Feedback A forum for readers to speak their mind on issues that are important to the design community

Who's dreaming?

That's plainly not true. Any journalist in this industry knows that Sun is not and will never consider adopting Pentium technology, period. SPARC technology has years of life to go and is in many ways a much better architecture for running technical applications. The platform "wars," as you term them, are far from over. Rather, multiple platforms will continue to exist throughout the enterprise, including the engineering department.

Your June editorial also contains some misinformed statements ["The Plight of Unix: Is It a Lost Cause?"]. First: "As for Sun, it believes it can bankroll Java into a computing language that can overwhelm Microsoft in Internet territory."

Do you have any idea what Sun (and IBM and Oracle and a bunch of other big companies) are really doing with Java? Call me, I'll send you some URLs and reading material so you can learn more and understand just what Sun is trying to achieve with Java technology. Meanwhile, heads up for our JINI announcement on July 20th--this technology will tell you a great deal about Sun's vision for the future of Java technology.

Next: "Sun appears ready to surrender the scientific and engineering markets. . . ." Well, to quote you, dream on! It's clear that you haven't tracked Sun's activities in these markets. I know you saw the hundreds of Sun workstations at DAC--we were by far the most dominant platform there. You saw the compute ranch we ran throughout the show, demonstrating how engineering teams can achieve much higher efficiency with the equipment they already own by using all their compute cycles instead of just 25 or 30 percent on a stand-alone desktop. You saw our technology demonstration of a current-generation UltraSPARC II processor running at 500 MHz in an Ultra 60 workstation.

And you know about Sun's latest workstation products, from the Ultra 5 at less than $2,500 for a basic system, to the Ultra 60 high-end workstation, which starts at about $12,000 (not bad for a system with graphics that rival SGI machines that go for $50,000). In fact, since the launch of these products, Sun has sold its largest volume of workstations ever in its history.

Does that look like we're ready to surrender without a fight? Somebody better tell Scott McNealy that, because he still thinks technical applications are one of our most important markets. And we think we're in a better position than the press would have us all believe. For example, you heard Gary Smith from Dataquest talk about how NT is not growing in EDA as people thought it would. Quarterly surveys by the EDA Consortium support that statement with real numbers. And we hope you talk with EDA vendors about how much product they are actually shipping on NT.

Sun doesn't have the deep pockets that Microsoft and Intel have. But we bring technical and competitive advantages, as well as 15-plus years' experience, to the technical markets, things the Wintel juggernaut wishes it really had (instead of just claiming to have). Customers and resellers know that. Meanwhile, as you've observed, more and more end users are getting fed up with the struggle to make NT a real industrial-strength operating system.

Please, check your facts, do your research, check into what ISVs are shipping and what customers are buying before you write your next editorial.

Christine Holland

Technical computing markets press relations manager
Sun Microsystems, Inc.
Mountain View, Calif.

Jonah McLeod replies:

Of course, Christine Holland is absolutely right about Sun not adopting the Pentium architecture. I did get my facts wrong and I apologize to Sun and to the readers for any misunderstanding that might have caused. However, I stand by the rest of my words.

Yet more on Linux vs. NT

Our coverage of Linux versus NT continues to generate stacks of letters, the vast majority coming from strong Linux backers.

A number of readers point to Red Hat and Caldera as offering "commercial support of an extremely high standard." Several reiterate the availability of excellent 24-hour news group support, and another claims that Linux requires less support "because it just keeps working or because drivers, fixes, and FAQs are readily available on the Net."

Another group appears to support Linux by default, primarily because Microsoft doesn't own it. Anti-Microsoft feeling obviously runs high; several readers float various conspiracy theories, one accusing the company of corrupting young engineers, another of a grand plan for world domination. Others appear to object to the entire GUI concept. One reader calls NT "the toy OS."

Others emphasize the speed and scalability of Linux. Bruce Ide, senior programmer at System Concepts, Inc. (Salem, Ore.), says, "You can install a Linux Beowulf cluster and get supercomputer performance. Even if you have to roll complex apps from scratch, the amount you save on the supercomputer could keep you in programmers for the next decade or two."

The pro-Linux and anti-NT mail came from a varied group of people: an astronomer, a high school student, two Britons, an Australian, and several U.S. government workers. A postgraduate student at the Institute of System Dynamics and Control Theory in Irkutsk, Russia, wrote to say that "the common students in Russia cannot afford even Windows 95"; the availability of Linux allows him to exclaim, "Now I am free!"

A group of readers launched more specific critiques of NT, including poor memory management, a proprietary registry that is difficult to edit, and the absence of remote access.

The editorials and the barrage of anti-NT comments did motivate a small but articulate group of pro-NT and neutral readers to respond. Several cited NT's "consistent user interface" and far easier installation procedures. "Easy installations is one area that the Windows camp has done well in--Unix vendors should take note. . . . Every installation should provide a default installation, one that can run virtually unattended," says Brian Masinick, an independent software consultant in Nashua, N.H., who nonetheless strongly prefers Linux for engineering and software development applications.

