Apr 23, 2009

SGI into Rackable Systems, and Sun into Oracle

Following SGI's $25M purchasing by Rackable Systems on April 1, now Oracle announced "Oracle Buys Sun" with $7.4B on April 20.

After IBM withdrawal of Sun's deal, we concerned about Sun's future.
Now Sun Microsystems seems that they succeed in finding a suitable boatman for Sun ship. I wonder why Sun did not propose their purchasing to Oracle first.

However, according to the article of NY Times "In Sun, Oracle Sees a Software Gem ", "Oracle executives emphasized that they did not regard Sun as a hardware company" although "Safra Catz, Oracle’s president, called Sun a “modern technology company.”
This message has something on our chest in HPC point of view.

According to Wall Street Journal "Oracle Snatches Sun, Foiling IBM", they reported a slightly different message about Sun's hardware business, "Safra Catz, one of two Oracle presidents, said Oracle intends to make Sun's hardware operations a profitable business unit."

In any cases, it is true that Oracle expects to transform Sun to a highly profitable organization, and they must make new decision about investment for Sun's system development, such as for HPC, that demands long-term resources and much money. For example, on April 14, Sun made a large announcement about advanced hardware - new blade servers, new family of network products including InfiniBand, storage systems, and large HPC system Constellation which is equivalent that Sun promises much investment for these users. I, therefore, cannot understand why they are not so sensitive to cost as if they neglected buyer's concern before conclusion.

Not surprisingly, Oracle executive said they could make Sun profitable, and industry analysts estimated that Oracle’s cost savings from Sun operations on April 20 in New York Times. It is difficult time, in particular, for Sun's hardware people.

The icing on the cake (Leg of a snake in Japanese):

I feel something wrong about the WSJ's headline "Oracle Snatches Sun, Foiling IBM". Actually NYT introduced that Mark Loughridge, IBM CFO, suggested "a Sun deal did not pass muster" in April 20's article "I.B.M. Affirms Earnings Goal Despite Sales Slide."
It looks more reasonable idea that IBM already lost concern and left from the Sun deal.