|
Sponsored Links
Resources
Enterprise Java
Research Library
Get Java white papers, product information, case studies and webcasts
|
News
News
News
|
Messages: 179
Messages: 179
Messages: 179
Printer friendly
Printer friendly
Printer friendly
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
XML
XML
XML
|
 |
Sun's CEO McNealy Suggests Open Source Could Be Hurting J2EE
In a recent interview, Sun Microsystems CEO Scott McNealy questioned the need for a J2EE certified JBoss application server, claiming that we already have Sun One. McNealy went on to suggest that open source models may be screwing up the industry's ability to market J2EE against .NET due to open source undercutting revenues (and marketing budgets).
Since when is Sun One open source?
An excerpt of the related questions have been published here:
http://www.oetrends.com/cgi-bin/page_display.cgi?77.
|
|
|
Message #55335
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Needs more background
I feel after reading this that I just get fed a bunch of FUD with no real substance. I certainly hope there is a lot more to this interview, because it feels like good sound bytes were take out and placed into this summary to sell magazines.
Just my .02.
Jim
|
|
|
Message #55337
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Sun's CEO McNealy Suggests Open Source Could Be Hurting J2EE
I thins this is a first step towards SUN charging for future services, advance products etc from SUN.
However good JAVA, J2EE is, SUN is in deep shit as its not making money thro it , but spending a lot to support the whole Java community.
Besides selling servers, SUN has no means to make money and their stock price is below $4. I know that they have a lot of cash and they wont crumble down, but there is always a chance of SUN starting to find ways to make money thro this java community soon.
|
|
|
Message #55339
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Sun's CEO McNealy Suggests Open Source Could Be Hurting J2EE
<Quote>
Q JBoss has had a hard time getting J2EE certification. Do you think it's important to have a certified open source J2EE implementation?
McNealy: No, we've already got one. It's called the Sun ONE app server. It's certified. Do I think it's important? I don't know what that means.
<?Quote>
Nobody was ready to pay for iPlanet/SunOne so we are giving it away for free and hoping to make money on the Service contracts.
Scott McNealy<Quote>
So, potentially you could make an argument that the open source thing is just screwing up all the revenue models and we aren't getting the advertising, because it isn't the best technology that always wins, it's who advertises more.
</Quote>
Translation.
We were making big bucks selling software that people don't really need. We need to advertise to convince people that they need all the bloatware.
Sadly, The only major advantage Java/J2EE has over .Net is the huge amount of Open Source stuff that's available. The other being that it's been around longer.
Of course you can argue that .Net is unproven/unstable/etc.
But most business app managers don't really care. They want something that is good enough and gets the work done quickly. If they feel .Net can get the job done they will go for it. That's the reason why VB used to be so popular.
Cheers
Ravi
|
|
|
Message #55341
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Sun's CEO McNealy Suggests Open Source Could Be Hurting J2EE
The only thing hurting the sales of application servers like iPlanet is that many of them suck.
Everyone needs to understand the purchase process and apparantly even Scott McNealy doesnt.
Customers make a purchase when the value of an item exceeds the price of that item.
That seems simple right? People forget it all the time. For instance, take Scott's example. He believes becase a product is free, people will always choose it over the pay version. If that were true Scott, we'd all drive free cars, live in free housing, and wear free clothes.
Plenty of shops buy app servers. Look at BEA and IBM's revenue numbers. Thos shops believe that the value they get from IBM WebSphere exceeds the price of IBM WebSphere. Its that simple Scott. The sad truth you cant get past is that you were unable to put enough value in your product to overcome a cost above zero.
JBoss being free indeed means that it is easier for value to exceed price. Welcome to the real world Scott. Put value in your product worth paying for, and people will pay. The laws of economics havent changed.
First attack MS as evil. Next attack Open Source? Scott, get back in the boardrood and not the soap box and write some code that doesnt suck will you.
Dave Wolf
The Scupper Group
|
|
|
Message #55342
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Sun's CEO McNealy Suggests Open Source Could Be Hurting J2EE
I agree with most of you. I have always seen Scott making stupid comments about microsoft. I agree that to some extent .Net etc is not that scalable, windows crashes , not robust etc etc etc etc. But Scott always makes it a point to say atleast 5 bad comments at microsoft. I ahevtn heard bill gates doing it every now and then. Visit microsoft.com for the latest comments from bill gates to the gathering of Microsoft employees. Whatever is the condition of software of microsoft makes, Bill has the professionalism top speak in public, make logical comments. Its a SHAMe top hear such a shallow and unthoughtful comments from Scott about open source stuff. I think open source gave us more than what any company gave us ever.
Also if you provide good service, there are companies ready to pay you. As someone here said, lok at BEA and Web sphere and even oracle back with a bang, they dont given everything for free, but still make money.
Anyway .. I hope Scott gets his act together ( he seems to be frustated with CTO leaving last month, then stock price tanked and he has a BIG EGO to lay off)
|
|
|
Message #55343
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Sun's CEO McNealy Suggests Open Source Could Be Hurting J2EE
The writing was on the wall for a while... J2EE infrastructure should become a ubiquitous commodity, allowing 3rd-party solutions to proliferate. That's what will make Java/J2EE successful. JBoss is just making it happen, faster; and it's a pretty darn good piece of software. This should also help to circumvent .Net in their Web services-led game. For example, Collaxa's Web Services Orchestration Server (J2EE-level Container) for JBoss.
Cheers.
Jill.
"Neo, this is the sound of inevitability" (The Matrix)
|
|
|
Message #55346
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Sun's CEO McNealy Suggests Open Source Could Be Hurting J2EE
Some would contend that the problem isn't with the application servers; it's with the J2EE specifications. The complexity of J2EE has violated Wiseman's law. Wiseman's law unequivocally states:
A successful technology will saturate an 80% sampling of programmer/analysts only if 80% of the technology can be understood by those same programmer/analysts without forcing them to work beyond their regular 45 hour work week.
Look back 10 years to PowerBuilder and Visual Basic. At the peak of Client/Server revolution, PB reigned as king, and VB held nearly as much market share in terms of number of applications rolled out into production. Why? Because a regular individual could learn how to be _productive_ with the tool in an extremely short period of time.
I love Java programming. However, EJB's are far too comlicated for the mere mortal to learn AND be productive with without a serious investment in time outside of the regular 40 hour work week. How many of us have spent our Friday nights reading the latest spec just to keep up with the times? Even our peers who are publishing their works in O'Reilly bindings are echoing simmilar sentiments regarding the complexity of the specifications.
While my love for Java has never been stronger, I believe the sun is setting, pun intended. Until our community can figure out how to de-mystify J2EE's complexity so that the mere mortals out there can learn it AND be productive, the step-by-step wizards in .NET that are make writing distributed applications a breeze will continue to gain ground on J2EE.
At the end of the day, open source isn't hurting J2EE. Complexity is hurting J2EE.
Jason Weiss
|
|
|
Message #55347
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Sun's CEO McNealy Suggests Open Source Could Be Hurting J2EE
*Sigh*
I strongly belive that Open Source is the only thing that can keep Java from obsolescence. For Sun to start posturing about OS Java is just another in a long line of reactionary positions the company has taken.
I hate raising the issue of .Net, becauser this forum has a tendency to get all evangelical about it, but Microsoft always pushes for the volume market, and if you look and .Net this is no different from their strategies in other areas. MS is really pushing .Net to a much 'lower-end' market than traditional 'Enterprise' vendors have approached, because what is lacking in BIG$ is made up in volume.
My take on it is this:
Entry: ? (whatever is cheapest & easiest)
Middle: .Net, Open Source J2EE, ColdFusion & JRun
High: Big J2EE vendors .Net(?)
Open Source J2EE provides an excellent migration path for companies to move to higher-end products and systems as their business needs require, and really provides the only real alternative to .Net in the middle space of Enterprise systems.
|
|
|
Message #55348
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Sun's CEO McNealy Suggests Open Source Could Be Hurting J2EE
The problem is Sun failed to capitalize in their Java technology. They let opportunities slip through their fingers only to have others make a ton of money on it.
IBM, and WebLogic did pretty well with Java. I see that they have a marketing problem and not a technology problem.
|
|
|
Message #55349
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Sun's CEO McNealy Suggests Open Source Could Be Hurting J2EE
If people at Sun are reading this, there are still markets for Java technology that are wide open where they can make billions if they are smart enough and bold enough to capture those markets.
|
|
|
Message #55351
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Sun's CEO McNealy Suggests Open Source Could Be Hurting J2EE
I agree... the tools market is still wide open. Even though no one I know is going to trade in Eclipse or Idea, a good tool for EJB content generation that has an intuitive interface and can work well with existing database structures (automatically generating Entities) would be great. I've tried a few of them out there, and I can still code it quicker than those tools can produce it, if they even produce it properly. I'm sure there is a tool out there I haven't tried that might be good, but if SUN had it, I would know about it and probably purchase it if it could generate my entity beans and some skeleton Session beans. Some tools use custom java libraries to make things easier (Borland comes to mind), but most coders (at least me) hate the idea of adding another layer of fluff that isn't part of the official specs or we have the source and a license that allows us to play with it if we find a bug. I moved to Java to get away from Borlands BPL's that are buggy in places, and they take precious time to fix it leaving you to cludge your way around it. I moved to Java to avoid the tens of _documented_ bugs in windows that will never be fixed. (would be more, but there were about 10 undocumented bugs in office/windows as well and these are only the ones that costed my project thousands in developer time) Java is robust, but honestly, should you have to tell the computer 4 times in XML, the interface, the bean, and in the security descriptors what functions are available remotely and locally? Wouldn't a bean declaration itself and another simple XML file generated by a wizard be enough? In fact, couldn't the wizard with simple check boxes eliminate half your ailes in typos of function names and force developers to make more compatible code? SUN should stop relying on IBM, BEA, IntelliJ and the like to get the tools right. If they would get off their a$$es, they could make something better than Forte or their silly EJB wizard.
Another market that hasn't been explored by SUN is the Bean Provider role. They would make EJB's for sell to handle complex financial calculations or statistics. Who says everything they make has to be for free. I want to see them make some money too. They have some nice hardware, but it's really hard to compete with AMD, Intel, Motorola, and IBM. Intel's on their way into the high-end server market, and it's only going to get more difficult. They could revive the whole "Java Accelorator" concept, but I think they just found that creative software on faster hardware was cheaper than more complicated hardware. It would be really nice if they combined efforts with someone like transmeta to make a "Java CPU" with "code morphing"(TM).
Honestly, they can't hope to win without the technology being ubiquitous, and that's what open source does. They need to embrace open source to make it popular and sell support or other productivity software. If JBoss was certified, it would be everywhere, and those companies would have more money to spend elsewhere (like tools and components).
Finally, if all else fails, they could sell J2EE solutions themselves. Who would be more compitent at producing good Java code than the company that invented it?
|
|
|
Message #55352
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Sun's CEO McNealy Suggests Open Source Could Be Hurting J2EE
McNealy: "I think it's important to have a community process, open specs, and choice for the customer, absolutely. How that gets implemented, I don't particularly care."
Yes, indeed, community process and open specs are key parts of Javas success. Open specs give companies confidence to select technology from an innovative but not necessarily 'big' vendor ... you know that a spec will be supported one way or another. Open specs give small vendors a chance to compete based on merits. IMO, Sun deserves a lot credit for establishing this environment and for making a good job of maintaining it during all these years.
McNealy: "I actually think we need more revenue in the J2EE space, so that we can do more advertising to get the message out, because right now the world is getting blitzed with Microsoft advertising, and promotion and branding and propaganda, and big lies, and that's why they're going, not because it's a better product."
