×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

183 comments

I would use it to be Frist Post! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#35538732)

Having a domain like SUN.com! Just think of the internet street cred!

Yo dog! I'm at owner@sun.com!

Re:I would use it to be Frist Post! (3, Informative)

darkpixel2k (623900) | about 3 years ago | (#35539586)

Having a domain like SUN.com! Just think of the internet street cred!

Yo dog! I'm at owner@sun.com!

And what would you do with sun.com? Start some sort of internet busin&@!%&*#%OHFUCK I already have a cease and desist letter from Oracle saying they still own the trademark 'Sun' in relation to all computer everything. Your best bet it so open Sun Bakery and sell cook#@&$*!DAMNIT! Cookies are computer related too.

Ok--here's the plan: Step 1: Buy sun.com for millions Step 2: Find out you can't start a computer company named 'Sun' or Oracle will sue you into oblivion. Step 3: Kill yourself because you are millions in debt with a worthless domain name.

One million? Really? (1)

thetagger (1057066) | about 3 years ago | (#35538758)

Dr. Evil: Here's the plan. We get the warhead, and we hold the world ransomed for.....One MILLION DOLLARS!!
No.2: Ahem...well, don't you think we should maybe ask for *more* than a million dollars? I mean, a million dollars isn't exactly a lot of money these days. Virtucon alone makes over nine billion dollars a year!
Dr. Evil: Really?
No.2: Mm-hmm.
Dr. Evil: That's a number. Okay then. We hold the world ransom for.....One hundred..BILLION DOLLARS!!

Many domains are worth more. (2)

Pharmboy (216950) | about 3 years ago | (#35538768)

I just don't see them selling it off right now. It isn't like Larry is broke and needs the bucks. And it isn't like the market for domain names is at a high point. He would get more selling the Sun name, domain, and some minor IP to someone as a set. He has already carved all the white meat off that turkey, which is the customer base and some software.

Re:Many domains are worth more. (2)

Massacrifice (249974) | about 3 years ago | (#35538822)

They wanna make sure it (the domain) doesn't come back. They wanna make sure those pesky hippies with their open-source sandals and well-engineered hemp shirts go somewhere else, somewhere that is NOT ORACLE. Because to have the PRIVILEGE of being served by an Oracle web server, you should be wearing an Armani suit, a silk tie and matching pointy italian shoes.

Re:Many domains are worth more. (2)

swordgeek (112599) | about 3 years ago | (#35538918)

Hah! Dead on there.

As one of those pesky hippies who works for a company that owns about 1500 Sun servers, allow me to say that Larry can go fuck himself. When they increased our support contract to $8M/year, we told them to take a hike. We are replacing all of our Sun software, most of our Solaris instances, and much of our Sun hardware in less than two years.

I mourn Sun, but they're dead now. Nobody is going to pay more than pocket change for the sun.com domain. Filthy dirty fucking Oracle.

Re:Many domains are worth more. (1)

Pharmboy (216950) | about 3 years ago | (#35538970)

The Chicago Sun. The U.K. paper "The Sun", etc. There are plenty of companies who would want it and would pay more than pocket change, although the economy won't support a premium price right now.

Maybe Oracle can make it one of those cheesy ad farms, complete with Google ads on both sides, top and bottom, complete with BizRate ads "Looking for a great price on sun?"

Re:Many domains are worth more. (1)

$RANDOMLUSER (804576) | about 3 years ago | (#35538996)

That's the Chicago Sun-Times. They NEVER call themselves just "The Sun", always "The Sun-Times".

Re:Many domains are worth more. (2)

rtb61 (674572) | about 3 years ago | (#35539164)

Well as an advertising site, they could donate it to NASA (possibly also other space agencies as a joint effort) and sponsor the creation of a web site based all around information about this solar system and promote the peaceful exploration and development of the rest of our solar system. Thus attempt to start creating a better public image.

So would this be worth more to Oracle in terms of marketing than the sale price of the domain.

