I can't say it feels like a match made in heaven but it's better than say HP buying Sun.
Not so sure. IBM will be motivated to ruin or kill Sun's software products.
Netbeans will be on the chopping block, since it competes with Eclipse. Same for Glassfish, as it competes with Websphere.
IBM will likely scrap Sun's excellent documentation and replace it with their crappy documentation that seems written to make you pick up the phone and call an IBM consultant.
Neither Sun or IBM have confirmed the rumours, so hopefully this doesn't happen.
Why would IBM kill off all the open source stuff? Adobe didn't kill off all the Macromedia apps. They'll merge apps, consolidate, gain intellectual property, etc.
They're buying it to gain market share. What are they going to do sell you a Sparq server with Windows on it? I think they'll continue to invest in open source and the Sun OS and/or just merge all of their OSes.
If true, this rumor is a good thing because Sun wasn't going to make it much longer. IBM is a strong company with good management. The fanfare of open source is too strong for IBM to abandon it.
There's so much wrong with your post that I don't know where to start.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bbwi
Why would IBM kill off all the open source stuff? Adobe didn't kill off all the Macromedia apps.
What software did Macromedia make that was open source and/or competed directly with Adobe's?
Quote:
They'll merge apps, consolidate, gain intellectual property, etc.
Like they merged DB2 and Informix? Riiiiight....
Quote:
They're buying it to gain market share.
By eliminating free, open-source, well-documented and supported products that compete with their own lousy, badly documented, bloated, and overpriced products.
Quote:
What are they going to do sell you a Sparq server with Windows on it?
What is that supposed to mean?
Quote:
I think they'll continue to invest in open source and the Sun OS and/or just merge all of their OSes.
IBM doesn't invest in open source. They leverage it and invest only when they need to in order to ensure that the product continues to survive. Aside from Eclipse and JFS, name me one product that IBM has open sourced. The vast majority of their products are closed source (Notes, DB2, Websphere, Rational, etc).
Also, you obviously don't know much about IT. You don't just "merge" two different operating systems.
Quote:
If true, this rumor is a good thing because Sun wasn't going to make it much longer.
Sun made an operating profit in the last quarter (excluding one time charges). They have billions of cash in the bank and their software business is growing. Please justify your statement.
Quote:
IBM is a strong company with good management.
No. They're just really big.
Quote:
The fanfare of open source is too strong for IBM to abandon it.
Right...that's how you make business decisions....by how much "fanfare" there is for it.
I hope IBM perpetuates Open Office. Their free version of Lotus is already based on Open Office (but I find it less user friendly and less functional).
IBM actually has a long history of sopporting open source projects. For instance, they maintain detailed Linux documentation on their website. If I'm not mistaken, IBM has also contributed certain technologies to the Linux OS.
I hope IBM perpetuates Open Office. Their free version of Lotus is already based on Open Office (but I find it less user friendly and less functional).
So why would you consider this good news?
Quote:
IBM actually has a long history of sopporting open source projects. For instance, they maintain detailed Linux documentation on their website. If I'm not mistaken, IBM has also contributed certain technologies to the Linux OS.
IBM only got in the Linux business to kill Solaris and HPUX. AIX was not doing the job and commoditizing Unix was in its interest. Likewise Eclipse was in its interest (and not the Java community's interest) when they fragmented the Java IDE market further. Instead of having a single solid VS competitor we have two Java IDEs that suck in different ways. And SWT as a distraction on top of that.
I wouldn't consider it a "long" history even if freetards think IBM is their savior from SCO.
Sun may suck in a lot of ways but IBM has no soul or imagination as a company. IBM buying Sun effectively kills the Unix market. Of course freetards probably think this is a good idea as Solaris might get GPL'd but that would END things like dtrace and zfs getting into BSD or OSX and would hurt open source in general.
Which would be a real shame. For $7B I prefer Apple buy Sun.
There's so much wrong with your post that I don't know where to start.