Perhaps more advertising dollars would not hurt ;-) Hopefully, Sun also realizes that Open Source projects have the same effect as millions of dollars spent on ads. Apache, NetBeans, Jboss and many others are extremely successful and well-known Java projects, they provide excellent technology at very low cost, thats a great message for the Java platform and a direct benefit to its users.
Sun has done a lot of good for the industry and, surely, itll be able to adapt and to make money in this (highly competitive) environment (thorough certification (yes, I do believe Jboss should pay for its certification), services etc). However, I doubt that stepping on Open Source is the way to Suns financial success (hopefully, that's not in Sun's intentions at all).
-- Igor
|
|
|
Message #55355
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Sun's CEO McNealy Suggests Open Source Could Be Hurting J2EE
Correct.
iPlanet app-server were not selling, but both WebSphere
and WebLogic are selling.
The obvious conclusion is that customers prefer
the IBM and BEA products for the SUN product.
And is is neither fair or make business sense
for SUN to blame an open source product for customers
not liking the SUN product.
And if SUN wants .NET to kill Java and J2EE, they
should just claim ownership and start charging for
everything.
In my opinion the success of Java is more due to
the myriad of free tools (all the Jakarta stuff,
JUnit, JBoss, jEdit etc. etc. - sorry the list
is too long to complete) than to SUN.
|
|
|
Message #55356
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Sun's CEO McNealy Suggests Open Source Could Be Hurting J2EE
Its about time SUN produced some intutive development tools for creating J2EE enabled application.
We are developing J2EE application for two years and we are still looking for something like VC++ that doesnt cost a fortune and eat up all the memory of the PC.
|
|
|
Message #55357
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Sun's CEO McNealy Suggests Open Source Could Be Hurting J2EE
>Java is robust, but honestly, should you have to tell the
>computer 4 times in XML, the interface, the bean, and in
>the security descriptors what functions are available
>remotely and locally? Wouldn't a bean declaration itself
>and another simple XML file generated by a wizard be
>enough?
Use XDoclet, tag the remote methods in your source code's javadoc comments, and all the rest is generated automatically for you. There's even a GUI being worked on to help you add the tags...
Andrew.
|
|
|
Message #55358
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Sun's CEO McNealy Suggests Open Source Could Be Hurting J2EE
The venerable Scott McNealy needs to go, it's as simple as that. During his tenure, Sun has done way too many things wrong and failed to capitalize on chances to make a big impact (and money).
Oh, what the hell - though I prefer writing code, I could clear my busy schedule for a few months and take over at Sun. Sun board members: you know where to reach me.
:-P
|
|
|
Message #55359
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Complexity Hurting J2EE? C'mon!
<quote>
At the end of the day, open source isn't hurting J2EE. Complexity is hurting J2EE.
</quote>
Neither is hurting J2EE - J2EE is completely learnable and is truly not that difficult if you just apply yourself ever so slightly (and you don't even have to do it on Friday nights ;-). And of course it offers more solution-bang for the buck than .NET because of the wide range of solutions (including the so-called web services) that development shops can implement on a wide range of hardware/OS platforms.
The comments have been right-on in this thread - BEA, IBM (and Oracle is making headway) provide products that people want to buy - Sun's product (at least the last time I used it) is horrible. I don't particularly care if its free. JBoss is good and free so I use it. When Sun produces good software I'll use it, too, if the situation warrants. To blame others on one's own bad software reflects poor knowledge of both your product and how the software industry has evolved over the past 5 years or so. The Open Source comments sound like the paranoid meanderings of people like Steve Balmer at Microsoft. The industry shows that if you have a good product, people will buy it - and for chrissake, if you are Sun Microsystems, your name alone will at least prompt others to try it - the fact that it hasn't made money reflects the software that Sun has produced not the evil Open Source products out there.
Cheers
Ray
|
|
|
Message #55362
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Sun's CEO McNealy Suggests Open Source Could Be Hurting J2EE
Don't kid yourself. Designing and constructing enterprise systems is not something you can adequately cover with wizards. Assuming they don't generate poorly designed, non-maintainable code (which is usually a bad assumption), they are nice for getting you started. But you need help with the inevitable tweaking (an understatement, really) that is *always* necessary. How about automated refactoring, real-time validation against specs/good programming practices, etc...
IMHO, writing these kinds of applications with EJB and J2EE has become much easier thanks to the specs. Sure, there is room for any number of improvements, but I think Java really shines on the server side. I am not interested in using tools aimed at neophytes, because they remove flexibility that I need. They may get you 80% there, but end up giving you applications that don't scale and that are difficult to maintain. They also encourage poor programming practices. And what if you need to do something outside of the model they provide? Well, you are out of luck. I never could create systems I was happy with using VB for these very reasons.
There are some things that could, and probably will be changed for the better in the specs, but the greatest room for improvement is in the tools space. Java by far has the best coding IDEs, but there is still much to do in the visual tools space. I am more optimistic here than you are. A number of these tools already remove the drudge work involved in creating components like EJBs, packaging them, and deploying them. Things will continue to get better. Instead of having just Microsoft working on improving tools, we have a number of companies/individuals in the Java space that will continue to innovate.
I welcome .Net, because it will make Java better in the end. Java still has a bright future.
Respectfully,
Bill
|
|
|
Message #55365
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Sun's CEO McNealy Suggests Open Source Could Be Hurting J2EE
Open source isn't hurting J2EE, it's not even hurting Sun. McWhiner is just sour because the other vendors still have a higher market share than the open source alternatives (Sun does not).
The fact is, if there were no open source alternatives, we still wouldn't buy iPlanet/SunOne garbage. Why? Go to their website and look to see when iWS going to be Servlet 2.3/JSP 1.2/JDK 1.4 compliant. They can't keep up with their own specs!
So, is open source hurting Java/J2EE? No. It's the only thing keeping it alive in my opinion. If there were no open source/freeware alternatives in the Java space, then Microsoft might actually have a case for .Net. I know I wouldn't be very excited about Java any more...but maybe Scott wouldn't mind that so much. ;-)
Cheers,
Clinton Begin
http://www.ibatis.com/jpetstore/jpetstore.html
|
|
|
Message #55366
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Sun's CEO McNealy Suggests Open Source Could Be Hurting J2EE
I agree with you that they should seel J2EE themselves. SUN should onsider diversifying in:
1. Being a J2EE consultant
2. Being a J2EE Consultant's consultant.
|
|
|
Message #55367
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Sun's CEO McNealy Suggests Open Source Could Be Hurting J2EE
Interesting thoughts from mr McNealy, and I for one agree with most of them. Specifically:
>No, we've already got one. It's called the Sun ONE app server.
> It's certified. Do I think it's important? I don't know what
> that means.
Absolutely true, he has no idea what that means.
>I actually think we need more revenue in the J2EE space, so
>that we can do more advertising to get the message out,
>because right now the world is getting blitzed with Microsoft
>advertising, and promotion and branding and propaganda, and
>big lies, and that's why they're going, not because it's a
>better product.
Yes, we need more revenue in the J2EE space, but not in terms of J2EE server sales, but rather in J2EE tools and applications sales. What's more important? 10 ads saying "Here's our great J2EE server!! Buy it!" or "Here's our great app, more functional, more secure, faster than anything else on the market. Powered by J2EE". I'd prefer the latter, thank you very much. More substance.
In JBoss we have said from the beginning:
J2EE is infrastructure. Infrastructure should be free and open. Applications written on top of J2EE is where the money is, in terms of product sales. It just makes sense (unless you're BEA or IBM).
>So, potentially you could make an argument that the open
>source thing is just screwing up all the revenue models and
>we aren't getting the advertising, because it isn't the best
> technology that always wins, it's who advertises more.
Is OpenSource screwing up all the revenue models? No, just the old ones. Newer models built with OpenSource in mind, such as service models or apps-on-top-of-OSS is better for everyone involved, except those who cling onto the old ways. Well, wake up and smell the napalm. Evolve and adapt or die.
>..because the open source community is cutting the legs out
>from under all the R&D and promotion efforts of all the open
> interface strategies -- not open implementation, but open
>interface strategies.
ROTFLMAO! Let's start with the R&D point. Generalizing wildly there are three types of R&D folks: those in academia, those at corporations, and those in OpenSource. In my experience the most motivated and out-there ones are in OpenSource. Why? Because (as the saying goes) "99.9% of the best developers in the world doesn't work for you". So, if you're a really talented developer at a company or academic instituion the best way to develop your 1337 skillzz is to find other talented developers at other companies, and work with them. How? Through OpenSource, or rather "Open Development" a la SourceForge. Kinda obvious, isn't it.
When it comes to "open interface strategies" I'm not quite sure what to say. It's such a big lie. Pretty much all of the OpenSource projects either a) implement open interfaces or b) use open interfaces or c) both implement and use open interfaces. OpenSource is *the* biggest proponent of open interfaces, because it freakin' makes sense. Open interface strategies for closed source development is always a kind of "yes yes, but no no" because they want it because customers like it but they don't want it because they need an edge, and what better way to do it than to use closed interfaces in some strategic places.
So while I agree with most of his view of reality, I *like* it this way whereas he don't.
/Rickard, one of the founders of JBoss
ps. .. who also expects now to be flamed by employees of companies who shares Scott's fear of what's happening. ;-)
|
|
|
Message #55369
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Sun's CEO McNealy Suggests Open Source Could Be Hurting J2EE
>And is is neither fair or make business
>sense for SUN to blame an open source
>product for customers not liking the
>SUN product.
Perhaps Sun should open source their iPlannet application server.
|
|
|
Message #55371
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Sun's CEO McNealy Suggests Open Source Could Be Hurting J2EE
Rickard: "What's more important? 10 ads saying "Here's our great J2EE server!! Buy it!" or "Here's our great app, more functional, more secure, faster than anything else on the market. Powered by J2EE". I'd prefer the latter, thank you very much. More substance."
Ultimately, the only substance ;-) ... app servers without apps are somewhat useless.
Rickard: "In JBoss we have said from the beginning: J2EE is infrastructure. Infrastructure should be free and open. Applications written on top of J2EE is where the money is, in terms of product sales. It just makes sense (unless you're BEA or IBM)."
I would agree that the standards and the ability to interoperate should be free, and nowadays companies rarely choose to base important investments around "closed standards".
Assuming that the server must be free is a bit overboard. While developers and groups like JBoss have every right to give their work away for free (in any meaning of free they so choose), that should not mean that commercial ventures are not welcome. As I've pointed out before, the goal of JBoss should be to be a great server, not to be an answer or a foil to BEA. The sooner the entire JBoss group gets over its BEA envy (<g>) the sooner JBoss will be free to succeed on its own merits.
And by the way, access to BEA documentation is free ;-).
Peace,
Cameron Purdy
Tangosol, Inc.
|
|
|
Message #55372
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Sun's CEO McNealy Suggests Open Source Could Be Hurting J2EE
All the open source fanatics forget where Java comes from:
A commercial company
This company has been more than generous in even letting JBoss exist. Now, its like the child is trying to eat its mother -It will be interesting to see when (not if) SUN takes a harder line against Open Source -just like microsoft.
The truth is that Open source is counter-productive to innovation, investment, and competition. You don't have to be a CEO to recognize this.
|
|
|
Message #55373
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Sun's CEO McNealy Suggests Open Source Could Be Hurting J2EE
>The truth is that Open source is counter-productive
>to innovation, investment, and competition. You
>don't have to be a CEO to recognize this.
Actually, there has been alot of innovation in open source and companies like IBM have figured out how to profit from open source and invest in open source projects like Linux and web services. I see alot of competiton because of the markets that are created due to open source development.