Re:Many domains are worth more. (1)

demonlapin (527802) | about 3 years ago | (#35539470)

Why would they care? Is www.thesun.co.uk too hard to type in?

Re:Many domains are worth more. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#35539784)

If a company thinks it will increase their profit by $x+1, they'll probably be willing to pay $x. I'm pretty lazy, I would be more likely to visit a site called sun.com, www.thesun.co.uk has way too many characters, and that annoying .co.uk suffix.

Re:Many domains are worth more. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#35539892)

Good shout on (The U.K.) Sun.

Any organisation that pays $580 million for an otherwise useless domain like myspace.com.. - figure something actually relevant to their tripe is gotta be worth, oh, $3-5 mill, or so - and, no, that is, actually, in all seriousness. If I was head of (thesun.co.uk) PR, or whatever, I would authorise that tomorrow, it is actually a no-brainer. Like their readers, of whom, it must be said, they have surprisingly a large amount of.

Re:Many domains are worth more. (4, Funny)

$RANDOMLUSER (804576) | about 3 years ago | (#35539142)

...Larry can go fuck himself...
...Filthy dirty fucking Oracle...

I find your ideas interesting and would like to subscribe to your newsletter.

Re:Many domains are worth more. (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#35539194)

Ditto here. I work for a Big Ten university and am responsible for purchasing most of our server equipment. We are migrating all of our stuff off of our Sun equipment as fast as we can. We never liked Dell much in the past, but now that so much of our stuff is on Linux and virtualized, it doesn't matter how unreliable the Dell gear is (and some batches we get are really bad :)

Solaris replacement (2)

Compaqt (1758360) | about 3 years ago | (#35539910)

Would you mind telling us what you're replacing it with? RHEL, Ubuntu Server, *BSD, other?

And how have you replicated those nice Solaris features (containers, that debugging thing, the new copy-on-write filesystem), or if they are missed at all?

Re:Many domains are worth more. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#35538984)

every day i see stupid people everywhere... and i wonder... isn't abortion legal? shouldn't they have all been aborted fetuses with a bunch of holes poked into their still-twitching heads by a sharp probe until they die and get flushed out the uterus like so much garbage? imagine the money we'd save on social services and how much easier it would be to drive places without some dumbass doing some stupid shit that endangers himself (which is ok) and you (which isn't). too many dumbasses leads to too big a government leads to too miserable a society for the small percentage of intelligent people who actually invent new things and contribute useful ideas and carry the weight of a whole mass of morons on their backs. fuck this shit.

Re:Many domains are worth more. (2)

EdIII (1114411) | about 3 years ago | (#35539176)

The domain on its own is worth hardly anything without the IP. Any party that is serious about the domain will want no problems with trade marks or IP claims against the use of the domain. Now I hardly think that is going for only a million dollars.

Of course, a business that had nothing to do with computers, software, databases, etc. might not have to worry about trade mark claims as their business might not constitute dilution of the mark (as in the case of Mr. Nissan with Nissan Computers), but I seriously doubt there is going to be a flower or quilting company willing to put up that much cash for a domain.

Domain squatters and their ilk are hilariously ignorant snake oil salesman participating in a shared, almost progressive, delusion of their assets and their worth.

Anybody that is considering even for a second to purchase a domain needs to do a trade mark search first and look for businesses with a name even close to it. It's not like it is unheard of for domains to be "transferred" after a big powerful company pushes a small entity around for the domain with claims of trade mark dilution.

The only real case that I know of where the defendant is not only right, but still winning against all odds, is the aforementioned Mr. Nissan of Nissan.com.

For everybody else in the real, and corrupt, world it's just not worth it to purchase a domain without knowing that you can, and will, be able to defend yourself against claims of cyber squatting and trade mark dilution.

I think sun.com is worth zero dollars on its own for precisely this reason.

