‹ BackHN Continuity

Thread

What Sun got wrong

692 points · 437 comments · chmaynard

  1. coreyh14444 · · focus · HN ↗
    As someone who was buying hardware in the late 1990s, it is hard to overstate the difference in buying experience between Sun or Digital (DEC) and someone like Dell. The former forced you into a live sales meeting, endless quote revisions, it was a nightmare. I remember calculating the server rails and power cords for a new Alpha server were going to cost more than a shipped/delivered Dell server that I could get the next day.
    1. sschueller · · focus · HN ↗
      For us dell has become that. Rep changes all the time, what appears to be random pricing and long unclear delivery dates. Instead I can for example go to Thomas Kren and configure my serves online for a fraction of the cost. They have what they list in stock, delivered a few weeks later. Everything is clear and hasle free.

      At this point I have the feeling dell just charges you what they think they can get out of you. You push back and the price drops, I don't want to negotiate.

      1. PaulHoule · · focus · HN ↗
        The iron law is that vendors want to become like the old Sun. The only reason they don't is if they are trying to compete their way up the hill. Take away the old Sun and SGI and IBM and now Dell is Sun.
        1. cherryteastain · · focus · HN ↗
          Difference is Sun was providing a "full stack" proprietary product including CPUs running a proprietary ISA, Unix OS, compiler, desktop environment and productivity apps. All that Dell does is assembling standard, commoditized parts and putting a free OS on it. Dell's business is incredibly easy to replicate, while Sun's business is extremely hard to replicate. Of course, Sun's competitive advantage turned into a curse when the components of that vertical integration become uncompetitive both features and price wise vs. the GNU/Linux-on-Intel stack. But regardless, Dell could never replicate the vertical integration Sun had.
          1. throw0101a · · focus · HN ↗
            > Difference is Sun was providing a "full stack" proprietary product including CPUs running a proprietary ISA, Unix OS, compiler, desktop environment and productivity apps.

            SPARC was not proprietary, buy fully licensable:

            * <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;sparc.org" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;sparc.org

            Fujitsu sold their own SPARC servers for many years with their own CPUs, and many third-parties put Fujitsu SPARC CPUs into (e.g.) laptops:

            * <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;jasoneckert.github.io&#x2F;myblog&#x2F;sparcbook3000st-the-coolest-90s-laptop&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;jasoneckert.github.io&#x2F;myblog&#x2F;sparcbook3000st-the-coo...

            Can you get an x86_64 CPU from someone other than Intel or AMD? x86 is much more proprietary than SPARC ever was.

            Sun used the non-proprietary Open Firmware (IEEE 1275) for booting (also used by Apple with PowerPC), and SBus (IEEE 1496) for cards before moving to PCI. SCSI and Ethernet&#x2F;IP were there since forever as well.

            The &quot;proprietary&quot; label on Sun, at least when it came to hardware, was always a mystery to me.

            1. spauldo · · focus · HN ↗
              It&#x27;s the platform that&#x27;s proprietary.

              Sun used a lot of open parts, but they had absolute control over the platform. Everything in your solution came from Sun or a Sun partner. Fujitsu doing weird stuff with Japanese mainframes was an interesting fact but irrelevant to 99% of Sun&#x27;s user base.

              Intel&#x2F;AMD combined with EFI or IBM-compatible BIOS? You can get that from anybody. An HP server is basically interchangeable with a Dell.

              Sun was proprietary in the same way Apple is.

              1. throw0101a · · focus · HN ↗
                &gt; SPARC has been licensed to several manufacturers, including Atmel, Bipolar Integrated Technology, Cypress Semiconductor, Fujitsu, Matsushita and Texas Instruments.

                * <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;SPARC" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;SPARC

                Fujitsu was selling Solaris-compatible systems (as were many others). Linux and BSDs also ran on them.

                There were a number of x86 makers up until the 1990s or so, but who is left of them? Can you still license x86(_x64) to fab your own CPUs? You can with SPARC:

                * <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.gaisler.com&#x2F;products&#x2F;gr765" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.gaisler.com&#x2F;products&#x2F;gr765

                1. icedchai · · focus · HN ↗
                  &quot;Many others&quot; is stretching the truth a bit. There were maybe 4 or 5 Sparc clone vendors, ever. The one I remember offhand is Solbourne: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Solbourne_Computer" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Solbourne_Computer

                  Sadly, they left the Sparc clone business before they could even support Solaris! They stopped at SunOS 4.1.

Open on Hacker News to reply ↗

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.