Conference 7.286::digital

    Solaris -'s:
    
    Lack of native V2.0+ applications
    No 64-bit capability
    Incredibly buggy code (not me speaking but their own customers)
    Disloyal customer base (analyst surveys)
    
    SUN would do well to cut the BS and adopt Alpha. Save the billions
    they'd need to invest in building post-puny-SPARC and put engineering
    resources in Solaris quality and 64-bits. The work that Digital's done
    with ISV's could move right over with minimal effort.
    
    regards,
    Ruben

    re: .1  "No chance..."
    
    Sorry, but your comments remind me of another time, when many Digits
    made exactly the same comments about Rainbows and the IBM PC. Those
    arguments were all based on the technical superiority of the Rainbow,
    and how many people hated the limitations of DOS and the PC.
    
    Your points may be valid, but they ignore market realities. Sun has
    a much larger installed base, a much larger applications portfolio,
    and the marketing savvy to keep customers coming back for more. We
    need to drop our technical snobbery once and for all, and remember
    that we're in business to sell computers, period.
    
    Geoff

    Solaris has a terrible reputation among Sun's own users.  Most
    are sticking to SunOS as long as they can.  
    
    				Steve

    Sun is a perfrect example of the fact the the technologically superior
    solution is not always successful in the marketplace. That said I think
    Sun is in a worse position than Digital was a few years ago, they've
    lost whatever techical leadership they once had, they've lost their
    perception as market leaders to HP, they've pushed their customer base
    through migration after migration for little real benefit and their
    attempt to adhere to standards by creating them (ala microsoft) has
    failed miserably. Practically every time Scott opens his mouth these
    days something stupid comes out. 

    .3
    
    I still hate the limitations of DOS and the PC.  What else is new!
    It's just one big buggy kludge!

    And Isn't 80% of Sun customers still use SunOS vs. 20% for Solaris ?
    
    Sun is a ~$4.5 Billion company. @20%, Solaris is an $900 Million dollar
    business or less than 4.5% of the UNIX Business. That makes it hardly a
    widely used OS, not to mention quality and functionality defects and 
    performance and migration problems.
    
    

    
    	I find all this technical "better than SUN" stuff a crock. The fact
    is SUN has done a fantastic job recruiting VARs, and selling the VARs
    value added to the end-user customer as the solution to the EU's
    business problems.
    	We, on the other hand, pit our VARs against our own sales force and
    our customers are disgusted with our business practices/processes and 
    sales behaviours.
    	SUN is making money. We are losing money. Many of our best field
    resources (in Chicago anyway) have left Digital in the last two years
    and are working for SUN. And they like it there, they tell me.
    	We could do a lot worst than linking arms with SUN. It would give
    Alpha instant market credibility, and position a Digital/SUN
    environment as the leading technical computing resource. And it sure
    wouldn't hurt either of us in the commercial space, also.
    	Our software folks could "clean-up" Solaris to emulate on Alpha,
    which is no big trick since OpenVMS does exactly the same thing. OSF/1
    gets breathing room, and both companies benefit mightly.
    	I have often mentioned to my peers that a Digital/SUN working
    partnership is an extremely intelligent long-term strategy.
    Unfortuantely, LT strategies seem to be in short supply these days.
    
    		the Greyhawk

RE: all

I agree with many of the comments so far (Sun has lost its technological
edge and customers know it, customers hate Solaris and are sticking with
SunOS, and none of the above really matters because Sun has such good
marketing policies and VAR relationships).  My customers are abandoning 
Sun as quickly as they can.

However, there is one point that I think has been missed so far.  To mis-use
a quote from the last Presidential election:

		It's the *APPLICATIONS*, stupid!

