[OpenIndiana-discuss] Java 7

Wed Aug 3 02:48:49 UTC 2011

On 8/2/11 9:23 PM, Anil wrote:
> Was that before things like ZFS etc?
that actually came out with opensolaris. there was some number that we 
hardly sold any of them, which made it ok to cancel.
>
> That happened to Sun because they were "donating" everything away, including
> the source. Open source might increase community involvement, but won't
> keep the boat afloat.
>
> Finding the right price isn't my job, but all I can say is, I am not gong to
> pay $800-$1000 per server (or something high like that) just for the OS...
That is what people pay. They pay about that for enterprise windows, 
about that for linux..Vmware list price is very expensive. Do you have 
any idea what hp-ux costs? or aix? published numbers are in the 10's of 
thousands..sometime per proc or core. Add some cluster and...and don't 
forget the database at 40K per cpu license. websphere 40k per proc, ... 
all of that to save money.
> if I were a big company, of course that's not an issue. If you are a SMB,
> this might become a problem
yes it is a huge problem. especially since the smb's almost always pay 
list price. The big companies negotiate to sometimes 60-80% discounts.. 
but the little guys pay list.


> ... Unfortunate for a lot of us, Oracle's target
> customers are different! We just need another revolution in some technology,
> and everyone will dump Oracle's enterprise-costs for the alternative (think
> Solaris vs Linux).
We need to help them understand that the technology they are getting is 
something we could build. They get it with linux, but they don't with 
enterprise storage. a disk is a disk. the difference between commodity 
disk and enterprise storage is... software. and that software is 
here...and free and open
>
> Sun thought it could repeat history by offering a free OS like Linux, but it
> couldn't. Sun at a later point had all the ingredients to actually charge
> for things and people would still pay (e.g. ZFS/zones etc...) IMO.
Does anyone remember for the 20 minutes sun actually had a linux? it was 
called sunlinux 5.0. We figured we could do linux just as well as anyone 
else... When we went to have the enterprise software vendors certify to 
it, everyone said... no. they did redhat or suse or both. but they 
weren't going to certify every linux distro.

IMHO the strategy of free and open was sound, the tactics were not. I 
actually used to have sales reps ask me not to tell customers that 
solaris was free or available on x86. It was hard to let people know, if 
we couldn't tell them :)
>
>
>
> On Tue, Aug 2, 2011 at 3:55 PM, Linda Kateley<linda.kateley at nexenta.com>wrote:
>
>> So sun tried that, it wasn't $99 but it was 349 for a year, for basically
>> self support.. and sun ended up on the side of the street with a sign "will
>> build os for food"
>>
>> Oracle will make you pay enterprise pricing for enterprise products, the
>> idea of concept of enterprise is diminished by not charging appropriately.
>>
>>
>> On 8/2/11 5:46 PM, Anil wrote:
>>
>>> For us the biggest issue is the price of the OS. We don't mind paying
>>> something like $99/year/system or some thing of that sorts to run Solaris
>>> (with patches). Sorry, support not required. Why can't Oracle do something
>>> like that? What's it got to loose? The pricing they gave us was
>>> ridiculous,
>>> so we stopped using it.
>>>
>>> I always wondered why Sun couldn't do that... so it can pay it's bills.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Aug 2, 2011 at 2:04 PM, Pablo Oddera<pablo.oddera at gmail.com>
>>>   wrote:
>>>
>>>   Alan,
>>>> Good links, but if you were going to emphasize that Oracle gave some code
>>>> to
>>>> the community, Microsoft gave the double. Even worst Oracle has
>>>> "Unbreakable
>>>> Linux (sic)", which is no more than a glorified clon of Red Hat (love Red
>>>> Hat by the way). So in short, they gave up a little, steal a lot and
>>>> close
>>>> the source of everything that they can. That's really how Oracle "loves"
>>>> the
>>>> opensource!
>>>>
>>>> Being the kind of company Oracle is, the size of the Linux related
>>>> projects,
>>>> you would expect a little more from them. Red Hat gave an 11% of the
>>>> code.
>>>> Microsoft 4% and Oracle 2%
>>>>
>>>> This is not against you, but Oracle as a company is not committed to help
>>>> the open source. I saw the link with your contribution and that's great,
>>>> but
>>>> that doesn't solve the bottom line for Oracle.
>>>>
>>>> Best regards
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Aug 2, 2011 at 5:17 PM, Alan Coopersmith<
>>>> alan.coopersmith at oracle.com>   wrote:
>>>>
>>>>   On 08/02/11 11:49, Apostolos Syropoulos wrote:
>>>>>> Yes, it is a nice licensing model, because Oracle is a business, not a
>>>>>> charity,
>>>>>> and it's first duty is to it's shareholders. Red Hat, IBM, Microsoft,
>>>>>> You cannot compare RH with Oracle and Microsoft. RH is selling support
>>>>>>
>>>>> for
>>>>>
>>>>>> an OpenSource OS while Oracle and Microsoft have donated to the Open
>>>>>>
>>>>> Source
>>>>>
>>>>>> community almost nothing. RH had produced and donated pieces of
>>>>>>
>>>>> software,
>>>>> but Oracle and Microsoft have done quite the opposite.
>>>>> http://lwn.net/Articles/**451243/<http://lwn.net/Articles/451243/>  -
>>>>> top employers of contributors to the
>>>>> Linux 3.0
>>>>> release cycle, by changeset includes both Microsoft (support for running
>>>>> Linux
>>>>> as a guest in Microsoft HyperV) and Oracle (btrfs&   general kernel
>>>>>
>>>> tuning).
>>>>
>>>>> http://oss.oracle.com/ - Oracle's contributions to Linux&   other open
>>>>> source
>>>>> products.
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.phoronix.com/scan.**php?page=news_item&px=OTE1MQ<http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=OTE1MQ>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>>         -Alan Coopersmith-        alan.coopersmith at oracle.com
>>>>>          Oracle Solaris Platform Engineering: X Window System
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ______________________________**_________________
>>>>> OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list
>>>>> OpenIndiana-discuss@**openindiana.org<OpenIndiana-discuss at openindiana.org>
>>>>> http://openindiana.org/**mailman/listinfo/openindiana-**discuss<http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss>
>>>>>
>>>>>   ______________________________**_________________
>>>> OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list
>>>> OpenIndiana-discuss@**openindiana.org<OpenIndiana-discuss at openindiana.org>
>>>> http://openindiana.org/**mailman/listinfo/openindiana-**discuss<http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss>
>>>>
>>>>   ______________________________**_________________
>>> OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list
>>> OpenIndiana-discuss@**openindiana.org<OpenIndiana-discuss at openindiana.org>
>>> http://openindiana.org/**mailman/listinfo/openindiana-**discuss<http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss>
>>>
>>
>> --
>> Linda Kateley
>> Global Evangelist and Community Manager
>> (mobile) 612-807-6349
>> (email) linda.kateley at nexenta.com
>> (skype) lkateley
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ______________________________**_________________
>> OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list
>> OpenIndiana-discuss@**openindiana.org<OpenIndiana-discuss at openindiana.org>
>> http://openindiana.org/**mailman/listinfo/openindiana-**discuss<http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list
> OpenIndiana-discuss at openindiana.org
> http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss


-- 
Linda Kateley
Global Evangelist and Community Manager
(mobile) 612-807-6349
(email) linda.kateley at nexenta.com
(skype) lkateley