Sun Microsystems Swings to Big Quarterly Loss

Discussions

News: Sun Microsystems Swings to Big Quarterly Loss

  1. Sun Microsystems Swings to Big Quarterly Loss (81 messages)

    Battered by competition and slowing demand, Sun Microsystems Inc. swung to a big loss in its fiscal first quarter, dragging the server and software maker's results below Wall Street's forecast. Sun also plans to write down the value of its business, a sign of the company's deteriorating competitive position and vulnerability to the economic meltdown. Shares fell more than 8 percent in after-hours trading. Read the rest here: http://tech.yahoo.com/news/ap/20081020/ap_on_hi_te/sun_microsystems_outlook This is primarily a financial posting, but the financial health of Sun has an impact on its ability to remain a leader in Java. The largest part of the write-off looks to be on the Storage Technology acquisition, but one wonders if a part of it is also directed at the $1 billion MySQL purchase.

    Threaded Messages (81)

  2. Battered by competition and slowing demand, Sun Microsystems Inc. swung to a big loss in its fiscal first quarter...
    IMHO, Sun is typical example what happens when incompetent management is leading the enterprise. Speaking from the software development perspective, I have check various open source projects and platforms, and in terms of code quality and functionality Sun solutions have always been at the top, if not the best. It is rather sad to see how management fails to monetize tech expertize. Cant speak about hardware/chip department at Sun, but at software (Java) department, they definitely have knowledge and expertize, and they have products with high quality. If I was Sun shareholder I would be pretty much pissed off at management for failing to their job. One (our of many) questions I would have for Sun executives: You (Sun) created the JavaSpaces model and yet you failed to monetize it, leaving it to others to cash you investment in research. Wtf?
  3. Not surprising at all[ Go to top ]

    Java rapidly falls behind .NET stack. SPARC is killed by x86. OpenSolaris fails to get adoption. The writing is on the wall.
  4. Re: Not surprising at all[ Go to top ]

    Java rapidly falls behind .NET stack.
    Yawn. http://www.tiobe.com/index.php/content/paperinfo/tpci/index.html Those C#' 3% look pretty strong champ, don't they?
  5. Re: Not surprising at all[ Go to top ]

    Java rapidly falls behind .NET stack.


    Yawn.

    http://www.tiobe.com/index.php/content/paperinfo/tpci/index.html

    Those C#' 3% look pretty strong champ, don't they?
    9.87% for VB + 3.7% for C# = 13.57% And I don't think TIOBE is a good measurement of performance. Right now I see that Java has nothing to counter new MS technologies like WPF and LINQ. They are really good.
  6. Re: Not surprising at all[ Go to top ]

    I fail to see the correlation between Java adoption and Sun's profitability. They mainly generate revenue from a. Hardware sells, b. Software licensing, and c. trying hopelessly to monetize OSS software. "a" is the problem for them right now. "b" and "c" are an utter disaster, as the clowns in charge don't have any clue about running an OSS business. We can only hope that some of MySQL's philosophy rubs off on them. Roy Russo http://www.loopfuse.com
  7. RE: Microsoft[ Go to top ]

    I'd agree with the rise and increased prevalence of .NET and C#, but I disagree with the why. Microsoft's strengths are far superior stability, and superior integration across a large stack of technologies, and industry critical mass. LINQ/WPF are just trendy buzzwords: LINQ is basically a Hibernate/JPA clone and WPF is nice, but it's just an desktop GUI framework. OpenOffice, NetBeans, and MySQL are much buggier and harder to integrate than Microsoft alternatives. Java by itself is great, but full software stacks built on Java are generally harder to integrate and maintain.
  8. Re: RE: Microsoft[ Go to top ]

    LINQ is basically a Hibernate/JPA clone
    I think actually LINQ is a query language/API only, in a refactorable form. JPA is an API for persistence *and* querying, and its query language is JPQL, which uses string form, rather than refactorable form. So not exactly a clone.
  9. Re: LINQ = Hibernate/JPA[ Go to top ]

    LINQ is basically a Hibernate/JPA clone

    I think actually LINQ is a query language/API only, in a refactorable form. JPA is an API for persistence *and* querying, and its query language is JPQL, which uses string form, rather than refactorable form. So not exactly a clone.
    Microsoft definitely did make improvements, particularly making the query language a true compiled and integrated language rather than just using plain strings within the language, and I know that's the Microsoft speaking point, but in general, it's definitely the same overall thing as Hibernate/JPA. They all fit neatly in the category of attribute/annotation based ORM systems. And personally, I think all of them are far better at making developers feel smarter rather than delivering practical improvements to software development.
  10. RE: LINQ[ Go to top ]

    LINQ is basically a Hibernate/JPA clone

    I think actually LINQ is a query language/API only, in a refactorable form. JPA is an API for persistence *and* querying, and its query language is JPQL, which uses string form, rather than refactorable form. So not exactly a clone.


    Microsoft definitely did make improvements, particularly making the query language a true compiled and integrated language rather than just using plain strings within the language, and I know that's the Microsoft speaking point, but in general, it's definitely the same overall thing as Hibernate/JPA. They all fit neatly in the category of attribute/annotation based ORM systems. And personally, I think all of them are far better at making developers feel smarter rather than delivering practical improvements to software development.
  11. Re: LINQ = Hibernate/JPA[ Go to top ]

    Sorry correct response follows: LINQ: Does it offer concepts such as managed/detached Entities with support for optimistic transactions? I'm not 100% sure, but as far as I know, LINQ doesn't. Therefore, I'd claim that JPA is still way superior to LINQ and also to the ADO.NET Entity framework.
  12. Re: LINQ = Hibernate/JPA[ Go to top ]

    Sorry correct response follows:

    LINQ: Does it offer concepts such as managed/detached Entities with support for optimistic transactions? I'm not 100% sure, but as far as I know, LINQ doesn't.
    LINQ is Language INtegrated Query, it can be used as a front-end for SQL databases, NHibernate, in-memory collections, Amazon DB, or your custom in-house COBOL system. And yes, you'll get detachable entities if you use LINQ with NHibernate. Next version of ADO EF will also support them properly.
  13. Re: LINQ = Hibernate/JPA[ Go to top ]

    it's definitely the same overall thing as Hibernate/JPA.
    You said LINQ, *not* ADO.NET. LINQ is a query language. JPA is more than that, as is JDO. LINQ could be used *with* JPA for example.
  14. Re: LINQ = Hibernate/JPA[ Go to top ]