Customers buy systems because those systems can do a job, better, faster,
cheaper, etc, then they can do the job any other way.  Right now the best
applications (from the customers point of view) **ALL** run on Sun gear.
**SOME** of those applications run on AXP, either DEC OSF/1, OpenVMS, or
Windows NT.  Until **ALL** of the applications that the customer uses run
on a given platform, the customer cannot move to that platform, and is 
therefore stuck on Sun gear.

IMHO, Sun has approximately 18 months left of this differentiator (at least,
6 months ago I said they had 2 years left).  By the end of 1995, every 
application that people care about, and which is primarily available on SunOS 
today, will be available on *many* other platforms.  Some of these platforms 
will be AXP (pick your O/S).  

At that time Sun Microsystems will be in *serious* trouble.  I think that
it is not unlikely that they will go out of business.  There will be too
many other hardware platforms which blow them away in terms of performance
and price/performance, and most of those platforms will be able to run the
applications that people want to run.

But until that time you will see Sun grow and prosper, because they have the
huge lead in applications, which is the primary thing which sells boxes.

-- Ken Moreau

    There once was a bunch of engineers in the woods. They were making this
    product what the world was waiting for. The king said: `what takes you
    so long. My people are waiting. I cannot keep them satisfied.' But more
    time was needed and more money, but this product would even satisfy the
    citizens more. Finally, the product was shown to the citizens. And yes,
    they were satisfied. However, very soon after, the king died, and
    another emperor came up.
    
    He very much liked the product, but hated the box. So, the product was
    adapted a little to put it in a `better' box. But now, the box was art
    nouvelle. And it was not yet time for that.
    
    So the guys in the forest still have a nice product in a nice box which
    would satisfy the citizens. The same product in an even better box, but
    that cannot be sold.
    
    And the king, he's out making war with his noblemen.
    
    And so it goes......

    re. 9
    And now the explanation.
    Once there was a product called E.C.H.O. (Electronic Case Handling
    Office). It was made by Philips (the dutch lightbulb industry). ECHO
    was based on SUN and SUNos. Lateron even on Solaris.
    Selling was impossible since the box did not have the burgundi label.
    So, ported to OSF/1 on AXP, it still cannot be sold.
    
    BTW. Now it is called CASEPLAN. Want to know more: see HLDE01::CASEPLAN
    
    Ronald

>    	We, on the other hand, pit our VARs against our own sales force and
>    our customers are disgusted with our business practices/processes and 
>    sales behaviours.

     Not for long.

    I believe that it won't be much longer before most UNIX vendors fall
    flat.  The industry is moving to PC applications, just go down to your
    local Circuit City and see for yourselves what is selling. I believe
    that in a few more years Microsoft/DOS/Chicago you pick it will so
    dominate the enduser computer industry that what will be leftover 
    won't be worth fighting for. 
    
    I realize that this is not the reality today, but look at the trends,
    do you see AT&T with Unix workstations on their TV  comercials, NOT !
    When customers think multimedia what's the first solution thats comes
    into mind (a Unix Workstation? ) NOT!, it's PC based. 
    
    The future of the computer business is in computer utilities 
    (like the phone and electric companies) not the hardware box/OS
    the enduser uses! Think about it, Compuserve,Internet, HBO, and the Sears
    Catalogue all rolled into one giant information service. That's IMHO
    where the money will be. Not who's chip is 64 bits verses who's  chip
    is rumored to be out of gas ! 
    
    The answer to who's UNIX is better, who's has bugs ect. doesn't matter !
    The lions share of the enduser computer industry isn't buying UNIX .
    

    How about a joint-venture
    
    Sun and Digital set up a third company to manufacture "Alpha Clones".
    We provide chips and technical expertise, they provide marketing and
    distribution.  Could be a worthy competitor if targeting the high - end
    graphics/imaging/CAD space.  Direct competition to SGI.
    
    Jeff
    
    PS I agree, the battle is one of marketing and distribution, even
    superior products do not sell themselves!.
    

    What should I do with an alliance or joint venture whatsoever...
    
