Twitter users have been busy tapping away their thoughts
on what a possiblesale of Sun to IBMwould mean. The
deal could give IBM access to Sun's valuable intellectual property,
particularly its Java software, tools, servers and
services.
The Wall Street Journal and the FT have both reported that the
two IT giants are in talks. The acquisition of Sun could
potentially give IBM a small boost in its server market share, but
Sun's Solaris-based Unix workstations and server hardware, which
use the Sparc microprocessor, are unlikely to fit with IBM's Power
processor family of Aix-based servers,Z-series mainframes and X
series PC servers.
Forrester analyst John Rymer says, "Sun's growth strategy of
appealing to developers through open source software - Open
Solaris, MySQL, NetBeans, GlassFish - and hoping they will then
turn to Sun for servers and storage will not work in a global
recession. The strategy depended on the rise of a new wave of
internet businesses - Web 2.0 - and expansion of the internet
offerings of telcos and existing large service providers - called
'red shift companies'. In a global recession, neither camp is
growing at the rates Sun needs. So for Sun, the game is over, and
it has to sell."
So if Sun has to sell, and IBM is themost likely buyer, what
will be the fallout? According to user on Twitter, "The buyout
would bolster IBM's heft on the internet."
Another asked where MySQL would fit in the possible take-over,
given that Sun now owns MySQL, and IBM already has the DB/2
database. "Will IBM keep both DB2 and MySQL?"
OneTwitter user believes IBM would drive the development
deployment of Linux and Java-based technologies if it took over
Sun: "Microsoft, Hewlett-Packard, Dell and Cisco will have to
rethink [their strategies]."
But there has been no news yet of an IBM acquisition.
Dana Gardner, president and principal analyst at Interarbor
Solutions, does not believe it makes sense for IBM to buy Sun. He
says, "By buying Sun, IBM gains little other than some intellectual
property and mySQL. IBM could have bought MySQL or open sourced
DB/2 or a subset of DB/2 any time, if it wanted to go that route.
IBM has basically already played its open source hand, which it did
masterfully at just the right time. Sun, on the other hand, played
(or forced) its open source hand poorly, and at the wrong time.
What is the value to Sun for having 'gone open source'? Owning Java
is not a business model, or not enough of one to help Sun
meaningfully."
So although IBM would most certainly gain a valuable software
from the acquisition of Sun, Twitter users and analysts are unclear
how well
Sun would fit within Big Blue.