Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!att!linac!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!julius.cs.uiuc.edu!apple!vsi1!daver!mips!winchester!mash From: mash@mips.COM (John Mashey) Newsgroups: comp.arch Subject: Re: Sun's Competitive Strategy Keywords: sun, open systems, portability Message-ID: <43777@mips.mips.COM> Date: 4 Dec 90 08:30:42 GMT References: <1990Dec1.030450.28687@isis.cs.du.edu> Sender: news@mips.COM Reply-To: mash@mips.COM (John Mashey) Distribution: usa Organization: MIPS Computer Systems, Inc. Lines: 88 In article <1990Dec1.030450.28687@isis.cs.du.edu> rballard@isis.UUCP (Rexford E Ballard) writes: >Sun, or any other vendor for that matter, has a simple competitive >strategy. Be "open" enough tbe the beneficiary of "commodity" support >software and peripherals, "unique" enough to warrant a higher mark-up, and >"closed" enough toensure growth and migration to new standards as they are >developed. Good summary.... Needless to say, this is an interesting discussion. :-) Here are a few more attribiutes that people might discuss in this one, particularly to compare the IBM PC evolution, and SPARCclone stuff: 1) Consider following model of industry structure, and try to figure out which companies control which pieces betweeen the two model:, and to what degree they control them: a) Clear monopoly b) Power of market %, and hence to determine evolution and do designs that othersmers must follow, or to do software also that others must track c) Buying power Note that a) is usually obvious, whereas b) and c) are more subtle. Microprocessor Architecture+Logic Design 1 Circuit design 2 Fab & sell 3 Support chips Design 4 Fab and sell 5 H/W System Design 6 Fab and sell 7 Software O/S (not just who licenses, but who controls by volume) 8 Key compilers 9 Interface Standards 10 Application software 11 Distribution End-user vs dealer vs OEM vs VAR, support, compatibility 12 Interesting thing: for IBM PC, IBM "controlled" hardly any of these. Also, note that if a single buyer buys a huge percentage of a seller's product, they have more influence over what's happening, and of course they get better prices. Sun has been qute open about wanting multiple sources of supply (as does any systems company). (I have my own charts of these things, but I might be biased; it would be interesting to hear other people's views in this model.) 2) Another way to slice it is to draw the chart that shows the largest vendor's % of a "compatible" market, by year. In this case, one would compare IBM: 1981, 1982, .... with Sun: 1987, 1988..... here are the IBM numbers, from IDC (or Dataquest; I'm in Japan right now and don't have it handy): year IBM % year Sun share of SPARC-based systems 1981 100% 1987 100% 1982 98% 1988 100% 1983 85% 1989 97.5% 1984 79% 1985 63% 1986 39% and these days, I think it's around 20% for IBM. I'd suggest, that rather than philosophical arguments, that the percentage of market is at least one realistic metric regarding the "open-ness" of what's really going on. The other useful one is to to see if there is any difference between marketing and sales, i.e., if you call up your Sun salesperson and tell them you're about to buy a lot of clones, do they say: a) Well, OK, I guess it's an open market b) Well, we can beat them on price or performance, or other "clonable" attributes. c) Well, you should stick with Sun because: support compatibility migration strategy earlier compilers or OS releases software that DOESN'T run on the clones (a lotoesn't; for example, about 350 of the items listed in the Summer 1990 SPARCware list require specific hardware or at least I/O busses and drivers, which are NOT necessarily guaranteed to work, even on a clone with same I/O bus. (oops, time to run to press interview). -- -john mashey DISCLAIMER: UUCP: mash@mips.com OR {ames,decwrl,prls,pyramid}!mips!mash DDD: 408-524-7015, 524-8253 or (main number) 408-720-1700 USPS: MIPS Computer Systems, 930 E. Arques, Sunnyvale, CA 94086 Brought to you by Super Global Mega Corp .com