    The point that triggers me all the time is that my fellow-noters keep
    talking about hardware. Make a box this and such and so, 64bit
    ultrascalair blabla....
    
    Customers are not looking for hardware boxes. They want a solution for
    their problem. And that solution is given by software running on
    hardware. I cannot imagine that a customer cares what's in the box
    (i.e. the computer), but what comes out of it.
    
    IMHO, if Digital wants to become the worlds largest boxpushing company,
    they should get rid of software engineering asap.
    But then I am very curious how salesmen will sell these boxes.
    
    or am i wrong.....   Ronald

    The results of such an alliance would be:
    
    1. A new company with first class marketing
    2. A new company with first class products
    
    
    If you were a software vendor would you want to write software for
    a workstation vendor who did not already have a strong product and
    distribution channel?  I know it is chicken and egg, but of course
    you need good software, good software is the reason why SGI is
    growing at 37% per year.  Every top package in graphics, animation,
    video, etc.. runs on a Indigo.
    
    What you could do with such a company is present a compelling 
    argument to software vendors to port to your platform.
    
    Jeff
    

RE: .15 (The results of such a union)

You reminded me of an old joke about the results of a union between Superman
(incredibly strong and handsome but not too bright) and Lois Lane (very smart
but not too strong):  You would either get a child with his strength and her
brains, or one with her strength and his brains...

Picture either Sun marketing the AXP, or Digital marketing the SPARC...

-- Ken Moreau

    Lest we forget how HP became players in the Workstation field as far as
    numbers go ? 
    
    They bought Apollo (who ?), had an instant migration base (what
    migration you ask - they simply had to abandon their Apollo
    workstations and move to HP-UX) and maxmimized market perception that
    they in fact were the new boy in town, the standard Unix, and everyone
    else was 2nd fiddle. Kind of reminds me of the MSoft story. 
    
    Perception, be it market position, applications, or plain boxes, is
    reality. Marketing usually creates it. 
    
    Herein endeth the lesson.
    
    -pb :-)

    Reality is...
    
    o Solaris 2.0 bites, users and ISVs are holding on to SunOS (Solaris
    1.0)
    
    o OSF/1 has more apps than Solaris 2.0
    
    o The UltraSPARC 64-bit is supposed to be out in 1995 or 1996, depends
    how TI is feeling toward Sun
    
    o 
    o Sun doesn't even recognize Digital as a company.  We were announced
    officially dead by Scott a couple of years ago.  We are never mentioned
    in meetings.

re.14:

>    Customers are not looking for hardware boxes. They want a solution for
>    their problem. And that solution is given by software running on
>    hardware. I cannot imagine that a customer cares what's in the box
>    (i.e. the computer), but what comes out of it.

Does the customer want their solution to run on the platform with the best 
price performance and the lowest cost of ownership? Aren't these factors 
part of the solution in this cost-competitive world?

Dave.

    re .-1
    
    Yes, of course they want the best price/performance. But when someone
    (would) come to me and ask what is the best solution to write his
    letters, I won't tell him/her he/she'd better buy a 66MHz 80486 with
    WordPerfect 6.0 or Word 6.0 for Windows, while he/she would have enough
    with a typewriter of 100 dollars.
    
    But what if he/she wants/needs a wordprocessor:
    e.g. WordPerfect is available on DOS and Windows on IBM-PC or
    compatible.
    But also on SUN, Apple, VMS.
    Then I say: who cares about the box as long as it `processes words'.
    
    Point is:
    You sell a solution to a customer, not the hardware box. But if the
    solution REQUIRES a hardwarebox (being AXP based systems or whatever),
    you sell that as well (I hope!). 

Mt customer has tried twice --- and FAILED --- to test Solaris with
manufacturing applications.

THEY WILL NOT install Solaris based applications in mission critical areas
because of the lack of stability/maturity of Solairs!

