ActiveWin.com - The Most Activated Windows Resource

ActiveWin

User Controls

New User

Edit/View My Profile

Active Network

ActiveMac

ActiveWin

ActiveXbox

DirectX

Downloads

FAQs

Interviews

MS Games & Hardware

Reviews

Rocky Bytes

Support Center

TopTechTips

Windows 2000

Windows Me

Windows Server 2003

Windows Vista

Windows XP

News Centers

Windows/Microsoft

Apple/Mac

Xbox/Xbox 360

News Search

XML/RSS Newsfeeds

Pocket PC Site

FAQ's

Windows Vista

Windows 98/98 SE

Windows 2000

Windows Me

Windows Server 2003

Windows XP

Windows 7

Windows 8

Internet Explorer 6

Internet Explorer 5

Xbox 360

Xbox

DirectX

DVD's

Latest Reviews

Xbox/Games

Fable 2

Applications

Windows Server 2008 R2

Windows 7

Adobe CS5 Master Collection

Hardware

Microsoft Express Mouse

Latest Interviews

Mike Swanson

Site News/Info

About This Site

Advertise

Affiliates

Default Home Page

Link To Us

Sun's Chinese deal 'shuts out Microsoft'

Time: 18:00 EST/23:00 GMT | News Source: Silicon | Posted By: Todd Richardson

A deal involving millions of Chinese PCs running Linux on Sun's Java Desktop System will not make much money, Sun admits Sun is aiming for "hundreds of millions" of desktops in China to be running Linux on its Java Desktop System as a result of its recent deal with the Chinese government -- but admits it won't make much money from it all.

Sun announced the deal for an initial half a million open-source desktop office software suites with the Chinese government-backed China Standard Software Company at Comdex in Las Vegas last month. But speaking at his company's European user event in Berlin today, Sun president, chairman and chief executive Scott McNealy admitted the deal won't be a big money spinner.

Read Only Comments
Return to News

Displaying Comments 1 through 7 of 7

This is an archived static copy of ActiveWin.com.

#1 By 16302 (64.201.211.161) at Thursday, December 04, 2003 07:18:29 PM

Well, that is smart - it is how Microsoft got in the game. Remember when database server software cost $75,000 for 5 users; Microsoft launched SQL Server for $2500. Remember Word Perfect, Lotus 1-2-3, Novell Netware, .... They may not make money on the initial installation, but with another 500,000 seats, there will be a lot more spinnoff business in the long run.

#2 By 1845 (67.161.212.73) at Friday, December 05, 2003 10:38:33 AM

Not sure I can agree with that, Shan. This seems more similar to Microsoft providing IE at no additional cost in Windows, if you want to use a Microsoft example.

So far as I can tell, there are two paths to take in software - closed and open. You go the first route if you can make money. You go the second route if you can't make money, and you want to prevent your competitor from making money.

MSN Messenger wasn't getting along well with AIM, and Microsoft pressed for IM standards.
Netscape didn't have a prayer of competing with IE by the time IE 5 was released, so they pressed for standards.
Sun doesn't have a prayer of competing with Microsoft Office, so the press for standards.

I really think Sun's motivation has very little, if anything, to do with making the Java Desktop a money maker. The goal is to starve Microsoft by hurting their Windows and Office franchises. I'm not saying it's a bad strategy, but at least let's call a spade a spade. StarOffice/OpenOffice.org are barely equivalent of Microsoft Office 95, much less 2003. Sun isn't interested in desktop productivity software. They are interested in Microsoft, in the long term, not having the funding to expand/continue to expand into other markets. If Windows on the desktop diminishes, Windows on the server likely will too. Surprise, surprise, that would benefit Sun.

#3 By 1845 (67.161.212.73) at Friday, December 05, 2003 10:41:59 AM

Forgot to add that it is no wonder that Sun's Mr. Schwartz says that Wallstreet doesn't see how Sun is monetizing Java. The reason Wallstreet doesn't see it is simple - they aren't. They are using it to hurt Microsoft, so the can monetize Solaris/SPARC. They aren't using Java itself to generate much revenue.

