Oracle To Stop Developing Sun Virtualization Technologies 145
hypnosec writes "Oracle will soon be announcing its decision to stop development of Sun virtualization technologies including Sun Ray Software and Hardware, Oracle Virtual Desktop Client, and Virtual Desktop Infrastructure (VDI) product lines. In an update to its support policies [Oracle support login required] for virtualization software and hardware, the database company has revealed that this decision is a result of its efforts to 'tightly align Oracle's future desktop virtualization portfolio investments with Oracle Corporation's overall core business strategy.'"
Wait... (Score:5, Insightful)
Oracle had a business strategy beyond "turn everything we touch into shit"?
Re:Wait... (Score:5, Funny)
Something about synergistically embiggening Larry's masculinity compensation plumage for great justice.
Re: (Score:3)
"Oracle had a business strategy beyond "turn everything we touch into shit"?"
What? NO! This is part of their "turn everything to shit" campaign. Wait... I see. You mean OP is implying there is something beyond our known reality. Let's call it... the Twilight Zone.
Re: (Score:3)
Oracle had a business strategy beyond "turn everything we touch into shit"?
They do: "Turn everything we touch into shit and charge a friggin' ransom for it"
Re: (Score:2)
That's a shame (Score:4, Insightful)
The Sun Rays are pretty handing technology. I was surprised at how well they work.
Re: (Score:2)
Fuck you Oracle (Score:4, Insightful)
You will not expand your market, you will shrivel, only your bribes to executives will keep you afloat. You destroyed a company that contributed more to the furtherance of computing and society as a whole than you will ever be able to achieve with your selfish business strategies and practices.
Re: (Score:2)
1 Person Liked this. Be the first of your friends!
(ps Karma Bonus forfeited ;-) )
Re: (Score:3)
1) Please, stop that.
2) Until someone can make a replacement for RAC that doesn't suck, isn't Microsoft**, won't cost a fortune, and doesn't require a degree in Cryptology to run? They'll (unfortunately) be around for a long, long time.
*sigh*... I wish Postgres was better...
** SQL Server is cute and all, but tends to buckle under very heavy loads, and the clustering tech leaves way too much to be desired.
Re:Fuck you Oracle (Score:4, Interesting)
It might have worked, if everybody actually using Solaris had also bought SUN x86 servers instead of installing it on generic hardware and bought more software from their stack. Additionally, for too long their business strategy seemed to be "Let's invent some mind-blowingly cool stuff and then have sales try to sell it to our customers".
And this not for one product, but basically for almost all of the products they came up with in the last years.
Oracle has no choice but to milk their current customers literally till the sun goes down.
Re:Fuck you Oracle (Score:5, Insightful)
For reference, what your post tells others is that you started this Internet thing late and missed the era where Sun was one of the big boys in the server and workstation arenas.
Just because you were only around for their decline doesn't mean thats the way it always ways :)
Re: (Score:1)
I also don't deny that they had great products. Just that the market didn't think they were great enough, at some point.
Re:Fuck you Oracle (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
Sun's hardware was, indeed, bulletproof. But at the end of 6 years, the extra money you spent on that single set of bullet proof hardware would have been better spent on 2 cheap sets of x86 hardware, with the second set 3 years newer and thus vastly more powerful, yielding an enormous improvement in available resources, with spare older hardware available for testing rigs or non-critical use. And their ongoing choices to develop their own processor technologies, combined with their decision to switch to A
Re: (Score:3)
AMD's x86-64 and Linux are what killed Sun. Their hardware and OS was the core of their business, and that got undermined at exactly the same time as all the other proprietary Unix vendors. When the Itanium and AMD's x86-64 came out, proprietary hardware crashed big time, and only those w
Re: (Score:2)
Sun, SGI, and the rest, didn't go from massive profits to massive losses in less than 2 years, either. It's a ridiculous complaint.
Re: (Score:2)
But I believe, memory-bus and I/O performance was superior - until AMD HT and then Intel QPI surfaced....
At least, they didn't waste as much money and focus on a "Windows NT" strategy as SGI did.
Re: (Score:3)
He's got a six digit number. I'm assuming he was around when Sun was one of the small boys making Unix workstations before any of them were big boys.
Re:Fuck you Oracle (Score:5, Funny)
Here's a nickel. Go buy yourself a real computer.
