Talk:Sun Microsystems/Archive 1

Stanford University Network

I think that there was a Stanford University Network computer design that Joy, et. al. commerialized upon. The history should try to reflect that they based their work on research technology from the University. Cisco did this too with IOS and their first multi-protocol router. Kstailey 19:43, 9 Nov 2003 (UTC)

I think that's not quite correct. Andy cooked up some scary looking (wooden box) prototype, and he and Scott tried to sell it to Stanford. They called it the "Stanford University Network" computer, hoping this would facilitate a sale (but I think it didn't). If memory serves, this workstation wasn't based on any specific Stanford researches. I am sure that Bill wasn't initially involved, and didn't come in until they'd setup the company proper (and realised they had nothing to actually run on the thing). I'd put this in, but I (clearly) don't know the story quite straight enough to be sure. -- Finlay McWalter 20:53, 9 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Finlay is correct in saying that the "Stanford University Network" reference was mostly unrelated to Stanford itself. If my memory serves me correctly, Andy had developed the computer with off-the-shelf parts to help himself do CAD drawings. He did this while studying at Stanford, and I believe he was driven to build this system because he wanted to have a system all to himself to do his CAD drawings (otherwise his only choice was to battle his way onto the Stanford systems everyday). I believe that the original system had some sort of networking capability and would make it capable of being used throughout the Stanford campus (hence the Network reference in the acronym). Otherwise, I don't think that Stanford had any rights to the original design. Bill Joy joined Sun a year or more after the company had been formed and had no influence on the original development of the hardware that Andy had made at Stanford (I'm pretty sure about that). John Bartlett

I SunRay is a diskless client, so unless that is considered another failed venture into diskless clients the first paragraph might have to be amended. Webhat 16:56, Feb 15, 2005 (UTC)

Yeah, and there's no entry for Sun Ray Tim Bray 06:14, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Klunky Language

Someone complained to me about some of the facts in here, but the writing is sufficiently klunky and horrible that I can hardly parse them. I am now doing a ton of mostly-for-style edits, when I get finished and we actually have something readable, feel free to come back and argue about the facts. If I change anything that feels material, I'll note it here. Tim Bray 04:36, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)

This para was stuck in the "Hardware" section. I moved some of it into the "Java" section but re-wrote it heavily in the process. Parking the original here for now in case feelings are hurt: Sun also heavily promoted the Java programming language. Java achieved modest success as a tool for developing server-side Web applications and client-side Java applets. But because Sun was hopelessly inexperienced at supporting consumer needs, and Java suffered from severe structural flaws in its early versions, it was never able to displace Microsoft C++ and the Windows API as the primary technology powering client-side applications on consumer and corporate desktops. Tim Bray 04:50, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)

OK, I'm done, at least it's in English now and all the sentences have subjects, verbs, and objects. Back to the NPOV wars. Tim Bray 06:14, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)

POV

Please explain what is "POV" in the following phrase, attempted to be deleted.

but Sun does not abandon its attempts of innovation in hardware, operation systems and user interface. Mikkalai 02:13, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)

This is the English Wikipedia, so the English has to be reasonable. The clause above is poor English; in fact, it's not clear what it means. It also appears to be the editor's opinion. If it is someone else's opinion, please provide a reference or better still a quote. Also, there is nothing wrong with the deleted link. SlimVirgin 02:16, Feb 16, 2005 (UTC)

External links are "necessary evil" they must be kept at minimum. the reasoin is simple: problems of maintenance. Wikipedia has no control over external links and thier content. There is nothing more frustrating than to browse thru dead links after some time. Mikkalai 02:30, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I would agree that the link to the Merrill analyst is now out of date and should go. Why not agree to remove that first? Webmink 03:35, Feb 16, 2005 (UTC)

I found the article very useful in explaining some of the background to the state of the company. It is not out of date, and I would like to retain it. SlimVirgin 03:42, Feb 16, 2005 (UTC)

I understand your position, but there are plenty of data points in the history of Sun of which this is but one. It was perhaps enlightening when it was written in 2003 but I feel it lacks sufficient context to still be valuable. What do others here think? Webmink 02:18, Feb 17, 2005 (UTC)

Some other recommendations: (m:When should I link externally):

• If the content is free (in the w:GNU/FDL sense), consider copying and wikifying it for us. If its not, you can cannibalise it. Extract the facts and rewrite it (in your own words since their words are copyright) or alternatively place a link to it in /Talk so someone else can do so
• In short one shouldn't link externally to anything that we would like internally..

