<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Strong Leaders, Strange Bedfellows and The Art of War by Sun Two</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.redmonk.com/jgovernor/2008/02/08/strong-leaders-strange-bedfellows-and-the-art-of-war-by-sun-2/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.redmonk.com/jgovernor/2008/02/08/strong-leaders-strange-bedfellows-and-the-art-of-war-by-sun-2/</link>
	<description>An industry analyst blog looking at software ecosystems and convergence</description>
	<pubDate>Fri, 21 Nov 2008 02:53:55 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.3</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Mike Dolan</title>
		<link>http://www.redmonk.com/jgovernor/2008/02/08/strong-leaders-strange-bedfellows-and-the-art-of-war-by-sun-2/#comment-304846</link>
		<dc:creator>Mike Dolan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 12 Feb 2008 22:39:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.redmonk.com/jgovernor/2008/02/08/strong-leaders-strange-bedfellows-and-the-art-of-war-by-sun-2/#comment-304846</guid>
		<description>"If customers weren’t choosing Solaris on x86 there is not a chance those firms would be supporting it."

James, that's not entirely true. While it could be a reason in some cases, but very often vendors pay or make other concessions for other vendors to support their product on a particular platform. I don't know the details of what transpired with Dell and I can't comment on IBM, but Sun could very easily pay any vendor enough to support Solaris on their platform. 

Support decisions are not just about customer demand for volumes of a product - and Solaris x86 is VERY far away from becoming a volume platform (in Sun's mind, yes, they consider it volume, but Sun isn't exactly winning in the volume server space). I would caution from making a conclusion that support for any vendor product means volume customer demand.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;If customers weren’t choosing Solaris on x86 there is not a chance those firms would be supporting it.&#8221;</p>
<p>James, that&#8217;s not entirely true. While it could be a reason in some cases, but very often vendors pay or make other concessions for other vendors to support their product on a particular platform. I don&#8217;t know the details of what transpired with Dell and I can&#8217;t comment on IBM, but Sun could very easily pay any vendor enough to support Solaris on their platform. </p>
<p>Support decisions are not just about customer demand for volumes of a product - and Solaris x86 is VERY far away from becoming a volume platform (in Sun&#8217;s mind, yes, they consider it volume, but Sun isn&#8217;t exactly winning in the volume server space). I would caution from making a conclusion that support for any vendor product means volume customer demand.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: mopteron</title>
		<link>http://www.redmonk.com/jgovernor/2008/02/08/strong-leaders-strange-bedfellows-and-the-art-of-war-by-sun-2/#comment-304844</link>
		<dc:creator>mopteron</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 12 Feb 2008 22:39:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.redmonk.com/jgovernor/2008/02/08/strong-leaders-strange-bedfellows-and-the-art-of-war-by-sun-2/#comment-304844</guid>
		<description>Partnering with Microsoft is suicide. Why can't Microsoft support UltraSparc the same way it supports AMD X64 and Intel X64 extensions? Sun should be promoting Solaris on X64 instead of selling windows.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Partnering with Microsoft is suicide. Why can&#8217;t Microsoft support UltraSparc the same way it supports AMD X64 and Intel X64 extensions? Sun should be promoting Solaris on X64 instead of selling windows.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