(The first Sun equipment I used was a Sun 3 workstation.)
Re: (Score:2)
Sun was in decline before slashdot existed. UID is irrelevant. Thanks for show that you too came to the party late.
Re: (Score:2)
Huh? "We put the dot in dot-com" for example was years after slashdot. Slashdot's owners, VA-Linux, was pitching using Linux to get something like a Sun workstation for $2k instead of the $7k to buy the real thing.
Workstations might have been in decline but the server market was exploding.
Re: (Score:2)
Huh? "We put the dot in dot-com" for example was years after slashdot.
Hah - I've still got a couple of t-shirts with that slogan.
Still wearing them - they are quite sturdy ;-)
Re: (Score:2)
We put the dot in dot com = 2000 /. launched = 1997
Re:Fuck you Oracle (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Fuck you Oracle (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Well played, sir....
Re:Fuck you Oracle (Score:5, Interesting)
I have to agree. While everyone kind of liked SUN and cherished their accomplishments - few ever bought anything of them.
It might have worked, if everybody actually using Solaris had also bought SUN x86 servers instead of installing it on generic hardware and bought more software from their stack. Additionally, for too long their business strategy seemed to be "Let's invent some mind-blowingly cool stuff and then have sales try to sell it to our customers".
And this not for one product, but basically for almost all of the products they came up with in the last years.
Oracle has no choice but to milk their current customers literally till the sun goes down.
No kidding. Sun's x86 hardware kicked ass. Unlike Dell and even HP, Sun actually engineered their x86 servers. They didn't just slap cheap-ass commodity components around the CPU.
A recent customer went through a lot of trouble replace "old" Sun x86 hardware that had been around four or five years with new HP hardware - to "save money", because HP's servers were cheaper than Oracle's servers (that Sun designed...).
Note I said "cheaper", not "less expensive". Yeah, the HP's were cheaper than the Sun servers. And slower. The four or five-year-old Sun x86 boxes were a shitload FASTER than the brand-spanking-new HP servers. Talk about a bunch of howling developers. I was laughing my ass off.
And even with the Oracle markup, after my customer had to go out and buy licences for software to manage HP servers - OOOOOPS! (iLO software, etc), the HP boxes turned out to be more expensive than the equivalent Oracle (nee Sun) servers. At least Oracle doesn't charge extra for things like that.
HP's servers also came with cheap off-brand FC HBAs that wouldn't play nice on the customer's SAN. Good God, crappy FC hardware that can't interoperate with other vendor's equipment was solved by QLogic et al a fucking decade ago.
Re: (Score:2)
HP's servers also came with cheap off-brand FC HBAs that wouldn't play nice on the customer's SAN. Good God, crappy FC hardware that can't interoperate with other vendor's equipment was solved by QLogic et al a fucking decade ago.
All of our Proliant and Integrity servers came with either Qlogic or Emulex HBAs. Of course, our last HP purchases was back in 2008
Re: (Score:3)
You know absolutely nothing but you say much. HP offers HBA's from the three major players in the FC world, QLogic, Emulex, and Brocade. As far as cost, the 5 year cost of an HP box with 6 hour call to repair support is a fraction of what a Sun box will cost with platinum plus (or whatever they're calling it today, it's been since shortly after the Oracle takeover since I've bothered to get quotes)
Re: (Score:2)
How many people using Solaris during the days when Sun existed installed it on generic x86 or x86 all? By the time Solaris ran on x86 Sun often had reasonably priced rack servers say Dell + 30% for the same quality. I don't think I've ever used Solaris or SunOS on non Sun equipment and I've used a lot of Solaris and SunOS.
Soon they kill Solaris (Score:5, Insightful)
This coming on the heals of XenServer going open source.
As soon as they realize the futile effort of supporting Sun hardware (Niagara, Sparc) and Solaris which are not selling well, they will also cease supporting them as well.
Frankly, I think IBM would have been a better company to have owned Sun and its assets.
Re:Soon they kill Solaris (Score:4, Insightful)
You mean the same IBM that has sold/is selling off most of its assets?
Re:Soon they kill Solaris (Score:4, Informative)
This has nothing to do with that kind of virtualization. A much better headline would be:
Clairification- VirtualBox is being continued (Score:5, Informative)
As I had to RTFA to figure this out, thought I'd pass on that VirtualBox is still going to be actively developed.