Re:Many domains are worth more. (2)

martin-boundary (547041) | about 3 years ago | (#35539764)

I think sun.com is worth zero dollars on its own for precisely this reason.

The internet is full of links to sun.com from all sorts of web pages that will never be removed. Anyone who owns the domain gets literally millions of link referrals for free.

Re (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#35538778)

Just buy sun.xxx instead.

Re:Re (4, Funny)

Massacrifice (249974) | about 3 years ago | (#35538848)

Oracle.xxx would actually make a lot of sense. Considering that their prices and policies are so obscene.

Re:Re (1)

jd (1658) | about 3 years ago | (#35539048)

There's a limit to how much material you can admit to being obscene before the tabloids get interested.

Do the right thing (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#35538786)

They should donate it to a non-profit organization. Something appropriate would be something involving astronomy education.

NBA (2)

lyinhart (1352173) | about 3 years ago | (#35538800)

Eh. They should probably sell it to the owners of the Phoenix Suns NBA team. They'll just redirect it to their official website.

Re:NBA (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#35538954)

or any of a million "The ___ Sun" newspapers

Re:NBA (1)

Tablizer (95088) | about 3 years ago | (#35539120)

Not the way they've been playing of late. They should go back to "run and gun" instead of trying to be a half-court team for the post-season. Fuck the post-season. It was more fun when they scorched everyone in the regular season. That's Nash's real skill.

Suns.com, not Sun.com (1)

antdude (79039) | about 3 years ago | (#35539844)

Suns already have suns.com. Sun.com doesn't make any sense. Look at laker.com, celtic.com, etc. NBA teams don't own those.

wasnt this the cause of the .com bubble (1)

Melted_Igloo (1482045) | about 3 years ago | (#35538838)

I mean buying domain names for much more than what they are worth worth? I havent visited sun.com in like ever.. nor will i ever

Re:wasnt this the cause of the .com bubble (1)

tnk1 (899206) | about 3 years ago | (#35539340)

Even if no one cares about Sun Microsystems, or has a paper named The Sun, or some other existing product or service with "sun" in it, its still a three letter .com domain. That is worth mucho dinero. And then massive extra credit points for being a common English word.

If there isn't a site already for the domain, someone will create or rename their site "Sun (\S+)" just for the domain. No one is going to forget a web site called www.sun.com.

If I thought that Slashdot had the money to do it, I imagine that the day after they bought the site, they'd rename themselves Sundot.

Mold Removal (0)

semone (2009226) | about 3 years ago | (#35538856)

Mold is quite common in homes, where its recycling habits can become a problem. We can do an inspection and begin the mold removal process the same day. Don’t let mold get the best of you..call our professionals today. Mold Removal [waterdamagelocal.com]

Re:Mold Removal (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#35538920)

Oh yay. Slashdot UIDs are now up over 2,000,000. Welcome to the "terrible" karma group spammer! FOAD!

Worth more to keep it (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#35538858)

Lots of people's brain bookmarks and software programs and browser bookmarks go to sun.com

Re:Worth more to keep it (4, Informative)

$RANDOMLUSER (804576) | about 3 years ago | (#35538942)

Indeed. I can't remember how many roomfuls of students I told to go to "java.sun.com" for all things Java.

Re:Worth more to keep it (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#35539356)

What good is that? Every link to sun.com is broken. For example, every link to documentation on docs.sun.com? Yeah, those now just point you to a useless main documentation page for Oracle at Oracle.com (pissed off Sun employee who had years worth of links here that are all useless now and make doing her job more difficult).

Re:Worth more to keep it (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#35539496)

pissed off Sun employee who had years worth of links here that are all useless now and make doing her job more difficult

That is a pretty proletariat attitude. Not controlling your means of production is the difference between a "job" and a "career".

It's always somebody else's fault... you probably voted for Obama.