Also, there was a policy under discussion with detailed examples of whats and whatnots: Wikipedia:External links/temp. But the discussion seems to die out. Mikkalai 02:54, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Okay Mikkalai, feel free to remove it. I won't revert again. And I apologize for the bad-English remark. You're right: I was mad at you over the other business. I am sorry. SlimVirgin 02:57, Feb 17, 2005 (UTC)

While the mentioned article may look revealing, it is ridden with numerous blunders:

• McNealy's brash, contrarian act is getting really "old."
• Java, a distinguished "financial failure,"
• Sun's value added should be based on Solaris and systems expertise, not the chip (i.e., "use Intel" (whitten a bit higher)),

to quote some. (And by the way, I am a long-time devotee of Wintel. Despite all badmouthing, its advantages for an average software developer like me are way beyond what sun/solaris or linux provide.) By the way, if you click "Join the Feedback to this item" link there, it looks that no one bothered to comment this text (but it could be that they don't archive the comments; I am not sure). As for the "state of the company", it was badly hit by Internet bubble, like many of us. And McNealy today acts exactly contrary to the most of the advices of the article, in his good "old" "contrarian act". Mikkalai 03:49, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Bad English is not the reason for deletion. If its bad, please fix it. People all around the world contribute here. If you start deleting everything on the basis of language, people will not understand you. Also, it is not an opinion, but a fact, confirmed by the whole article: sun is not stalled, it releases new products and services. I will try to rephrase to reflect this. Mikkalai 02:30, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)

The English is so poor that it's not clear what's meant. I tried to rewrite it but it's POV, editor's opinion, and the tense is not clear. Please leave it out or find a reference. This is an encyclopedia. SlimVirgin 02:33, Feb 16, 2005 (UTC)

What is your opinion about "Its less successful ventures"? The goal of my text was to neutralize this phrase, criticized by Webhat above. Since I obviously failed, please help me to fix this. Mikkalai 03:07, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)

You said you would find someone else to explain it to me, so I'd be grateful if you would do that. Many thanks, SlimVirgin 03:08, Feb 16, 2005 (UTC)

The issue of Java's suitability for applications...

Hello there:

I think I put a reference in an earlier draft of this article to how Java was a complete failure for end-user applications (in addition to applets) but someone edited it out.

Can anyone name a widely deployed, widely used, well-known end-user consumer application that is based in Java? And I'm talking about something more important than the NetZero dialer app (which, I will admit, is written in Java).

The last time I checked, Corel's attempt to rewrite WordPerfect and CorelDRAW in Java had gone nowhere. The vast majority of consumers are still spending their computer time in apps that run on C or C++.

Yes, there are many Java applications running inside corporations for limited purposes like HR, but it's one thing to deploy an app internally for 30,000 users (most of whom are between 25 and 55 years of age), and a whole different ball game to deploy a consumer app to 3 million people who might be of any age.

--Coolcaesar 04:00, 3 Apr 2005 (UTC)

LimeWire; it gets downloaded 1.4 million times a week. Superb UI, even if you may end up with the RIAA heavies knocking your door down. Tim Bray 04:41, 3 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Right, but is there any Java application used by consumers for a purpose that's not illegal and that's more than just a cute toy? I'm thinking of mainstream applications like word processing, tax preparation, photo editing, interior design, graphic design, etc.

I know it sounds like I am looking for a way to slam Java, but I'm just a little bitter because (like Corel) I got suckered into the Java religion when it first came out. It's kind of frustrating that after ten years of Sun's broken promises, it's 2005 and the vast majority of consumers still turn on their computers every morning and load a certain suite of office applications owned by Bill Gates.

My personal suspicion (as borne out by a discussion with a friend inside the company) is that the basic problem is that Sun has never been a consumer-oriented company; its executives failed to pull off the necessary switch in corporate culture. Of course, I will concede that doing so is not easy; Corel failed (which is why it went private and is retreating to target only specialized markets) and Intel and Microsoft barely pulled it off (having several well-documented near-death experiences along the way). --Coolcaesar 03:20, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)

OK, so go over to the Java article and update it to say (if it doesn't already) that Java is much more widely used on server-side than client-side applications. Tim Bray 07:04, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)

More applications that you know are written in Java. Lockheed Martin, the largest writer of software in the world, writes a good portion of its software in Java. Widely used programs that are not illegal such as Eclipse (ironic because a lot of C++ code is written using this) and Acrobat Reader. Also, Java runs applications on more than one billion cell phones. You don't find c++ running the cell phone applications.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.59.45.249 (talk) 05:56, 21 January 2007 (UTC).