Anyone who does not recognize this should not be a CEO.
|
|
|
Message #55374
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Sun's CEO McNealy Suggests Open Source Could Be Hurting J2EE
The real issue is not .NET or Open Source. It's this:
As the world evolves, the line of what individuals and organizations are actually willing to pay for rises. Look at the kazaa and all those other file sharing programs. I'm not saying they are right, but obviously the world's standards for what media and music is worth is lowering every day. Eventually, these industries will die or will have to give some compelling reason to buy.
The same goes with Open source. With more projects and skilled developers making free software, our tolerance things on what we are willing to buy. JBoss vs. a $50k implementation of BEA WebLogic + addons? Give it 30-50 years, the concept of money just won't exist anymore. People will make things because the world needs then, not because we have these N-dimensional partner-consumer-supplier relationships that are practically meaningless if capitalism just didn't exist.
What we see is the first of these movements. Organizations like Sun and Microsoft better start to see it too.
|
|
|
Message #55375
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Sun's CEO McNealy Suggests Open Source Could Be Hurting J2EE
As I see it, then SUN has not "let JBoss exist" - instead
JBoss has helped promote J2EE.
There are plenty of opportunities to make money
on J2EE - IBM and BEA are doing it. SUN has just not
been capable of doing the same.
That is not JBoss's fault. It is SUN's fault. I doubt
that SUN will sell one single iPlanet Enterprise
license if JBoss disappeared tomorrow.
SUN will not make more Money by going after
the Java open source community. They migth
hurt Java real bad (in the extreme they may kill
it totally).
And I do not understand your disrespect for open
source - I think Linux and Apache has proved that
open source can be a success.
|
|
|
Message #55376
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Sun's CEO McNealy Suggests Open Source Could Be Hurting J2EE
> The real issue is not .NET or Open Source.
I agree with you here. There are companies out thare that are willing to pay Weblogic, IBM, and Oracle $50K for a fully supported application server. Sun should be making money in that market space. If they failed to compete there then blame their own marketing department. Sun need to point the finger at itself rather than make excuses.
I have suspected for a long time that there is a deficit of brain power in Sun's marketing department and the fact that they have not capitalized on their own standards and technology is proof of that.
|
|
|
Message #55377
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Sun's CEO McNealy Suggests Open Source Could Be Hurting J2EE
> ...their stock price is below $4.
Sounds like a bargain to me. If you have money in an IRA account, perhaps you should snap some Sun stock up while it is still cheap -- Just my opinion that Sun is a strong company that will figure out what they have been doing wrong in terms of marketing and fix the problem.
|
|
|
Message #55378
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Sun's CEO McNealy Suggests Open Source Could Be Hurting J2EE
/**
Don't kid yourself. Designing and constructing enterprise systems is not something you can adequately cover with wizards **/
I think Bill you nailed it on the head. Unfortunately lot of people pay too much attention on the Wizrads and tools becuase it is very easy for them to visualize. Throw some one the best Microsoft technology ever (VB) and the best of breed tools (Visual studio) and ask them to write multi threaded Trasanctional applications, on the other hand I can use my $16 Ultradedit editor using Java/J2EE API, guess who can acomplish the task first:-)
Again it is the right framework that counts in the long run, not some fancy Wizrads/tools.
|
|
|
Message #55379
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Sun's CEO McNealy Suggests Open Source Could Be Hurting J2EE
At the risk of going a little bit off-topic, I'd say there will always be a kind of market economy where limited resources exist, including expertise. Yes, we might get rid of limits and control on physical resources and production but expertise and knowledge are still limited by the number and quality of individuals who know how to do "stuff". Ultimately, I suspect (and hope) that my grandchildren's children will come to see the current state of the world as a kind of global poverty.
I think that open source/free software provide the backend to organizations that are the first of their kind to have the capability for affecting large scale changes in their environment mostly based on their influence/clout. The normal reaction from individuals and organizations who see themselves at the top of food chain is first to protect the existing situation or, failing that, protect their places in a changing world. It seems to me that the flares from McNealy are an effort to reconcile Sun's inertia to these changes with an unforgiving reality that keeps them off their feet.
|
|
|
Message #55380
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Sun's CEO McNealy Suggests Open Source Could Be Hurting J2EE
This man is amusingly silly! He says:
>I actually think we need more revenue in the J2EE space, so
>that we can do more advertising to get the message out,
>because right now the world is getting blitzed with Microsoft
>advertising, and promotion and branding and propaganda, and
>big lies, and that's why they're going, not because it's a
>better product.
Yet he seems to want to "Blitz" Open-Source in particular JBoss with their own advertising and as such get their PRODUCT not message out not on its merits but on marketing.
I grow weary of Sun's crybaby antics, other people are content to try and make money from J2EE, which to Sun's credit is a very good concept and technology.
|
|
|
Message #55382
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Sun's CEO McNealy Suggests Open Source Could Be Hurting J2EE
>Assuming that the server must be free is a bit overboard.
>While developers and groups like JBoss have every right to
>give their work away for free (in any meaning of free they so
>choose), that should not mean that commercial ventures are not
> welcome. As I've pointed out before, the goal of JBoss should
> be to be a great server, not to be an answer or a foil to
>BEA. The sooner the entire JBoss group gets over its BEA envy
>(<g>) the sooner JBoss will be free to succeed on its own
>merits.
FWIW, I never subscribed to the "BEA envy" part of the whole deal. I agree that it's completely ludicrous and simply a bad approach.
FWIW, I also never assumed that all servers should be free by people working for free. If someone can make a good server and make a living out of it (such as my good friends over at OrionServer.com), then I'm all for it (in principle). *I'm* not the one to judge *how* to do it: that's what other developers making J2EE apps should do. For me OpenSource is the right way, for other's it isn't. Big deal.
I welcome any approach to making J2EE work. That's the ultimate meaning of "free" I guess. Which is, FWIW, one of my main reasons why I don't like the GPL: it enforces the view of the author of the code on the one using it. To me, that's not "freedom", because that involves a choice where all variants are "right".
Aaanyway. Peace, Love, and Good Code.
/Rickard
|
|
|
Message #55383
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Sun's CEO McNealy Suggests Open Source Could Be Hurting J2EE
<quote>
The truth is that Open source is counter-productive to innovation, investment, and competition. You don't have to be a CEO to recognize this.
</quote>
I disagree 100% - Open Source *drives* innovation and competition and hence investment. Anyone who doesn't recognize that won't be a CEO for too much longer.
Cheers
Ray
|
|
|
Message #55384
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Sun's CEO McNealy Suggests Open Source Could Be Hurting J2EE
Perhaps the way to for Sun to sell J2EE is to emulate the business model of IBM. They have IT departments that can build the entire solution for the customer -- and wouldn't you know, the solution involves WebSphere.
The cost of outsourcing a solution has some tax appeal too like being able to depreciate all of the costs.
|
|
|
Message #55386
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Sun's CEO McNealy Suggests Open Source Could Be Hurting J2EE
JBoss helps J2EE by generating additional interest in the Java/J2EE platform.
Sun has been pretty active in the Open Source arena:
1) Sun bought StarOffice. Soon afterwards, Sun created
http://www.openoffice.org/ (open source office suite)
2) Sun bought NetBeans. Soon afterward, Sun created
http://www.netbeans.org/ (open source Java IDE)
3) Sun donated the Tomcat servlet engine code
to http://jakarta.apache.org/tomcat/
4) Sun has engineers contributing code to
Jakarta projects such as Jakarta Struts and
Jakarta Commons. These Sun people include
Craig R. McClanahan and Remy Maucherat.
|
|
|
Message #55388
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Sun's CEO McNealy Suggests Open Source Could Be Hurting J2EE
Hi Rickard,
<quote>
ROTFLMAO! Let's start with the R&D point. Generalizing wildly there are three types of R&D folks: those in academia, those at corporations, and those in OpenSource. In my experience the most motivated and out-there ones are in OpenSource.
</quote>
The generalization you just made is really too wide. People doing CS research (in AT&T labs, IBM, Microsoft research, academia etc) generally have nothing to do with actual implementations - quite often they are not coders at all - they formulate and prove (or disprove) theorems and lemmas. This is a very expensive process, which requires corporate funding, research grants, etc.
--
Dimitri
|
|
|
Message #55389
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Sun's CEO McNealy Suggests Open Source Could Be Hurting J2EE
On the wizards topic (off-topic a little):
I just don't think that you can type descriptive function names into ejb-jar.xml (both the bean declarations and security and transactions), MyBeanHome.java, MyBean.java, MyBeanEJB.java for any project worth using J2EE as quick as a tool could generate it. I agree the tool should not write any real code, just declarations so the programmer still has to think about the code. There are finite options for attributes of functions (Local/Remote, return type, arguements, security role required, transaction attributes) that require a lot more time to type than is neccisary. I'll have to take a look at XDoclet, but I'm skeptical. It would just be great to reduce the chance for typos, forgotten or bad throw clauses, forgotten security/transaction attributes for functions, etc. It would be extremely cool if there was a way to specify all pertinant information about a bean in one place. As it is now, you have about 6 different files to look in. I don't particularly care for all the redundant typing even with auto-completion (which is a lot better than the old way). Refactoring should be handled by the same tool so that it is "EJB Aware" unlike most editors that are only aware of direct references from other files. I for one would pay for such a tool if it had a nice GUI :)
|
|
|
Message #55390
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Sun's CEO McNealy Suggests Open Source Could Be Hurting J2EE
Thanks to SUN's Business Development Strategy, they(SUN) succeeded in taking themselves out of game and are hell-bent on taking down bright small companies along with them. The only choice they left for upstarts developing J2EE based products is to take the contrarian stance. "Create OPEN SOURCE product and pray for SUPPORT fees."
The last time I saw they have 37 J2EE licensees, while there are more than thousand companies developing components for J2EE. Doesn't that number sound wrong to CEO. Is their licensing model working? Do you know how much microsoft charges for certifying/licensing .NET? You will be surprised.
-Stevens
|
|
|
Message #55391
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Sun's CEO McNealy Suggests Open Source Could Be Hurting J2EE
<quote>
And by the way, access to BEA documentation is free ;-).
</quote>
Interesting, I was puzzled about this myself. Does anybody know where JBoss documentation is? www.jboss.org "documentation" link points to a collection of ads for JBoss publications. The only "free" documentation available there is "A free volunteer maintained manual was developed in the early stages of JBoss 2.0".
Does this mean that the product is free but the documentation is not?
--
Dimitri
|
|
|
Message #55396
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Sun's CEO McNealy Suggests Open Source Could Be Hurting J2EE
> Does this mean that the product is free
> but the documentation is not?
Keep in mind that pricewise, you are comapting apple and oranges when comparing Weblogic and JBoss. They have different pricing model.
Weblogic costs $10K per CPU and JBoss is free, but the extensive documentation for JBoss costs around 10 dollars.
10 dollars is small price to pay for documentation for a quality product when the alternative is $10K for Weblogic.
I have seen whiners who complain about the 10 dollar price for the documentation. Nothing is free the time the sponsores of JBoss puts into developing the product is extensive and they are entitled to be conpensated for their efforts.
As for the whiners, if they have not contributed to JBoss through development or through supporting others then all I have to say is be grateful that you don't have to pay the $10K.
If people still want to whine about the price then I say go pay the $10K for Weblogic and get their free documentation. As for me, I prefer the free JBoss app server and paying 10 dollars for the documentation.
|
|
|
Message #55398
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Sun's CEO McNealy Suggests Open Source Could Be Hurting J2EE
Dmitri,
You said
"The generalization you just made is really too wide. People doing CS research (in AT&T labs, IBM, Microsoft research, academia etc) generally have nothing to do with actual implementations - quite often they are not coders at all - they formulate and prove (or disprove) theorems and lemmas. This is a very expensive process, which requires corporate funding, research grants, etc. "
I work primarily in research right now (Northwest Alliance for Computational Science and Engineering). I don't remotely get how you came to this conclusion. While it's definitely not the same as commercial development (did that for a while before research), we definitely have to deliver, or we stop getting money to do research.
