Beta
×

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!

Sun Acquires CFS/Lustre, Becomes Windows OEM

ScuttleMonkey posted more than 7 years ago | from the new-toys-to-play-with dept.

Sun Microsystems 138

anzha writes "Sun Microsystems announced today that they are acquiring Cluster File Systems Inc. CFS owns the intellectual property related to and develops the open source file system known as Lustre." Relatedly Sun has also signed an agreement with Microsoft to be a Windows OEM. "Sun and Microsoft will work together to ensure that Solaris runs well as a guest on Microsoft virtualization technologies and that Windows Server runs well as a guest on Sun's virtualization technologies. Sun and Microsoft will work together on a support process for customers who are using the virtualization solutions. This joint commitment to customers ensures that Windows and Solaris will provide a solid virtualization experience."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Problem (2, Insightful)

BloodyIron (939359) | more than 7 years ago | (#20579309)

Is this a problem?

I dont see one...

Re:Problem (1)

TheRaven64 (641858) | more than 7 years ago | (#20579391)

I don't think it's a problem, just news. Novell already has a deal with Microsoft related to Xen, to provide a compatibility layer allowing Xen guests to run on Microsoft's hypervisor, and vice versa. As to the OEM thing, I thought they were already one; they've been boasting for about a year that Sun workstations and servers are the only one you can by that are certified to run Solaris, Red Hat Enterprise Linux, or Windows.

Re:Problem (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20580367)

they've been boasting for about a year that Sun workstations and servers are the only one you can by that are certified to run Solaris, Red Hat Enterprise Linux, or Windows.

"Sun is now a single source for today's leading operating systems - Solaris and Windows - on the industry's most innovative x64 systems and storage products. Customers can now take advantage of the virtualization benefits of Windows and Solaris on Sun's energy efficient x64 systems," said John Fowler, executive vice president, Systems Group, Sun Microsystems.
Now you might need to ask them: "but does it run Linux?"

Well, FWIW I won't buy Novell any more (3, Interesting)

HiThere (15173) | more than 7 years ago | (#20580491)

That should be qualified. If it's under GPL3 I might consider it safe to buy. Otherwise I wouldn't and don't. I've striped SUSE off my systems, because I don't trust what they might upgrade me with.

Before you accept any reassurances from Novell, actually READ the published parts of their agreement with MS. Its reassurances are trash, garbage, worthless. And *THAT'S* the part they weren't too ashamed to reveal.

Re:Problem (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20579657)

"Is this a problem?"

If Windows implementation of Java didn't teach Sun anything, then they will soon be reminded when Solaris tries to run under Microsoft's virtualization I suspect. But, hey, We've all seen leopard's change their spots, right.

Re:Problem (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20580359)

I'm more worried about getting shat on by the pigs that learned to fly when this deal was made.

Re:Problem (3, Funny)

notthe9 (800486) | more than 7 years ago | (#20581121)

We've all seen leopard's change their spots, right.

What the hell does OSX have to do with anything?

That depends on the terms of the deal (1)

HiThere (15173) | more than 7 years ago | (#20580417)

As just a flat statement, it's not a problem. It is a reason to be wary.

OTOH, if Sun releases something under the GPL, it's under the GPL, and therefore trustworthy. Especially if it's under the GPL3.

Still....if it isn't under the GPL3 I'm going to scrutinize the terms of the agreement with extra care, and refuse to accept questionable clauses. This is something that should be done anyway, but it's more important when a company has an agreement with MS whose terms I don't know.

Step one (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20579329)

OK, there's the 'embrace'. Ready for the 'extend'?

Re:Step one zOMG CLUSTERFUCKED!!1 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20580041)

Did hell just freeze over, a bit? o_O

Hey, it worked for SGI... (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20579345)

oh wait....

Re:Hey, it worked for SGI... (3, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20580315)

On the other hand - it did work for the SGI exec responsible for this. Rick Belluzzo [wikipedia.org] not only killed Irix and MIPS at SGI, he then went on to kill HPUX and Pa_RISC at HP -- before getting the President/COO job at Microsoft. He didn't last long there, though - so it seems that job was more a reward for his services at SGI and HP, rather than for anything he brought to Microsoft.

Re:Hey, it worked for SGI... (2, Informative)

vought (160908) | more than 7 years ago | (#20581637)

Rick B is in charge of this?

Good lord, my faith in the Valley's ability to weed out the weak is really shaken. This guy is a moron.

On the other hand, I can see this being a good fit for Sun on a certain level. Where I work, the fact that Macs now run Windows "if needed" has bought them a lot of mindshare. If the same thing happens in datacenters, maybe Sun can sell more hardware.

On the other hand, this may just be a gift to Dell and other Windows Server vendors in the future. I understand the value of running Solaris and Windows Server on the same machine, but can't see why someone with the need for Sun's heavy iron to plop Windows on there just to run Exchange, for example.

It's working for HP and Dell (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20580961)

And Sun wants a piece of that action. SGI was going downhill long before they made a few NT boxen.

Sun has done this before (2, Informative)

Roadkills-R-Us (122219) | more than 7 years ago | (#20581417)

OK, not exactly this, but they attempted to straddle the fence. It failed last time.

