3 ms·

This was the real success of Linux. It didn't take over the consumer desktop market, but it sure decimated the need for specialty servers and proprietary server

This was the real success of Linux. It didn't take over the consumer desktop market, but it sure decimated the need for specialty servers and proprietary server operating systems. Once Sun was forced to compete in the commodity hardware market, it was over.

lallysingh 17y ago
Indeed, while Dell, et. al. just spent their time pumping out ever-cheaper products, Sun actually spent cash developing the aformentionted technologies. Nice "real success": killing the innovators in the UNIX space and letting the vultures come in and eat up all the market share.
- mseebach 17y ago
  SPARC with Solaris is pretty inferior to Linux on x86 for many purposes, including the entire web-stack. This competition forced Sun to innovate, giving us the UltraSPARC T1 and T2, which is simply amazing technology. Suns UNIX innovation (i.e. Solaris 10 with dtrace and ZFS) came as a response to the success of Linux, not in spite of it. Sun paused to sleep on their .com laurels, and it killed them.
jhugbj 17y ago
Still they outlasted, DEC, SGI, Pyramid and all the other minicomputer/workstation makers.
- 10ren 17y ago
  Yes, Sun and Digital (DEC) got killed by the same thing - Clayton Christensen on Digital (not Sun): Every disruption has three components to it: a technological enabler, a business model innovation and a new commercial ecosystem. In computing, the technological enabler of disruption in computing was the microprocessor. It so simplified the design of a computer that Steve Wozniak and Steve Jobs could just slap one together in a garage. It transformed the industry’s fundamental technological problem—the design of a computer—from a problem that took hundreds of people several years to solve into one that was much simpler. Then that simplifying technology had to be married with a business model that could take the technology into the market in a cost-effective and convenient way. Digital Equipment Corp. had microprocessor technology, but its business model could not profitably sell a computer for less than $50,000. The technology trapped in a high-cost business model had no impact on the world, and in fact, the world ultimately killed Digital. But IBM Corp., with the very same processors at its disposal, set up a different business model in Florida that could make money at a $2,000 price point and 20% gross margins—and changed the world. It’s a combination of the technology and business model that makes formerly complicated, expensive, inaccessible things affordable and accessible. http://74.125.153.132/search?q=cache%3Asloanreview.mit.edu%2Fthe-magazine%2Farticles%2F2009%2Fspring%2F50314%2Fgood-days-for-disruptors%2F+%22every%20disruption%20has%20three%20components%20to%20it%22 http://74.125.153.132/search?q=cache%3Asloanreview.mit.edu%2...
  - sahaj 17y ago
    "It’s a combination of the technology and business model that makes formerly complicated, expensive, inaccessible things affordable and accessible." this reminds me of google. they are essentially providing what used to be complicated and expensive tools at a much lower cost.

lallysingh 17y ago

Indeed, while Dell, et. al. just spent their time pumping out ever-cheaper products, Sun actually spent cash developing the aformentionted technologies. Nice "real success": killing the innovators in the UNIX space and letting the vultures come in and eat up all the market share.

mseebach 17y ago
SPARC with Solaris is pretty inferior to Linux on x86 for many purposes, including the entire web-stack. This competition forced Sun to innovate, giving us the UltraSPARC T1 and T2, which is simply amazing technology. Suns UNIX innovation (i.e. Solaris 10 with dtrace and ZFS) came as a response to the success of Linux, not in spite of it. Sun paused to sleep on their .com laurels, and it killed them.

jhugbj 17y ago

Still they outlasted, DEC, SGI, Pyramid and all the other minicomputer/workstation makers.

10ren 17y ago
Yes, Sun and Digital (DEC) got killed by the same thing - Clayton Christensen on Digital (not Sun): Every disruption has three components to it: a technological enabler, a business model innovation and a new commercial ecosystem. In computing, the technological enabler of disruption in computing was the microprocessor. It so simplified the design of a computer that Steve Wozniak and Steve Jobs could just slap one together in a garage. It transformed the industry’s fundamental technological problem—the design of a computer—from a problem that took hundreds of people several years to solve into one that was much simpler. Then that simplifying technology had to be married with a business model that could take the technology into the market in a cost-effective and convenient way. Digital Equipment Corp. had microprocessor technology, but its business model could not profitably sell a computer for less than $50,000. The technology trapped in a high-cost business model had no impact on the world, and in fact, the world ultimately killed Digital. But IBM Corp., with the very same processors at its disposal, set up a different business model in Florida that could make money at a $2,000 price point and 20% gross margins—and changed the world. It’s a combination of the technology and business model that makes formerly complicated, expensive, inaccessible things affordable and accessible. http://74.125.153.132/search?q=cache%3Asloanreview.mit.edu%2Fthe-magazine%2Farticles%2F2009%2Fspring%2F50314%2Fgood-days-for-disruptors%2F+%22every%20disruption%20has%20three%20components%20to%20it%22 http://74.125.153.132/search?q=cache%3Asloanreview.mit.edu%2...
- sahaj 17y ago
  "It’s a combination of the technology and business model that makes formerly complicated, expensive, inaccessible things affordable and accessible." this reminds me of google. they are essentially providing what used to be complicated and expensive tools at a much lower cost.