The difference really comes down to mentality and paradigm. In commercial the objective is to reach the goal through the shortest-distance/least-effort/most cost-effective. In research the objective is to come up with a new way to reach the goal. Both require consistent, strong delivery.
Sure there are plenty of ivory tower CS people, but you'll find them as much (if not more) in commercial than in research. In commercial it's easy to be Ivory Tower, as so often the people around you don't understand. In research at universities and R&D companies like IBM you can't get away with that. Too many people with good understanding, and too much money on the line.
I feel as much, if not more pressure to deliver than in commercial.
-Newt
|
|
|
Message #55399
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Sun's CEO McNealy Suggests Open Source Could Be Hurting J2EE
I agree with everything said here (well almost).
Sun was slow to pick up the ball in regards to app servers.
Sun One is not in the "A" catagory yet.
Their hardware is overpriced when you compare it to something like Oracle's unstoppable Linux.
Mr. McNealy should not bad mouth some of Java's most devoted followers.
Repeat after me : Open source is good !
But, let us take the time to remember, there would be no Java if it was not for Sun. IBM would not have done it.
IBM is deftly using open source to bludgeon Sun (and hopefully Microsoft) with. It doesn't take Sigmund Freud to see why IBM named there open source IDE - Eclipse - in response to Sun's Open Source Netbeans; and has helped shut Sun out of some key web services committees. The only reason I point out IBM is because: who else is there ?
At least IBM is giving to Open source. I am not saying that Sun was being purely philanthropic; but, I think what Scott
is really saying is : HELP!!
Sun is being eaten at the bottom end by Linux and MSFT and by IBM and (soon) HP at the top end. Open source is Scott's scapegoat. If he could only see that it is his savour.
Wake up and smell the coffee Scott. You gotta compete on price with Linux; make a Sun Linux on AMD's Opteron; sell the boxes pre-configured with open source software; then beef up the SPARC and invest in Solaris. Keep the full version Star Office open source and invest in your support
team.
All this advice is open source.
|
|
|
Message #55400
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Sun's CEO McNealy Suggests Open Source Could Be Hurting J2EE
<Q>
Does this mean that the product is free but the documentation is not?
</Q>
No, it means that you have a CHOICE, you can either use the free documentation contributed by volunteers, or you can get documentation with a little more consistency and effort being put in for as little as $10.
Which ever you wish to read is up to you. Or just read the source, that too works for some people.
--
Thomas
|
|
|
Message #55401
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Sun's CEO McNealy Suggests Open Source Could Be Hurting J2EE
Another way Sun can compete is to agressivley push their iPlanet server onto third party software that needs an application server to run on. Software application that use servlets often ship their demo software and, it would be better if it had a full blown app server as part of their installation instead of just a servlet/JSP engine.
Sun need to work with the J2EE software application developers to make it easier for them to embed their product into iPlanet and to help them produce a demo CD of their app embedded with iPlanet.
|
|
|
Message #55406
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
A superficially convincing argument with a fatal flaw
McNealy's argument is that it is advertising that wins markets, not software quality alone. To win against .NET, J2EE needs strong advertising dollars to be spent over the next few years. For such money to be available, commercial J2EE vendors must be able to make sufficient margins. The presence of Open Source J2EE is preventing commercial J2EE vendors from making money, and thus starving J2EE of advertising dollars. Thus, Open Source will be responsible for the victory of .NET over J2EE.
That argument sounds superficially convincing, but McNealy's assumption doesn't hold true with Open Source. Apache became (and remains) the world's leading webserver without a cent spent on advertising by anyone. Linux may now be promoted by companies like IBM, but it got to the stage where it was good enough to be championed, without either advertising dollars or research dollars being spent on it.
Open Source is its own R&D and its own advertising. Applying the commercial model to Open Source is simply wrong. McNealy's point may have been relevant to the pre-Open Source world, but everything has changed now.
The only way for J2EE to beat .NET is through its Open Source implementations, - JBoss today, and Jonas and OpenEJB tomorrow. My fear is that Sun will never understand this, and end up doing something really stupid, such as taking legal action against JBoss to stop its distribution. If that happens, it will be Sun, not Open Source, that will be responsible for the victory of .NET over J2EE.
Ganesh Prasad
|
|
|
Message #55407
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Sun's CEO McNealy Suggests Open Source Could Be Hurting J2EE
I don't understand his arguement.
A) Open Source takes revenue from people that would advertise J2EE
B) J2EE isn't being advertised because of A.
But I don't understand how this could be possible considering JBoss's popularity. The first time I a lot of my friends heard about J2EE was the JBoss article on Slashdot.
McNealy shouldn't be upset at all. If people are choosing .Net because it's advertised and not because it is a better product, then those companies are seriously lacking in research and intelligence. When Company.Net gets their product to market and have to compete with J2EE-Company, Company.Net is going to have to match J2EE-Companies prices. When they do, every licence fee for Windows X.X Serever and every license fee for MSSQL is going to come out of Company.Net's pocket. J2EE-Company will be able to sell their product with JBoss/Jonas/Tomcat/Jetty and MySQL/PostgreSQL/SAP/HSQL on a Motorola/AMD/Intel/Sparc/Arm/Toaster-Oven running OSX/WinNT/Linux/Unix/Aix/Solaris for much less overhead. When .Net companies start dropping like the .Coms, who advertised better isn't going to make one bit of difference. The server/enterprise market is virtually unpenatrable by MS anyhow because of previous and ongoing security, performance, licensing, or just plain stability issues. Advertising is for week products or for products targeted at week minded people.
Honestly, do you want the fool who didn't research to blame his failure on J2EE because he saw a cool ad for it, bought it, but was too incompetant to make it work?
|
|
|
Message #55408
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Sun's CEO McNealy Suggests Open Source Could Be Hurting J2EE
Hi Sam,
You may want to take a look at ObjectAssembler. It initially generates all of the necessary code for your EJBs. It allows you to view your enterprise beans as one single component, while still allowing you to easily get under the covers. You may choose to work with your beans with this visual representation or from the code editor, and both are kept in synch. It also validates (against the specs) your beans in real-time as you work.
I would be interested in your opinion of how we do this. FYI, we are planning a maintenance release in about a week (just let me know if you run into any problems before then).
Happy coding...
Regards,
Bill
|
|
|
Message #55413
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Sun's CEO McNealy Suggests Open Source Could Be Hurting J2EE
Here I provide Sun CEO the strategy for free. If it works, please write me an email.
Sun can not sell iPlanet Servers because users do not like it. iPlanet failed does not come from open source J2EE implementations. Why Weblogic was sold out pretty well.
iPlanet dates back to Netscape Servers and it has many junky codes NOT for J2EE. I meant it is not tidy, compact, and easy to use as Weblogic or OC4J.
Solution... is Sun need to dump iPlanet Server and buy Weblogic. If Sun can not buy Weblogic because BEA is huge now, Sun still can buy Orion Server and fill in the Webservice stacks.
Sun still can start from fresh with tidy J2EE server and build up the Portal, Wireless, Intergration and Webservices stacks. In deed the money put on high level frameworks will be much more than the pure J2EE infrastructure. J2EE Server will become commodity stuff even it is very important.
Best regards,
Thanh
thanhdoanchi@yahoo.com
|
|
|
Message #55417
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Sun's CEO McNealy Suggests Open Source Could Be Hurting J2EE
Point #1. Dot Net is better than J2EE the way Sun sells J2EE (read the next point)
J2EE is sold as must have EJB for DAO.
As a software engineer, we are to pick best:
Simpler
Cheaper
Faster
Easier to develop
Easier to deploy
More flexible (any sql statement (self join, correlated, outer) and multi row support)
Only non software engineers strive for complex and expensive and hence slow.
EJB is very expensive ($15K per license and up) and has bad phone support by vendors.
Sun is at $4 now and it will go out of business the way Digital has because it does not know how to sell software as good as MS (and it HW is expensive and according to tpc.org slower than cheap Intel machines).
Companies that did try to deploy EJB in production or maintain it get disgusted. Then comes a 3rd party solution vendor and says
. If you use the cheaper IIS and cheaper SQL ADO, you will develop faster and save money, here let me show you.
It would be prefers for a manager to chose something slower and more expensive.
Any version of EJB fairly quickly leads a customer to use .NET and webForm and ADO on their next project!
I have lost many clients to .NET and I am flaming. Objectively, .NET is better and cheaper if you look at it from a software engineering point of view.
Also C# and byte code is ECMA open standard.
EJB is .NETs best sales tool for converting clients over. Sun plays this in by saying one should use EJB with J2EE. OpenEJB is just as BAD.
(see www.basebeans.com/bad.jsp for more on EJB)
Lastly, it would be easy to write MVC in C#
Point #2. Open source, like Jakrta (Tomcat, Struts, Standard Tags, etc) and SourceForge (basicPortal, Jasper, etc) and others (OpenOffice.org, PostgreSQL.org, Linuxes, Eclipse IDE) are better and cheaper and faster than dot Net.
This to me means J2EE is great, most of it (Except EJB).
Tomcat can handle a large load for free, PostgreSQL is very fast under very largeDB and is free, Struts is a great framework etc.
And each open source has great support for FREE.
Semi-free is Resin and dbExperts and they have good support.
My experience is J2EE bad. .Net Good.
Open Source BEST.
We are trying to add value and save companies money 2 ways. Finding a way for them to use IT to save money and make money. And do that the fastest and cheapest way.
If Sun deprecates EJB and standardizes on a DAO interfaces (that could use RowSet or JDO or any other implementation internally - sample DAO interfaces is at CVS of basicportal.sourceforge.net ) that would go a long way.
Sun might keep giving away the JRE but charge some $ for SDK.
Sun should stop selling HW or sell that to IBM.
Sun should do more Linux, as it just announced (and get rid of SlowLaris).
This sounds like a sales pitch but its not since it is open source.
I tried to implement (and not just say) good practices in web app development to save money in basicPortal (MVC struts, standard tags, fast db access, DAO, event driven, easy).
I mean
. How hard is it to write Hello world using Pet Cemetery? Vs WebForms in ASP?
BasicPortal shows you how to do this better than .Net or PetStore.
(Also, JavaServer Faces
if it does not make Struts the reference implementation will make a big mistake).
Currently Sun makes money on J2EE licensing to BEA, etc. (BEA are losing market share to IBM.)
Conclusion:
Open Source is best.
Sun will go out of business as all of its revenue streams dry up and because it does not know how to sell software, it competes with its 3rd party vendors (MS forbids competition with its resellers and consults).
A good open source vendor is IBM which endorses Linux on Mainframes and elsewhere and it is able to sell Java.
It will be MS(+Dell) vs IBM in the end.
Recommendation:
Please use more standard open source to save your company money and demonstrate it.
Wasting company money on bad J2EE (EJB)
Better than webForms is basicPortal and I will continue to improve it.
I really wish best for Java, and best for it is open source.
My 2 c.
Vic
|
|
|
Message #55418
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Sun's CEO McNealy Suggests Open Source Could Be Hurting J2EE
<quote>
tool could generate it. I agree the tool should not write any real code
</quote>
WebLogic 7 ships with a GUI tool called Builder that will automatically create deployment descriptors for you if all you have is EJB classes. Builder will go as far as figuring out relationships, CMP fields, etc...