It was the Roadrunner 386i, which came out in 1988. It was a 386 system running SunOS (or was it Solaris by then? I forget) with a daughter board and co-processor to run DOS (not Windows, IIRC). I know, because I developed applications on it! The best part was that the beta release of the OS (bundled with their wonderful FORTRAN compiler!!!!) came on a stack of floppies several inches thick. Took a while to IPL or upgrade...

Anyway, Sun survived that debacle, and I suspect they'll survive this one. This time, the product may even survive as well!

Re:Hey, it worked for SGI... (1)

linumax (910946) | more than 7 years ago | (#20581893)

It works for IBM and HP.

Another nail in the StorNext coffin (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20579349)

Sorry Quantum, StorNext [wikipedia.org] is dead, as are you.

Ars Technica coverage (5, Funny)

Nimey (114278) | more than 7 years ago | (#20579365)

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20070912-sun-to-sell-windows-server-boxes.html [arstechnica.com]

Notice the so-funny-yet-true chart towards the bottom.

What I want from Sun (2, Insightful)

Colin Smith (2679) | more than 7 years ago | (#20579523)

The FASTEST most powerful machines I can fit in my datacentres.

Simple.

 

Re:Ars Technica coverage (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20579587)

Heh, so true indeed. Sun seem to be heading in the right direction overall, but certainly not in a straight line ...

Attention: Not 1998. (5, Informative)

fm6 (162816) | more than 7 years ago | (#20581421)

The author of that article knows jack. We (I'm the documentation lead for a couple of Sun x64 boxes) have been selling and supporting Windows servers for some time. We have a fair number of people working on Windows-related software, QA, support, and documentation (including me). We've even contributed some source code to a couple of open-source products in order to make them work better on Windows.

What we haven't been doing is selling servers with Windows pre-installed, or providing install discs with our drivers already on them. We couldn't do these things without an OEM agreement. Now we can. That will mean less work for me and various other Sun people, and (much more important) fewer headaches for our customers.

Next time I see Jonathan Schwartz (no, we don't know each other, but we eat in the same cafeteria) I'll have to resist the urge to prostrate myself. I just hope he's working on similar deals with our other OS partners.

Don't get me wrong, I love Solaris. It's a beautiful OS. We'll always support it. (In fact, the x86/x64 version is a lot better supported than it was 8 years ago.) But our job is to meet our customers needs, not force our favorite technology down their throat.

Get it through your heads, folks: the Sun-Microsoft feud is over. And good riddance. It was bad for both companies.

Re:Attention: Not 1998. (1)

GaryOlson (737642) | more than 7 years ago | (#20582117)

Don't get me wrong, I love Solaris. It's a beautiful OS. We'll always support it.... But our job is to meet our customers needs, not force our favorite technology down their throat.
This customer requests Solaris hosts that can authenticate natively to an Active Directory domain. Yesterday would be a good delivery date.

Re:Attention: Not 1998. (1)

fm6 (162816) | more than 7 years ago | (#20582647)

I work on the hardware side, so I'm in no position to address that issue. I am curious as to what you mean by "native" authentication.

In any case, I suspect "yesterday" is not feasible. There's lots of stuff Sun should have done, but just at the moment we're concentrating on what we will do.

Re:Ars Technica coverage (1)

this great guy (922511) | more than 7 years ago | (#20581587)

This chart depicts how Sun used to be. But since Schwartz became Sun's CEO in April 2006, the company has been actually very focused on its goals (opensourcing its OS, CPUs, languages, increasing R&D, etc). Of particular interest is how Schwarts made the point in one of its recent blog entries [sun.com] , that his company is the perfect example of how you can make money from opensource products (since he became CEO, Sun has become profitable):

We did this while driving significant product transitions, going after new markets and product areas, and best of all, while aggressively moving the whole company to open source software (leading me to hope we can officially put to rest the question, "how will you make money?").

Hmmm (4, Interesting)

scubamage (727538) | more than 7 years ago | (#20579371)

Microsoft seems to be making a lot of buddy buddy partnerships for compatibility recently. The novell one made me think they're going to try pulling something, but now they're going for Sun? Hmmm, maybe M$ actually is trying to actually fix its interoperability issues? Theres got to be a catch here somewhere.

Fighting off Linux? (2, Interesting)

HerculesMO (693085) | more than 7 years ago | (#20579489)

Linux makes a lot of inroads against MS in the enterprise market.. maybe they are just trying to offer the best of both worlds, while maintaining the competitive nature of Sun and their own history, against the 'brand' of Linux that actually makes no money whatsoever. IBM makes money, Novell makes money.. Linux as a brand doesn't really make money at all, does it?

Re:Fighting off Linux? (2, Insightful)

setagllib (753300) | more than 7 years ago | (#20580549)

This may be difficult for some to understand, but Linux and projects like it don't need to make money, because they make wealth. Any improvement to a Linux system potentially improves the lives (and consequently productivity, efficiency, etc.) of its primary and secondary users, that is, the ones sitting on Linux machines and even the ones sitting on client machines accessing Linux servers. In general, you don't have to pay for the update, so you get it more or less free.

IBM, Red Hat, etc. know that this model is great for them, because Linux systems are developed collaboratively by pretty much the whole planet, to varying degrees. The companies get improved software for free, and improve it themselves as well, and fuel the ecosystem that makes it all practical. And at all steps along the way, everybody benefits. Even Microsoft couldn't survive in a true Microsoft monopoly, because, well, have you ever *used* a Windows Server?

