Thursday, June 30, 2005 (A.G): Sun Revels In Java Making It To A 2nd Decade

This week's gala JavaOne Developer Conference in San Francisco, at which Sun among quite a few other proclamations also announced the $387M acquisition of SeeBeyond (below), is supposed to, per Sun, coincide with the first decade of Java technology innovation.  In other words this is supposed to be Java's 10th birthday.  Though some cognoscenti may wish to point out that this may not be strictly the case since the so called "green project" masterminded by James Gosling (who by the way received another award at this bash), Patrick Naughton and Mike Sheridan, which went onto become Java a decade ago, came to be towards the end of 1990.

But I have to concede that despite (or probably because of) all the dramatic ups-and-downs that we in high-tech weathered during that decade, these last 10 years seems to have flown by.  I still remember all of the Java-centric, Web-to-host related excitement and promise in 1996 with the likes of OpenConnect and Jacada.  I am, however, not sure whether Java really has lived up to what we have hoped for at that juncture.  For a start, thanks (if that is the appropriate word) to Sun, it never became the true, vendor-independent industry standard that was initially promised.

I could be dead wrong, but I feel that the Java community is riven by way too much competitive fears, pressures and suspicion -- and Sun's latest moves with SeeBeyond and selling a commercial Java app. server just flames these fires.  Thus it is ironic that Sun, this week, talked about sharing Sun Java System Application Server 9 Platform Edition and Sun Java Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) technologies with the open source community.  They also inked a 10 year, Java licensing agreement (with arch rival) IBM!  This all seems rather puerile to me.  It always amazes me how Microsoft's competitors always fall about shooting themselves and each other, in their collectively clumsy feet, without even any known provocation from MS.  Just a few weeks ago IONA said that it intends to share a Java-based ESB, called Celtix.  In the same vein, with JBoss and Gluecode, we already have proven open source Java app. server technology.  In my eyes what we need is some solid coordination, corporation and leadership vis-à-vis Java.  But that will never happen under Sun.

Tuesday, June 28, 2005 (A.G): Sun Sets Its Eyes on SeeBeyond

Today's announcement that Sun intends to snap-up EAI specialist SeeBeyond for $387M (in cash again), coming on the heels of the $4.1B StorageTek acquisition plans at the start of this month, leaves us in no doubt that Scott is now intent on trying to make Sun into a mini (or at least a micro) IBM.  This acquisition of a relatively well known player also underscores how inane IBM's string of piddly little purchases look [e.g. Meiosys] -- as I have been agitating about for the last few weeks.  [Aside:  On June 24th (below) I speculated that Palamasino was most likely trying to fudge the books to disguise a poor 2Q.  I happened to hear on CNBC this morning that the SEC is going to be taking a look at IBM because they have also got an inkling that IBM may be playing with some numbers to distract investors from the real 2Q results. Interesting.]

Anyway back to Sun.  This in many ways was an astute purchase, at just over two times current revenues.  [There has got to be so many people crying into their java about such valuations, after the 5x revenues they got used to in the mid-1990s.]  But at the same time it kind of bothers me because of the potential conflict of interest with Java partners.  Yes, when Sun got into the commercial app. server market it raised a few hackles, though in that case it really was only impinging on the other big boys like IBM, BEA and Oracle.  But with SeeBeyond, Sun is now going to be stepping on the toes of a lot of host integration/EAI vendors [e.g. WRQ/Attachmate, SEAGULL, Jacada] that have put their lot behind Java.  That bothers me.  Maybe it shouldn't.  But it does!

Monday, June 27, 2005 (A.G): Is SEAGULL On The Way Up?

Last week, on June 21 to be precise, SEAGULL, who has been so busy of late snapping up Oak Grove and SofTouch, got around to publishing their numbers for the full fiscal year that ended April 30, 2005 (FY 2005) along with those for the 2nd half of that fiscal year (H2 FY 2005).  At first glance, especially with the usual helpful subtitle informing you that full-year revenues were up by 2%, they look "OK" and one could even speculate that maybe SEAGULL has turned the corner and is on the way up.  But then you look at the numbers a bit more carefully, and once again you start to experience a sinking feeling.  Yes, revenues, indubitably, are up (though by not much), and they have, to their credit, managed to staunch the red ink when it comes to the size of their loses.

But the ever so important software licensing revenues, at $9.7M for the year, are down again.  That is the part that I don't like and no doubt doesn't fill SEAGULL management with too much glee either.  Yes, these numbers do not reflect the new acquisitions.  The timing of these were immaculate.  They bought themselves the maximum amount of time before they have to announce the next set of results that will have to show the contributions of SofTouch and Oak Grove to the bottom line.  So lets wait and see.  In the meantime just have a look at this chart that shows their revenues in the past.  SEAGULL, as of 2002, is definitely flying at a lower stratum of the market.

Friday, June 24, 2005 (A.G): IBM Now Acquires Meiosys

Just a week ago, viz. June 16, when IBM had just acquired Isogon, I expressed by misgivings about IBM's new craze for buying piddly, unknown companies when there are much bigger fish that need frying and even told you the story about Gerstner's views on who and what IBM should be acquiring -- with Lotus being the classic example.

Well yesterday, IBM announced, real sotto voce (as if they really were embarrassed) that they had acquired another, private company, for yet another undisclosed amount of money.  Methinks that 2Q results are going to be so bad that IBM is padding the books!  How is that for a bold claim?  If you were an avid student of the M&A mania (led by Cisco) in the mid-1990s you would know that acquisitions can be a great way to fudge the books and buy time.  With this one, I am now convinced that this is what IBM is up to.  Why else?

