Return-Path: jdg117@elvis.arl.psu.edu Delivery-Date: Sat Sep 7 16:26:43 2002 Received: from elvis.arl.psu.edu ([146.186.165.126]:36981 "EHLO elvis.arl.psu.edu") by elvis.arl.psu.edu with ESMTP id <S858796AbSIGU0b>; Sat, 7 Sep 2002 16:26:31 -0400 X-Mailer: exmh version 2.5 07/13/2001 with nmh-1.0.4 To: John Loiacono <john.loiacono@sun.com> cc: jdg117@elvis.arl.psu.edu Subject: Re: [Fwd: Re: Response to John Groenveld, rev 2 - pls respond by noon!] In-Reply-To: Message from John Loiacono <john.loiacono@sun.com> of "Wed, 04 Sep 2002 16:08:36 PDT." <3D769274.C9BC777D@sun.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Sat, 07 Sep 2002 16:26:31 -0400 From: John D Groenveld <jdg117@elvis.arl.psu.edu> Message-Id: <20020907202640Z858796-518+238@elvis.arl.psu.edu> Return-Path: <jdg117@elvis.arl.psu.edu> X-Orcpt: rfc822;jdg117@elvis.arl.psu.edu Dear Mr. Loiacono, Thank you very much for your email message of September 4th. I could not reply by your noon September 5th deadline as I was duty bound to collaborate with the community on this note to you. I was quite surprised to hear from you as I never received a reply regarding my letter to you of April 17th. <URL:http://www.save-solaris-x86.org/loiacono.html> In your email message to me you state, "we can quibble over the accuracy of some of the points you raise as fact in your letter." Exactly which points of the San Jose Mercury News advertisement does Sun wish to dispute? I fully stand behind the ad and will purchase a full page follow-up with my retraction and my apology should you show any factual errors contained within it. Do you contend that Sun's customers are not disheartened by the January 8th press statement indefinitely delaying Solaris 9 x86? Do you contend that Sun's customers are not disappointed by the August announcement limiting Solaris 9 x86 to the LX50 platform? Do you contend that Sun's customers are not deeply troubled by Sun's embrace of Linux vis-a-vis the new line Linux entry level servers? I challenge you in the next two weeks to contract an independent market research firm to question 1000 Solaris users. The random sample should be extracted from Sun's database of registered Solaris users and I reserve the right to hire my own independent auditor to oversee the process. <URL:http://wwws.sun.com/software/solaris/binaries/get.html> Again, if I am wrong about the pulse of the community, I will admit my mistake to the public, I will purchase a follow-up ad in time for SunNetwork with my retraction, and I will reimburse Sun for its costs to survey its customers. I am aware of the ongoing meetings between managers inside Sun's software division and our six representatives from the Solaris x86 community. While I am not privy to the details of those discussions, it is widely held in the community that they are hampered by the lack of a high level commitment to satisfy customers. I am very troubled by your insinuation that the advertisement is tantamount to a personal attack on Mr. McNealy's character. The intent of the advertisement was to ask Mr. McNealy, Chief Executive Officer, to give our now over eight month old customer complaint the personal attention it needs to be resolved. By mischaracterizing the advertisement, you appear to be attempting to skirt the core issues. I must request that Sun refrain from attempting to disparage its Solaris x86 customer community and marginalize us in the trade press as "low-end customers," "hobbiests," and "enthusiasts." Certainly Solaris x86 is installed in small environments and on individual developer systems but it is also present in very large and notable environments. Regardless, is Sun suggesting that customers who bought a single StarOffice license for $70 should not expect to be treated with respect unless they also buy a million dollar StarFire server? As a stockholder, I must ask, exactly where does the buck stop at Sun Microsystems? Does Mr. McNealy, a co-founder of the company, not take ultimate responsibility for his company's actions? It seems highly hypocritical for Sun to claim that its CEO can not be personally called to account by its customers and stockholders when Mr. McNealy is legendary for his frequent criticism of the CEOs of Sun's competitors. I am sorry to read that we cannot expect a direct response from Mr. McNealy regarding our concerns. For over eight months we have used every channel we can imagine to try to explain to him our concerns and win his support of our efforts to improve Sun's relationship with its customers. Is he aware of our customer complaint? I never received a reply from him regarding the open letter of January 10th. <URL:http://www.save-solaris-x86.org/> I hope you will forward this email to Mr. McNealy and relay back to me his answers to my questions so that I can share them with my fellow Solaris x86 customers. John groenveld@acm.org |