    Java is open source and a standard and if SUN right now the leader cant handle it anymore pass the flag to Google, Fujitsu, IBM, Oracle, etc. Anyway SUN doesn't innovate Java since the 90's. JavaFX?, It is a joke everybody knows. Its like you will tell me that Ruby or Python or PHP will be broken because this financial crisis hahaha that is insane. Java is Open Source and Free same as Ruby and Python and C, Java doesn't depend of a single entity anymore. "Java is FREE".
  15. Re: Not surprising at all[ Go to top ]

    Right now I see that Java has nothing to counter new MS technologies like WPF and LINQ. They are really good.
    I don't think LINQ has been around long enough to know whether it is "really good". The software industry has nothing equivalent of the FDA (food and drug administration). How many times have companies created the equivalent of anabolic steroids which do indeed increase productivity in the short term but in the long term shrink your balls to the size of peas? Figuratively, of course. LINQ may be the greatest thing ever but it's too soon to judge that (IMO) and it has the potential to be a really big sticky tar pit.
  16. Re: Not surprising at all[ Go to top ]

    Java rapidly falls behind .NET stack.


    Yawn.

    http://www.tiobe.com/index.php/content/paperinfo/tpci/index.html

    Those C#' 3% look pretty strong champ, don't they?


    9.87% for VB + 3.7% for C# = 13.57% And I don't think TIOBE is a good measurement of performance.
    Really? Please share your sources/numbers that can provide us a better measurement?
  17. Re: Not surprising at all[ Go to top ]

    Really? Please share your sources/numbers that can provide us a better measurement?
    http://jobsearch.monster.com/Search.aspx?re=130&cy=us&brd=1&JSNONREG=1&q=Java&jto=on&rad=20&rad_units=miles and http://jobsearch.monster.com/Search.aspx?re=130&cy=us&brd=1&JSNONREG=1&q=C%23&jto=on&rad=20&rad_units=miles
  18. Re: Not surprising at all[ Go to top ]

    Really? Please share your sources/numbers that can provide us a better measurement?


    http://jobsearch.monster.com/Search.aspx?re=130&cy=us&brd=1&JSNONREG=1&q=Java&jto=on&rad=20&rad_units=miles

    and

    http://jobsearch.monster.com/Search.aspx?re=130&cy=us&brd=1&JSNONREG=1&q=C%23&jto=on&rad=20&rad_units=miles
    Didn't get your point... The links you posted show 1962 Java ads against 852 C#... (Java wins by far...) Anyway, I'm glad to see you referencing job opportunities here, since I think this is really a good (and independent) measurement. By the way, we DO monitor such trends here in our company (and we have been doing it for a long time). For instance, last six collected data from Dice.com, ranging from 2008/05 to 2008/10 presented the following results (first number is Java, second number C#): 2008-May (15422/7732) 2008-Jun (15155/7461) 2008-Jul (15237/7569) 2008-Aug (15038/7572) 2008-Sep (15575/7268) 2008-Oct(today)(13719/6642) We also monitor Monster.com, among others, but their IT database is way smaller than Dice. So... It may take a while until .net/c# get there (and I don't think they will) Just my 2 cents. Cheers.
  19. Re: Not surprising at all[ Go to top ]

    Really? Please share your sources/numbers that can provide us a better measurement?


    http://jobsearch.monster.com/Search.aspx?re=130&cy=us&brd=1&JSNONREG=1&q=Java&jto=on&rad=20&rad_units=miles

    and

    http://jobsearch.monster.com/Search.aspx?re=130&cy=us&brd=1&JSNONREG=1&q=C%23&jto=on&rad=20&rad_units=miles


    Didn't get your point... The links you posted show 1962 Java ads against 852 C#... (Java wins by far...)

    Anyway, I'm glad to see you referencing job opportunities here, since I think this is really a good (and independent) measurement. By the way, we DO monitor such trends here in our company (and we have been doing it for a long time). For instance, last six collected data from Dice.com, ranging from 2008/05 to 2008/10 presented the following results (first number is Java, second number C#):
    2008-May (15422/7732)
    2008-Jun (15155/7461)
    2008-Jul (15237/7569)
    2008-Aug (15038/7572)
    2008-Sep (15575/7268)
    2008-Oct(today)(13719/6642)

    We also monitor Monster.com, among others, but their IT database is way smaller than Dice.

    So... It may take a while until .net/c# get there (and I don't think they will)

    Just my 2 cents.

    Cheers.
    Your search is wrong if you're just searching for "C#". C# isn't .NET. But the search is pretty useless anyway. .NET is huge, used many, many companies. There might be a point if you were comparing Java to Common Lisp
  20. Re: Not surprising at all[ Go to top ]

    Lets make imaginary assumption .Net stack can compare in technical quality with Java stack (I believe Java platform is much better, hence imaginary), that is one can successfully accomplish needed business functions by using any of the two platforms. Now, if we take into consideration that Microsoft' strategy is:
    Our mission is to establish Microsoft's platforms as the de facto standards throughout the computer industry.... Working behind the scenes to orchestrate "independent" praise of our technology, and damnation of the enemy's, is a key evangelism function "
    one can ask himself: Do I want my business to depend on company lead by those moral values? http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20071023002351958
  21. Re: Not surprising at all[ Go to top ]

    one can ask himself: Do I want my business to depend on company lead by those moral values? http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20071023002351958
    The scum at Groklaw are about as immoral as it gets.
  22. Re: Not surprising at all[ Go to top ]

    The scum at Groklaw
    @Frank You are obviously on wrong forums. That kind of discussion is really uncalled for on these boards.
  23. Re: Not surprising at all[ Go to top ]

    Your search is wrong if you're just searching for "C#". C# isn't .NET.
    It wasn't me who started comparing Java to C#. I was just replying to such a comparison, started by another poster. And yes, I'm aware that "C# isn't .Net" (even though your colleague, the other .NET guy who started this, might not know...)
    But the search is pretty useless anyway. .NET is huge, used many, many companies.
    We also have monthly stats comparing both, Java and .NET., as we've been doing such comparisons and trend analysis for a long time. And, although .NET is, indeed, used by "many, many companies", Java is used by "many, many more companies" ;). But don't take my word for it, go to Dice.com now and see for yourself. Sorry. The numbers just don't sustain your assertions and wishful thinkings...
    There might be a point if you were comparing Java to Common Lisp
    Please, get a brain. Cheers.
  24. Re: Not surprising at all[ Go to top ]


    It wasn't me who started comparing Java to C#. I was just replying to such a comparison, started by another poster. And yes, I'm aware that "C# isn't .Net" (even though your colleague, the other .NET guy who started this, might not know...)