--
Cedric
|
|
|
Message #55421
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Sun's CEO McNealy Suggests Open Source Could Be Hurting J2EE
Hi Newt,
<quote>
we definitely have to deliver, or we stop getting money to do research.
</quote>
Of course everybody has to deliver ;-) I meant to say that in case of research these deliverables are not nesessarily java code (or any code for that matter).
--
Dimitri
|
|
|
Message #55423
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Sun's CEO McNealy Suggests Open Source Could Be Hurting J2EE
Listen Mommy, if it weren't for IBM and BEA, java would have died in your womb.
|
|
|
Message #55426
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Sun's CEO McNealy Suggests Open Source Could Be Hurting J2EE
>>10 dollars is small price to pay for documentation for a
>>quality product when the alternative is $10K for Weblogic.
I think we need to keep things in perspective - keep an eye on the real costs in a project. There is way too much fixation on license costs.
Depending on the respective sizes of the development and deployment, even 10K/cpu is a relatively small cost. In general, the licenses costs make up a small proportion of the *total* costs of a project.
1) Development costs FAR outweigh license costs.
2) Support and maintenance represents 70-80% of the total cost of a project over its lifetime.
Its been summed up well in an earlier post:
Open Source software is good - so long as the value is greater than its cost. And the license cost is a small part of the total cost.
-Nick
|
|
|
Message #55427
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Sun's CEO McNealy Suggests Open Source Could Be Hurting J2EE
>Depending on the respective sizes of the development
>and deployment, even 10K/cpu is a relatively small
>cost. In general, the licenses costs make up a
>small proportion of the *total* costs of a
>project.
I am in complete agreement here. Choosing the right app server also depends on the type of project.
|
|
|
Message #55430
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Tickets - Tickets - Get your Tickets!
Copy and Paste from the LinuxWorldExpo website:
http://www.linuxworldexpo.com/linuxworldexpo/v31/index.cvn?ID=10028&p_navid=2
Scott McNealy, CEO and Chairman of Sun Microsystems, will share his ideas on Linux, and how Sun will participate in the open source community to ensure continued choice, innovation and compatibility, while still managing to make money in the process. Mr. McNealy will talk about new Sun products and services that will expand the company's commitment to supporting the Linux community. Mr. McNealy will also discuss the need for developers to write to a higher order platform like Sun ONE, as opposed to writing to a proprietary application binary interface, which he feels is "so last millennium."
|
|
|
Message #55439
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Sun's CEO McNealy Suggests Open Source Could Be Hurting J2EE
<quote>"At the end of the day, open source isn't hurting J2EE. Complexity is hurting J2EE." Jason Weiss</quote>
J2EE is overly complex and fails to deliver full compatibility between Appservers. Problems such as Classloading hierarchies, differences in EAR deployment and self certification for each app server means you have to know about each appserver even when you write to the J2EE APIs and specs.
<quote>"Sun can not sell iPlanet Servers because users do not like it." Thanh Doan</quote>
Having worked with most appservers iPlanet is bottom of my list. It is difficult to install and unpleasant to use.
Sun really need to do something more constructive than release APIs, they need to run software as a business that they value as much as their hardware ops.
|
|
|
Message #55441
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Tickets - Tickets - Get your Tickets!
He is speaking to business not techies. As such he is seen as talking rubbish. i.e. talking to business is all about how you say stuff, and nothing to do with reality (loved the links). How many of us have been in sales meetings and had to keep ourselves silent as the sale folks go off on one.
This isn't to say they are wrong to do so. Without sales people doing a number on clients there would be no money for the techies - even if your product is in its golden moment of brilliance it soon ages and then sales speak is really needed.
So all this interview shows is an amazing mismatch in the speaker to the audience.
The background of open source v's big tech companies is fascinating. And it is going to create far more tension over the next few years. The fundamental problem is that a group of 5 programmers (or 2) with no families (ie loads of time) can develop world class systems which wipe out mego co's prize baby. So open source can pull in 100 folks and achieve far more.
I wonder if tech co's may respond by buying out the key movers. A short term solution that could work. Or sabotage. :) Pay one of the subscribers to an os project to inject loads of bugs... that can't be corp espionage as there is no corp.. That would be fun.
Jonathan
|
|
|
Message #55443
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Sun's CEO McNealy Suggests Open Source Could Be Hurting J2EE
Hi all,
I think J2EE must have:
- Very good IDE like Microsoft Visual Studio. Its very hard to deploy a J2EE application to Application Server.
- Many and many companies, such as: IBM, SUN, BEA, Borland
and many open source organizations support J2EE standard.
- Added standard like SOAP to communicate from J2EE platform to MS .NET platform. (The HTTP standard is a technical revolution)
Best wish,
|
|
|
Message #55469
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Sun's Sun CEO McNealy loses the plot
> So, potentially you could make an argument that the open
> source thing is just screwing up all the revenue models
> the open source community is cutting the legs out from under
> all the R&D and promotion efforts of all the open interface
> strategies -- not open implementation, but open interface
> strategies.
Right - how must Craig McClanahan be feeling right now? His boss comes right out and says that his work is undermining his employer, that Tomcat undermines the Servlet and JSP specs!
What about the NetBeans people - are they undermining Forte? Are the OpenOffice people undermining StarOffice? (Note that the OpenOffice community were _very_ pissed off last week when Sun 'announced' that they would be co-operating with Apple over a StarOffice port to OSX - without happening to check with the OpenOffice developers first... Proves they really understand open-source!)
For a company with such strong ties with open-source efforts, it seems odd that he apparently has not read Eric Raymond's 'The Cathedral and the Bazaar', which states quite clearly that:
"Perhaps in the end the open-source culture will triumph not because cooperation is morally right or software "hoarding" is morally wrong... [snip] but simply because the closed-source world cannot win an evolutionary arms race with open-source communities that can put orders of magnitude more skilled time into a problem."
Raymond's point is that open-source, by its very nature will undermine closed-source. So it seems insane for a company that has put so much time and resources into open-source (and this seems to be increasing rather than decreasing) to claim that their work is being undermined by it.
The only rational explanation is that McNealy differentiates in his own mind between the open-source projects that he believes that Sun controls (Tomcat, NetBeans, OpenOffice) and ones that they palpably don't (JBoss).
McNealy's approach as a CEO has always been questionable (the ritual bad-mouthing of Microsoft has served more, IMHO, to undermine his credibility rather than MS's), but I really think he has reached the point where he doesn't have a clue how Sun can work with (non-Sun led) open-source, which (again IMHO) casts doubts over their relationship with the whole open-source community.
/david
|
|
|
Message #55474
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Sun's CEO McNealy Suggests Open Source Could Be Hurting J2EE
This appears to be a rather short sighted statement. If Mr. McNeely and his counterparts could have found a way to agree to some sort of standard during the UNIX wars, would we even be having such a discussion about M$?
I am having a very hard time understanding how open-source like JBoss is bad for the J2EE revenue stream, but a free Sun One is not? However, free poop is still free poop. Hence, why JBoss does so well and why Bluestone has gone away and Sun One will go the same route.
If the Java world is going to take down .NET, a low cost J2EE application server is needed. Which is why I can not understand Mr. McNeely's comments. JBoss and other open source projects are lowering the cost to entry into J2EE. The reason .NET is here in the first place is because of the HUGE costs associated with J2EE from training, to app servers, to tools, etc. The more costs we can eliminate from this platform, the better chance there will be to take down .NET. The more developer centric tools there are the better we will be.
Microsoft has a new license that is making a lot of their customers unhappy. That with low cost J2EE could be what the Java world needs.
Maybe the answer for Sun and Mr. McNeely is to let go of Java. If you are not making money b/c there is no revenue model, let others figure it out. Do what you do best, make hardware and a good OS.
|
|
|
Message #55476
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Tickets - Tickets - Get your Tickets!
Business audience or technical audience, he still misses the mark. To the business person, which I am, his statement is EXTREMELY CONTRADICTORY as his company just annouced a FREE J2EE product a few weeks back. So in this case, free closed source, is better than free open source. One helps the revenue model and the other hurts it?
I am confused....
|
|
|
Message #55477
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Sun's CEO McNealy Suggests Open Source Could Be Hurting J2EE
Peter: "Weblogic costs $10K per CPU and JBoss is free, but the extensive documentation for JBoss costs around 10 dollars."
Just to be clear, the original post did have a grin attached. I was kidding with Rickard (who has my greatest respect) because there are a few people involved with JBoss that see the JBoss project as being ordained to destroy BEA (perhaps I overstate it, perhaps not). Personally, I feel that such a goal (or perception) taints an otherwise good project.
Within reason we try to support open source efforts. We'll probably buy the JBoss manuals ;-). Regarding the original comment about the documentation, I do think that some of the open source mantras have seemingly blatant contradictions, particularly when it comes to what has "value" (what is OK to charge for) and what doesn't have "value".
Peace,
Cameron Purdy
Tangosol, Inc.
|
|
|
Message #55478
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Sun's CEO McNealy Suggests Open Source Could Be Hurting J2EE
did I missed something ? Sun One is open source ? McNealy need to review his definition of an open source project ...
IMHO, open source community is one (perhaps the only) of the entities that can save J2EE from micro$oft commercial aggressivity.
|
|
|
Message #55484
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Sun's CEO McNealy Suggests Open Source Could Be Hurting J2EE
>>
Give it 30-50 years, the concept of money just won't exist anymore. People will make things because the world needs then...
<<
???
|
|
|
Message #55489
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Completely contradictory
I find the comments extremely bizarre. Sun has promoted Open Source, in fact has made significant investments in Open Source projects:
Here's just a few:
OpenOffice
NetBeans
JXTA
Jini
Mozilla
Tomcat
Ant
You can find it all at: http://www.sunsource.net/
Now to say that they are losing business because of it is completely perplexing. I thought it was part of their strategy!
I think the problem with Sun has been pure and simple lack of execution:
What happened to the Chorus acquisition? It was supposed to be a state of the art Object-Oriented operating system. Don't see them in the embedded space.
What happened to the Forte acquisition? It was supposed to be a state of the art distributed object systems for business applications. Anyone ever see the fruits of this acquisition?
What happened to the Magc processor? It was supposed to be a high performance processor that could crunch java at blazing speeds.
Bea, IBM, Oracle have just out performed java in the enterprise space, you can only blame oneself for this. There's just something about how things are done in Sun, great technology, unfortunately poor execution. What the hell is going on over there?
|
|
|
Message #55490
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Tickets - Tickets - Get your Tickets!
Well Ben,
To clear up your confusion :), looking at my latest issue of Linux magazine Sun has taken out a fullpage advertisement on page 9 with the headline "Affectionately known as the one-two punch". Subtitle - "The Sun Fire 280R and BEA Weblogic Enterprise Platform. High performance and scalability that will KO the competition." Oh heh - there's a url at the bottom: www.sun.com/servers/entry/beapromo2
cheers,
Markus
|
|
|
Message #55495
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Sun's CEO McNealy Suggests Open Source Could Be Hurting J2EE
Pretty hot discussion !!!
I am sure given a choice Scott will get back his word :-)
Here are my views on this issue..
Before that check out this resource
www.sdmagazine.com/documents/s=746/sdm0003d/0003d.htm
Note: This might ask you to register...
1. Open Source serves a good marketing agent for J2EE technologies. Recent polls by Together Soft says "JBoss is the widely used development appserver". The total no of JBoss downloads assures the fact.
2. Open source products are Innovative. ( though some products might be a simple copy & paste ).
JBoss is the best appserver with complete MBean architecture.
ANT is the best build tool in the market.
Apache is the No-1 appserver.
3.Open source products aids easy entry to the system.
I think there are lot of such good things with Open Source..