Re:Fighting off Linux? (1)

mabhatter654 (561290) | more than 7 years ago | (#20582299)

you hit the point that Linux does not make money for developers but wealth for users. The REAL Microsoft monopoly is on mindshare that they (or somebody) need to be paid (however small) to make computers work. While lots of companies are "embracing" Linux most are using it as a "fad" to sink you into their products more.. never giving you the things you really need (like drivers) trying to bring "free" to their side. Microsoft is trying to get "free" under control so people don't think they can use computers for free and just pay for hardware and the software that makes them money... Microsoft is like Walmart, built on providing the same "crap" to everybody. If something changes that, then game over if you can just break Active Directory, Exchange, and Office. Microsoft is buying the competition so they don't have to actually compete.

Re:Fighting off Linux? (1)

ChatHuant (801522) | more than 7 years ago | (#20581595)

Linux makes a lot of inroads against MS in the enterprise market..

I know this is the conventional wisdom around those parts, but it doesn't seem to be the case: here [informationweek.com] is an article that indicates the share of both Windows and Linux servers growing in businesses, while Unix usage dropped dramatically. And in related news, another recent article here [enterprise...ervers.com] shows IIS 6 making inroads against Apache. So Sun's decision does make economic sense.

Hidden agenda (1)

canuck57 (662392) | more than 7 years ago | (#20579547)

I am sure there is a hidden agenda. M$ is up to something, with Novell partnership as well. Maybe Microsoft Linux is coming and Sun wants in for the server hardware sales? Maybe punishment for Dell offering Linux as HP is also getting in the act. Or just perhaps a realization that a real server runs xNIX.

What if Microsoft bought Sun and Novell?

This of course this is just conjecture. But one thing is for sure, M$ is up to something.

Or maybe as the old saying goes, keep your enemies closer...

Re:Hidden agenda (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20579621)

Ooooh, you used a dollar sign to spell Microsoft! That's so original!

Re:Hidden agenda (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20579673)

AND shows a high level of maturity, too!

Re:Hidden agenda (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20579915)

Get over it. MS loves money so it's honorable to say M$. For the love of MONEY!

Re:Hmmm (1)

marcello_dl (667940) | more than 7 years ago | (#20579611)

Microsoft has pulled something with the novell deal, scaring biz into getting "safe" open source software.

This agreement with Sun seems relevant for image more than substance. If MS or Sun virtualization didn't work well with most popular OSs, people would choose another one which is more flexible. They have no dominant position to exploit in the virtualization market.

Re:Hmmm (1)

nurb432 (527695) | more than 7 years ago | (#20579677)

There is a catch, and i guarantee its in Microsoft's favor.

We will find out soon enough, im afraid.

The Catch. (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20579817)

Microsoft seems to be making a lot of buddy buddy partnerships for compatibility recently. The novell one made me think they're going to try pulling something, but now they're going for Sun? Hmmm, maybe M$ actually is trying to actually fix its interoperability issues? Theres got to be a catch here somewhere.

Yeah there's a catch alright. The "catch" is that there's fixing to be a Democrat in the whitehouse come January of 2009. And there's also going to be Democrat party controlled both houses of congress. And Microsoft knows there's nothing they can do to prevent this inevitability from coming, and the certain revival of the anti-trust court actions which they were able to weasel out of any effective punishment for nearly a decade under the Republican administration. Microsoft is now building up what they hope will be seen as a plausible defense against that. MS may be evil, but they're certainly not stupid.

No brainer (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20582115)

Ya jim-bob, thats why we gots us some heavy democrat funding already going on here at MSFT to help with that thar election yer speakin' of:

http://www.opensecrets.org/industries/contrib.asp?Ind=B12&cycle=2006 [opensecrets.org]

We're fixin' to be the top in the industry... Hyuk!

Re:The Catch. (1)

LaughingCoder (914424) | more than 7 years ago | (#20582129)

It seems that the facts disprove your theory: http://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/summary.asp?ID=D000000115 [opensecrets.org] In the past 4 years Microsoft has been giving more to Democrats than Republicans. In fact they gave almost twice as much in 2004 to Democrats as they did to Republicans. In 1992 they gave 4X as much to the Dems. In 1996 they gave 2X as much to the Dems.

Lackies (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20579971)


Hi! I am Sun and I am a microsoft lacky! Please buy our hardware!

Re:Hmmm (2, Insightful)

FrozenFOXX (1048276) | more than 7 years ago | (#20580703)

No doubt about a catch. I don't wanna sound like a anti-MS-troll or anything but their track record isn't all that great; a little paranoia would probably be a good thing "just in case." I'm not an expert but I'd imagine if they were trying to "pull something" then it'd be trying to soften up the community to the idea of making more things work FOR Microsoft products without giving anything back, kinda like what I'm told happened between the Wine group and Transgaming. I could be wrong, who knows but MS?

Re:Hmmm (1)

jt2377 (933506) | more than 7 years ago | (#20583059)

I don't think how this can turn into Linux vs. Windows. It seem like everything on Slashdot is all about Linux vs. Windows. This is very common in the business world. Sun's old CEO Scott were on the pissing game with Microsoft and it got Sun what? Some pitty cash from Microsoft for the JVM and lose everything! You forge partnership when it benefit you and part away when it doesn't. It's a simple Business 101.

darthvader (0)

tanveer1979 (530624) | more than 7 years ago | (#20579375)

Sun does a darth Vader? Tag suggestion : darthvader

Talk about timing (4, Funny)

tb3 (313150) | more than 7 years ago | (#20579457)

So Sun got themselves a Cluster File System and a Cluster Fuck System on the same day?