    "My colleague"? I'm not even a .NET guy. I guess that's another case of Java developer paranoia on your part.

    We also have monthly stats comparing both, Java and .NET., as we've been doing such comparisons and trend analysis for a long time. And, although .NET is, indeed, used by "many, many companies", Java is used by "many, many more companies" ;). But don't take my word for it, go to Dice.com now and see for yourself.
    Sorry. The numbers just don't sustain your assertions and wishful thinkings...

    You're not searching right. Actually, if you would go to recruiters in major cities and ask them, instead of using flawed search terms, you would know the truth, but then again that might feed your Java developer bitterness and paranoia even more.
  25. Re: Not surprising at all[ Go to top ]

    Actually, if you would go to recruiters in major cities and ask them, instead of using flawed search terms, you would know the truth
    Pretty convincing. I'm impressed with these "evidences". Cheers.
  26. Re: Not surprising at all[ Go to top ]

    If something happen to Java and I think it will not happen but "if", I will go with PHP or Ruby. Im not interested in Microsoft anymore. I used Microsoft products from 1987 to 2000.It was enough BS.
  27. Re: Not surprising at all[ Go to top ]

    Java rapidly falls behind .NET stack. SPARC is killed by x86. OpenSolaris fails to get adoption.

    The writing is on the wall.
    I work extensively with Java and with .NET, and Java is hardly falling behind the .NET stack. There are simply different areas that Java and .NET focus on. As an example, the tooling around .NET is antiquated compared to what Java has already had for years, while the GUI capabilities in .NET are much more accessible for developers. At any rate, .NET is only as relevant as Windows is, which may be anywhere from 0% to 100% relevant depending on the work you're doing. While "SPARC is killed by x86" is certainly true in terms of numbers sold, Sun sells quite a bit of both, and is one of the leading x86 server vendors (and makes some very good kit). The move to open up Solaris probably came a few years too late, but Sun doesn't try to make its revenue there, so it's largely an irrelevant point. Peace, Cameron Purdy Oracle Coherence: The Java Data Grid
  28. Re: Not surprising at all[ Go to top ]

    I work extensively with Java and with .NET, and Java is hardly falling behind the .NET stack. There are simply different areas that Java and .NET focus on.
    It's more like 'Java still works better than .NET on servers'.
    As an example, the tooling around .NET is antiquated compared to what Java has already had for years, while the GUI capabilities in .NET are much more accessible for developers.
    VisualStudio 2008 with Resharper is close enough to IDEA/Eclipse in code editing capabilities. However, Studio clearly wins in integration with the rest of Microsoft stack. I can design ADO Entity Framework model, sync database with it, create a simple WPF app with a grid and bind a query to it all without writing a line of code. It's almost like the bad old days of VisualBasic/Delphi. Except that now I can do it with a really powerful language without violation of good software design patterns.
    At any rate, .NET is only as relevant as Windows is, which may be anywhere from 0% to 100% relevant depending on the work you're doing.
    Yes, that's true. But many businesses will happily switch to Windows+.NET if it becomes more productive. And it'll probably happen soon.
    While "SPARC is killed by x86" is certainly true in terms of numbers sold, Sun sells quite a bit of both, and is one of the leading x86 server vendors (and makes some very good kit).
    Yes, we bought Sun Netra T5220 based on Niagara 2. It's really nice, but Intel CPUs have already caught up on performance and price. I don't see Sun outcompeting Intel soon.
  29. Re: Not surprising at all[ Go to top ]

    I Don't think thousands of companies will switch to Microsoft offerings. 1.Java is already very well established on many systems as Cobol was. With a huge Java army of developers and we have still almost all the fortune 500 using Java so it is difficult to port millions of lines code to .Net. 2. Java is "Open Source" and is a standard. This days we dont need ECMA or ISO to make standards and almost all the .Net framework is proprietary, As usual in 5 years we will see a switch in technology of .Net as Microsoft did with Win32 and VB6.They are already planing to switch the tech and drop Win32 for their Next Next Windows OS."VB6 was a fine tool for Gui development, why they dropped and changed for a bloated and more complicate as .Net" 3. For server development Java is king and is where more the mind share it is. .Net it is not so good for server development lacks features and Microsoft is showing they are lacking and they are introducing their Asp.net MVC framework, Java had this for years. 4..Net maybe is good for Windows GUI development but this days is getting irrelevant, The Web is the king in here and if you really need GUI you could use Flex or alternatives. Also I Dont see Photoshop coded with C#.Net anytime soon, C/C++ still relevant for high performance Gui development.
  30. Re: Not surprising at all[ Go to top ]

    I forget to say, 5.Java have the best tools of the market with Eclipse, IntelliJ and Netebans, supporting many languages and platforms. For me is a pleasure to work with IntelliJ, I worked with VS2005 for one year and I dont want to go back. I checked VS2008 is not so different so no thanks. 6.Java have the best servers and app servers of all times Tomcat, Jetty, Glassfish, JBoss, Websphere, Spring dm, Geronimo and lots more. Microsoft just have IIS and it sucks really. 7.If I really I need to switch technology I will go with PHP/Zend Framework, Python/Django or Haskell/HApps, I dont want to go back to .Net it is proprietary one vendor lock-in and bloated offering from a not so honest company as Microsoft. You have to kill me to go back to Windows and Microsoft offerings.
  31. Re: Not surprising at all[ Go to top ]

    I work extensively with Java and with .NET, and Java is hardly falling behind the .NET stack. There are simply different areas that Java and .NET focus on.

    It's more like 'Java still works better than .NET on servers'.
    People have been talking about Java being doomed for a long time. Every time they talk about it, the moment is just around the corner. It seems to be a slipping event horizon from one year to another, but if people keep hammering the point their probability of being right is 100% - it just might take 10 years and something else than .NET. Look, .NET has one big freakin Achilles heel. That is Microsoft itself. As long as Microsoft does what it does best, there is always going to be an adoption limit for .NET. My guess is that .NET adoption is already pretty close to where it can ever go.
  32. Re: Not surprising at all[ Go to top ]

    I work extensively with Java and with .NET, and Java is hardly falling behind the .NET stack. There are simply different areas that Java and .NET focus on.

