Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : All About Sun Microsystems -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: cheryl williamson who wrote (27926)	2/17/2000 9:46:00 PM
From: Thomas C. Kimmel	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 64865

Cheryl, Your comments are really thought-provoking. Why would Ballmer ever say such things? If I may speculate: - He was just looking at the Win2K validation test results and observed that there were only 64000 (so far) identified defects. That's only 1.6 per 1000 lines of code - quite an admirable achievement. Then he just got carried away and, instead of silently, with dignity, allowing his superior product to speak for him by inexorably crushing the opposition in the marketplace, he succumbed to a brief weakness to indulge in some juvenile baiting. or: - Given the cutbacks in the test suite due to delivery pressures, only 10% of the logic was actually covered during validation. The addendum to the report anticipates that the lengthy beta process would have encountered the worst of the predicted additional 576,000 defects, had they existed. Ballmer has some problems with this assertion which the Tums will not entirely assuage. Hence his testiness. or: - Ballmer has been cogitating on the fact that Bill Gates is the Chief Software Architect of his company. This scares the bejeezus out of him and he is going off the deep end. Other theories? -tck

To: cheryl williamson who wrote (27926)	2/18/2000 12:18:00 PM
From: rudedog	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 64865

Cheryl - For once I agree whole-heartedly with your post. Having just spent the last three days at the various Win2K launch activities, I can say that my impression is that MSFT still does not "get it", and I stand by my earlier posts about where the real battle will be and why SUNW has little to fear from MSFT in the enterprise space. MSFT is under pressure in the ASP space from the combination of DELL and Intel, who threaten to enable Linux as an alternative OS... I think the little dance that Michael DELL did in the days before the Win2K launch, and the resulting premier position that MSFT gave to DELL at the Win2K launch - DELL was featured to the virtual exclusion of other vendors - shows just how vulnerable MSFT is to that kind of threat, and how little they care about real enterprise business if their volume business is under attack. Surely no one would take DELL seriously as an enterprise vendor - they have no services, no technology capability and no presence in the enterprise market aside from the low end departmental stuff. For MSFT to put DELL forward as their enterprise horse is a clear indication that Ballmer is blowing smoke and that MSFT is still not serious about solving the tough problems in the enterprise. IBM and HP are credible enterprise vendors - but neither would advance NT over their own Unix products, or in IBM's case, over their proprietary high end products. CPQ could have been a credible enterprise horse for MSFT, but instead MSFT starved CPQ's Alpha NT product to the point where CPQ abandoned it, and now is enabling DELL in CPQ's volume markets, probably at Intel's behest... despite the fact that only CPQ has the engineering capability to actually drive NT into mission critical applications, as shown by their 70% share in the exchange business and their delivery of those world-record benchmarks - which incidentally were presented by Gates as a MSFT engineering feat even though everyone knows CPQ delivered the results. Gates did not even mention CPQ in discussing the results... amazing. It looks to me like MSFT was giving CPQ just enough encouragement to keep CPQ "in the tent" but with no intent to actually take any risks with CPQ to move into the enterprise. There was an announcement in September of 1998 between CPQ and MSFT about a number of initiatives to move CPQ's high end technology into NT, but that never led to anything as far as I can tell - I have not seen a single word about it since that time, and the executives who were driving it - John Rose at CPQ and Paul Maritz at MSFT - are either "semi-retired" in the case of Maritz or gone in the case of Rose. So I think SUNW continues to drive architectural dominance through initiatives like iPlanet and EJB, continues to drive the performance envelope with next generation products, and MSFT continues to make noise while driving their real agenda which is preservation of their volume market, a market which as you point out is not important to SUNW.