Sun has even gone off a "contracted" with Amdahl to produce a "Commercial"
version of Sloaris because they couldn't do it themselves.

First testing is being done on the Amdahl version and guess what --- it doesn't
look any better than Sun's version.

The customer is telling me that Sun is leading them down a "Proprietary" path
with Solaris!!!!

NO THANKS to a Sun/Digital alliance!!! You think we have problems?? Just wait
and watch Sun!!

Don

    According to this week Computer World, at SunWorld, Sun's CEO said
    in his speech something like: If you want to see stupid pet tricks,
    just go down to DEC's booth.
    
    First, what were we showing that triggered that STUPID remark ?
    
    Second, we shouldn't be making alliances with such jerks, we should be
    out there in force trying to do to them in the latter half of the 90's
    what they did to us in the early 90's. 
    They are vulnerable. We should be planning how to go for the kill.
    
    Can't afford to be nice guys anymore.
     
     

    re.22
    The Digital booth at SUNWORLD showed Alpha AXPs running DEC OSF/1...
    themes were turbocharging your SUN environment with Alpha AXP,
    migration from SUN to DEC OSF/1 etc.  Just another jab at Digital
    by Scott Mcnasty in his on-going attempts to position Digital as
    a non-player in the market.  
    
    Mark
    

    Myself and the rest of the StorageWorks group were at SunWorld in
    force with our own booth. (second largest behind Sun).  We had the
    juggling act there that has drawn tons of attention to our events
    and has won awards at trade shows for best floor show.  We were right
    across from Sun and people would regularly leave the Sun booth, and the
    booths of our major storage competitiors, to come see our show. 
    Vendors
    were so desperate that they would bring over literature and hang out in
    the large crowds that would congregate in and around our booth. 
    Everyone, particularly Sun, was pissed that Digital StorageWorks and
    the Alpha booth got about twice as much traffic as they did.
    
    It does not surprise me for him to say this, they continue to not have 
    any competitive advantages of their own so they must continue
    competitor bashing and fear creation in hopes that their customers
    never wake up and smell the proprietary solaris java.
           

    .25
    
    Great ! 
    
    However, I wish I read that in Computer World. 
    
    

    Way to go guys!

    Think of it: we write the PAL layer to put SUN OS (not solaris) on
    Alpha.  And suck their installed base right out from under them.....
    
    The installed base would probably pay up front for this as well.
    

  re: .28
  > Think of it: we write the PAL layer to put SUN OS (not solaris) on
  > Alpha.  And suck their installed base right out from under them.....
    
  > The installed base would probably pay up front for this as well.

It's probably just as easy to get them to move to DEC OSF/1 -- you'd have
to recompile anyway for a new architecture, and the OSF/1 system call
interface is very close to SunOS, SunOS being essentially BSD.  In fact,
we are marketing the fact that it's much easier to move from SunOS to 
DEC OSF/1 than to Solaris.  I don't know how successful it's been --
does anyone have any info?

	Steve

    re .29

> It's probably just as easy to get them to move to DEC OSF/1 -- you'd have
> to recompile anyway for a new architecture, and the OSF/1 system call
> interface is very close to SunOS, SunOS being essentially BSD.  In fact,
> we are marketing the fact that it's much easier to move from SunOS to 
> DEC OSF/1 than to Solaris.  I don't know how successful it's been --
> does anyone have any info?

I was talking to one of the VP's at JP Morgan (Investment Banking NY, NY)
about why SunOS is still so widely used there in spite of the bank's
dissatisfaction with Sun.  The upshot of why they aren't porting much of
anything to anyone's platform is because the programmers there are goaled
on how many NEW applications they write, not how many they port.  Secondly,
for the same reason, the programmers themselves don't want to learn another
variant of UN*X because it would slow them down when writing new apps. 
They can get by by buying more SPARC's for awhile and keep running SunOS.

re 28:

Good idea, but anything less than 100% compatibility won't cut it.

Tom