Wait, how would that work? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#35538872)

So if they sold the domain but kept the rights to the Sun name as a trademark, then how could anyone open up a new Sun.com without being in danger of violating Oracle's trademark? People have been sued over their domains named after themselves when it has the same name as a trademark, even when their domain has nothing to do with whatever area the trademark is in.

Re:Wait, how would that work? (1)

SiMac (409541) | about 3 years ago | (#35538914)

So if they sold the domain but kept the rights to the Sun name as a trademark, then how could anyone open up a new Sun.com without being in danger of violating Oracle's trademark? People have been sued over their domains named after themselves when it has the same name as a trademark, even when their domain has nothing to do with whatever area the trademark is in.

If the company operates in an entirely different area from Sun Microsystems, such that no confusion could arise, or if Oracle abandons the Sun trademark, which they probably would be if they sold Sun.com, then there's no problem.

WRT lawsuits, the CIA has also been sued for mind control. You can sue for anything; winning is the hard part.

Re:Wait, how would that work? (1)

d6 (1944790) | about 3 years ago | (#35539126)

I can't imagine Oracle will sell the domain. If they did tho, the buyer would have to get some sort of understanding about uses that didn't constitute trademark infringement... So I can't see Oracle letting it go without the surviving bits and chunks of Sun attached. Not like they're hard up for cash.

semi o/t, but this site might interest you [nissan.com]

The gent has the same last name as a big car company. Sort of bad luck for him. He still has his domain, but out of pocket for lawyers...

Re:Wait, how would that work? (1)

jd (1658) | about 3 years ago | (#35539056)

Duh! That's how Oracle intends to make the really big bucks.

I must have this site...but first... (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#35538882)

What's the IP Address of the Sun?

Malware (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#35538888)

There is probably tons of software that points at sun.com, automatically downloading software, docs, etc. Buy the domain, analyze the traffic its getting, put up stuff that would cause people problems, then charge them to automatically redirect requests from their IP addresses to oracle.com, etc. Or just put up some malware and rake in the dough.

Re:Malware (1)

zill (1690130) | about 3 years ago | (#35539154)

There is probably tons of software that points at sun.com, automatically downloading software...

Oh God, it's like a black hat's wet dream. Thousands of machines requesting binaries from your server every second and then blinding running them.



On a more seriously note, sun.com is already gone, but my Java updates are still working fine, so I'd assume their update server isn't located at sun.com. Not to mention Java updates are probably cryptographically signed.

There's LOTS more than web servers on a domain. (1)

Ungrounded Lightning (62228) | about 3 years ago | (#35539180)

There is probably tons of software that points at sun.com, automatically downloading software, docs, etc.

There's lot of other stuff, too.

Like @sun.com mail addresses, just for starters.

Hmmm (1)

demonlapin (527802) | about 3 years ago | (#35538890)

Is there a financial instrument out there that will let me short-sell whatever moron thinks sun.com is worth more than pocket change? It's like dec.com, a historical footnote. Larry should just give it to a computer history society/museum for caretaking.

Re:Hmmm (1)

$RANDOMLUSER (804576) | about 3 years ago | (#35538980)

That might almost be a fair analogy - if Digital hadn't been bought out when the WWW was in its infancy. dec.com was gone before most people would have looked for it. Besides, Digital was really only a computer company for the computer industry - except for HUGE successes like the Rainbow. Sun at least has/had Java and Open Solaris driving traffic to sun.com.

Re:Hmmm (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#35539214)

.. except the word 'sun' isn't just the name of a corporation, its also a valid word in the English language..

Re:Hmmm (1)

demonlapin (527802) | about 3 years ago | (#35539442)

So? I didn't buy my latest household purchases from tv.com, furniture.com, computers.com, or food.com.

Re:Hmmm (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#35539574)

According to www.alexa.com [alexa.com] www.tv.com [tv.com] is the 1125th most popular site on the internet, 664th for the US audience. If I wasn't as computer literate, I might assume that going to tv.com would bring up information about TV, and magically, it does! Imagine if I could come up with some sort of content for a site called www.sun.com. Maybe I could run a magazine or newspaper called 'The Sun', maybe the UK's largest with over 2,000,000 subscribers. Maybe a classic record label? A band? A cell-phone company?