Re:Clairification- VirtualBox is being continued (Score:5, Insightful)
For now.
Re:Clairification- VirtualBox is being continued (Score:5, Informative)
For now.
Virtualbox is GPLed free software. Oracle owns the domain and trademark, so they could force everyone to change the name, and they could use FUD to scare people off. But they cannot kill it. It would be like their efforts to kill MySQL and OpenOffice. Those projects were set back some, and renamed, but they live on.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
A lot of the open source vbox stuff doesn't work well for me - USB and sharing under linux.
Hence I am using the oracle version, which is unfortunate.
Re: (Score:2)
OSE is always behind the commercial version. I stopped using OSE for precisely the same reason you did.
If oracle ever decides to drop virtualbox then I hope they release the commercial code so it can be merged into OSE.
Re: (Score:2)
OSE and Commercial are one and the same these days - actually. (I think it changed in Vbox4). So the version you get with Linux is the same Oracle distributes, unless they decided to compile it themselves. But as long as they didn't change the interfaces, it's still good.
What Oracle had in th
Re: (Score:2)
For now.
Virtualbox is GPLed free software. Oracle owns the domain and trademark, so they could force everyone to change the name, and they could use FUD to scare people off. But they cannot kill it. It would be like their efforts to kill MySQL and OpenOffice. Those projects were set back some, and renamed, but they live on.
I sure as hell hope so I have over a dozen VirtualBox VMs that I use for development and I am in no mood to migrate.
Re: (Score:2)
A dozen, seriously? I know folks who have migrated hundreds of VirtualBox VMs to KVM. It's not that difficult.
I use VirtualBox on my MacBook to run Debian on a handful of VMs, but anything persistent, for both dev and production, is on hosts running KVM.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
you got any hints how to do this? i tried migrating a debian wheezy image across (sid host) today and never managed to get bridged networking working, also it was slow as mollasses.
i assume you don't have to make stupid scripts up to add a tap interface for each vm like its still 1990 do you? i converted my eth0 to br0 and all i could do was ping the host from the guest and vice versa, no LAN/WAN access. that was using the virtio driver and the vhost_net module.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
The submitter undoubtedly knew that VirtualBox would be continued, but he also knew that the story wouldn't be accepted if it mentioned that fact, because it's all we're going to talk about in this thread.
Re:Clairification- VirtualBox is being continued (Score:5, Interesting)
As I had to RTFA to figure this out, thought I'd pass on that VirtualBox is still going to be actively developed.
Virtualbox development, however, is now going to "tightly align ... with Oracle Corporation's overall core business strategy."
Something tells me we may have a fork, and possibly a shift in Qemu development energy in the future.
VirtualBox should be forked NOW (Score:1, Interesting)
I very much doubt that anyone on the planet still lives in that happy place where Oracle continues open source development of VirtualBox indefinitely with no strings attached.
After the Java debacle against Google's Dalvik, it's abundantly clear that Oracle harbors no love for open source at all, and just sees it as a way of getting a lot of people dependent on its code ready for the harvesting.
Because of this, I recommend forking VirtualBox sooner rather than later. The fork doesn't have to be anything mor
Re: (Score:2)
Thanks for summarizing the summary - that's the only bit I care about.
Successor is...? (Score:1)
Where do I click to download a copy of "overall core business strategy"? I don't speak PR.
VirtualBox: Don't panic! (Score:5, Informative)
If, like me, the summary freaked you out, you'll be happy to hear that VirtualBox is not getting the axe.
Re:VirtualBox: Don't panic! (Score:5, Funny)
since [Ellison] was hired
He kind of founded the company.
Re: (Score:2)
Ya, and also while we may not like them, they aren't exactly falling on hard times either.
Re: (Score:2)
Nope. Read up more, he was fired repeatedly.
OK, what should we read that indicates that Larry Ellison was fired repeatedly from Oracle?
Re: (Score:2)
"Larry Ellison fired from Oracle" provides exactly zero links that says what you claim.
Re: (Score:2)
It would matter. The big thing that makes vbox useful is the extpacks: without them, Virtualbox has very limited desktop virtualization; with them, it's an awesome deployment staging and home/smb office option due to its ability to run on anything and everything (hardware) and a fair number of useful features (pxe boot, rdp server, utility through phpvirtualbox, etc.)