The side effect is Yes they eat the bottom line,they make the product a commodity.. If Open Source doesn't do it & then some other company might do it... So plz don't put the blame on Opensource..
Areas where companies (especially SUN ) can make money..
a) Consulting... Sun should be the leader in this.. For any microsoft related issue we go to "msdn" & for java related issues where do we go.. ??? javasoft !!!! NO way.. So SUN has to beef up its bottom line to cater to all this. It should make every one to be aware that they are technology experts....
b) Add value to the tools..Not just Forte can be sold.. but ready made components,framework etc into the system & make people to buy that.. e.g. Struts, BC4J (ORACLE )etc
c) Training.. I never see SUN doing a agressive work in this..
d) Never recommend a single solution for every project.
Come up with Business patterns so that people can choose their application architecture.. eg.
Architecture - 1: JSP/Servlets -> JDO -> Database
Architecture - 2: JSP/Servlets -> EJB -> Database
Help customers to to decide upon the right architecture for their requirement & also help them to transition from one to other...
e) Segmented solutions.. i mean assemble the stack & have different stack of solutions like
Stack-1: Linux + Intel/AMD + Tomcat + Apache
Stack-2: Solaris + Sparc + iplanet
etc.. & provide a easy navigation path.. If Sun guarantees that it can move any existing application running in stack 1 to stack-2 in 2-weeks who will be not interested ???
f) Be the leader in implementing your specs !!!
g) Win the OpenSource support.. I believe the best company in the world is IBM. No company can play the card so well so that can be the buddy of "Microsoft" & "Open source " community at the same time :-)
The Bottom line is
Stop complaining.. Time to go back & think what needs to be done to prevent this downslide..Try to become a solution company rather than a H/W company...
All the Best.. :-)
~Murali
|
|
|
Message #55497
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Sun's CEO McNealy Suggests Open Source Could Be Hurting J2EE
I think that McNealy and everybody else will gradually learn that people are sick and tired of paying for the same software over and over again.
Sun should be smart and concentrate on building hardware and consulting services. Machines are expensive to build, and people are expensive to train, but infrastructure software eventually becomes free.
The problem with Sun is not that it can't sell its software - it's that it needs to sell sparc software in order to keep its hardware market alive. But I think that fighting Intel is futile. Let's face it, the sparc market is not going anywhere. However, there's hope for everyone. Just look at IBM.
The horse is dead. If McNealy understands that, I think he'll sleep better at night.
Guglielmo
|
|
|
Message #55500
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Sun's CEO McNealy Suggests Open Source Could Be Hurting J2EE
<Q>I think J2EE must have:
- Very good IDE like Microsoft Visual Studio.
</Q>
It does.
<Q>Its very hard to deploy a J2EE application to Application Server.
</Q>
There are Java IDEs that make it simple.
<Q>- Many and many companies, such as: IBM, SUN, BEA, Borland
and many open source organizations support J2EE standard.
</Q>
???? They do.
<Q>- Added standard like SOAP to communicate from J2EE platform to MS .NET platform. (The HTTP standard is a technical revolution) </Q>
There is.
|
|
|
Message #55502
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Sun's CEO McNealy Suggests Open Source Could Be Hurting J2EE
>>
>>
Give it 30-50 years, the concept of money just won't exist anymore. People will make things because the world needs then...
<<
???
<<
And we will all live in perfect harmony ... .
Too many futuristic movies?
|
|
|
Message #55503
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
money just won't exist
>Give it 30-50 years, the concept of money just won't exist >anymore. People will make things because the world needs >then...
Well in Star Trek the Federation doesn't have a concept of money, unfortunately, everybody seems to be employed by the Military!
|
|
|
Message #55504
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Sun's Sun CEO McNealy loses the plot
<david>
"Perhaps in the end the open-source culture will triumph not because cooperation is morally right or software "hoarding" is morally wrong... [snip] but simply because the closed-source world cannot win an evolutionary arms race with open-source communities that can put orders of magnitude more skilled time into a problem."
Raymond's point is that open-source, by its very nature will undermine closed-source. So it seems insane for a company that has put so much time and resources into open-source (and this seems to be increasing rather than decreasing) to claim that their work is being undermined by it.
</david>
I don't understand this. Computer history in these past twenty years proves that Eric Raymond's statement is simply not happening (operating systems, app servers, end user applications, etc... all these areas are dominated by closed source solutions).
Why would that change now?
--
Cedric
|
|
|
Message #55507
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Sun's CEO McNealy Suggests Open Source Could Be Hurting J2EE
Companies need this "Open Source" to sell a lot
of their "Research Lab" products to the dev / user
community. Makes perfect business sense as
1. Get a back door entry to any organisation.
2.
a. Always puts the competitors off balance in terms of
pricing ("someone else is offering this free!")
b. confusing the dev/user community as to which way
they should be going, thus putting pressure on
the competitor in the same product group.
|
|
|
Message #55509
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Sun's Sun CEO McNealy loses the plot
"I don't understand this. Computer history in these past twenty years proves that Eric Raymond's statement is simply not happening (operating systems, app servers, end user applications, etc... all these areas are dominated by closed source solutions)."
IMHO the situation is not so clear-cut. How many managers choose gcc, Apache, Linux, without thinking twice?
Guglielmo
|
|
|
Message #55513
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Sun's CEO McNealy Suggests Open Source Could Be Hurting J2EE
I agree with this 100%. I have worked on a number of enterprise products and not one of them has used JBOSS. I think JBoss is an interesting idea and something I might personally use, but customers want to see names like WebLogic and WebSphere when discussing Application Servers.
The bottom line is that back in the early days of this J2EE world, Sun had a choice: they could have bought Weblogic or they could have bought NetDynamics. They bought NetDynamics and they chose poorly! Now they are trying to blame OpenSource for their problems.
IBM and BEA are going head to head in the Application Server space. For Sun the game is over and they are out of the running. They should look elsewhere in the their attempts to generate revenue from their Java efforts.
As for Sun's future, I worry about that too. That's even more reason for Java and its associated standards to be regulated by industry standards organizations rather than Sun.
|
|
|
Message #55515
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
money just won't exist
<>Well in Star Trek the Federation doesn't have a concept of money,<>
The Ferengi did though. And did they. :) Hmmm.
|
|
|
Message #55517
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Sun's Sun CEO McNealy loses the plot
Cedric,
History is rarely a good economic indicator. I'm not necessarily agreeing with david _or_ you. I think the reality lies somewhere in the middle.
However, just because something has been done one way for twenty years is often the reasons old economies and companies get left behind. So it's just not a compelling argument. There have to be compelling economic and technical reasons for people to use things, and this applies to open-source and closed.
-Newt
|
|
|
Message #55520
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Sun's CEO McNealy Suggests Open Source Could Be Hurting J2EE
Sun's purchase of NetDynamics was not the big mistake; at the time ND was far ahead of BEA's product. The big problem came over the next 18 months, as Sun and AOL stumbled badly in getting an iPlanet product out the door. I will definitely give BEA their props, the team there took advantage of this by strengthening their product line and making some smart marketing decisions. Also remember that for sales (and not technical) reasons, iPlanet executives chose to use Netscape App Server as the basis for iPlanet App Server.
If Sun had never gotten into the iPlanet deal, or if the executives had managed the transition better, the market might look very different now.
|
|
|
Message #55523
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Sun's CEO McNealy Suggests Open Source Could Be Hurting J2EE
Should JBoss be any threat to the j2EE market? Am I crazy or?
Surely for a large project nobody would think of any other app server than Weblogic/Websphere?
For a small/middle solution there is Resin - no need for EJB
What do you need JBoss for???
Regards
Rolf Tollerud
|
|
|
Message #55525
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Sun's Sun CEO McNealy loses the plot
<Jason>
History is rarely a good economic indicator. I'm not necessarily agreeing with david _or_ you. I think the reality lies somewhere in the middle.
However, just because something has been done one way for twenty years is often the reasons old economies and companies get left behind. So it's just not a compelling argument. There have to be compelling economic and technical reasons for people to use things, and this applies to open-source and closed.
</Jason>
Note that I wasn't disagreeing with him either. I was just asking him why he thought things were going to be different now.
I am definitely looking out for signs that the trend is changing, but so far, I haven't seen anything that would indicate that such a radical paradigm shift is about to occur.
I would go one step further, actually: companies selling closed-source solutions have been showing a pretty good sense at creating incentive for customers to buy their product instead of using open-source ones.
Open-source proponents often make the mistake to assume that innovation only happens in their world, but they vastly underestimate the power of innovation that upholds capitalism (note that I'm making the assumption that money can only be made with closed source solutions, which is what history has shown us so far).
--
Cedric
|
|
|
Message #55526
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Sun's CEO McNealy Suggests Open Source Could Be Hurting J2EE
What do you need JBoss for? I can think of lots of reasons...
First, the obvious - it's free.
Second, using open-source software gives you control. If there is a bug that you find, you can fix it. You don't have to wait for a vendor to release a patch.
Third, what if you don't like Weblogic or Websphere? This gives you another choice. I (am forced to) use Websphere. I don't like it at all. I find a real pain in the ass for the most part to configure [and if you poke around this site, you will find I am NOT the only one :-)].
Small- and middle-sized solutions can use EJBs, too. Nothing says that because you are not involved in a giant project you should have to write security and transaction control for your application from scrath. EJBs handle a lot of this nicely for you, so you can focus all coding your business requirements. JBoss fits quite nicely in this space.
I have heard comments and seen benchmarks that claim JBoss does not perform as well as Weblogic or Websphere. You know what - so what!!! Is is fast enough is the question you need to ask. Most of time, the answer will be yes. If you need a solid app server and you don't want/can't spend $?K on one, why NOT use JBoss?
Ryan
P.S. Have YOU ever used JBoss?
|
|
|
Message #55528
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Sun's CEO McNealy Suggests Open Source Could Be Hurting J2EE
I believe JBoss brings J2EE to everyone, not just Fortune 500 companies. There are things the BEA and others do better, so JBoss isn't always the answer, but the fact that you have choices makes J2EE very attractive over .NET .
Just my opinion though.
|
|
|
Message #55530
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Sun's Sun CEO McNealy loses the plot
<Cedric>
I am definitely looking out for signs that the trend is changing, but so far, I haven't seen anything that would indicate that such a radical paradigm shift is about to occur.
</Cedric>
Perhaps not in the app server market. But who's to say it won't. Linux is making in-roads. IIRC, Yahoo uses BSD quite a bit. Apache is the de facto standard for UNIX web servers.
Obviously, OSS can be relied on for mission-critical solutions. Why won't the app-server market be commodotized in a few years, like we servers are today?
<Cedric>
Open-source proponents often make the mistake to assume that innovation only happens in their world, but they vastly underestimate the power of innovation that upholds capitalism.
</Cedric>
I think some OSS advocates can come across this way. Obviously, ground breaking software can come from commercial, closed source endevours. However, it IS true that commercial software innovations are limited by the employees involved, no? OSS really has no limits on who can innovate.
<Cedric>
I'm making the assumption that money can only be made with closed source solutions, which is what history has shown us so far.
</Cedric>
Not true. There probably a FEW people out there making a living admin'ing Apache or Linux, right? Obviously, not much money will be made selling OSS (sort of the whole idea behind it). But there are other ways to make money in software.
Besides, when people buy software - are they buying the features of the software, or the promise of support for the software? If BEA goes out of business tomorrow, do you think somebody would pay the same price for WebLogic as they would today, even though they are still getting the exact same "software"? People buy support/piece-of mind, NOT the software. This can happen with OSS, too.
Ryan
|
|
|
Message #55531
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Sun's Sun CEO McNealy loses the plot
"Computer history in these past twenty years proves that Eric Raymond's statement is simply not happening (operating systems, app servers, end user applications, etc... all these areas are dominated by closed source solutions).