#4 By 1845 (67.161.212.73) at Friday, December 05, 2003 06:37:07 PM

What can't you do?

Can't open Word documents correctly. OO.o doesn't do hardpages nor does it do widow/orphan control as Word does.

Macros? SmartTags? TaskPanes? OCR? Voice Recognition? PIM? etc.

My statement is very accurrate. SO/OO.o are barely equivalent to Microsoft Office 95. Truthfully, Office 95 was more sophisticated and more extensibe. SO/OO.o is more similar to WordPad than Word95.

Here's a q - why wouldn't your university just stick with its current version of Microsoft Office? What's the point in downgrading? Makes very little sense to me.

#5 By 1845 (67.161.212.73) at Saturday, December 06, 2003 12:51:43 AM

That's a nice attack. You realize your first statement invalidates your argument? You attacked the company Microsoft rather than refuting my statement. You made the claim on SO/OO.o's compatibility. The fact is, you are wrong, and won't admit it. Instead, you attack Microsoft.

I tested OO.o on a research paper I wrote for my last class. I'll email it to you if you'd like. Contrary to your incorrect belief, OO.o does not open all Word documents fine.

You now severly limit the scope of usage. I said SO/OO.o barely implemented the feature set of Microsoft Office 95. You respond by talking about the needs of students. Students are only a smal percentage of the user base of Microsoft Office, so it doesn't matter if they don't need something that someone else does.

Macros are extremely useful in business.
SmartTag are extremely useful to anyone. Since they are extensible, they are also a value-add to businesses.
Voice Recognition - so because you haven't used it, nobody needs it?
OCR - first of all, you can do OCR on any image, not just an image stream from a scanner. second, most OCR software that ships with scanners is very low quality. third, you're deflecting again. Bottom line is that Microsoft Office has it, and SO/OO.o don't.
PIM - once again, bottom line is that Microsoft Office has it, and SO/OO.o don't.

You claim that SO/OO.o does what Microsoft Office does. The reality is that SO/OO. are woefully deficient. They might satisfy a small percentage of the market (students with little need for sophisticated software functionality), but that doesn't mean that they are close to comparable to Microsoft Office.

Um, Microsoft can't triple your fees for using an existing product. Perhaps of an upgrade, but I highly doubt of an existing product. Furthermore, I find tripling the upgrade cost a gross exaggeration. I find it more likely that you are employing some heavy hyperbole and that you do not know whereof you speak.

#7 By 1845 (67.161.212.73) at Saturday, December 06, 2003 01:14:17 AM

Perhaps this is the class you referred to:

http://www.cs.uwm.edu/~pats/Compat/SurveyResults.htm

From question 7, I'd say that several of your classmates don't see SO as doing everything that Microsoft Office can do. A few excerpts:

"PowerPoint files can be mangled when opened and saved with StarOffice"

"Spreadsheet cannot page preview and cannot print charts."

"Things (tools) weren’t where I expected them to be. File, Insert, Edit, etc"

"Just the general look of StarOffice and certain features like macros not working the same." (Wait, I thought students don't use macros?)

"You can't use the old macros from MS Office." (Hmm, macros again. Maybe this was just a class requirement?)

"No Marcos, no buttons. In MS Office one can place buttons and text boxes, etc. in a document. StarOffice does not recognize them."

"Impress was not very compatible with PowerPoint files. Conversion of fancy existing PowerPoint files may require editing of each slide. Simple presentation though probably wouldn't require modification."

"Also StarOffice can't handle tables that have multiple tables inside."

"No grammar checking in StarOffice"

"Not as sophisticated as MS Office."

"PowerPoint is much better than StarOffice."

etc. etc. etc.

replica watches