Market Cap

The phrase about the market cap dropping 90% in 3 years has re-appeared - I don't think this is correct. Checking Yahoo, ([[1]]), the share price is now about $4 - and in April 2002 it was about $10. OK, it has dropped 90% from its peak in September 2000, but I think for NPOV this needs to be tempered with the overhyping of Sun stock at the time, and the subsequent over-correction. -- Sigbusyff

The wording and the placing of the addition clearly shows malicious intent. I will add some numbers into the "Bubble" section. (or you may do it). Mikkalai 19:22, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Malicious intent? Excuse me, Mikkalai, but do you presume to be a mind reader? Sun is a company that has been performing dismally under its current CEO, and that is a fact, not a POV. I have no emotional stake in Sun's performance, being neither a customer nor a shareholder. What you're doing by removing this sentence is white-washing.

Yes, it was a one-sided out-of-context personal attack. The neutral statement about market ups/down is in the section "The Bubble and Its Aftermath". While I agree that Sun could have done better, but it is very strange to put the blame for internet bubble burst on company leaders. Also, this article is not financial analysis. Market cap and stuff is what makes company attractive to speculative investors, but speaks nothing about company survival and progress. Mikkalai 15:35, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I suspect that you have a personal interest in pretending that Sun is in better shape than it is. If you want this page to be your own personal playground, have at it. I don't care to fight with you about it.

As a possible proof that I am not that fond of Sun, I say that I liked your addition about "debug everywhere". It reflects plainself-contained truth that speaks for itself. As for stocks... Of course, the fact that Sun stock was bloated and then sharply plummetted may be attributed to the same financial shortsightedness as the rest of the word: the fact that sun VIPs were no smarter than the rest is not an excuse for them. But the phrase about 90% drop torn out of context oversimplifies the matter big time. Stock is not live money. The fact that stocks were sky high meant that the investors were about to be ripped off, not that the companies were going to die when the stock go south, as all wisened market analysts race to tell you today.

And I am no way a judge of sun's shape, neither I have a reason to be (of course, you are free to disbelieve me). I am in EDA software business, not in chip/computer manufacturing. I am keeping my eye on Synopsys and Cadence articles (my competitors), and, since I have a sun station on my desk, I look at Sun a bit. And if I'd seen the same phrase in any of the articles about companies I watch (believe me, or check for yourself, it is equally applicable to any of them), I would react exactly in the same way, for exactly the same reason. Mikkalai 06:43, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I checked IBM, INTC, CSCO, HPQ, MSFT. All of them basically returned to the end-of 1998 level, with IBM landing a bit better, you know why. Mikkalai 19:56, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Thanks, your edits look good. -- Sigbusyff

HQ?

I work for Sun, and whereas the nominal HQ may be in Santa Clara, the campus in Menlo Park has as much (probably more) executive presence. I think that the assertion that the HQ is in Santa Clara, and the paragraph about the Agnews/insane asylum, verges on misleading. I'd like to rewrite to something along the lines of "The company's headquarters is in Silicon Valley; there are large campuses in Menlo Park and Santa Clara (comprising several buildings previously part of an insane asylum). If nobody disagrees, I'll do that soon. Tim Bray 05:27, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)

AFAIK HQ can be onpy in one place; this is an official designation for the company; it should be somewhere in financial information, visible e.g., at finance.yahoo.com, and of course at Sun home page, and it must be taken from an official text. But of course you may describe the actual state of affairs about executive presence, if it is not a classified or otherwise sensitive information :-) We don't want wikipedia sued. 16:45, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)

did these guys invent the pop up add?

did these guys invent the pop up add?

I doubt it. Sun has done a lot of odd things, but I don't think they would be that crazy---I hope. --Coolcaesar 06:59, 4 May 2005 (UTC)

"dot in dot com"?

Could someone indicate exactly who else thought they were "the true 'dot'" in the quote:

The "dot in the dot-com" one caused an outcry from many who felt that they are the true "dot".