Re:Talk about timing (1)

ScrewMaster (602015) | more than 7 years ago | (#20579469)

I think the Cluster Fuck is in Sun's boardroom.

Interesting (3, Insightful)

El Lobo (994537) | more than 7 years ago | (#20579461)

Interesting that with all these deals everybody is (as always, duh) critisizing Microsoft for "Extending and Embracing", but almost anybody is failing to see that it is in reallity THE OTHER PARTS who are trying to get some oxygen by teaming with the big guy. It's a SYMBIOSIS, people when everybody involved gets something good for them. And in the end, the winners are we, the users, because if we left the ********funny ideologies********* aside, nothing wrong have come with peace and understanding. Ever.

Re:Interesting (1)

melted keyboard (798559) | more than 7 years ago | (#20579893)

Despair Inc has a few things to say about people working [despair.com] in groups... [despair.com]

Re:Interesting (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20580191)

How come this guy El Lobo (994537) has been trolling in favor of Microsoft for years and still gets modded insightful?
I mean i know there are lots of corporate monkeys with mod points here, but instant +3, Insightful? Really...

Re:Interesting (1)

El Lobo (994537) | more than 7 years ago | (#20580455)

Well, just because, i'm not trolling. It's so easy as that. Yes, it's true that slash dot is full of zealots of every kind and most of the time when they see the world Linuzzz, or Open Source or Apple or Google, most people just salivate, while seeing the word Microsoft just provokes an automatical repulse. Fortunatly, this seems to be changing, and more and more people are trying to *think* instead that acting like Pavlov's dogs and people (yes even here) are beginning to realize that not everything is white or black, but that there is a full spectrum of 32000 colors there in between: MS is not the devil, nor an angel, Stallman is not the devil but neither is he an angel, Apple is a corporation and acts as such, Linuzzz is just another OS with it's good sides (many) and bad sides (many), Open Source is not the Holy Grail, nor are commercial apps, and so on... Thinking is the key. Whith your brains, not with your heart.

Re:Interesting (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20580553)

You should tell yourself that little story. Maybe next time your sig won't contain an insult on Linux or Apple (at least the last 3 of them did).

Re:Interesting (0, Troll)

El Lobo (994537) | more than 7 years ago | (#20580787)

So having a MS (or, to speak the /. language, M$) insulting signature would be politically correct in this place? Because this ******seems to be the norm here******** and few pwople react, but my sigs seem to, for some reason, provoque moral panic in this place.... And BTW where is the insult on my sig? Is called sarcasm. Or are you telling me that there are holy things you can't joke about here? Is Linuzz teh Holy Word?

Re:Interesting (1)

Hucko (998827) | more than 7 years ago | (#20581091)

so, are you twitter or is twitter you?

Sadly... (2, Interesting)

jd (1658) | more than 7 years ago | (#20580235)

That is completely bogus much of the time. Take-overs are rarely in the interest of the company being taken over, even when the board approves it. Money talks louder than pride of craftsmanship. It has done for centuries. It's not going to change.

Now, let's consider what Sun gets out of Lustre. This is clearly competition against Polyserve's take-over by HP, as there simply aren't any other rivals to Luster that Sub could have been threatened by. By all accounts, however, Polyserve's products were superior and it is unlikely Sun can survive a direct confrontation with what is (relatively speaking) not much more than a toothpick.

Microsoft? Their Cluster Edition has minimal clustering capability, is truly painful to use, suffers from horrible network filesystem access, and really should be put out of its misery. (I'd suggest finding a suitable volcano and dropping all copies of the source code into it.)

CFS, then! Beep, wrong answer! ClusterFS stand to lose their top developers (that's the usual consequence of such a merger), Sun just don't understand OSS and have a near-xenophobic reaction towards Linux, and precisely because the politics will be very hot, it will be impossible for third-paries to propose any necessary hooks or speedups. Everyone'll be too focussed on the battle.

So Sun and Microsoft get no tangible benefit beyond the elimination of a potential competitor who they could never have matched on a fair playing field. Linux? 1% of the market and the rate of rising is so slow that you could probably find the correct asymptotic equation for it. Besides, when has Microsft ever done anything that wasn't money-making?

There will be no winners in this takeover, only losers. GFS is so dead and beyond the grave that only zombies use it. Oracle OFS2 is no better, abandoned by Oracle themselves and suffering from really bad latency. At least that explains why Mr. Whitham worships at its feet - fools will follow fools. Intermezzo? Merged, abandoned and then unmerged. What a complete waste of time for the core kernel developers. CODA? Right, when did they last do a new tarball?

There are questions as to whether a DFS is even needed - if you can migrate code to data, on the grounds that data is going to typically larger anyway - then you are moving everything from process space to process space (so don't need a filesystem for the processes) and local data would be locally seen. A few people have tried this idea out with mixed success.