But I don't think I will, as I think the competition from all the people who decided to call their tabloids and bands DEC would be too much for me to handle.

Re:Hmmm (1)

demonlapin (527802) | about 3 years ago | (#35539754)

Yes, because www.thesun.co.uk is painful to type in, and because the average Joe really wants to know about the solar weather so he can shield his transmission lines the next time a solar storm comes through.

Re:Hmmm (1)

MoonBuggy (611105) | about 3 years ago | (#35539686)

And yet pizza.com sold a couple of years ago for $2.6million. I know the economy was in better shape then, but it was still a 'legitimate' sale, not some crazy bubble start up in 1998.

I don't understand it either, if I'm honest, but we all know that what something is worth is whatever someone will pay for it, and apparently generic domains really are worth a bit.

Re:Hmmm (1)

demonlapin (527802) | about 3 years ago | (#35539760)

Well, I do wish them the best, and everyone hopes to have some utterly irrational bidders in the pool. I'd just hold onto it, personally.

Re:Hmmm (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#35539230)

I don't think sun.com has any increased value because of it's history, but because it is a 3 character domain that is actually a word. Plenty of companies would be interested in the domain... DEC is just an acronym...

Re:Hmmm (1)

demonlapin (527802) | about 3 years ago | (#35539456)

Did you make a lot of purchases lately from car.com, rap.com, dog.com, nap.com, sew.com, or some of the other three-letter English words? sun.com is short, and it's an English word, but that's not really worth a lot, in itself.

Re:Hmmm (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#35539664)

All 3-letter domain names are worth money.

From www.3character.com/recentsales.html [3character.com]. Words and useful combinations of letters are worth more than random combinations of letters:

sex.com = $12,000,000
ged.com = $150,000
dso.com = $20,000
eol.com = $43,000
olt.com = $93,000

It doesn't matter whether you'd go there, it matters whether a good number of people would, and the answer is potentially, yes.

Re:Hmmm (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#35539618)

Absolutely correct. Like 'dec', what kind of arrangement of characters is 'sun'? As if that sequence of characters has any real meaning outside of tech circles.

Re:Hmmm (1)

demonlapin (527802) | about 3 years ago | (#35539740)

Are you dying to pay a million dollars to let the world know about the latest info re: the sun? Briefly: still a star, still undergoing fusion reactions, not expected to burn out in the next billion years.

Feeling a tad smug (1)

NiceGeek (126629) | about 3 years ago | (#35538900)

I remember working in the IT department of a fair-sized company back in '99 and it was a dedicated Sun shop, in fact my boss denigrated Linux and open-source software (of course he called it freeware) any chance he could. He talked like Sun would be around forever...oops.

Re:Feeling a tad smug (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#35539316)

That was before Ponytail came in and fucked us all in the ass and ran off into the sunset with riches and a fucking twitter haiku, like a cunt.

Too cheap (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#35538940)

Apart from the fact that they don't need selling off TLD:s, this domain is definitely worth a lot more than $1 million. About a year ago, Poker.org [poker.org] was sold for the same price.

Generally speaking, the shorter, older and more generic a domain is, the higher the value. If you look at the most expensive domains, they're typically short (sex.com, fund.com, porn.com, beer.com, shop.com, etc). That does not mean that xzg.com (or similar) is worth a fortune, but as soon as you have a word (gay.com, cool.com, dot.com, fun.com, etc) the price goes up substantially.

Oldest dotcoms (1)

Andy Smith (55346) | about 3 years ago | (#35538962)

Interesting that Microsoft, established in 1975, doesn't appear on the list of the 100 oldest dotcom registrations. Xerox registered before IBM. Boeing before Adobe. And Microsoft isn't on the list. Did they not recognise the long-term importance of the internet?