    It's more like 'Java still works better than .NET on servers'.
    OK, that's just another way to say: '.NET still works better for Windows client-side applications.'
    As an example, the tooling around .NET is antiquated compared to what Java has already had for years, while the GUI capabilities in .NET are much more accessible for developers.

    VisualStudio 2008 with Resharper is close enough to IDEA/Eclipse in code editing capabilities.

    However, Studio clearly wins in integration with the rest of Microsoft stack.
    Yes, you are right about Microsoft integration. However, VS'08 is nowhere near what we have with JDK + IDEA + ANT + Perforce, for example. Our developers work in Java and .NET and C++, and they unanimously prefer Idea. For .NET, we use Resharper, because without it, VS.NET is simply unusable -- we might as well use VI. ;-)
    While "SPARC is killed by x86" is certainly true in terms of numbers sold, Sun sells quite a bit of both, and is one of the leading x86 server vendors (and makes some very good kit).

    Yes, we bought Sun Netra T5220 based on Niagara 2. It's really nice, but Intel CPUs have already caught up on performance and price. I don't see Sun outcompeting Intel soon.
    You're missing the point: Sun is a major vendor of Intel-based x86 servers, and they are (or at least they recently were) the largest vendor of AMD-based x86 servers. Peace, Cameron Purdy Oracle Coherence: Data Grid for Java, .NET and C++
  33. Re: Oracle on Sun boxes[ Go to top ]

    Cameron, Your opinions are hardly noteworthy, considering you are not writing from a personal opinion, but are once again doing the bidding of your employer, as it is well-documented that Oracle dis-favors Sun's T2 chips in its prohibitive pricing for multi-core... So, while Sun does sell x86 boxes, much to the preference of Oracle, i think it should be fairly obvious at this point that the volume server market, that Becholsheim was brought back for (whatever his name is) and his project have all but run their course at Sun... The only way forward for Sun is on the multi-core front, and though i don't know how to compare with Intel chips, as the previous poster asserted, it should be viewed as the only thing going at Sun... I mean its great that Sun sells some Xeon and Opteron servers, but you are the one missing the point if you think that this matters to anyone associated with Sun other than Oracle... I guess i dont fault you for writing opinions based on what you know or even what is in your best interests, but it is amateur analysis to think that x86 will have any bearing at all on Sun's prospects...
  34. Re: Oracle on Sun boxes[ Go to top ]

    Douglas -
    Cameron, Your opinions are hardly noteworthy..
    .. considering you are not writing from a personal opinion, but are once again doing the bidding of your employer ..
    .. as it is well-documented that Oracle dis-favors Sun's T2 chips in its prohibitive pricing for multi-core...
    So, while Sun does sell x86 boxes, much to the preference of Oracle ..
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tin_foil_hat Peace, Cameron Purdy Oracle Coherence: Data Grid for Java, .NET and C++
  35. Re: haha[ Go to top ]

    Cameron, Like i said, i don't have a problem with you giving your myopic p.o.v. that basically follows the formula of: whatever Oracle policy is, is what is best for everyone... i just think you need to be relatively open to other posters pointing out that myopic p.o.v., and also by giving the readers some additional context that will be quickly recognized as necessary perspective to overcome your total and complete bias for all things remotely related to Oracle... just to re-cap: Sun is in complete meltdown, and this thread was previously known as a debate on why and how to get them out of the death spiral; in jumps you, with some complete irrelevance about x86 boxes, and i felt it necessary, per usual, to make sure that we don't miss an opportunity to give people the truth: that no matter what Oracle prefers, Sun is better off selling multi-core chips than x86 gear... anything else we need to discuss today?...
  36. Re: Oracle on Sun boxes[ Go to top ]


    I guess i dont fault you for writing opinions based on what you know or even what is in your best interests, but it is amateur analysis to think that x86 will have any bearing at all on Sun's prospects...
    Doug, for once, you may actually be right :) but possibly for the wrong reasons : http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/23/technology/start-ups/23switch.html?_r=1&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss&oref=slogin - Rich http://blog.softwhere.org
  37. Re: Not surprising at all[ Go to top ]

    OK, that's just another way to say: '.NET still works better for Windows client-side applications.'
    Yes. And client applications on .NET almost inevitably cause server-side apps to be written on .NET. I've seen it personally. Also, ASP.NET is a pretty good web framework and it's EASY to use and learn for novices.
    However, VS'08 is nowhere near what we have with JDK + IDEA + ANT + Perforce, for example.

    Our developers work in Java and .NET and C++, and they unanimously prefer Idea.
    Yes, I also prefer IDEA and most of my employees prefer it too (several weirdos favor Eclipse). But VS+Resharper is already close enough for this not to matter _much_. And MSVS will only get better. Besides, C# 3.0 is much nicer than Java: type inference, lambdas, LINQ, real generics...
    For .NET, we use Resharper, because without it, VS.NET is simply unusable -- we might as well use VI. ;-)
    Yeah, JetBrains' tools rule. Tangasol/Oracle Coherence is also awesome :)
    You're missing the point: Sun is a major vendor of Intel-based x86 servers, and they are (or at least they recently were) the largest vendor of AMD-based x86 servers.
    And it won't help them much. As far as I understand, profit margins on x86 hardware are significantly lower than on custom SPARC hardware. Sun made a smart move few years ago offering AMD-based servers when Intel CPUs sucked, but now tables are turned and AMD lags behind Intel. But now Sun has a lot of competition. I doubt that they can become as efficient as Dell, for example. So they'll need to compensate for it somehow.
  38. Re: Not surprising at all[ Go to top ]

    @Alex Besogonov, C# 3 is not much nicer than Java because the average Joe doesnt know even what is a lambda or type inference, they still think that type inference is like Javascript var. In fortune 500 I have not see people using even generics with .Net, Everybody using .Net as point and click and hoping the generating code works. Also is insane to rewrite a server app to a client app using .Net. Mostly all the people doesnt need the C# 3 features, Java still more simple and practical to use. That is why Java it is a success. If you see this stats I know is not so accuracy but gives and idea is that C# have never been a great success and is behind even Python popularity. Java is and will still be a success: http://www.tiobe.com/index.php/content/paperinfo/tpci/index.html Good luck with one vendor lock-in and I remind you that take care with Microsoft offerings and their dishonest tactics. Java is here to stay, you will see it. The people that go to .Net they will cry later because Microsoft changed the game. I saw it many times with Microsoft behavior anyone rememeber VB6?, Don't tell me that VB.Net is more easy to use and RAD. VB6 success was the easy to use and so fast to create a Gui app.VB.Net is bloated and complicate compare to VB6.
  39. Re: Not surprising at all[ Go to top ]