I'll wrap up by saying that yes, the little guys do need oxygen. But they're thrice fools if they buy it from the people who shoved them in the airlock in the first place. You seriously think that people who have a long history of betraying users, betraying employees, betraying legal obligations and betraying those in an alliance with it should be trusted with ANYTHING? You think that treachery and financial debauchery didn't play a bigger factor in the death of Spyglass than some perceived "accidental" conflict in their relationship? If a serial spouse abuser gets hauled up in court for the tenth time for the same crime, you'd have to be dumber than beyond to seriously believe the person without some damn convincing evidence.

So why treat this any different? We know about the copyright violations by Microsoft, the open willingness to "murder" in some sense the competition, the open and knowing violation of anti-trust laws, the willingness to ignore reasonable and direct court orders and demands, and so on. If their users can be considered married to their product, Microsoft is guilty of spousal abuse on a grand scale for decades.

What else is different? There's no symbiosis. There's nothing in common between Sun and Microsoft. The don't even use the same type of CPU. Nor is there any between Sun and Linux. Sun's attitudes in the past five to ten years has been nothing short of disgusting. They get CFS and I pretty much guarantee you won't see a damn thing, if they ever distribute anything at all. Don't assume they will. CFS has no strategic value to either party, so the only option left is that it is going to be used in a way that is threatening, hostile and soul-destroying. Neither of these wants Lustre for Lustre, they want weapons of intellectual destruction and those have been achieved.

Re:Sadly... (1)

max cohen (163682) | more than 7 years ago | (#20580469)

GFS is so dead and beyond the grave that only zombies use it.

Is that a typo for CFS, or are you really saying that about GFS, global file system?

Re:Sadly... (1)

jd (1658) | more than 7 years ago | (#20580755)

I'm saying that about GFS, the global file system which has a horrible track record (corrupting disks across entire networks was the most dramatic I've heard). It may be in the kernel, but it gets precious little maintenance and those I have discussed it with (primarily users) have preferred almost anything else - even (gasp!) NFS - to using GFS. Of the major users I've encountered with heavy-duty networked filesystem arrangements, they use Lustre or Polyserve. That is the the entire list of what they are willing to stomach. The alternatives aren't even close. Both have been bought out by companies with histories of ditching those product lines that were any good, making it frighteningly likely that neither alternative will survive for much longer.

Re:Sadly... (1)

JerkBoB (7130) | more than 7 years ago | (#20581009)

Of the major users I've encountered with heavy-duty networked filesystem arrangements, they use Lustre or Polyserve. That is the the entire list of what they are willing to stomach. The alternatives aren't even close. Both have been bought out by companies with histories of ditching those product lines that were any good, making it frighteningly likely that neither alternative will survive for much longer.

The nice thing about Lustre, though, is that it's Open Source. True, Sun may decide to start offering non-OSS features to paying customers, or even conceivably take the whole thing closed-license. But, they can't take back what's already out there, and what's out there is a kickass DFS with awful management tools.

Given that many of the world's top supercomputers use Lustre, I am sure that at the very least a community will form to maintain the current code base. I wouldn't be at all surprised if some of the non-Sun players started trying to poach Lustre talent (I'm looking at you, Cray) so that they are not completely beholden to Sun for Lustre support and new features.

Interesting times in the HPC world, for sure. As for Winderz on Sun hardware? Puh-leez. The whole reason people buy Sun hardware is because it's what Solaris runs best on. Love it or hate it, Solaris is one of the best unices out there for certain applications (think telecoms, banking, etc.).

Running SunOS Under Windows VM? (1)

Filter (6719) | more than 7 years ago | (#20579497)

Running SunOS Under Windows VM? Holy Crap!

Re:Running SunOS Under Windows VM? (1)

ackthpt (218170) | more than 7 years ago | (#20579957)

Running SunOS Under Windows VM? Holy Crap!

No doubt, this looks arse-backward to me too. Where once the world was run on operating systems neatly tailored to their hardware, we have pretty well gone the direction of a Jack-of-all-trades-master-of-none OS bodged into a nearly infinite combination of hardware, which means its rarely optimised for the hardware, you usually guess at a lot of things before you give up and say, 'feck it, it's good enough' and as a result of the fine fit it often goes tits up with a not so humourous BSoD. Back when Sun was a giant, creating the sort of hardware geeks lusted for, did anyone ever think they'd see the day Sun would be peddling the Wal-Mart of computers?

The end for Sun (1)

ackthpt (218170) | more than 7 years ago | (#20579511)

On this path they'll be another Gateway or Dell.

Sun set already (1)

EmbeddedJanitor (597831) | more than 7 years ago | (#20579773)

Many of the best technical people at Sun have already left. The same happened to SCO too. Is Sun another SCO in the making (a once-good company that just runs out of steam and decomposes) or can they turn it around?

Sun has no brand presence amongst the Windows faithful so it is very difficult to see them making an effective box business.

Re:Sun set already (1)

larry bagina (561269) | more than 7 years ago | (#20580059)

Sun is the 5 windows server OEM (that's an upward trend).

or HP or IBM (1)

flaming-opus (8186) | more than 7 years ago | (#20580589)

Who both have windows server boxes, as well as linux and high-end unix and mainframe products. These guys are trying to be an end-to-end provider of servers, software, storage, and middleware. Sun was cutting themselves out of a big chunk of business. Champion whatever cause you like, but there aren't very many data centers without windows servers in them. From the point of view of the sun salesman, you can either have a machine room full of suns and HPs, or you can have a machine room full of suns and suns alone. What they want to avoid, is the machine room full of HP and HP alone.