What software did Macromedia make that was open source and/or competed directly with Adobe's?
To be fair to bbwi, Macromedia had Dreamweaver and Flash while Adobe had GoLive and SVG. Adobe have taken on Flash and Dreamweaver as their own major products.
I'm sorry, but what the hell does Sun do nowadays anyway? I think since the "We're the dot in dot com" things have just gone downhill for them. But I'm not some corporate IT whiz, so, what do I know... \
I'm sorry, but what the hell does Sun do nowadays anyway? I think since the "We're the dot in dot com" things have just gone downhill for them. But I'm not some corporate IT whiz, so, what do I know... \
Hey I don't know the full extent of Sun and years ago I used to work for a company that managed their payroll.
Sun is a lot like Apple. They're really a software company now that makes profitable (at some level) hardware as the vehicle.
Sun has excellent developer tools and a pretty rabid Solaris fanbase.
Of course we know their popular items like
Java
MySQL
OpenOffice
Netbeans/Studio 12
but they also have some very bright minds that have created
ZFS
Lustre filesystem
Dtrace
Crossbow (network virtualization)
Threaded 10G NIC
and more.
Frankly i'm dissapointed that Apple isn't even interested here. Sun has attempted to come to Apple's aid a couple of times in Apple's time of need.
Is Sun worth 5 billion to Apple? That's debatable but there's no doubt that the Unix knowledge and brainpower at Sun is still intact. Sun is like many vendors who profited years from high end Sparc systems but watched Enterprise move to more commodity X86 parts. They are in transition and I think they would have made a "not so surprising" acquisition by Apple.
Let's face it Apple is never going to be a company that delivers High Performance Computing (HPC). I think Sun brings that sort of focus and Apple brings supply chain smarts, distribution and marketing. Would there be culture clash? Sure but I can tell you that I've never heard a Sun employee say a negative word about Apple. It's a very Apple friendly environment and it makes me sick to think about what IBM would do.
Latest rumor now is that Cisco may be interested. There's another company that will buy and pick to the bones any acquisition they make. Sigh.
Comments
http://www.channelinsider.com/c/a/IB...ystems-326007/
I can't say it feels like a match made in heaven but it's better than say HP buying Sun.
I can't say it feels like a match made in heaven but it's better than say HP buying Sun.
Not so sure. IBM will be motivated to ruin or kill Sun's software products.
Netbeans will be on the chopping block, since it competes with Eclipse. Same for Glassfish, as it competes with Websphere.
IBM will likely scrap Sun's excellent documentation and replace it with their crappy documentation that seems written to make you pick up the phone and call an IBM consultant.
Neither Sun or IBM have confirmed the rumours, so hopefully this doesn't happen.
If this deal goes through, I wonder if ZFS will still be in OS X?
ZFS is open source, so if IBM changes the license, Apple can simply fork it.
ZFS would survive and Dtrace but who knows where Virtual Box, Lustre and
the plethora of projects Sun is working on would go.
They're buying it to gain market share. What are they going to do sell you a Sparq server with Windows on it? I think they'll continue to invest in open source and the Sun OS and/or just merge all of their OSes.
If true, this rumor is a good thing because Sun wasn't going to make it much longer. IBM is a strong company with good management. The fanfare of open source is too strong for IBM to abandon it.
Why would IBM kill off all the open source stuff? Adobe didn't kill off all the Macromedia apps.
What software did Macromedia make that was open source and/or competed directly with Adobe's?
They'll merge apps, consolidate, gain intellectual property, etc.
Like they merged DB2 and Informix? Riiiiight....
They're buying it to gain market share.
By eliminating free, open-source, well-documented and supported products that compete with their own lousy, badly documented, bloated, and overpriced products.
What are they going to do sell you a Sparq server with Windows on it?
What is that supposed to mean?
I think they'll continue to invest in open source and the Sun OS and/or just merge all of their OSes.
