On Tue, Jan 26, 2010 at 9:51 AM, Uros Nedic <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>   Does Google have a focus? They are going pretty well.
>   If you are on the market you have to diversify your
> product portfolio to be able to minimize risk, and hope
> that one technology will bring revenues to cover all possible
> looses on other sides. This is how life goes. When you
> did not found your "successful project" and you experience
> recession then you will have to do exactly what SUN execs
> did. This could happen to ORACLE, too. Only difference is
> that ORACLE had more luck than SUN.
>    You cannot eliminate uncertainty that future brings.
> Otherwise, we could think about it that we invented
> time-machine.
> Uros
>
> ---------------------------------------------
> "Man is the lowest-cost, 150-pound, nonlinear,
>   all-purpose computer system which can be
>   mass-produced by unskilled labor."
> -NASA in 1965



Hi Uros,

although it generally _sounds_ good what you wrote, the emphasis is on
_generally_ and sounds.
How closely and for how long have you paid attention to Sun related biz news?
http://finance.yahoo.com/q?s=java
How many ¨Sun NC¨ shows have you visited in person or on the web?
Since before 2000 or after?

Secondly I think that google has pretty much of (internal) focus,
while Sun didn´t.
I agree with what Erik writes. Sun tried to move forward into all
directions at once, 360 degrees at the same time.
If I have more time I can post specific examples and links, from 1999 onwards.

And btw: I do not believe too much in ¨coincidents¨ or ¨luck¨.



%martin



>> Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2010 22:41:42 -0800
>> From: [email protected]
>> CC: [email protected]; [email protected]
>> Subject: Re: [osol-discuss]
>> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/01/22/sun_schwartz_signoff/
>>
>> Edward Ned Harvey wrote:
>> >> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/01/22/sun_schwartz_signoff/
>> >>
>> >> I always knew (after 2006 at least) that JS is a God-damn *TRAITOR*.
>> >>
>> >> ¨Upon change in control, every employee needs to emotionally resign
>> >> from Sun. Go home, light a candle, and let go of the expectations and
>> >> assumptions that defined Sun as a workplace. Honor and remember them,
>> >> but let them go.¨
>> >>
>> >
>> > I don't think there's anything wrong with that at all. He's right. Those
>> > people from Sun who are moving on to Oracle ... they are getting new
>> > bosses,
>> > and a new corporate culture, and moving in a new direction. This is not
>> > comfortable, but it's better than getting terminated if the company
>> > collapsed.
>> >
>> > Oracle didn't buy Sun to gain their idealism or culture. They wanted to
>> > acquire talent and technology. Those employees who are transitioning ...
>> > must accept the fact that it is a transition. Things will not remain the
>> > same. They must embrace change, and welcome their new ... Robotic
>> > overlords. ;-) Seriously though, except the overlords part.
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > opensolaris-discuss mailing list
>> > [email protected]
>> >
>>
>> From my standpoint as a current Sun employee, my biggest problem with
>> Sun has been it's lack of focus. We've spent way to much time, effort,
>> and money doing a variety of neat things, all which /might/ be really
>> sweet. However, as a consequence, all of them tend to be late-to-market
>> or perpetually starved for resources to accomplish their stated goals.
>> I hold Sun's Sr. management responsible for this lack of focus, in that
>> they've flailed around, and been unable to make the hard decisions as to
>> WHICH "cool" tech is worth the 100% effort (and, stick to those
>> assessments for more than 6 months), and then cut (or, preferably
>> reassign) those resources from non-priority projects. This problem has
>> been exacerbated by the layoffs in the last two years, where, instead of
>> cutting whole teams and canceling projects, we've had to absorb 10% cut
>> across most divisions, without a corresponding adjustment of priorities
>> and goals.
>>
>> The sorry thing I see of this whole merger is that it was COMPLETELY
>> UNNECESSARY. Sun had more than enough cash on hand, and quite a few
>> very profitable products. We could very well have returned to being a
>> (quite) profitable company, if a hard focus could have been attained.
>> And, of course, the idiot distraction of trying to buy other companies
>> (MySQL, anyone?) which don't help our existing core competencies.
>>
>> I like Jonathan, and supported many of his initiatives. But he
>> fundamentally failed in being able to reign-in and refocus Sun, which
>> was what could have saved the company. It's sad.
>>
>> We'll see what the Oracle buyout does for focus and budgets (I'm
>> actually hopeful here). I'm also hoping we can retain some of the
>> fabulously innovative culture here, but that's a much more sketchy
>> possibility.
>>
>> Then again, what do I really know. I'm just a line-level worker here.
>>
>>
>> [I in no way speak for anyone but myself at Sun. This is merely my
>> personal opinion.]
>>
>> --
>> Erik Trimble
>> Java System Support
>> Mailstop: usca22-123
>> Phone: x17195
>> Santa Clara, CA
>> Timezone: US/Pacific (GMT-0800)
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> opensolaris-discuss mailing list
>> [email protected]
>
> ________________________________
> Keep your friends updated— even when you’re not signed in.
> _______________________________________________
> opensolaris-discuss mailing list
> [email protected]
>
_______________________________________________
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
[email protected]

Reply via email to