Re:or HP or IBM (2, Informative)

ToasterMonkey (467067) | more than 7 years ago | (#20581731)

Sun seems to want to use Linux and now Windows to get their foot in the door and offer other services/hardware.

sun the innovator (1)

dankelley (573611) | more than 7 years ago | (#20579553)

Whether this make business sense, only time will tell. As a money-losing Sun investor, I sure hope so. As a two-decade Sun purchaser, it's hard to see this as the sort of innovation for which Sun was once known.

Re:sun the innovator (2, Insightful)

QuantumRiff (120817) | more than 7 years ago | (#20580079)

Sun has containers.. Sun is also working on other virtualization stuff.. Lets say I need a Solaris box for my DB, and a Windows server for my App.. Do I buy a $10k sun box for the DB, and a $5k box for windows, both with different hardware, warranties and contracts to keep track of, etc, or do I buy a $15k box, put Solaris on it, and Run windows under a VM? Keep in mind that i still need a license to run windows in the VM, so I would rather buy it all from the same company for support and simplicity. Now, after this, do I pay $ for VMWare, or do I use the free Solaris VM software (that sun signed this contract today for), allowing me to spend $15k+$ on the server, and get even more performance... (or just spend less money). Now, I get more bang for the buck, Better hardware performance, and One vendor to go to for ANY Problem on the system! That does sound like innovation (when innovation is defined as not throwing the customer all over the place, pointing fingers at the "other" company, while your critical systems are down!)

Re:sun the innovator (1)

TheRaven64 (641858) | more than 7 years ago | (#20580241)

For this kind of thing, you would probably run Xen, rather than use a Solaris container. Containers don't provide a different kernel; you can use them to run virtual Linux environments because Solaris has Linux ABI support, but that's it. You would, instead, be more likely to use Xen. Fortunately, Solaris runs as a Xen Domain 0 guest (as does Linux and NetBSD 4).

Re:sun the innovator (1)

pjr.cc (760528) | more than 7 years ago | (#20581967)

Agree'd.

The sun x86 boxes are really quite nice unto themselves, but its not the "Sun" i grew up with and that is a bit disappointing. Ironic when you look back and think they almost canned x86 solaris at v9/8.

The E class servers they used to make where briliant, i still know places using e450's, e[3456]500 and even e[3456]000. Such a pity they couldnt have continued the way they were going. Thats not too say they've killing their e-line and unix, far from it but the things you used to expect from sun in the big-ass-box era are fast drawing to a close.

And now they're a windows OEM - HAHAhahahah. Might as well just buy my x86 servers from Dell now i guess.

Will Apple do the same? (1)

makellan (550215) | more than 7 years ago | (#20579555)

Apple doesn't make its own virtualization software, but even for the purposes of BootCamp, would this be an option for them? Letting me buy my next tower with both OS' preinstalled and working well together would save me enough hassle that I'd pay for it.

Re:Will Apple do the same? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20580283)

I think this deal with Sun goes both ways (and if I were Microsoft that would certainly be a condition). So I would guess not unless you could buy a Windows tower running a copy of OSX under virtualization and not just a OSX tower running Windows under virtualization.

It makes sense for Sun (4, Informative)

brennz (715237) | more than 7 years ago | (#20579603)

They have some nice boxes [sun.com] . I'm sure some admins would like to run Windows on them.

I'd like an X4600 so I could throw VMware ESX on it

Just when you think Sun are recovering... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20579681)

another schizoid episode. How well did becoming a Windows OEM work out for SGI?

Microsoft want to own the virtualization market, they want everything else running on top of a Windows hypervisor. They want to tie Windows DRM to the hardware and lock other operating systems out. Sun would be better of reneging on this deal, it'll end up hurting them and their customers.

Lotsa x86 Boxen (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20579761)

Sun wants to sell lots of x86 boxes. To do so, it would behoove them to be a Windows OEM. Simple. And if Microsoft refuses, then they are being anticompetitive - this would seem like a poor choice of a place to be anticompetitive for Microsoft - there are much better ways - haha. Since both Microsoft and Sun have their own virtualization technologies, it would make sense for them to look at virtualization interoperability with each other as a way to maybe grab a slice of the virtualization money pie from VMWare. Microsoft to be sure is at a point where it needs to hedge its bets with Virtualization. If VMWare succeeds in getting broad adoption by the major server vendors of the newly announced ESX Server 3i embedded hypervisor, [vmware.com] then VMWare has virtually (pun intended) locked in a crucial component of the next big thing in the data center.

And the verdict is... (4, Funny)

swordgeek (112599) | more than 7 years ago | (#20579813)

Let's see here. It's a Wednesday, and the date is an even number in a month with 30 days. On the other hand, the moon is just past new, Britney Spears' performance at the VMAs bombed, and oil broke $80/barrel today.

Clearly Sun is EVIL on /. today.

Sorry, it's Sun that's Schizophrenic (4, Interesting)

walterbyrd (182728) | more than 7 years ago | (#20580127)

Yes techies flip-flop on their opinion of Sun. But, that is because Sun flip-flops on Sun's strategies, and opinions, like mad.

