Feeds

Sun loves Fujitsu, despite SPARC slip

What's a few months between friends?

Internet Security Threat Report 2014

Sun Microsystems wants to prolong its relationship with partner Fujitsu beyond 2008 despite the companies' first, joint high-end servers hitting a delay.

David Yen, executive vice president of Sun's scalable systems group, expressed optimism on Wednesday that the company could continue its relationship with Fujitsu in the face of their mutual server enemy - IBM.

Yen's enthusiasm came as he conceded that the first fruits of the companies' relationship, the Advanced Product Line (APL) of servers, that are expected to feature Fujitsu's own SPARC64 processor, would not ship until 2007.

Originally due for the middle of 2006, Yen said the delay would last "a few months".

"You can expect low-end four and eight-way [servers] will happen sooner - before the end of this year. High-end 13, 32 and 64-way [servers] will probably happen in the early part of next year."

Yen did not give a reason for the delay.

Sun entered into the relationship with Fujitsu nearly two years ago, after canning the planned, and somewhat troublesome UltraSPARC V and Gemini processors. Under the companies' deal, Sun will ship servers using the Olympus edition of Fujitsu's SPARC64 processor instead of using UltraSPARC.

The APL product line was scheduled to kick-in during 2006, just as Sun's UltraSPARC IV came to the end of its lifespan. The deal potentially leaves Sun with a hole in its roadmap that is likely to be filled by Sun's UltraSPARC IV+ servers, demand for which outstripped expectations during its second fiscal quarter.

Sun already plans a 1.8GHz architecture, but Yen said: "We may even push beyond that."

Separately, Sun will open source its Niagara chip by March, with specifications published to www.opensparc.net. "Sun is publishing the chip's architecture so that "SPARC [can] go beyond Solaris and for Solaris to be successful... beyond SPARC," Yen says.

The website is designed to off-load the effort of supporting independent development efforts. "To facilitate the Linux porting, and to reduce our support burden, we will publish the API for the internal firmware," Yen said. He added that he already knew of "more than one" effort to port Linux to the T1000 and T2000 (Niagara) platform. ®

Internet Security Threat Report 2014

More from The Register

next story
Docker's app containers are coming to Windows Server, says Microsoft
MS chases app deployment speeds already enjoyed by Linux devs
IBM storage revenues sink: 'We are disappointed,' says CEO
Time to put the storage biz up for sale?
'Hmm, why CAN'T I run a water pipe through that rack of media servers?'
Leaving Las Vegas for Armenia kludging and Dubai dune bashing
Facebook slurps 'paste sites' for STOLEN passwords, sprinkles on hash and salt
Zuck's ad empire DOESN'T see details in plain text. Phew!
Windows 10: Forget Cloudobile, put Security and Privacy First
But - dammit - It would be insane to say 'don't collect, because NSA'
Symantec backs out of Backup Exec: Plans to can appliance in Jan
Will still provide support to existing customers
VMware's tool to harden virtual networks: a spreadsheet
NSX security guide lands in intriguing format
prev story

Whitepapers

Forging a new future with identity relationship management
Learn about ForgeRock's next generation IRM platform and how it is designed to empower CEOS's and enterprises to engage with consumers.
Cloud and hybrid-cloud data protection for VMware
Learn how quick and easy it is to configure backups and perform restores for VMware environments.
Three 1TB solid state scorchers up for grabs
Big SSDs can be expensive but think big and think free because you could be the lucky winner of one of three 1TB Samsung SSD 840 EVO drives that we’re giving away worth over £300 apiece.
Reg Reader Research: SaaS based Email and Office Productivity Tools
Read this Reg reader report which provides advice and guidance for SMBs towards the use of SaaS based email and Office productivity tools.
Security for virtualized datacentres
Legacy security solutions are inefficient due to the architectural differences between physical and virtual environments.