    C# 3 is not much nicer than Java because the average Joe doesnt know even what is a lambda or type inference, they still think that type inference is like Javascript var.
    Ten years ago "average Joe Plumbers" knew nothing about OOP. People said that Java is going to lose because of all these complex keywords like: 'public final class'. Besides, VB.NET is fairly Joe-friendly.
    In fortune 500 I have not see people using even generics with .Net, Everybody using .Net as point and click and hoping the generating code works.
    That's the point. You CAN write software like this in .NET. It might even work sometimes. Now try to do this in Java.
    Good luck with one vendor lock-in and I remind you that take care with Microsoft offerings and their dishonest tactics.
    Historically, MS lives pretty well with ISVs. And most people don't care about vendor lock-in (look at all these iPhones and iPods).
  40. In all fairness, Sun didn't create the JavaSpaces model - David Gelernter and Nick Carreiro did. (See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linda_Programming_System for details.) Agreed, though - Sun has some of the best minds in the industry. They should be flying high, not creating JavaOne 2008.
  41. In all fairness, Sun didn't create the JavaSpaces model - David Gelernter and Nick Carreiro did. (See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linda_Programming_System for details.)

    Agreed, though - Sun has some of the best minds in the industry. They should be flying high, not creating JavaOne 2008.
    I said JavaSpaces, and not TupleSpaces, so yes, Sun did create JavaSpaces model.
  42. They created the JavaSpaces specification, not the model - the model's pretty much Linda, done in Java. And yes, it's semantics.
  43. My own experiences with the Sun culture is that it is entirely geared toward hardware. Every decision is biased by a hardware-only perspective. There are plenty of bright individuals in software and in Java in particular, but all strategies seem to be built around how to sell more hardware.
  44. My own experiences with the Sun culture is that it is entirely geared toward hardware. Every decision is biased by a hardware-only perspective. There are plenty of bright individuals in software and in Java in particular, but all strategies seem to be built around how to sell more hardware.
    That seem like really bad moves to me.
  45. I was thinking something similar, during my MBA I read SUN financial statements and reports. And I have to say, I felt enlightened. My perception of SUN had previously been that of an IT employee. SUN for me was Java and some hardware server that sells very little where I am. SUN according to their financial statements, make very little money from software, very little, I dont recall the percentage but it was definitely less than 10%. SUN is a systems company, and by systems they mean hardware and the infrastructure software used to run and manage it. User and Business software is a minor thing. And to readdress the culture issue. If seniors inside SUN perceive it as a HW company, this won't change. There is money in software, but SUN need to complete restructure to enter this market, they be like a newcomer, with a brand-name! But operationally they will be similar to a new entrant.
  46. My own experiences with the Sun culture is that it is entirely geared toward hardware. Every decision is biased by a hardware-only perspective. There are plenty of bright individuals in software and in Java in particular, but all strategies seem to be built around how to sell more hardware.
    I wish I could say I know what Sun should do but it seems to me that this is an outdated approach. I think they need to face that hardware is a now a commodity. Few companies will choose to go with expensive, specialized hardware when they can buy lots of cheap multi-core machines and install linux on them.
  47. The hardware and Solaris are a core of Sun. All other Sun technologies one way or another are driven by these cores. Through expertise of core developers. But I agree that these other technologies should be monetized better than they do.
  48. My own experiences with the Sun culture is that it is entirely geared toward hardware. Every decision is biased by a hardware-only perspective. There are plenty of bright individuals in software and in Java in particular, but all strategies seem to be built around how to sell more hardware.
    Sun is a hardware seller that is promoting open software, Microsoft is a software seller that is promoting open hardware. With Schwartz they have a software man who took control, so they try to shift focus. I agree that the open software model is not working for them. Companies like Red Hat make their money from support and education. Sun has ousourced its education business and their support is geared towards Solaris, not towards Java.
  49. My own experiences with the Sun culture is that it is entirely geared toward hardware. Every decision is biased by a hardware-only perspective. There are plenty of bright individuals in software and in Java in particular, but all strategies seem to be built around how to sell more hardware.
    That mirrors my experience from contracting for Sun a few years back - some brilliant minds in software and Java, but the business and sales is completely geared to selling more hardware
  50. You (Sun) created the JavaSpaces model and yet you failed to monetize it, leaving it to others to cash you investment in research. Wtf?
    Sun did try to monetize it (JINI etc.), but there was no substantial monetary interest, so they made it open source. The several companies that tried to build around JavaSpaces all went out of business except for Gigaspaces, and they are still burning money. Where Sun has done fairly well of late is their x86 servers, which are very popular in financial services companies (which also are the same companies that buy the big Sun boxes that have high profit margins), so you can imagine that the crash of the financial services sector is going to hit Sun harder and faster than it will hit most tech companies. At any rate, Sun can find a way through it .. there will be some hard decisions to get there, but they've been through it before. Peace, Cameron Purdy Oracle Coherence: Data Grid for Java, .NET and C++
  51. Fiscal years alignment[ Go to top ]

    Could it just be that Sun's first quarter happens to fall on a majority of companies last fiscal quarter during the worst economic times in a great while? No one typically buys or agrees to significant contracts at the end of their fiscal year. I predict Sun will bounce back in it's quarters two and three.
  52. image Java's future without Sun[ Go to top ]

    regardless of how much value one attributes to Java SE, EE and other Java technologies, i think it's worthwhile to contemplate a future of Java and the JCP without Sun's leadership: - will another company take over? IBM seems a logical successor, but given their execution when they tried to bypass the JCP (think SCA) this doesn't seem very promising. SpringSource might be interesting, but they have buy-in and credibility in only a small sub-set of Java and so may have little interest in the wider Java space. - should the JCP be led by an industry consortium like the OMG? i'd say that Sun's leadership definitely generated more drive and energy than any consortium may ever muster. furthermore, i shudder when i try to envision a Java world that is as coherent, technically sound and well-managed as the world of WS-* (that has essentially been evolved and standardised by consortia lobbied by small ad-hoc bands of companies). - or should the JCP essentially switch to maintenance mode, leaving innovation and de-facto standardisation to spring from other sources (pun intended), as it increasingly has done in the past anyways? IMHO Sun has taken excellent care of the Java ecosystem and it will be hard to substitute for their leadership. (part of the reason for that good stewardship may be the very fact that they've always been generating most of their revenue from hardware.) cheers, gerald http://www.gerald-loeffler.net
  53. regardless of how much value one attributes to Java SE, EE and other Java technologies, i think it's worthwhile to contemplate a future of Java and the JCP without Sun's leadership:

    - will another company take over? IBM seems a logical successor, but given their execution when they tried to bypass the JCP (think SCA) this doesn't seem very promising. SpringSource might be interesting, but they have buy-in and credibility in only a small sub-set of Java and so may have little interest in the wider Java space.