IBM doesn't invest in open source. They leverage it and invest only when they need to in order to ensure that the product continues to survive. Aside from Eclipse and JFS, name me one product that IBM has open sourced. The vast majority of their products are closed source (Notes, DB2, Websphere, Rational, etc).
Also, you obviously don't know much about IT. You don't just "merge" two different operating systems.
If true, this rumor is a good thing because Sun wasn't going to make it much longer.
Sun made an operating profit in the last quarter (excluding one time charges). They have billions of cash in the bank and their software business is growing. Please justify your statement.
IBM is a strong company with good management.
No. They're just really big.
The fanfare of open source is too strong for IBM to abandon it.
Right...that's how you make business decisions....by how much "fanfare" there is for it.
I hope IBM perpetuates Open Office. Their free version of Lotus is already based on Open Office (but I find it less user friendly and less functional).
IBM actually has a long history of sopporting open source projects. For instance, they maintain detailed Linux documentation on their website. If I'm not mistaken, IBM has also contributed certain technologies to the Linux OS.
Good news if true.
I hope IBM perpetuates Open Office. Their free version of Lotus is already based on Open Office (but I find it less user friendly and less functional).
So why would you consider this good news?
IBM actually has a long history of sopporting open source projects. For instance, they maintain detailed Linux documentation on their website. If I'm not mistaken, IBM has also contributed certain technologies to the Linux OS.
IBM only got in the Linux business to kill Solaris and HPUX. AIX was not doing the job and commoditizing Unix was in its interest. Likewise Eclipse was in its interest (and not the Java community's interest) when they fragmented the Java IDE market further. Instead of having a single solid VS competitor we have two Java IDEs that suck in different ways. And SWT as a distraction on top of that.
I wouldn't consider it a "long" history even if freetards think IBM is their savior from SCO.
Sun may suck in a lot of ways but IBM has no soul or imagination as a company. IBM buying Sun effectively kills the Unix market. Of course freetards probably think this is a good idea as Solaris might get GPL'd but that would END things like dtrace and zfs getting into BSD or OSX and would hurt open source in general.
Which would be a real shame. For $7B I prefer Apple buy Sun.
There's so much wrong with your post that I don't know where to start.
What software did Macromedia make that was open source and/or competed directly with Adobe's?
To be fair to bbwi, Macromedia had Dreamweaver and Flash while Adobe had GoLive and SVG. Adobe have taken on Flash and Dreamweaver as their own major products.
I'm sorry, but what the hell does Sun do nowadays anyway?
Hey I don't know the full extent of Sun and years ago I used to work for a company that managed their payroll.
Sun is a lot like Apple. They're really a software company now that makes profitable (at some level) hardware as the vehicle.
Sun has excellent developer tools and a pretty rabid Solaris fanbase.
Of course we know their popular items like
Java
MySQL
OpenOffice
Netbeans/Studio 12
but they also have some very bright minds that have created
ZFS
Lustre filesystem
Dtrace
Crossbow (network virtualization)
Threaded 10G NIC
and more.
Frankly i'm dissapointed that Apple isn't even interested here. Sun has attempted to come to Apple's aid a couple of times in Apple's time of need.
Is Sun worth 5 billion to Apple? That's debatable but there's no doubt that the Unix knowledge and brainpower at Sun is still intact. Sun is like many vendors who profited years from high end Sparc systems but watched Enterprise move to more commodity X86 parts. They are in transition and I think they would have made a "not so surprising" acquisition by Apple.
Let's face it Apple is never going to be a company that delivers High Performance Computing (HPC). I think Sun brings that sort of focus and Apple brings supply chain smarts, distribution and marketing. Would there be culture clash? Sure but I can tell you that I've never heard a Sun employee say a negative word about Apple. It's a very Apple friendly environment and it makes me sick to think about what IBM would do.
Latest rumor now is that Cisco may be interested. There's another company that will buy and pick to the bones any acquisition they make. Sigh.