Why would that change now?
--
Cedric"
What a braindead statement Cedric. Think for a minute. Things take time to evolve. The tools and infrastructure needed to propagate open-source development just wasn't there 20 years ago, not even 10 years ago, (not even 5?). The internet phenomenom is relatively new. SourceForge is new and invaluable to the community. It takes time how to figure out how to manage open-source efforts, since it takes much more than a good coder to have a successful open-source project.
"dominated by closed source."
Please...Your domination is a myth. I'm on my 4th client switching to JBoss from BEA.
Bill
|
|
|
Message #55533
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Sun's CEO McNealy Suggests Open Source Could Be Hurting J2EE
One Straight forward question !!!
Is there any "One" Open Source product which possess a serious threat to any of the commercial product !!!
I don't see any thing..
Is JBoss a competitor to Weblogic or Websphere or Sun One server
ANT a competitor to what ?
Apache is not eating any one's market.. It has a niche segment..
Except Linux i don't see there is any thing that competes head to head with many OS but not in all segments..
In small mail,print,web servers.. linux is a serious threat to commercial OS'es. Big deal .
Open source products creates new markets yes.. think of this. if you want to create a Enterprise solution & sell it some "5000" customers is it possible to do with commercial ones.. with weblogic or websphere !!!. Licensing cost will kill you !!!
So the only alternate is to go for M$ solution..But JBoss,Tomcat & other tools help to go in for that..
Stop whining .... Think smart :-)
|
|
|
Message #55535
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Sun's Sun CEO McNealy loses the plot
<bill>
What a braindead statement Cedric.
</bill>
It wasn't a statement, it was a question (noticed the question mark?).
Now that we have cleared this up, care to answer it?
<bill>
Please...Your domination is a myth.
</bill>
What the hell are you talking about?!?
--
Cedric
|
|
|
Message #55536
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Open Source is Good as long as it doesn't compete with my produc
One correction...It's good as long as it's directed aginst MS :)
Cheers,
Elango
|
|
|
Message #55544
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Sun's CEO McNealy Suggests Open Source Could Be Hurting J2EE
Please listen to interview on this very site with Marc Fleury, originator of JBoss, wherein he makes the convincing argument that the free open source JBoss is what is going to **save** J2EE against .NET. Emphasis on save is mine.
|
|
|
Message #55550
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Sun's CEO McNealy Suggests Open Source Could Be Hurting J2EE
"Apache is not eating any one's market.. It has a niche segment.."
Somehow I would hesitate to define Apache's market as a "niche segment". Apache has around %50 of the market. To me that's not a niche segment.
Apache is the default web server on unix systems. It used to have competitors, like Netscape server, but they are pretty much gone. The only major competitor left is IIS. As it happens, because of IIS' security holes that never seem to end, Gartner Group currently recommends that customers switch to Apache! If that happens, then Apache's "niche" will approach 100% of the market.
Also, look at Linux. The last I hears, 10% or more of new servers (or was it 25%) ship with Linux. That's a sizable market.
Look at GCC. Look at sendmail. Look at Perl, or PHP. Look at VI, or Emacs. Do I need to go on?
Guglielmo
|
|
|
Message #55551
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Bill Gates is laughing his butt off?
"...Bill Gates may be sitting up there laughing his butt off because the open source community is cutting the legs out from under all the R&D and promotion efforts of all the open interface strategies..."
Doubt Bill's got that much of a sense of humor, but who knows? They've been touting Open Source a dangerous cancer and un-American for quite some months now. Poor Sun, it's a tough world out there when you give your product away and still can't compete with BEA, IBM and MS--not to mention JBoss, which appears to be a loose federation of developers with no VC capital and no friends in the industry.
So anybody know if JBoss is making any serious money? Seem to remember an old Marc Fleury interview on the JBoss site (since has come down) where he says that the JBoss developers are neither wealthy philanthropists nor rabid communists. So how can they afford to be such a thorn in the industry's side?
|
|
|
Message #55552
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Sun's CEO McNealy Suggests Open Source Could Be Hurting J2EE
<quote>
Perhaps the way to for Sun to sell J2EE is to emulate the business model of IBM. They have IT departments that can build the entire solution for the customer -- and wouldn't you know, the solution involves WebSphere.
</quote>
Yes quite. Not just Websphere. But Domino, Tivoli, and a whole bunch of hardware, too. Sometimes they are even technology-agnostic. Often they make more money from the service agreements than the actual hardware and software. Certainly the add-ons. (cost of Websphere pales in comparison to the cost of some of its add ons!)
I think this is one of the reasons that IBM is willing to support open source. They understand the infrastructure is pretty much becoming commodity and this means it's on a forever-downward cost spiral. They make money off the integration of, and the services that support, the infrastructure.
|
|
|
Message #55554
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Sun's CEO McNealy Suggests Open Source Could Be Hurting J2EE
McNealy must understand three facts. If he can, he can build a business model around Java.
1. The OS is a commodity. In his case, Java is now the OS. Forget Solaris, the OS for most apps is now, or will soon be, Java or .Net. The OS has been built (J2EE.) It time to really get the tools and apps market going.
2. Linux is grabbing marketshare so fast into his market he does not even realize it is in the door. Read the news. Companies are switching critical functions from "UNIX" to Linux and getting not only money saving, but also claimed major speed increases. You don't even need to read the tech publications to see this; USA Today had an article today (on their web site at least) today about it. It's time to support Linux on real low to midrange servers, or back up the reasons to use Solaris instead. If Sun offered Linux on their low end (64 bit servers) at a price comparible to their real competition on the low end (Dell/Compaq) they would fly off the shelves. UNIX no longer has the advantage it has enjoyed for years. UNIX is now on the Intel platform. Wake up! Smell the last 12 months! IBM did.
3. SunOne App Server (iPlanet) sucks. Just read the posts here. People hate it. Get a clue. (I myself have never used it.) If you can't give it away, that should be a hint. My suggestion? Buy out the JBoss Group or Orion, or at least buy themselves commit access to the JBoss cvs. Sell Sun support and "solutions" for JBoss. Compete with IBM...Sun, it's your game, twist the rules a little...make IBM swirm. The money is now in services and applications (IBM gets it.)
If McNealy can graps those, I think they can find a market to make money in again. As a Java web developer who deploys on Linux (Resin Servler container), I am worried Sun is driving the platform into the ground. We have never given Sun a penny. They don't have a product that we feel is worth paying for. Charge for Java? That's a sure way to shrink the userbase. Their app server? It sucks. Tools? Have you used Forte? I tried it a few months ago and am still waiting for the interface to catch up with what I clicked on a couple months ago. (ok, it's not quite that slow.) I use IDEA. IDEA is fast and I am more productive with it. Beans for either my JSP's or and app server? Do they sell any useful Beans? Your guess is as good as mine. Servers? We have 3 Linux admins. Oh, they run Solaris? Nevermind, we can't support that with staff on hand. Hold on, we just hired an intern...4 linux admins.
The market is changing. New "UNIX" people are growing up in the lower end world of Linux, not commercial UNIX. I was playing with Linux when I was in school. I use it in my job today and have for the past 4 years. I am sure I am not alone. The first app I need an EJB app server for I will probably develop on JBoss. I have experimented with it before and know how to use it. If it can scale to what I need it for, I will use it. What reasons do I have to try iPlanet even if it is free? Everyone says it is horrible.
Sun are you listening? There is a whole market willing to pay you if you can provide us value for the money we spend beyond what we currently get with Intel/Linux/Java. From a "low end" standpoint, Sun does everything they can to keep us from having a reason to be their customer.
I have ranted long enough. I'd love to pay sun for something. They have nothing we have any reason to purchase. I don't even know if I want to buy their stock for the current > $4 price.
-Pete
|
|
|
Message #55559
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
money just won't exist
<quote>
>Give it 30-50 years, the concept of money just won't exist >anymore. People will make things because the world needs >then...
Well in Star Trek the Federation doesn't have a concept of money, unfortunately, everybody seems to be employed by the Military!
</quote>
Now now. In Star Trek the "Federation" has no concept of money, but yet they do business with many other species that do "Ferengi etc."
An interesting world....
You know. A group where everything is free manages to live in harmony with a group for whom money is everything...
....sound like a nice place for J2EE to be? Most definitely. Are we anywhere near? Nope. Too many people bickering with each other. Microsoft must love it! Just sit back and watch them beat the crap out of each other....
Whether you agree with me or not doesn't really matter. What matters is this. J2EE needs to differentiate itself from .NET (which was really what McNealy was trying to say.)
And I mean DIFFERENTIATE. I don't mean "our technology is better becasue of xyz." I mean differentiate in terms that the people at the top (the ones who don't really understand the technology in depth) will understand. How much cheaper is my project with J2EE than it would be with .NET? Those kind of questions. And vague waffly answers like "Well it's open source so you can switch vendors if you don't like the one you pick" etc. are a complete waste of peoples time. It is _very_ rare for a large company (which is where they need to target) to change vendor. And I mean _VERY_ rare.
Bottom line. Get in on the ground floor with *real reasons* why J2EE is better than .NET and you are fairly well set. Mess around arguing over whether .NET is up to the job or not and MicroSoft will have done an end run around you and the games over. It's really very simple and I cannot for the life of me see why Sun can't spot that.
Open source is good. So is commercial product. But for heavens sake when will Sun simply dig in and push this technology properly! And I mean to the customers and people not using it (the rest of us get it ALREADY!)
Just my 2c.
Chz
Tony
|
|
|
Message #55561
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Sun's CEO McNealy Suggests Open Source Could Be Hurting J2EE
<And by the way, access to BEA documentation is free ;-)>
Now I ask you, what is the better deal? Paying a six figure yearly license fee for the software and get free docs. Or pay nothing for the software and getting a monthly subscription to docs for $10 per month.
|
|
|
Message #55562
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Sun's CEO McNealy Suggests Open Source Could Be Hurting J2EE
<I don't even know if I want to buy their stock for the current $4 price.>
Hmmm. Perhaps if the Sun stock price goes a little lower, the JBoss Group can buy Sun and the Open Source problem will be solved !!
|
|
|
Message #55564
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
money just won't exist
<tony>
I mean differentiate in terms that the people at the top (the ones who don't really understand the technology in depth)
</tony>
Did it occur to you that it's precisely those people who really understand the technology in depth who should *not* be at the "top"?
--
Cedric
|
|
|
Message #55596
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Sun's CEO McNealy Suggests Open Source Could Be Hurting J2EE
>>Yes quite. Not just Websphere. But Domino, Tivoli ...
In addition:
I would say their say their solution involves at least one piece of their software. But it also does, sometimes, include software from 'the darkside'. They even have examples on how to do it (ie. ADO with DB2). That combination probably doesn't work as well as say, Java with their products, but they support customers wanting to do what they want (I reeeeally want to say '... do crazy and even stupid things').
|
|
|
Message #55598
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Sun's CEO McNealy Suggests Open Source Could Be Hurting J2EE
Bye,
(Was that the right response? Did I win anything?)
|
|
|
Message #55602
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
money just won't exist
<Cedric>
Did it occur to you that it's precisely those people who really understand the technology in depth who should *not* be at the "top"?
</Cedric>
That is fine as long they defer technology decisions to those who do understand. But who is going to determine who knows? My wife pointed out that I've never worked\done work for anyone who does - at least that is how I come across (she thinks I have a problem with authority - I guess I should do what she says and not complain :) or is :( ).