Terrible article

The syntax and grammar in this article are awful, the narrative is non-existent, the structure is jumbled, and some of the interesting facts are missing. To wit:

WTF does Sun's earthquake insurance, or lack thereof, have to do with "current focus"?!? That should be under "trivia" or something non-essential like that.

And isn't it a textbook example of "POV" to defend Sun for not having earthquake insurance?

Since Java is such a phenomenal language (maybe the article could just link to the entry on it, rather than trying, and failing, to explain it) wouldn't the actual beginnings of the language be worth adding? Java was originally conceived as a software platform for cable television set-top boxes as part of Sun's joint venture with Time Warner into interactive TV in Florida (Orlando, I believe) in the early '90s. It was repositioned as the "write-once, read-anywhere" solution to client-side web programming later, after the Time Warner experiment fizzled and Netscape IPO'ed for over a billion dollars. When the client performance sucked (as interpreted bloated languages on sub 200MHz processors tend to do), server-side Java--where most of the interesting work has happened for over ten years--was invented to try to capture some of the buzz. Remember, folks, Sun was the original Google, at least in terms of "is going to invent something wicked-cool to break MS's stranglehold on the OS" is concerned. (Linux folken, hush. The "buzz" surrounding Linux as an MS replacement began well after the Java hype left the pages of Newsweek. Trust me.)

And if you want to add more actual interest to this lame article, detail some of Scott McNealy's infatuation with competing with Microsoft generally, and William H. Gates, III, specifically. That's actually relevant to people who might be looking here for info on Sun.

And no, I'm not about to try rewriting this monstrosity. Those who are willing to are to be commended, then directed to read actual encyclopedia articles for guidance.

PS - I'm not an MS apologizer. I hate the Beast from Redmond with a passion, so I expect an article on Sun to be, um, readable.

Get to it.

-- DDN

Be bold. Rather than lengthy whining, you might as well have been edited the article itself. mikka (t) 17:43, 18 September 2005 (UTC)

Yeh, I'm sorry I can't feel sorry for you that much. You have a huge list of things that I sure you are capable of doing.

Gutworth 03:49, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

McNeally

Scott McNeally did not found Sun, he was brought to the company later. It was originally founded by Vinod Khosla and Andy Bochtelsheim

First sentence needs fixing

"Sun Microsystems, Inc. (NASDAQ: SUNW) is a computer, computer component designer, and software manufacturer ...". In this context, Sun is not a computer, but I doubt this is what is intended anyway. How about "Sun Microsystems, Inc. (NASDAQ: SUNW) is a computer and computer component manufacturer and software developer ...". Nurg 09:39, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

Good catch. Perhaps it would be even better in the active voice: "Sun Microsystems sells computers, designs microprocessors, and writes computer software". --70.189.73.224 22:18, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

CoolThreads chips

Could someone add something about the "CoolThreads" chips? I saw a brief mention of it in "Sun Bets on Cool Profit With New Chips": "CoolThreads has eight cores, or processing brains, on a single chip. Each core can handle four programs, or threads, at once." which reminds me of the Cell microprocessor. Anyone have more information? --70.189.73.224 22:18, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Suns newest chip the Niagra2 has 8 cores and 8 threads per core, giving you 64 threads per chip! Amazing!

ZFS

In the beginning of the article it says "the NFS and ZFS network file systems"; Is ZFS a network filesystem?

No, it's not. And neither ZFS nor NFS are "products," strictly speaking -- they're technologies that are part of certain Sun products. --NapoliRoma 17:03, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

Repair Sites

This section is badly written, is apparently about Celestica not Sun, and I don't think really adds value. I'm nuking for now. If someone would like to argue, here's the place. Tim Bray 01:52, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

NMAS red link in the article

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Network_management_system ?? Poweroid 18:50, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Financials refs in infobox

It looks like at one time there was a ref in the infobox to a Reuters site that got changed to a Sun site instead. However, this named ref was also used for two other bits of data that are not actually backed up by the Sun page. So, I've taken those two references and changed them to {{cn}}s. If anyone has time to chase these down, please have at it. (I also formatted the infobox and embedded citations, since it helped me figure out what was what.)--NapoliRoma 02:12, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Q2 FY2007 Financial Results

I added the Q2 FY2007 Financial Results. I realize that these results are not for a full year yet, but since the old results were two years old, and because Sun has recently done much better, I thought it would be better to post the newest results. 192.18.101.5 21:43, 23 January 2007 (UTC)