Paul Gress <pgress@pb.net> writes:

> I use Pro-Engineering, this program stresses both the video
> processing (3D) and the CPU for processing power. There is still a
> fair amount of people using Sun computers for this type of work, but
> if Sun doesn't do something soon, they're going to loose this market
> completely.

Have you tried the port of Pro/ENGINEER Wildfire to GNU/Linux?
HP sells GNU/Linux workstations that are certified to run
Pro/ENGINEER, at fairly attractive price points (attractive, that is,
compared to both Sun workstations and HP-UX workstations :-).

Pro/ENGINEER still hasn't been ported to HP's Itanium 2 GNU/Linux
boxes. But if you fit in 32 bits, the x86 GNU/Linux boxes look pretty
attractive, hardware-price-wise.

Perhaps Sun should emulate HP and support GNU/Linux on the desktop.
It would save Sun valuable resources, compared to maintaining Solaris
on the desktop for the indefinite future.

On Wed, 2 Jul 2003, Paul Eggert wrote:

> Perhaps Sun should emulate HP and support GNU/Linux on the desktop.
> It would save Sun valuable resources, compared to maintaining Solaris
> on the desktop for the indefinite future.

That is waht Mad Hatter is all about, apparently. (Quite why
Sun went with Linux instead of Solaris x86 is beyond me, but
oh well.)

And as Robin Kay said, some of us prefer to support just one
OS, on the desktop AND the server.

--
Rich Teer, SCNA, SCSA

President,
Rite Online Inc.

Voice: +1 (250) 979-1638
URL: http://www.rite-online.net

Robin KAY <komadori@myrealbox.com> writes:

> Paul Eggert wrote:
>
>> Perhaps Sun should emulate HP and support GNU/Linux on the desktop.
>> It would save Sun valuable resources, compared to maintaining Solaris
>> on the desktop for the indefinite future.
>
> Surely one of the principle points of Sun producing workstations is so
> that developers and sysadmins can have the same operating system on
> the desktop as they do on the server.

True. However, this argument is becoming obsolete, as Sun moves more
to a network-centric model (as opposed to a workstation model). Sun
itself uses Sun Rays heavily, for example.

Also, Sun and others sell a large number of GNU/Linux servers, so even
if you prefer the workstation model, there is an argument for having a
GNU/Linux workstation to match one's GNU/Linux servers. At my current
location, for example, the GNU/Linux servers (barely) outnumber the
Solaris servers.

groenvel@cse.psu.edu (John D Groenveld) writes:

> Rich Teer <rich.teer@rite-group.com> wrote:
>>That is waht Mad Hatter is all about, apparently. (Quite why
>
> Maybe.
> Project Arsenic Poisoning ...

Hey, let's get our poisons straight here. Hatters went mad because of
mecury poisoning, not arsenic.

> ... was first proposed at SunNetwork SF2002
> as a call center desktop solution.

and they said it'd be out in early 2003, if I recall correctly.
(I guess "early" didn't mean "first half of".)

I suspect that the handwriting is on the wall for Sun Rays, though.

In article <7wel18pg3l.fsf@twinsun.com>,
Paul Eggert <eggert@twinsun.com> wrote:
>Hey, let's get our poisons straight here. Hatters went mad because of
>mecury poisoning, not arsenic.

Good catch, thanks.

BTW the project is called Enterprise Linux Client.
<URL:http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/4/30005.html>

>and they said it'd be out in early 2003, if I recall correctly.
>(I guess "early" didn't mean "first half of".)

Slipped to mid CY03.
<URL:http://www.sun.com/aboutsun/media/presskits/lowcostcomputing/FactSheetLinuxV7.pdf>

>I suspect that the handwriting is on the wall for Sun Rays, though.

I gleamed the same from Sun's bizarro marketing.
The handwriting doesn't bode well for Solaris as a desktop solution.

John
groenveld@acm.org

groenvel@cse.psu.edu (John D Groenveld) writes:

> BTW the project is called Enterprise Linux Client.
> <URL:http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/4/30005.html>

Aack, and they're calling it "ELC" for short. And have an old
Sparcstation ELC sitting not three feet from me. Haven't powered it
on in months, though. I guess it's time to recycle it, or I'll get
hopelessly confused with the new acronym.

groenvel@cse.psu.edu (John D Groenveld) writes in comp.unix.solaris:
|I can't fault the former Cobalt Networks product managers for
|not remembering the SPARCstation ELC, though I do fault Sun for
|not putting someone with some institutional knowledge in Jon Schwartz's
|office when the idea was pitched.

You think confusion with a decade-old workstation name would actually
make any difference? Confusion with current product names doesn't stop
marketing when coming up with new ones (Sun Blade vs. Sun Fire Blade,
SunONE Studio 5 vs. SunONE Studio 8, SMC (Sun Management Center) vs.
SMC (Solaris Management Console), Solaris Volume Manager (DiskSuite) vs.
Solaris Volume Management (vold), etc.), so why should products few people
remember be any different?

--
__________________________________________________ ______________________
Alan Coopersmith alanc@alum.calberkeley.org
http://www.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU/~alanc/ aka: Alan.Coopersmith@Sun.COM
Working for, but definitely not speaking for, Sun Microsystems, Inc.

In article <be9mgf$1dg1$1@agate.berkeley.edu>,
Alan Coopersmith <alanc@alum.calberkeley.org> wrote:
>marketing when coming up with new ones (Sun Blade vs. Sun Fire Blade,

I hoped that was purposeful. A Sun Blade desktop could just be
a dual CPU Sun Fire Blade put into a mid-tower case with storage,
video, etc.

John
groenveld@acm.org