Echoed by others, Jeff Jones, a senior network software engineer at Z-Tel Communications, Inc. (Atlanta), defends the reliability of NT. "The trick to successfully running any OS is knowing how to use the tool correctly. When I changed to NT, I took the time to learn how it was intended and designed to be used, and adopted that paradigm. I run many programs on NT 4--multiple development sessions, e-mail, browser, word processor, spreadsheet, and others--and do so concurrently. I can't remember the last time I had NT 4 crash on me." A simulation software engineer (who asked that his name be withheld) avers that "software that exploits the features provided by NT can offer a lot of advantages. Of course, that requires not just software engineers being able to recognize it, but also customers requesting it."

Convincing the marketers

To the Editor:
I'm into direct action, so I took up a conversation with an EDA vendor. Here's the sanitized transcript.

From: Dan Kegel (DK)
To: Marketing Engineer (ME)
Subject: Some EDA Company Web Site Feedback Form
Message Type: Complaint
Topic: Products
Comments: Why no Linux support?

ME: Dan, we don't have current plans to support Linux. We are tracking the customer demand for this, however, and may reconsider in the future. Thanks for your inquiry.

Regards,
The Marketing Engineer

DK: I'd be interested in hearing what vendors like your company feel are the problems with offering Linux support for their tools. Have you seen any good presentation of the problems, or can you describe a few of them yourself?

If there are any missing pieces of infrastructure--for example, dongle/copy protection methods for Linux, distribution methods, or ways to minimize the cost of porting the software to the new platform--I'd like to find out so I can help nudge the Linux world closer to a solution for you.

ME: One of the key issues is the one you mentioned first. We must have a secure mechanism for licensing. Dongle support is one way. Support for a mixed network (Unix & PC) will help because PC Linux users could point their license server to a Unix license server. PC-only networks would require good dongle support, preferably for the Globetrotter dongles that we're currently using.

Another problem concerns which flavor of Linux to support (Red Hat, Slackware, or others). Is Red Hat becoming the dominant player?

Hardware support I understand is also very difficult. The price point of our product would not support us having to answer video driver questions.

Probably the biggest hurdle is just in building the potential business on Linux to justify the opportunity cost (not just the raw cost) of adding 20 percent to our product/platform support/maintenance cost base. We have been getting many requests very recently for Linux support and would love to expand our customer base if it made business sense.

DK: I imagine you would prefer to continue using the licensing server vendor you're currently using. Which one is that?

Is dongle support related to network licensing support--in other words, does the license server use a separate dongle system?

As to which flavor of Linux to support, Red Hat is the clear choice in the U.S. and probably India. All the other flavors of Linux will support Red Hat packages, so if you develop for Red Hat, other vendors will tend to support it automatically, or fix the problems.

As for hardware support, people who are running Linux are usually careful to buy hardware that Linux supports well. I suspect that you could certify two or three configurations, call others unsupported, and leave it at that. VA Research, which sells a lot of Linux systems, might be able to provide some guidance here; you could just certify their most popular configurations, for example.

ME: The licensing software we use is FlexLM by Globetrotter. The dongle is a surrogate for the Unix hostid. Preferably the user would tie their license server to a Unix box's host id. Otherwise, one dongle would be needed on a PC to serve the licenses.

DK: Looks like FlexLM already supports Linux in two ways: natively, and through Java. In fact, it supports Linux both on Intel and on DEC Alpha. Since Globetrotter is your existing vendor, it looks like you'll be able to use existing license servers just fine. That's one hurdle out of the way. I suspect the hardware support hurdle can be solved by fiat: let the users fend for themselves. That's one of the things Linux users are best at.

That leaves the main hurdle: building the potential business on Linux to justify the opportunity cost. The low cost and high quality of Linux will open doors for you. Did you know that movie studios now commonly use Linux to render their special effects sequences because it's easy to set up a huge farm of fast Linux boxes? The big scenes in Titanic were rendered by a big farm of Alphas running Linux, not DEC Unix; Linux provided the best bang for the buck. Companies needing to set up simulation farms may well do the same--if you'll let them.

Everyone knows Linux has a big following in the U.S. and Europe, but India seems keen on Linux, too; a popular computer magazine there has distributed Linux on CD-ROM as an insert several times and has given Linux a prominent spot on its Web site.

ME: Thanks for all the info. I've forwarded your e-mail below to our engineering and marketing teams. I doubt you've pushed us over the Linux edge, but I'm sure you've nudged us closer.
The Marketing Engineer

Dan Kegel
Senior programmer
Activision
Santa Monica, Calif.

To voice an opinion on this or any Integrated System Design article, please email your message to miker@isdmag.com.

integrated system design  September 1998