Re: (Score:2)
As if it matters, the source is out there so if it was axed people would pick up where Oracle left off. Probably do a better job, too, seeing as how Ellison and the gang haven't managed to go through a single quarter without fucking something up since he was hired.
Oracle is only relevant because a host of businesses made the mistake of investing in their technology. Unless every IT department on the face of the earth is entirely staffed by Alzheimer's patients, I'm guessing that strategy is only going to work for them so long. Exactly as long as it takes an open source alternative to replace them.
Oracle VirtualBox to be replaced by LibreBox?
I would definitely miss Oracle's proprietary extensions, but forking VirtualBox could be a good thing for VB/Qemu integration. Among other things, I'd expect to see more support for the Virtualbox FUSE plugins, and tighter integration of the virtualization framework with the Qemu core. End result might even be a single front end that can spin up a virtualized OR an emulated environment -- something to give MESS a run for its money as well as Parallels and VMWar
Re: (Score:1)
If it's such a beloved project, and so trivial to do a better job... why hasn't it already been done? Seriously, this sort of "well fuck you, we'll just do it all ourselves" belies the huge number of failed open source projects that never manage to do a better job because they're too busy engaging in pissing contests over their logo and whether or not to endorse ViM or Emacs
Re: (Score:2)
it won't be forked until the moment oracle give the community a giant F*** you, untill them people will be content with it. look at libre office peopple stuck with it until it was unbarable and the forked it. oracle seems to like virtualbox and continues to develop it (unlike openoffice.org) and maintains a open-source licensed compatible version..
Re: (Score:2)
Probably do a better job, too, seeing as how Ellison and the gang haven't managed to go through a single quarter without fucking something up since he was hired.
Ellison co-founded Oracle and has been its CEO for its entire history. "since he was hired". LOL.
Oracle support login required (Score:5, Insightful)
Yet another reason to avoid helping Larry buy another yacht.
Re: (Score:2)
Don't you mean island?
Re: (Score:2)
One of my favorite jokes, old as it is, goes: What's the difference between Larry Ellison and God? God doesn't believe he's Larry Ellison.
What does Oracle even do anymore? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Killing Sun Products/Projects, fucking customers over and sueing Google.
Re:What does Oracle even do anymore? (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
I doubt they would be killing them off if they were profitable. I do a lot of work in the virtualization and VDI space (not all of it by choice, mind you) and I have never run into anyone even asking about Oracle in those regards. AFAIK the only thing that could be considered really successful is Virtual Box and it's sticking around, thank [omnipotent bearded deity #4].
The problem here is that profitable is NOT always the same as important, useful, or any number of other virtues essential to technological progress.
Sun provided a lot of important products - Java being one of their most prominent examples. But profitable, it wasn't.
A lot of things that make you profitable actually make you less useful. Stuff like arbitrary tricks to ensure vendor lock-in, expensive products that winnow out potential contributors because they cannot afford the buy-in, developing a protective
Re: (Score:2)
On the flip side a product can be important, useful, etc and still be a money hole for a company. If that's the case, more than likely the company will eventually ditch it.
I'd argue that in this c
Re: (Score:2)
What does Oracle even do anymore? All they've been doing lately is killing off products/projects. Same with HP.
Yes, and IBM [slashdot.org] and Apple [slashdot.org] and Google [slashdot.org]... US tax, SEC and patent law as well as Fed/Obama helicopter drops assures that Goliath companies grow by absorbing smaller companies, not by innovation. And the overhead of a Goliath company assures that anything that doesn't add half a billion or more to the balance sheet will be killed. The good news is that this leaves huge holes in the market which can be filled by smaller companies. Sun Ray has been around for more than a decade and if you've seen it in action, you m
Re:What does Oracle even do anymore? (Score:4, Insightful)
My opinion is that they bought Sun to gain ownership and control of Java, period. Full stop. Tons of their software relies heavily on it.
I also think they will eventually discard or sell off every last bit of the former Sun properties/technologies (other than Java) not only because very little of it is relevant or profitable anymore, but also to discard the employees who develop and support these items.
Oracle: Where Technology Goes to Die.
Re: (Score:2)
They also wanted the MySQL customer lists, to migrate them over to Oracle tools.
