMO.
And why would you want Trusted Solaris on your desktop?
In fact, Solaris on the desktop is a pretty bad idea compared to Linux, it's just too much work with little benefit.

And there's no way Solaris will ever create a community wide standard, the community just doesn't care all that much about Sun, though source access to Solaris will probably result in improvements to other OSS projects.

 

[kamper]

Originally posted by: Nothinman
Solaris and Java should die.

Yeah, everything Nothinman doesn't like should just die! What a dumbass statement :roll:

 

[Nothinman]

Java apps are slow and awkward, the only people who like it are the developers. If Mono provides a complete .Net implementation on Linux and other systems, I don't see why Java would have a reason to live besides supporting legacy apps.

And Solaris is Solaris, it's probbaly not too bad now that they're installing more GNU tools out of the box, but by the time it's as nice to use as Linux it'll be essentially GNU/Solaris.

 

[kamper]

Originally posted by: Nothinman
Java apps are slow and awkward, the only people who like it are the developers. If Mono provides a complete .Net implementation on Linux and other systems, I don't see why Java would have a reason to live besides supporting legacy apps.

And Solaris is Solaris, it's probbaly not too bad now that they're installing more GNU tools out of the box, but by the time it's as nice to use as Linux it'll be essentially GNU/Solaris.

Alright, I agree that java isn't the most user friendly thing on the desktop. I kinda like it there, but I'm a developer. At any rate, .NET suffers from many of the same problems that java does on the desktop and it will never approach java in terms of open source friendliness.

But don't you think it's a little narrow to be saying that the language should disappear because it's not ideal in one tiny area? Are you aware of the other areas in which java is quite important?

 

[Nothinman]

At any rate, .NET suffers from many of the same problems that java does on the desktop and it will never approach java in terms of open source friendliness.

.Net fixes the biggest problems with Java. Mainly the ugly widgets and slow loading time and C# IMO is a nicer language, but I'm not a professional developer. Java is just as closed and proprietary as .Net is, there is nothing Open Source friendly about it. Hell I don't even think you're allowed to redistribute the JRE without Sun's express permission.

But don't you think it's a little narrow to be saying that the language should disappear because it's not ideal in one tiny area? Are you aware of the other areas in which java is quite important?

It's far less than ideal, it fails miserably in most areas IMO. I don't have a JRE on any of my machines except my work machine and I'm not missing out on anything IMO.

 

[kamper]

Originally posted by: Nothinman

At any rate, .NET suffers from many of the same problems that java does on the desktop and it will never approach java in terms of open source friendliness.

.Net fixes the biggest problems with Java. Mainly the ugly widgets and slow loading time and C# IMO is a nicer language, but I'm not a professional developer. Java is just as closed and proprietary as .Net is, there is nothing Open Source friendly about it. Hell I don't even think you're allowed to redistribute the JRE without Sun's express permission.

Ugly widgets can be fixed easily and slow loading time can be a fault in both but it can be fixed in both. But nevermind that, I don't want to argue about the desktop.

First, the open source. The jre is rather inconsequential when you're considering the big picture. It's a little platform that you run underneath all the stuff that really matters. The fact that it is restricted the way it is may not be ideal but anyone is free to make their own jvm. I think the fact that there isn't a viable open source one indicates that it's not necessary.

The value of open source in java is the standards and the 3rd party libraries. Through the java community process anyone qualified to do so can contribute to the development of java standards. Those standards are then released as specifications and both proprietary and open source groups are free to offer implementations. Right now there is very healthy competition between the two sides, with open source products among the best. All the biggest software companies in the world (except microsoft) contribute expertise to the standards but so do many individual developers and many of the standards are heavily influenced by successful open source systems.

Compare that to .NET where one company releases all the core apis and essentially has complete control over the language and the environment. I'd be willing to bet there's a lot less open source development going on in .NET than there is in java. I'm not claiming to be an expert there though. I'd appreciate if a .NET experienced developer could step in and demonstrate some open source .NET tools.

But don't you think it's a little narrow to be saying that the language should disappear because it's not ideal in one tiny area? Are you aware of the other areas in which java is quite important?

It's far less than ideal, it fails miserably in most areas IMO. I don't have a JRE on any of my machines except my work machine and I'm not missing out on anything IMO.

It doesn't really matter if you have a jre on your machine. I'm just curious, what are "most areas" that you're talking about?

And just as a little bait, I'd venture to say that if java dropped off the face of the planet today, Microsoft would gain an enormous amount of market share in the server os market very quickly. Mono is not a substitute for .NET in enterprise development (not yet anyways) but java is. Many would even argue (gasp) that it's better.

 

[Nothinman]

It's a little platform that you run underneath all the stuff that really matters.

The fact that all your things that matter are still tied to 1 non-free platform doesn't bother you?

I'd be willing to bet there's a lot less open source development going on in .NET than there is in java

Of course there is, java has a huge lead and I think Mono isn't quite done yet.