Penguine suit McNeally *loves* linux. Then sun joins with scox to kill Linux. Then sun tells us that only sun linux is legal. Then sun tells that linux is great - but only as a desktop, not a server. Finally sun tells us that linux is java.

Sun's official opinions on msft, and on x86 technology, have been equally schitzo. One day sun curses msft as an evil company, with crap technology, the next day, sun is msft's biggest bestest buddy in the whole wide world. One day sun sneers at all things x86, the next day sun is releasing x86 solaris - then sun is cranking out x86 windows boxes.

So when sun stops flip-flopping on everything, maybe people will stop flip-flopping on their opinions about sun.

Re:Sorry, it's Sun that's Schizophrenic (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20581293)

Sun's struggled to finds its direction after the tech boom but you may think they've flipflopped more than they really have because some of your characterizations are exaggerated or dishonest.

> Then sun joins with scox to kill Linux.

Sun buys the rights to x86 drivers that they need from the company that apparently held them and that's "joins with scox to kill Linux"? I don't remember any actions Sun took together with SCO. Since you've bought a laptop with Windows on it, I guess you've "joined with msft to kill Linux".

> Then sun tells us that only sun linux is legal.
> Finally sun tells us that linux is java.

When did these happen? Got references?

Re:Sorry, it's Sun that's Schizophrenic (1)

walterbyrd (182728) | more than 7 years ago | (#20581617)

>>Sun buys the rights to x86 drivers that they need from the company that apparently held them and that's "joins with scox to kill Linux"? Then sun tells us that only sun linux is legal.
> Finally sun tells us that linux is java.

2003, shortly after sun joined msft in sponsoring the scox-scam. McNeally said something like: "of course we are very exicted to have the only legal version of linux on the market." You can research it yourself. Sun calls their version of linux "Java Desktop." Java? WTF? It's Linux.

Hmmmmm lets just sell our competitors product (0, Troll)

codepunk (167897) | more than 7 years ago | (#20579815)

I guess when faced with a runaway monopoly there is not much left that you can do other than sell your competitors software to make a buck.

It starts with the hardware ... (1)

garphik (996984) | more than 7 years ago | (#20582759)

It starts with the hardware,
who knows probably a few weeks later we might see a new prog. paradigm .JET

uh huh (2, Insightful)

SolusSD (680489) | more than 7 years ago | (#20579883)

A solid virtualization experience for both OSs. I'm sure that's what MS is after.

So what? Sun is not what they used to be. (1)

walterbyrd (182728) | more than 7 years ago | (#20579923)

In the 1990s, Sun was awsome. Sun created amazing technologies, and set the standards. Now Sun just provides commodity products and services. If Sun wants to be another winbox maker, so what. Frankly, it suits Sun.

These days, Sun is more interested in cutting costs, than developing cutting-edge technology.

Re:So what? Sun is not what they used to be. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20580207)

What the hell is wrong with you? Do you even know what the hell Sun develops?

Not cutting edge technology? Oh yes, because ZFS, Dtrace, and the easy maintenance of zones surely was around on every other OS!

Learn what the hell you're talking about before pretending to know what you're talking about.

Re:So what? Sun is not what they used to be. (1)

kwerle (39371) | more than 7 years ago | (#20580855)

Really, not trolling.

What did SUN ever do that was amazing? They made some good, big hardware. What else?

I happen to like a lot about Java, and made a living coding in it for a bunch of years, but I won't ever code in it again if I can avoid it. For all that, I think Java was a lucky fluke, and they have mostly let it rot since 1.1.

And I hear that ZFS is real cool, though I have yet to experience it - and I've used a netapp fileserver and thought it was wonderful. OK, that's 2 things I'm giving them some credit for (other than big hardware). What else?

Re:So what? Sun is not what they used to be. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20581495)

"I've used a netapp fileserver and thought it was wonderful."

Good thing Sun gave Netapp a business to be in by inventing RPC and NFS [wikipedia.org] and making them open more than 20 years ago!

Without a relatively open (in terms of standards) company like Sun in the '90s there very well may not have been a GNU or a Linux.

Re:So what? Sun is not what they used to be. (2, Insightful)

walterbyrd (182728) | more than 7 years ago | (#20581667)

> What did SUN ever do that was amazing?

Although nothing special by today's statndards: NFS, NIS, and Java, were innovative, and important technologies, at the time.

Re:So what? Sun is not what they used to be. (1)

GuyverDH (232921) | more than 7 years ago | (#20581027)

WTF are you smoking?

Today's SUN products clearly outshine, outperform, and outrun the products of the 90s.

Just to name a few...

Software:
Solaris 10
ZFS
Containers
DTrace

Hardware:
X4500 - Cheapest 12/24/36 TB system with most reliable filesystem available.
T1000/T2000 - Best web services systems currently available - from any vendor.

Joanthan Schwartz, the friendly (1)

G3ckoG33k (647276) | more than 7 years ago | (#20579943)

One thing that has struck me is that Joanthan Schwartz appears to be a friendly guy. Why would a company that big need friends?! Poor economy? Lack of direction and ideas? Or, even larger enemies? Or the threat from Linux? Hmmm... Wonder if a dinner with Linus Torvalds would have made a difference here.