    - should the JCP be led by an industry consortium like the OMG
    Plain and simple, Sun's problem is that the open source business model is not really working for them. When it worked so far, it worked only for the owners of open source companies who sold their companies at very high valuations prices to stupid acquirers (notably JBoss or MySQL). As we Java developers know, Sun has very good engineers and the Java platform was (and still is) very innovative, but unfortunately Sun is not earning profits with Java. Most businesses are using the Java platform for free. This is why Sun is emphasizing its hardware business. I'm always laughing, if someone recommends SpringSource as an alternativ to Sun. This only show the complete lack of understanding the typical Java techie has. I've been telling you repeatedly already that SpringSource is a shaky company, much more shaky than Sun. VC guys didn't invest in SpringSource because SpringSource's business model is so great (the company is probably bleeding money). They invested in hope for making big bucks in case SpringSource got bought by another stupid acquirer. Developers need be paid a salary, this is why a working business model is necessary. But if the software is given away for free to large users (banks, insurance companies etc.), where should the cash flow to pay the programmers come from? The consequences are simple: If the software vendor doesn't earn enought profits (or is loss-making), it has to trim down its developer staff. Best scenario for us Java developers would be that Google took over Sun's Java software division to secure its future.
  54. More about Sun's problem[ Go to top ]

    Another problem is that Sun cannot easily charge businesses for its Java software, developer tools etc. If Sun did, many Java developers would immediately flock to the .NET platform or Adobe technologies such as Flex. Sun's biggest mistake was that it ignored the desktop and also RIA applications. Adobe, on the other hand, has the market power to charge for its tools. You can only do so if your technologies are perceived as superior. Sun's RIA strategy is a joke. What do they want with another scripting language (Java FX), if the player (Applet container) remains so slow and bloated that users and customers prefer Flash to Java applets? Flash is perceived as cool by users. Java applets as slow. It's very difficult to sell Java applets to customers nowadays, most customers demand Flash for their websites.
  55. Plain and simple, Sun's problem is that the open source business model is not really working for them.
    This is, plain and simple, a gross misunderstanding. Direct sales are not the only measure of economic success. How many servers has SUN sold because of Java?
    I'm always laughing, if someone recommends SpringSource as an alternativ to Sun. This only show the complete lack of understanding the typical Java techie has. I've been telling you repeatedly already that SpringSource is a shaky company, much more shaky than Sun. VC guys didn't invest in SpringSource because SpringSource's business model is so great (the company is probably bleeding money). They invested in hope for making big bucks in case SpringSource got bought by another stupid acquirer.
    ... which was supposed to be SUN (they bought MySQL instead). Fortunately SpringSource demystified itself through recent licensing maneuvers.
  56. I'm always laughing, if someone recommends SpringSource as an alternativ to Sun. This only show the complete lack of understanding the typical Java techie has. I've been telling you repeatedly already that SpringSource is a shaky company, much more shaky than Sun. VC guys didn't invest in SpringSource because SpringSource's business model is so great (the company is probably bleeding money). They invested in hope for making big bucks in case SpringSource got bought by another stupid acquirer.
    I couldn't have said it any better! Tom
  57. Best scenario for us Java developers would be that Google took over Sun's Java software division to secure its future.
    I'll respectfully disagree with this comment. I think Google would be ill suited for this task. Google certainly has enough money to keep development going, however I don't see this aligning with their business model very well since Google is a marketing business more than anything else. I believe Oracle or IBM would be better positioned to take over such a project. Both have a strong middleware and server business, the expertise to carry on the evolution of the language, and it compliments their existing business model. (I know I'm probably going to catch hell for mentioning Oracle, so there's your gasoline, anyone have a match?) Tom
  58. Best scenario for us Java developers would be that Google took over Sun's Java software division to secure its future.


    I believe Oracle or IBM would be better positioned to take over such a project. Both have a strong middleware and server business, the expertise to carry on the evolution of the language, and it compliments their existing business model.
    Sun is now playing a neutral role that IBM/Oracle may have difficulty doing. Besides, both have their own road maps to support the latest version of JDK on their app servers. If they were to acquire then their business models would start dictating how or when they make upgrades to JDK. What happen to the host of open source projects besides other commercial vendors. I'm also not sure if it would be as collaborative as it is today. What happens to the fate of MySQL? Most of all, I'm not sure if legally it would even be permissible for IBM or Oracle to buy Sun. This is different from IBM or Oracle buying SpringSource. As for Google, I think they won't care. I would only hope for Sun to revive itself. But, I'm afraid that may not happen.
  59. Oracle is by far the evilest software company on the planet.
  60. Oracle[ Go to top ]