Re:Oldest dotcoms (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#35538988)

Of course not. Microsoft sold microcomputer software. Microcomputers couldn't connect to the Internet.

Re:Oldest dotcoms (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#35539000)

No. Bill Gates' first book, "The Road Ahead" published in 1995, famously did not refer to the Internet. The much-hyped Windows 95 OS was released without a web browser (that apparently wasn't a coincidence, Jim Clark and the Netscape crew carefully timed the release of Navigator). But MS made up for lost time. They quickly struck a deal with a small company called Spyglass for rights to their browser, which became IE. They made sure that IE was a "integral" part of Windows that couldn't be de-installed, and re-released Windows 95 to feature it. In December, 1995, Gates sent out a company-wide email called "The Internet Tidal Wave".

Re:Oldest dotcoms (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#35539018)

Not till 1991. Al Gore had not yet perfected the internet, something about Winsock.

Re:Oldest dotcoms (1)

guruevi (827432) | about 3 years ago | (#35539078)

Microsoft did not have TCP/IP support until well into the '90's instead attempting to 'standardize' their NetBIOS and trying to win people over with cartoon-like chat programs and 'channels' or 'folders' instead of websites into their own Microsoft Network (MSN) which was not connected to the Internet. Thankfully the industry ignored them and MS has since been trailing in the adoption of the proper Internet in general.

Re:Oldest dotcoms (2)

Marillion (33728) | about 3 years ago | (#35539122)

Microsoft totally missed the Internet. They had their sights set on AOL back when most AOL users didn't care to venture (or realized you could) outside of the AOL garden. It was all MSN all the time. Then they had an "oh shit" moment.

Bill Gates and the CD-ROM revolution (2)

mattdm (1931) | about 3 years ago | (#35539168)

Bill Gates's book "The Road Ahead", is, in its first 1995 edition, focused on how the CD-ROM was going to change everything about computers. Remember Encarta? They were really focused on that -- multimedia on discs, that was going to be the future.

But then, for the 1996 printing, the whole thing was re-written and suddenly CD-ROMs weren't the hot thing. It was all about the Internet.

Re:Bill Gates and the CD-ROM revolution (1)

Kenshin (43036) | about 3 years ago | (#35539756)

Ya, encyclopedias on CD were "the future"... in 1990.

My school had a Mac with a CD-ROM, and a copy of the Grolier (I think) encyclopedia. It was the most amazing thing at the time.

Re:Bill Gates and the CD-ROM revolution (1)

bill_mcgonigle (4333) | about 3 years ago | (#35539984)

and suddenly CD-ROMs weren't the hot thing

I used to have a clipping on my cubicle wall from a Time magazine in 1995 where Bill Gates was dismissing the Internet as a fad. Despite the book's change, Microsoft never really 'got' the Internet. Sure, they had some de-facto monopoly power in it, with IE6 and such, but every strategy was how to wrap Windows in the Internet.

It was then that a couple guys were getting fed up with Altavista (OK, we all were, but they decided to do something better).

Re:Oldest dotcoms (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#35539174)

Interesting that Microsoft, established in 1975, doesn't appear on the list of the 100 oldest dotcom registrations. Xerox registered before IBM. Boeing before Adobe.

Of course Boeing registered early. Do you know a major focus of why the Internet was intended? As a communication system in the event of nuclear war. That's why it was sponsored by DARPA. And so a major defense contractor like Boeing got involved because well, government money!

Besides, Microsoft was not huge in 1975, or for years afterward. The idea that it was formed like Athena from the brow of Zeus is not true.

And Microsoft isn't on the list. Did they not recognise the long-term importance of the internet?

It took over 2 decades for the internet to reach any kind of building importance even in Academia. Commercially it didn't even get that far till the late 90s. oh sure, everybody says they saw it coming now, but most people? Were not even as involved as Al Gore was. He at least was willing to put tax payer dollars to work on it.