Meiosys?  Never heard of them.  Supposed to provide software technology that facilitates application migration across platforms though from the little I saw (before I got very bored) their technology seems to only relate to Unix applications.  So maybe this is to help IBM convince Solaris customers to move to p5s.  I am not even going to bother saying that Palamasino is way, way out of his league.  This proves it, conclusively.

Thursday, June 23, 2005 (A.G): AttachmateWRQ: Is That Really The New Name?

I got an e-mail on Monday, and it had to have been the very length of it, but my eyes were subconsciously drawn to the suffix that said: "@attachmatewrq.com".  Wow.  My first reaction, and this is no doubt due to my obviously colorful background, was to think that it sounded like an exotic tropical disease.  Then I quickly revised that.  It sounded like an unpleasant antidote to a tropical disease.

My next reaction was that I would have to (yet again) eat humble pie IF in my original assessment of this April 18th merger/takeover I had said that WRQ's marketing folks were savvy.  Because if they were, they would not have agreed to such a bland and long name.  I knew that I had said that Attachmate's marketing was inept, and this name had the hallmark of ineptness written bold, all across it.  OK.  I didn't say that they were good.  I said they were relentless, aggressive and arrogant.  So was Attila the Hun (but I have also heard that he was kind of good at what he did).  That was a relief, though, I, after so long in this business, actually quite like the taste and texture of humble pie.

Would a hyphen have been so hard?  So difficult?  So wrong?

Attachmate-WRQ?  But then what do I know about such stuff?

Yes, I understand, and I might even have said this myself: Attachmate has much, much more name recognition than WRQ.  Plus customers (and prospects) actually kind of liked them.  From what I can see they were never obnoxious.  Though I obviously have heard the likes of SEARS and Ohio State University complain that Attachmate Web-to-host products were difficult to use, I have never encountered anybody who felt obliged to make the sign of the cross, with their fingers, when they mentioned Attachmate's name.  The implication here being ...  Enough said.  So it makes sense to preserve that name and have it as the lead though as I have already said, many times, I suspect that WRQ folks will try and run the shop -- as is their wont.

But to just append 'WRQ', especially when it appears in lowercase as in e-mails, seems incongruous.  But to be fair this lengthy, undemarcated name is the least of their problems.

Wednesday, June 22, 2005 (A.G): z990 MCM Does Have 16 Processors

On May 24th BLOG I pointed out that a z990 MCM appears to contain 16 processors (PUs) as opposed to the 12 PUs that IBM has claimed (given that it contains 8 dual-core chips).  That is a fairly significant 33% variance. Well it took me nearly a month but I now have confirmation from IBM that this is indeed the case.  16 PUs rather than 12.

As I had speculated, this understatement of PUs has to do with potentially defective PUs.  With the manufacturing yields that IBM was experiencing in 2002-2003 they did not want to commit to being able to deliver 16 PUs per MCM.  That could have led to too many MCMs having to be discarded.  With the complexity and densities involved that would have been prohibitively costly.  Hence the compromise.

But IBM does have MCMs with all 16 PUs working hunky-dory.  Yep.  They even have an RPQ if you would like such a 16 PU MCM.  Honest.  Talk to your friendly IBM sales rep. and tell them that it is "OK", Anu told you about it.  SMILE.

So what does this mean?  The 2nd generation z990s are already here and you may already have one!  So when IBM tells us that they have new z990 models with more PUs we know where those PUs are coming from.  This is kind of funny if you have a z990-B16 with two 'books' [i.e. two z990 MCMs plus memory].  Rather than having 16 business processors [i.e. CPs] you may actually have 24 CPs.  Hence you already have a C24 [albeit without all the SAPs and spares.]  Go do the sums.  Hence the RPQ -- which by the way is still 'virgin' in that nobody has ordered it.  Most likely because IBM has never really publicized these phantom PUs.

Tuesday, June 21, 2005 (A.G): A Different Core for Apple

Prior to and even following Apple's big 'switch-a-roo', confirmed on June 6, we have all heard the various disparate reasons cited for this momentous decision which have run the gamut of: IBM's too expensive; IBM's too hot, and even, ironically, that IBM doesn't have enough power.  I personally think Apple had enough of IBM's arrogance.  But this switch to Intel is not going to be easy and there is already valid speculation that there is likely to be a drop in Mac sales while knowledgeable prospects hold back waiting to see how Apple will handle the transition -- given that we all know that there will be some bumping and bruising.

Amidst all of this I heard another intriguing theory as to why Apple made this switch.  It would now enable them to offer a better performing, even close to native-mode, Windows emulation!  Yikes.  This makes sense.  Yes, I remember running Windows emulators on Macs (mainly so my kids could try, and try being the operative word, and run Windows-only games on their Macs).  Yes, switching to Intel will indeed facilitate this -- probably because you could run Windows XP in native mode.

So was this what this was all about?  Just having a schizophrenic Macs that can run both Mac OS X and Windows XP?  If so, mark my word, this is the end of Macs!  Yes, the beginning of the end.  If that is Steve's 'ultimate vision' we will end up with Macs becoming but a 'theme' (or 'appearance') of 'Longhorn' (or whatever the next Windows is called).  I can just see it.  We will be able to go into the Control Panel -> 'Appearances and Themes' and just pick Mac OS.  Thanks Steve.  Nice job.