Re: (Score:3)
They sell a well know database used for relational and data warehousing
They own a 1/2 dozen other important databases: MySQL, Berkley, Times Ten...
The Java ecosystem
JD Edwards ERP
Peoplesoft (#1 HR)
Oracle Financials
Oracle CRM
Oracle Fusion Middleware
Oracle Business Analytics
etc...
They are huge and they do a ton.
Diverse company... (Score:3)
"Oracle To Stop Developing Sun Virtualization Technologies"
Huh. I didn't even know they were in the tanning bed business...better grab one while they're 'hot'! :p
Fork you Oracle! (Score:5, Funny)
Another take on this... (Score:1)
The anti Oracle bias is quite clear on this thread but just consider...Sun was a horribly run company. Jonathan Schwartz had this bizarre notion that if they gave everything away for free they could somehow make money off it. We all saw how that turned out. Sure, Sparc stations were pretty cool...back in the 90's. But then they got leapfrogged by commodity servers and never caught up. Sun failed to innovate so it got swallowed up by the bigger fish.
Look - I'm the first to admit that Ellison is a first class
Re: (Score:2)
Sure, Sparc stations were pretty cool...back in the 90's. But then they got leapfrogged by commodity servers and never caught up.
Did you mean "commodity desktops" there? Sun's still selling SPARC servers, but the SPARCstation line's dead at the hands of PC's running {Windows,Linux,whatever}.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3)
When did Sun attempt to monopolize Unix? During most of the Sun years: SGI, SCO, Dec, Compaq, AIX (IBM)... were all players. And then of course the Linux and the BSDs came along and were major players.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You think people were holding a grudge from the birth of SVR4 days? I'm not sure if I would even consider it a monopoly attempt that's sort of a least charitable view of the whole thing.
Re: (Score:2)
I disagree with you. Larry Ellison is a third class prick.
Re: (Score:1)
Hahaha...touche my friend, touche :-)
Re:Another take on this... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
A sun 3/60 was a most excellent workstation in the late 80s.
I did my first grep on a 3/60.
Re:Another take on this... (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't think most people would hate Oracle if all they did was "keep what works and get rid of what doesn't." After all, Google dumps far more unprofitable products each year and they have a much better reputation on these boards. Oracle has earned its reputation by repeatedly attacking the very foundations of the tech industry in the (short-sighted) pursuit of higher profit margins from more vendor lock-in. This is the root of the anti-Oracle bias, not scrapping a few products.
Re: (Score:1)
Yeah that's a fair point and I'm not disputing it. I just think that in this case Sun would have gone down either way, given their bad management. Would IBM be a better partner? Sure...but IBM isn't exactly a model corporate citizen either. Just ask any of the thousands of US based employees that have been laid off in the face of record profits.
I know that I'm in the minority here - and I don't have a horse in the race either way - I'm just trying to stir up some spirited debate on it.
Cheers.
Coporate speak (Score:2)
When they say
tightly align Oracle's future desktop virtualization portfolio investments with Oracle Corporation's overall core business strategy
It means
The thing makes money, but not enough for our greedy shareholders, therefore let us drop it.
How to ruin a good company. (Score:2)
Bullshit bingo (Score:3)
WTF does that mean?
Re: (Score:2)
It means they're going to take the resources they put into virtualisation, and whatever technology they developed for it, and put it into whatever else the company is doing. They've managed to state the bleeding obvious in thousand-dollar words, as usual.
Re: (Score:2)
It means they're screwing their customers, but expect to be *thanked* for doing so.
Oracle makes it official (Score:3)
Speaking as a ThinLinc marketer... (Score:2)
Re:Crap (Score:5, Funny)
Has anyone ever thought that the Oracle might be evil?
Re: (Score:1, Funny)
Has anyone ever only thought that Oracle might be evil?
Re: (Score:2)
I imagine Oracle's Mission statement is the exact opposite of Googles.
Re: (Score:1)
I imagine Oracle's Mission statement is the exact opposite of Googles.
I imagine it's identical: rule the world by making a shitload of money.
Re: (Score:3)
Maybe Larry is a vampire, as he seems to want to block out the Sun....
Re:Crap (Score:5, Funny)
Oracle just wants to destroy everything that was good about the Sun.
Oh, so they are staying in the storage business then.
Re: (Score:2)