    Oracle is by far the evilest software company on the planet.
    Oracle Fusion Middleware division (which includes WebLogic, jRockit, Coherence, and many, many more Java products) is now the largest supplier of Java enterprise infrastructure. Oracle continues to make larger and larger investments in the Java platform. Regarding the "evil" comment, I hope that the work that we are doing -- including the pride we have in the quality of our products and the manner in which we care for our customers -- will change your mind. Peace, Cameron Purdy Oracle Coherence: Data Grid for Java, .NET and C++
  61. I'm a techie but at the same time I have a strong appreciation of business issues. I hate to hear techies talk code and hardware as being the main problems facing a company that's not doing so well when compared to those technologies and services that are offered by their competitors. The fact is that companies like Sun, IBM, Microsoft, Oracle, etc. produce darn good technologies, both software and hardware with the delta between them not being all that different. Take for example the story of Sun and IBM. Both are hardware and software companies. Sun was the inventor of Java and most of its derivative technologies. So naturally you would expect Sun to be a commercial leader in that space, however it's not. Sun also produces good hardware products and have excellent engineers. IBM is also a strong hardware and software company with excellent engineers, but yet, IBM has successfully aligned all their resources (people and technology) to create a profitable and strong business enterprise. Therefore, the problem cannot be discussed from the technology perspective, but should be discussed more from the management, sales, and marketing perspective. I've worked in the fiercely competitive telecoms business in the Caribbean for a couple of years, where as you can imagine, most of the telecoms providers use the same mobile network technologies (i.e mainly GSM or CDMA) with good all round service coverage, but yet still, I find that the telecoms providers that do well in crushing their competition are not necessarily the ones that offer the cheapest call rates, but the ones that are more visible from a marketing perspective and whose management puts greater emphasis on promoting excellent customer service practices and on their customers receiving value for money for the call rates they pay. How many of you have ever seen a Sun microsystems ad on TV for any of their product offerings? I've seen ads from Microsoft, Apple, and IBM. Technology companies should not take for granted the power of marketing and strong business practices in promoting and selling the goods and services they offer. More aggressive focus should be placed on marketing and sales, and on doing things like selling services just like what IBM is doing. Software cannot just be used as a driver to sell hardware. That approach is totally one dimensional rather than seeing how you can monetize all of your strengths as a commercial organization. In some developing countries like Jamaica for example, Microsoft has a seriously strong technology presence in government, schools, and business, with IBM a distant second. Where the heck is Sun and Java in these developing countries? Sun should now be seeking to take serious advantage in aggressively selling and promoting their low cost but powerful technology offerings to markets in the current global financial meltdown coupled with services that can be offered by their elite team of engineers. If Sun needs to be acquired to stay afloat, I would consider IBM or Google to be the better options.
  62. It's the Hardware...[ Go to top ]

    It's always about the hardware and enabling folks to leverage that hardware. The software needs to be basically a self sustaining marketing arm for the company. Sun and IBM are the only companies, for good or ill, that can provide the entire infrastructure stack: hardware, OS, network services, databases, and application servers. People who think that hardware is a commodity item are only looking at white box PCs made from parts by Newegg. The Suns, HPs, and IBMs of the world make very sophisticated SYSTEMS that are more than simply Intel CPUs socketed on to whatever motherboard that comes off the assembly line. As with any industry, it's the low end that gets "commoditized" and "cheap", but that doesn't mean there isn't value add at the higher levels. Sun wants to distinguish that hardware and leverages it through their software. Recall in the past when companies such as DEC, and Sun, and others of course, would subsidize hardware sales to universities in order to expose future decision makers to their products in an intimate way. The OSS software that Sun makes is done to prevent it from being a barrier to acquiring their hardware. "Gee that hardware looks good, but it runs Solaris". Now there's no excuse to not evaluate or use Solaris before you buy the hardware. Or not to try out Glassfish, MySql, or any of the other gigabytes of software that they give away. It's so clever. You get to try out their software ON YOUR DIME! It's a viral marketing technique, and you can then call them up for references or what ever other assurances you want that they'll support their software. They'll happily take your money to support their software in your enterprise. And all of that works as a marketing vehicle towards their hardware. If you're happy with the software, happy with the support, maybe you'll be happy with the hardware and its support. Because once engaged with Sun, via their support organization, their software, their forums or communities, you now have a better "feeling" for Sun. When you look at a server spec sheet, it's not just a block of MHz and GBs, but it's also SUN MHz and GBs. And if you see that "ya know, the Sun gear is perhaps marginally more expensive than the other one" (assuming that's the case), then that good will they may have built up through the use of their other services may well be enough to sway the deal. Of course you may have a crappy experience with their systems and software, such is the game. I'm not going to say it's all roses. I'm just talking the technique that's The Plan. Software needs hardware to run. By promoting better ways to build and deploy software, Sun enables you to create more of it. The more software you make, the more hardware you'll need. If you're happy using their software, maybe you'll be happy using their hardware, and that prompts a phone call from someone, somewhere, to start the conversation. Sun doesn't want to lose a hardware sale because you couldn't have the software infrastructure necessary to pull it off. As long as the they can keep the software side to being at least break even, then there's value in maintaining and advancing the software arm. And they're doing that. So, that's how all of this works in the big picture.
  63. Sun's biggest mistakes[ Go to top ]

    Sun's biggest mistakes: 1) Not making sure that they had the #1 selling app server early on 2) Not having a proffesional services arm as their primary source of income.
  64. Re: Sun's biggest mistakes[ Go to top ]

    Sun's biggest mistakes:

    1) Not making sure that they had the #1 selling app server early on
    2) Not having a professional services arm as their primary source of income.
    As they say here in the Silicon Valley, everyone knows what Sun should do :-) You can be sure that Sun will handle this, just as they have many times before. Regards, Slava Imeshev Cacheonix - Affordable Data Grid for Java
  65. Re: Sun's biggest mistakes[ Go to top ]

    Sun's biggest mistakes:

    1) Not making sure that they had the #1 selling app server early on
    2) Not having a professional services arm as their primary source of income.


    As they say here in the Silicon Valley, everyone knows what Sun should do :-) You can be sure that Sun will handle this, just as they have many times before.

    Regards,

    Slava Imeshev
    Cacheonix - Affordable Data Grid for Java
    Sun has been lackluster ever since the dot-com bust. It doesn't take a very smart person to look at other big IT companies to see that they make alot of money from server software and proffesional services. Server Software might be too late for them but proffesional services isnt. Bottom line is that Sun needs new management that can think outside of their box.
  66. Re: Sun's biggest mistakes[ Go to top ]

    Sun's biggest mistakes:

    1) Not making sure that they had the #1 selling app server early on
    2) Not having a proffesional services arm as their primary source of income.
    I concur 1000% on (2). IBM's OS, app server, JVM, etc, have issues compared to Sun's. Why do folk go with IBM? Because they have a huge services arm that lives and breathes these IBM products and which will, of course, recommend more IBM products. Sun needs this sort of ecosystem around their products.
  67. Re: Sun's biggest mistakes[ Go to top ]

    Slava and Jess, I agree with you guys, the inherent capabilities of Sun PS Java Center people was unmatched, even though they had to do most of their work on WebLogic, since iPlanet was never a working product...so, the two were certainly tied together for the early years of Enterprise Java of 1999-2002... But with the Sun ONE version, which became widely available in 2003, and every subsequent release, culminating in Glassfish v.2, which has full enterprise capabilities, Sun could have over-invested in Java implementations, but instead have just been making crazy moves, mainly around openSolaris... I focus much of my blog on Sun, for those who have read an entry (albeit a small sub-set here), you will know that i can't stand what direction this company is headed, but OSS is not the problem, i would not even do justice to all that is not working from an execution standpoint in this entry, but suffice to say, that Jonathan has bet the viability on the company on vertical integration, from top-bottom, and i know that was initiated by McNealy and is almost a justifiable business strategy, if it were not for the existence of Red Hat: if Red Hat were not executing so well on Linux, i could see putting 1,000 engineers on openSolaris, but the fact that Sun is playing defense on OS, instead of playing offense on app server, database, and multi-core chips, means that we will suffer through another year of painful quarters of missing expectations... douglas dooley douglasdooley.blogspot.com
  68. Re: It's the Hardware...[ Go to top ]

    People who think that hardware is a commodity item are only looking at white box PCs made from parts by Newegg.