I think the fact that there isn't a viable open source one indicates that it's not necessary.

Or that noone really cares for other reasons. There was Kaffe but I have no idea where it stands right now. And gcc includes gcj. So people are/were working on OSS Java implementations, they just haven't taken off for one reason or another.

And just as a little bait, I'd venture to say that if java dropped off the face of the planet today, Microsoft would gain an enormous amount of market share in the server os market very quickly.

Possibly. Or those developers could switch to ColdFusion, mod_perl, PHP, etc just as easily. It's a complete rewrite no matter what, so why would those that already have Apache on unix/linux spend money on Windows just for ASP?

Mono is not a substitute for .NET in enterprise development (not yet anyways) but java is. Many would even argue (gasp) that it's better.

Not yet, but it will be. And I'd venture to say that they'll have a much simpler time keeping up with ASP.Net than the desktop stuff too. And people would argue anything =)

It doesn't really matter if you have a jre on your machine. I'm just curious, what are "most areas" that you're talking about?

You can't mix and match JREs, the desktop/UI portions are terrible, startup time is horrendous, instead of logs of readable error messages you get java back traces. I could probably come up with more, but I avoid Java whenver possible so my exposure is pretty limited.

In what areas do you think it's "quite important"?

 

[kamper]

Originally posted by: Nothinman

It's a little platform that you run underneath all the stuff that really matters.

The fact that all your things that matter are still tied to 1 non-free platform doesn't bother you?

No. It's unfortunate but it's not a big deal. I can still get it for no money and I don't need to influence how it's developped any more than I already can. Open sourcing something purely for the sake of saying it's open source doesn't help anyone.

I'd be willing to bet there's a lot less open source development going on in .NET than there is in java

Of course there is, java has a huge lead and I think Mono isn't quite done yet.

It has nothing to do with mono. You can write stuff in .NET on windows and release it as open source.

I think the fact that there isn't a viable open source one indicates that it's not necessary.

Or that noone really cares for other reasons. There was Kaffe but I have no idea where it stands right now. And gcc includes gcj. So people are/were working on OSS Java implementations, they just haven't taken off for one reason or another.

They haven't taken off because nobody has produced a value that isn't already in suns implementation. I think it's great if they manage it but it's not going to happen any time soon.

And just as a little bait, I'd venture to say that if java dropped off the face of the planet today, Microsoft would gain an enormous amount of market share in the server os market very quickly.

Possibly. Or those developers could switch to ColdFusion, mod_perl, PHP, etc just as easily. It's a complete rewrite no matter what, so why would those that already have Apache on unix/linux spend money on Windows just for ASP?

ColdFusion is java based. perl and php are not going to provide the world with an enterprise development platform like .NET does. Sure people would use them more for low end stuff but a bank is not going to write it's backend transaction management in a scripting language.

Mono is not a substitute for .NET in enterprise development (not yet anyways) but java is. Many would even argue (gasp) that it's better.

Not yet, but it will be. And I'd venture to say that they'll have a much simpler time keeping up with ASP.Net than the desktop stuff too. And people would argue anything =)

The problem is that it will always be just "keeping up". Mono will never dictate .NETs standards and it will always be a step behind in implementing them. Non-sun people have an opportunity to define java through a democratic process.

It doesn't really matter if you have a jre on your machine. I'm just curious, what are "most areas" that you're talking about?

You can't mix and match JREs, the desktop/UI portions are terrible, startup time is horrendous, instead of logs of readable error messages you get java back traces. I could probably come up with more, but I avoid Java whenver possible so my exposure is pretty limited.

I can mix and match jre's all I want, you just have to know how to use it, like any technology. How well can you mix .NET runtime versions? Logging is the app developers fault, it can be fixed but most non-developer, desktop users don't care about logs. One of your frequent complaints is memory usage. You can start up the jvm with a hard cap on memory usage quite easily. If the app starts to run out, it's the developers fault for coding too liberaly.

In what areas do you think it's "quite important"?

For "quite important" I'd say any large enterprise application, anything between the thin client and the database (and sometimes both of those too.

Are you familiar with the Blackberry? Rim runs their backend with java and there's java on the devices as well. Many banks run their backend systems on java (I know my webbanking runs an ibm java app server). My dad works for a very large insurance company that uses a mix of .NET and java to run the website that clients use to manage their insurance. My company produces software that handles radiology exam scheduling for more than half the city of Boston (with a single java app server). There's a lot more money in these areas than the desktop stuff you're complaining about.

For new, enterprise class development java and .NET are the platforms of choice and they compete fairly evenly. The only area that I'm aware of that .NET really has anything over java is when you have a chance to deploy rich clients, but so far that requires tying your clients to windows, ie and .NET and I think we can agree that's not ideal.

 

[Nothinman]

Open sourcing something purely for the sake of saying it's open source doesn't help anyone.

And if Sun's headquarters get bombed tomorrow? If that's the only place the JVM source is located that's gonna hurt, but if it was open sourced there would be no such single point of failure.