Re:Joanthan Schwartz, the friendly (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20580731)

It's just simple new-fashioned coopetition. IBM's pretty good at this. Other's will learn this too, including Microsoft, who is slowly realizing that the embrace, extend, extinguish paradigm is pretty impotent in a F/OSS world. Especially when you're not so good at your core competency (software development) anymore.

lustre cvs is down? Current source for lustre? (1)

thule (9041) | more than 7 years ago | (#20580375)

I tried to grabe the lastest source and their cvs server listed on their wiki page is down. The article didn't mention the GPL at all. Is Sun keeping lustre under GPL?

Re:lustre cvs is down? Current source for lustre? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20581717)

I tried to grab the latest source and the cvs server listed on their wiki page is down.

It's due to incompetent admins, not some evil plan by Sun. Really, their IT "group" (it's 2.5 guys, only one based in the US) is a bunch of knuckleheads. Posting anon for obvious reasons.

Crap. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20580389)

Lustre+Linux was competitive with ZFS+Solaris. Have to wonder how HP let this happen - HP SFS is based on Lustre. Now HP is Sun's bitch?

Oh wait. Lustre is GPLed, HP, Linux, Lustre all still okay. RMS proven right one more time.

 

Ah Yes... (4, Insightful)

Greyfox (87712) | more than 7 years ago | (#20580489)

The SGI Maneuver. Let us know how that works out for you. History has a short memory of the also-rans. Will anyone know who Sun was in a decade?

The big UNIX vendors blew it. They rested on their laurels when they should have been improving the system and researching new ways for people to interact with computers. Soon only IBM will be left and I think they're too smart and too well diversified to die that way. They adapted their business model as deftly as a company of several hundred thousand possibly could.

I think Apple is the UNIX company of the future. They've shown that they can put a pretty face on UNIX. You don't even have to know that it is UNIX. Their nifty little devices run UNIX and interact with people in very unique ways. They didn't take that long to develop, either. A fraction of the time the big UNIX vendors wasted sitting around arguing about "standards" and deriding PCs as "toys."

I'm just glad that if another UNIX vendor goes under, more or less, I still won't have to program for Microsoft platforms.

Re:Ah Yes... (1)

kildurin (938538) | more than 7 years ago | (#20581265)

Um, Sun was working and is working with Apple today. A friend of mine who works at Sun is looking for a new laptop. There are 3 offered. 1 Toshiba, and 2 Apple Macs. My friends and I were trying to convince him to go for the Mac. Problem is he has a lot of Solaris Demo's to give and the Mac is not quite as Solaris friendly.

Re:Ah Yes... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20581325)

I think Apple is the UNIX company of the future.


BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH

Re:Ah Yes... (1)

samkass (174571) | more than 7 years ago | (#20581433)

They didn't take that long to develop, either.

Only, what... 20 years or so of development... NeXTstep came out in the late 80's.

I'm just glad that if another UNIX vendor goes under, more or less, I still won't have to program for Microsoft platforms.

You'll almost certainly have Java still available to you whether or not Sun goes under, now that it's open source.

Re:Ah Yes... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20581501)

I think Apple is the UNIX company of the future. They've shown that they can put a pretty face on UNIX. You don't even have to know that it is UNIX.

Are we still talking about servers? Because if we are, "pretty" has nothing to do with it. I'd rather have a decent NFS implementation or a launchd which actually replaces SysV and StartupItems rather than just adding another layer of complexity, thank you.

On the other hand, if you just mean that Apple will sell the most UNIX boxen in general, then I think they're the UNIX company of _today_...

UNIX blew it by fragmenting the market, IMO. (1)

walterbyrd (182728) | more than 7 years ago | (#20581739)

In the early 90s, before NT had a foothold, UNIX could have taken over the server market.

The problem was: which UNIX? The major vendors gave lip service to integrating standards, but actually the majors were more interested in protecting their own turf. So you couldn't write a program for one UNIX, and expect it to run on another. Supporting the product would have been another huge headache. Also, UNIX was very expensive.

Microsoft stepped in and solved the problem.

JMHO.

Cats and dogs (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20581117)

living together!

In other news (2, Funny)

Nazlfrag (1035012) | more than 7 years ago | (#20581907)

Botnet creators announced that they would work together with Sun to utilise their new Microsoft capabilities to the fullest extent.

Unrelated topics actually. (2, Insightful)

Jacques Chester (151652) | more than 7 years ago | (#20582351)

It's a pity these two topics were smooshed together because they have very little to do with each other.

The Windows thing is obvious. Sun sell Opteron boxes and it helps their marketing if they're an official Windows OEM.

The filesystem stuff is much more interesting. It seems to me that the Lustre purchase is to fill a gap in the ZFS firmament: distribution. ZFS as it currently exists only works on single computers. The natural next step is to allow simple clustering. I imagine they did the old buy-vs-build weighoff before deciding to buy an existing clustering fs technology.

It may also be that Lustre is the subject of patents that might be useful to own were -- just a hypothetical here -- a NAS/SAN company were to start a lawsuit regarding ZFS.

Note to self: RTFPR (1)

Jacques Chester (151652) | more than 7 years ago | (#20582377)

It's there in black-and-white in the press release: "As previously announced in July 2007, Sun also plans to deliver Lustre servers on top of Sun's industry-leading open source Solaris ZFS solution".

Well, this'll be a total clusterfsck. (2, Funny)

seebs (15766) | more than 7 years ago | (#20582429)

Oh, come on. It was inevitable.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?