Besides most people genuinely don't care about the Internet. They care about the Web.

Re:Oldest dotcoms (1)

Compaqt (1758360) | about 3 years ago | (#35539948)

Back in the day, if you asked someone what their email address is, you'd get various takes on a blank/concerned/weirded out stare. So, yeah, Internet was available, but by no means mainstream.

Re:Oldest dotcoms (1)

demonlapin (527802) | about 3 years ago | (#35539494)

The Internet of the NSF backbone days was a very different beast. Companies that appeared on it were usually defense contractors or university computing suppliers.

Misread that (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#35539026)

I misread that at first as "Oracle Could Rape $1 Million For Sun.com Domain".

Or maybe I didn't.

Whoopee! (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#35539102)

$1M. Wow. Imagine what Oracle could do if they had $1M dollars.

Forget the domain, ask about the IP blocks (2)

RedLeg (22564) | about 3 years ago | (#35539156)

As the TLDs expand, the value of a ".com", even a sexy three letter one with some history decreases.

Ask instead which (pre CIDR) address block(s) Sun had and Larry E now has. IIRC, they're sitting on at least one "A" and potentially multiple "B"s.

Since "IPv4" is gonna implode this year (yeah, right, but just go with it.....), the IP space is gonna have much more real value.

Red

Re:Forget the domain, ask about the IP blocks (1)

MoonBuggy (611105) | about 3 years ago | (#35539662)

As the TLDs expand, the value of a ".com", even a sexy three letter one with some history decreases.

I agree with you on the IP addresses, but how much of your browsing is really done on sites with extensions other than .com or your local ccTLD? There are some occasional exceptions, of course - I'm aware we're posting on a .org, for instance, and bit.ly springs to mind - but when was the last time you saw a legitimate site on a .biz or .info name? Even if the alternate domains do eventually gain a bit more acceptance, decent sounding .com names will have the cachet that comes with exclusivity; more so, if anything, once they really start becoming scarce.

That said, it's still only a million. Sure, I'd be happy with that much cash for something as simple as a domain name, but to a decent size company it's nothing.

Why should they? (1)

drolli (522659) | about 3 years ago | (#35539192)

I am sure, they keep it as a redirect. for sure in-links are mentioned in old documentation, for which customers may hold the new owner responsible (in the sense of the next buying decision). It makes a very bad impression if you follow a support instruction and end up on a webpage which does not exist (or worse: was sold and re-sold to a porn company).

Re:Why should they? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#35539256)

Right, they are not selling it. This story is just sensationalism. They are shutting down blogs.sun.com and whatever else. sun.com will redirect to oracle.

Re:Why should they? (1)

fatp (1171151) | about 3 years ago | (#35539832)

... It makes a very bad impression if you follow a support instruction and end up on a webpage which does not exist ...

Never mind, it is common on oracle.com anyway.

Dependencies (1)

mtinsley (1283400) | about 3 years ago | (#35539212)

Doesn't some Java code depend on certain resources at that domain? Isn't Oracle in the same situation Adobe was in when it purchased Macromedia? Take a look at Adobe's documentation for embedding flash (the codebase attribute in particular). http://kb2.adobe.com/cps/415/tn_4150.html [adobe.com] Adobe still owns Macromedia.com even though they've phased out the brand from all of their products.

total permanent world disarmament happening now (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#35539244)

sounds important.

Lunch money (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#35539458)

LOL... Lunch money for Larry Ellison and Oracle.

Think.com (1)

POTSandPANS (781918) | about 3 years ago | (#35539468)

They already own the 3rd oldest .com domain so owning the 12th oldest likely doesn't mean much to them. Maybe collecting old domain names is what you do when you run out of other stuff to buy..

What is this, Austin Powers? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#35539886)

Is $1 million supposed to mean anything to Oracle? As long as they don't forget to renew, I'm sure there's much more potential for them in simply redirecting to oracle.com.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...