It has nothing to do with mono. You can write stuff in .NET on windows and release it as open source.

Of course you can, but there are very few Windows developers doing OSS. Probably 99% of the OSS apps on Windows are ports of things that started on unix.

ColdFusion is java based

If so that probably explains why it's so slow and I hate it as well =)

perl and php are not going to provide the world with an enterprise development platform like .NET does. Sure people would use them more for low end stuff but a bank is not going to write it's backend transaction management in a scripting language.

You don't consider jsp scripting? How is that any different than mod_perl or php?

I can mix and match jre's all I want, you just have to know how to use it, like any technology

Right. Several of our departments use Java and there was always "This doesn't work this this JRE" and "If you install this JRE this works but breaks that" type of thing.

How well can you mix .NET runtime versions?

Well AFAIK there's only 2 versions so far and 1.1 runs 1.0 apps just fine, so there's no reason to. But I havn't had the luxury of dealing with many .Net apps either.

Are you familiar with the Blackberry?

Sadly we have some of them were I work, luckily I'm not one of the people using them.

There's a lot more money in these areas than the desktop stuff you're complaining about.

I don't care where the money is, I want something that works. Java was supposed to create an abstraction so that apps could run on any system that had a workable JRE and so far that hasn't happened.

but so far that requires tying your clients to windows, ie and .NET and I think we can agree that's not ideal.

Most clients that I know of are already tied to Windows, so I would probably choose .Net over Java if it was up to me.

 

[drag]

bah.

I mean Java is used ALOT, but it's not dominate. It could of been dominate and it's too late now to regain lost ground.


The only reason .NET is acceptable is because Microsoft did a decent job on it, and MONO. That's it. That's all there is. Simple

If years ago Sun openned up Java it would be dominate in the open source community. Most GUI apps would of been written in it. It would be a integral part of every Linux installation. You'd have Gnome dependent on it, you'd have KDE dependant on it. Hell, you'd probably have Java window managers, java games, java everything.

but right now I have to go and scam a obsolete version of a slow-ass IBM java runtime enviroment to even get it to run on my laptop. I can't even get one from Sun. But I can get Mono just fine.

Hell I can get Mono just fine from Debian. apt-get install mono-whatever. Can't do that with Java.


Window's requirement from .NET applications is only applicable if your forced to program in such a way that it's Windows only. There are plenty of OSS replacements for Windows-only stuff, and they'll run on Windows just as well as they do on Linux.

Some Mono applications for Linux.
tomboy (note manager)
f-spot (camera/photo stuff)
beagle (desktop search)
MonoDevelop (IDE for Mono and GTK#)
Muine (simple music player)
Blam! (RSS reader)
MonoDoc (document reader)

They are all pretty new things, but they are some examples of C# applications on Linux.

C# is just another programming language. It can be Windows-dependant, or it can be cross platform, or it can be Linux-dependant, or even OS X dependant. The good part is that I don't have to get Sun's permission to run my applications, and like with FreeBSD I don't have haggle with Sun over licensing restrictions.

C# has a open source run time enviroment for it, is decent, and is a published standard. That's it. That's all.

Personally I think Python kicks both their @sses, but that's just me.

 

[kamper]

Originally posted by: Nothinman

Open sourcing something purely for the sake of saying it's open source doesn't help anyone.

And if Sun's headquarters get bombed tomorrow? If that's the only place the JVM source is located that's gonna hurt, but if it was open sourced there would be no such single point of failure.

Nobody keeps source code to something like java in only one place. Look, I'm agreeing with you that it would be nice if sun was a little more open with the vm but it's just not important enough to care about.

perl and php are not going to provide the world with an enterprise development platform like .NET does. Sure people would use them more for low end stuff but a bank is not going to write it's backend transaction management in a scripting language.

You don't consider jsp scripting? How is that any different than mod_perl or php?

Anybody who writes business logic in jsp should probably be shot. It leads to unmaintainable code. Jsp is simply an add-on to servlet technologies that allow you to lay out html in a convenient way. None of that matters though, because many better things than jsp are coming along, in fact, they have been for years.

I don't care where the money is, I want something that works. Java was supposed to create an abstraction so that apps could run on any system that had a workable JRE and so far that hasn't happened.

The original intent was to create an environment where code compiled on one machine could be transmitted over the internet and run on another machine securely. That hasn't taken off like sun expected but java has found many other uses and the whole managed, secure container thing is what inspired .NET in the first place.

My point isn't that java is perfect because of course it's not. My point is that there are areas where it is very imporant and very successful and just because you haven't had a pleasant experience with it doesn't mean that it should drop off the face of the earth.

 

[kamper]

Originally posted by: Nothinman

but so far that requires tying your clients to windows, ie and .NET and I think we can agree that's not ideal.

Most clients that I know of are already tied to Windows, so I would probably choose .Net over Java if it was up to me.

And if a bomb dropped on Redmond tomorrow...