Ok, 'back on subject'. If those in the know are not deciding or 'controlling' or somewhere important in the decision making then they will end up trying to implement .Net on the Z/OS. Or a least supporting OSS in one area and bad mouthing it somewhere else. Unfortunately Sun is not the only one in this sinking boat (sinking boat == 'the insase are incharge of the asylum'). We can only bail so fast. Of course we and our buckets will get the blame - not the holes in the boat and those who picked the boat.
|
|
|
Message #55611
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
"Those who understand technology shouldn't be in control"
"Did it occur to you that it's precisely those people who really understand the technology in depth who should *not* be at the 'top'?"
Cedric, this sort of statement coming from one of the lead developers of WebLogic is rather sad. Just because some engineers get let into the big house to polish the silver (compared to toiling the cotton fields like most of us) doesn't mean they should sell out and buy into the whole "you are not worthy" line pure business people feed them. Sure, people who understand both tech and business are rare, but where they do exist they generally kick everybody's ass. Think Hewlett and Packard and more recently Bill Gates. Personally I think it's a hoot that Marc Fleury, a former Sun engineering peon is giving Scott McNealy a run for his money.
|
|
|
Message #55629
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
"Those who understand technology shouldn't be in control"
Actually, from a management perspective Cedric is right in a way. A good manager doesn't do everything, but he does get everything done. That's an important distinction. The really good managers don't have to know all of the details, they do have to be good at taking recommendations from their people. That means listening, and surrounding yourself with good people.
So many techies talk about how their manager doesn't understand them, or the technology, but that's not their job; that's your job. If a manager is sour, it's more likely because he/she doesn't listen, or ignores recommendations, doesn't protect his people enough from the higher-ups, is an ass-kisser, doesn't make expectations known in a swell though out manner, whatever. That's a separate discussion though.
-Newt
|
|
|
Message #55632
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Sun's Sun CEO McNealy loses the plot
Hi Cedric,
> Note that I wasn't disagreeing with him either. I was just
> asking him why he thought things were going to be different
> now.
Actually, I wasn't intending to make a statement one way or the other about open-source. I was merely pointing out the inconsistency that anyone working with open-source projects should be aware of Raymond's article (given that it is often regarded as the manifesto of open-source), and so complaining that open-source is doing what Raymond said open-source would do is rather bizarre.
> I was just asking him why he thought things were going to
> be different now
Infrastructure, mainly. A readily accessible internet has, and is, bringing more and more people to the open-source table (not just in the western world...).
> Open-source proponents often make the mistake to assume
> that innovation only happens in their world
Interestingly, in Microsoft's Halloween Documents on Linux, they tried to claim that innovation only happens in the closed-source world. Raymond argues that it is individuals that innovate, not any management or development structure, which I cannot find any fault with.
/david
|
|
|
Message #55634
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
"Those who understand technology shouldn't be in control"
<jason>
Actually, from a management perspective Cedric is right in a way. A good manager doesn't do everything, but he does get everything done. That's an important distinction.
</jason>
Right, but it goes further than that. Obviously, any competent individual gets their job done, whatever their job is.
My previous statement was simply and humbly acknowledging that while I know a little bit about software engineering, I don't know much about running a company or selling a product.
Accepting your limitations is the first step toward becoming better at what you don't know yet.
--
Cedric
|
|
|
Message #55641
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
"Those who understand technology shouldn't be in control"
I think the point was that business is so dependant on technology that having someone with no technology knowledge making decisions on techology and even worse - in charge of a technology company - well is more than likely bound for failure (at some level).
|
|
|
Message #55643
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
"Those who understand technology shouldn't be in control"
This is true in an org with a pyramid management structure.
I have worked on a team were the manager handled the money (mostly) and somewhat other things. We did everything else. It wasn't perfect but it definitely better than "manager A handing a task to manager B and manager B handing the task to team lead A and then ..." .
You probably are thinking of a good leader. A "good manager" doesn't need to manage.
Well, back to reality. :(
|
|
|
Message #55645
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
"Those who understand technology shouldn't be in control"
>I think the point was that business is so
>dependant on technology that having someone
>with no technology knowledge making
>decisions on techology and even worse - in
>charge of a technology company - well is
>more than likely bound for failure
>(at some level).
Never allow an idiot to be in a leadership position. The entire company will be destroyed as that person continues to mismanage and make poor decisions.
|
|
|
Message #55648
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
"Those who understand technology shouldn't be in control"
Where [Enron] would [Tyco] you [Worldcom] get [Atari] such [Adelphia] an [Commodore] idea? (BTW way in case any of you haven't seen Kevin Nealon on SNL - the '[]' are subliminal messages).
So how would you suggest not allowing that to happen?
|
|
|
Message #55657
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Sun's CEO McNealy Suggests Open Source Could Be Hurting J2EE
<quote>
I have worked on a number of enterprise products and not one of them has used JBOSS. I think JBoss is an interesting idea and something I might personally use, but customers want to see names like WebLogic and WebSphere when discussing Application Servers
</quote>
Isn't that the point of the question in the article?
If JBoss had the 'J2EE Certified' stamp, customers would be more likely to consider it alongside WL and WS.
|
|
|
Message #55708
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Sun's CEO McNealy Suggests Open Source Could Be Hurting J2EE
Well I cannot completely agree. While I have no problem
paying a fair price for the JBoss doc's (The price is fine, and I have brought the basic 2.x book)
I do take issue with the state of the JBoss docs. There is virtually NO doc on the various Jboss configuration and deployment files. I recently wasted days looking for info on configuring the server to run through firewalls with only partial success.
Note to JBOSS folks: Thoughtly document your installation and configuration steps, and make money on the advanced docs (Clustering and CMP)
You are driving folks like myself who WANT to use your server and buy your support as an alternative to outragous per CPU pricing models, but just carn't get enough confidence to make the leap.
-- Success is about listening to customers....
Rob
|
|
|
Message #55728
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Sun's CEO McNealy Suggests Open Source Could Be Hurting J2EE
i wonder why he thinks open source is eating up his revenues when he is hell-bent on giving up everything free.
why not charge ten dollars for java - with 3 million java developers that is a sizeable annuity driven revenue. the open in "open source" if anything makes java developers productive
|
|
|
Message #55745
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Sun's CEO McNealy Suggests Open Source Could Be Hurting J2EE
check this out 1-800-Flowers.com - a higher share price than sun and a lower p/E ratio. just goes to show if u want to make money u can - maybe he needs a strategic advisor from flower shops unless of course its a worldcom story
|
|
|
Message #55755
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Sun's CEO McNealy Suggests Open Source Could Be Hurting J2EE
The higher share price and lower P/E say nothing about a firms relative economics. Last I checked BHS was running at $70,000/share. That doesn't mean anything. How many shares are there? What's the price to book ratio (that's the ratio that _really_ tells you if there is a value being created for shareholders). If their PE is lower then what's driving their returns, assets?
PE doesn't really mean anything in your context either. Flowers probably does depend somewhat on real assets (ROA), and to some extent so does Sun. However, a lot of Sun's value driver to the share price is going to be driven by intangibles like intellectual property (software and hardware engineering IP). So _of course_ their share price will be driven up by these things.
Flowers probably has little IP, and little intangible assets, therefore their price is going to be more driven by assets, receivables, sales.
Plus there are about 1200 other things that speak to a firms finances, cost of debt, cost of equity, structure, debt to equity, etc, etc.
I don't mean to sound harsh, but you need to learn a little more about finance before you spit this stuff out. Someone might listen to you.
-Newt
|
|
|
Message #55771
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Sun's CEO McNealy Suggests Open Source Could Be Hurting J2EE
Because all the other companies/organzations/individuals who contributed to Java will want their cut.
|
|
|
Message #55774
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Sun's CEO McNealy Suggests Open Source Could Be Hurting J2EE
McNealy = Gates... different circus... same clowns...
|
|
|
Message #55780
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Sun's CEO McNealy Suggests Open Source Could Be Hurting J2EE
The problem with OSS is that if it is extremenely successful (as the things you mentioned, Xerces, Xalan etc.) people after a while forget that something is an OSS -it just becomes a part of their life. They are estabilished, and by being free, wide-spread (=> good support) and good sw to boot, they ROI is hard to beat by commercial software, so no-one generally tries (people do try though - Sun with iWS, MS with IS).
The ones that are in the process of estabilishing themselves (i.e. succeeding or failing) are the one that tend to attract attention.
See things like JBoss, Mono etc.
Regards,
Vlad
|
|
|
Message #55782
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
"Those who understand technology shouldn't be in control"
Actually, Atari has been re-invented, albeit as "only" a game publishing company :).
|
|
|
Message #55786
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Sun's CEO McNealy Suggests Open Source Could Be Hurting J2EE
I think Scott McNealy might have a problem doing this. I vaguely remember his comment about two years back that "SW is not important. Anyone can do SW. It's what it runs on that counts." (not a verbatim quote, couldn't find it anywhere).
He changed his tack about a year back, that SW matters. Unfortunately, to move even further, to services, is another quantum leap which at the current rate we can expect in about 5 years.
IMB managed to to it under Lou Gerstner, who rebuilt it from scratch and changed its culture considerably. Can McNealy do it? Personally, I doubt.
|
|
|
Message #55789
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Sun's CEO McNealy Suggests Open Source Could Be Hurting J2EE
sounds a lot like XDOCLET, which you can get for free:)
|
|
|
Message #55823
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Sun's CEO McNealy Suggests Open Source Could Be Hurting J2EE
Cedric
>I don't understand this. Computer history in these past twenty
>years proves that Eric Raymond's statement is simply not
>happening (operating systems, app servers, end user
>applications, etc... all these areas are dominated by closed
>source solutions).
>
>Why would that change now?
I think this is a very very good question. Loads of us will no doubt cry 'cos it works just as well and is free!'
But that is techie wierdness. What of the business perspective where folks are scared of technology and going with the heard is the best choice you can make? i.e. big market share, well suported etc. If its a rubbish choice then you can point at the other cattle and say they made it too.
My only real thought is one about age. i.e. the 20 somethings are getting heavily into OS. Even some of us 30 somethings. In another 10 years we will all be more senior and hopefully influence architectural and infrastructure decisions. And so certain proven OS infrastructures will make it.
However. OS is not magic. The people behind OS will rarely give up their lives for a peice of software. They will move on, or decide money really is a good thing. eg Star Office is no longer free. Linux for most people costs £30 to £90 because they buy a box in a shop. I recon this will continue, the sucessful OS infrastructure projects will start to turn retail... because money is a good thing, and clients want support. eg apache stronghold, shareware stuff like paintshop pro.
So does that leave us in a bad way? No, it's good. The prices are low (at least initially). Not all OS - some of the tiny stuff will remain free, eg ANT, struts and so on.
Jonathan
|
|
|
Message #55837
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Sun's CEO McNealy Suggests Open Source Could Be Hurting J2EE
To Newt
I may not be a finance xpert but finance xperts from cnbc have a story on returns from a flowers website as compared to returns from tech firms - u can check it out. Sun definitely has IP value but IP can only have value attached to it if it provides a return to investors
|
|
|
Message #55844
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Sun's CEO McNealy Suggests Open Source Could Be Hurting J2EE
Has McNealy forgotten that open source Jakarta Tomcat is the Sun's official reference implementation for Servlets and JSP ???
Why can't JBoss be the reference for EJBs ?
|
|
|
Message #55850
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
"Those who understand technology shouldn't be in control"
So has Commadore - well the Amiga part they bought and then screwed up. Anyway, both are different companies using the name.
|
|
|
Message #55852
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Sun's CEO McNealy Suggests Open Source Could Be Hurting J2EE
wonder how those 'xperts' portfolios are currently doing.
My dad says experts are 'drips under pressure'. (not real sure what that means but I have a guess)
|
|