    The Suns, HPs, and IBMs of the world make very sophisticated SYSTEMS that are more than simply Intel CPUs socketed on to whatever motherboard that comes off the assembly line.
    Sorry but it's not true that I'm "only looking at white box PCs". The more machines you buy the more it makes sense to save money on them. The benefits of specialized hardware have diminished over the years and will continue to do so. Ironically, Java is part of the trend that makes the hardware you use less relevant. I don't develop to a specific processor. I develop to the JVM. I actually work with specialized hardware from IBM. I develop my Java to the JVM and deploy it to that hardware and it's largely irrelevant to my code what platform the JVM runs on. I can (and do) deploy that same code to other hardware. The reason that we use this hardware is not because of the benefits it might provide but because of legacy systems. Believe me, as soon as we can move away from it we will. The cost of the system and supporting it is very high. Why do you think Apple moved to the intel architecture and why Sun now sells it? It's not because the architecture is superior, it's that it's becoming more and more irrelevant. Custom architectures might still make sense but only if they are priced competitively with standard hardware. The vast difference in economies of scale make it harder for custom systems to be priced comparatively. And as parallelization becomes more common, the cost of non-standard hardware becomes more difficult to justify.
  69. Sun Microsystems Inc. swung to a big loss in its fiscal first quarter
    So do lot of other companies, so what is the big deal. SUN is a solid company with tons of intellectual property and years of experience; if companies like serverside.com survives why not SUN.
  70. Java is open source and a standard and if SUN right now the leader cant handle it anymore pass the flag to Google, Fujitsu, IBM, Oracle, etc. Anyway SUN doesn't innovate Java since the 90's. JavaFX?, It is a joke everybody knows. Its like you will tell me that Ruby or Python or PHP will be broken because this financial crisis hahaha that is insane. Java is Open Source and Free same as Ruby and Python and C, Java doesn't depend of a single entity anymore. "Java is FREE".
  71. oops sorry for the duplicated post.
  72. Anyway SUN doesn't innovate Java since the 90's.
    Not quite true. Java 1.6 is huge leap forward from 1.4, and 1.7 will be blast for concurrent programming. Go go go Doug Lea!
  73. reminds me IBM few years ago[ Go to top ]

    a big Déjà vu from the IBM situation on the beginning of 90's :) If IBM get resurrected from that stage selling mainframes and COBOL, I believe Sun can do that as well...
  74. déjà vu[ Go to top ]

    http://news.zdnet.co.uk/hardware/0,1000000091,2071313,00.htm ahahah.. the same history repeating itself..... who is next ? Google ? Oracle ?
  75. HP is also there[ Go to top ]

    http://news.zdnet.co.uk/itmanagement/0,1000000308,39163376,00.htm
  76. Re: HP is also there[ Go to top ]

    Yeah all the companies have bad and good times, But I don't see anything releated with the financial crisis Sun is passing with Java the language. Java is there and always will be is a technology free and open source it is not a financial tool.
  77. Re: HP is also there[ Go to top ]

    Thanks god Sun released Java as Open Source but if Sun didn't released as Open Source ok this article could have a lot of value and I would right now get my projects to other platform heheh but this is not the case.
  78. As years of follower of Sun, and recommender of Java, I felt that I must write down some advices to Sun before it is too late. This list is just a sample look from enterprise world: 1- Find a way to earn money from Java efforts 2- Open source contribution must turn into a revenue stream 3- Find a way to enter Enterprise space For detailed post: http://fromapitosolution.blogspot.com/2008/10/what-should-sun-microsystems-do-for.html
  79. I Don't think thousands of companies will switch to Microsoft offerings.
    Of course they wont because they have better and free solution at disposal - Java platform, that covers 80% of use cases (high volume with not so high speed requirements). For the bleeding edge ultra-high-speed-needed scenarios, people won't use Msft stack even for that because of maybe things like this? http://news.cnet.com/8301-13846_3-10036286-62.html In that scenario linux/unix wins.
  80. Hey Chief -
    Java platform, that covers 80% of use cases (high volume with not so high speed requirements).
    Java covers most of the high-speed / low latency requirements well now. You should check out jRockit Real Time :-) http://www.oracle.com/technology/products/jrockit/jrrt/index.html
    For the bleeding edge ultra-high-speed-needed scenarios, people won't use Msft stack even for that because of maybe things like this?
    http://news.cnet.com/8301-13846_3-10036286-62.html

    In that scenario linux/unix wins.
    Interesting link ;-) Most of the exchanges still build their core engines in C, and that isn't likely to change in the next 24-36 months. (FWIW - I've never seen an exchange using Windows anywhere near to the core, and I've done work in a lot of the major exchanges.) Anyhow, for all but the core engines, Java is used extensively (and quite successfully) by all the major exchanges, LSE (aka LSX) included. Peace, Cameron Purdy Oracle Coherence: Data Grid for Java, .NET and C++
  81. I think the most important question on everyones mind is Can Java, Glassfish, Open ESB and the ecosystem survive without Sun?
  82. I think the most important question on everyones mind is Can Java, Glassfish, Open ESB and the ecosystem survive without Sun?
    Yes Java can do it. If PHP, Python or Ruby can do it also Java can do it. Java doesnt need a corporate behind anymore, already Java is Big and a Success. Also now with the JVM that host hundred of languages it is much better the future for Java and JVM. Im not sure about the other projects but if glassfish go down we have JBoss or Spring or another alternatives. For real, Java is here to stay, It is a free/freedom language already, we dont need to fear nothing. But I wish the best to SUN because after all is a great company with lots of great people. They opened the doors to many and they innovated in the past very very great.