Slashdot Mirror
Xerox Trying To Sell PARC
JavaTenor writes "Xerox, with their stock currently at a 10-year low, is apparently shopping the Palo Alto Research Center (commonly known as PARC) to Silicon Valley venture capitalists. Anyone who's studied the history of computing will know how great a contribution PARC has had to the advancement of technology, and especially to GUI development. This should be an interesting story to follow. See the New York Times writeup here."
What came out of PARC was the result of a commitment to an idea. Pay a bunch of hard core nerds to sit on their ass and just think up really cool shit.
PARC is not an asset to be sold. If anything, it's a stewardship that should be passed on to another orginization or company that can give it the attention it deserves. Maybe a consortum of companies... Sun, Apple, ect.
That's nothing. I interviewed with Adobe in May of this year and went to the trouble of putting my resume in PDF to send to them. They claimed to be pleased, but when I showed up each interviewer had a photocopy of a fax that was missing the bottom corner. This was *their own format*, and they couldn't even be bothered to use it. Not to mention they never called back to say they weren't interested.
Del
Why not Sun? I hate seeing Scotty gloat, and he'd be all over this one.
Why not Apple? Apple already has enough trouble. They don't need a research division bleeding them back into the red.
Why not MS? Even though the breakup is a bit off, they'd be seeing integration problems. Also, Microsoft already has a slightly (okay, moderatly) cool research division.
I'd go IBM, because they already do this sort of high-end conceptual stuff. Or perhaps HP, who is in much the same market (digital imaging/printing) but hasn't really turned out anything exciting and cutting edge since the 8000.. Both have the money.
Unfortunatly, I think your Option 3 will be correct. They'll roll some VC's for a quick buck, and try to have a go of PARC making a buck off their patent portfolio, or perhaps actually roll out some of their commercially 'viable' ideas..
.sig: Now legally binding!
The exodus was bad enough in the spring, when Xerox's fortunes weren't quite so bad. With the company continuing to fumble, I can only imagine the morale there now (this is sad - the people there are friends; I worked with them for years).
Personally, I don't put a lot of credit in this rumour; for one thing, I don't see a clear buyer. Maybe HP or IBM, but they've both already got large Bay Area research facilities. Remember - the inventions PARC creates belong to Xerox, not to PARC itself, so what can you sell? All the patents? Xerox is using a lot of them. The buildings? Xerox doesn't own those. The employees and ongoing projects? That's possible, I suppose... there are a bunch of really cool projects going on there (including ones I worked on), and a lot of really bright people still there. They're working as hard as they can to create Xerox's future, but that's always been a long-term thing, and the short-term needs may trump that.
If Xerox does end up selling PARC, I don't know what will come out the other side - but it won't be the PARC that I worked at.
PARC is a relic of another era, and even as a research center, it has been relegated to imagining the ultimate photocopier.
"Anyone who's studied the history of computing will know how great a contribution PARC has had to the advancement of technology, and especially to GUI development."
Maybe they can sell it to someone who will know what to do with it. Remember PARC developed Smalltalk, GUI, the mouse, etc in the 70's, but it took Steve Jobs to release it to the world, and Bill Gates to steal that and make it popular. Xerox management didn't know what they had,mush less how to market it.
If they would deliver the miracle that is Digital Paper, maybe they wouldn't have to look around to scrounge up cash. But no, some other startups will all implement it badly and at the same time, patent-infringing each other to death.
I'd laugh if Adobe came up with it first, since they've got the PDF format down like it's the digital paper that can't get out of the computer, but who am I kidding. Just a mindless rant... I want my digital paper, Xerox! Where the hell is it!
Maybe they should convert into an institution of higher learning --- a technical college. Nerds can still sit on their butts creating cool things, and they will spend some of their time teaching other nerds too. There may be some significant value in the name PARC for technical education marketing purposes.
Higher learning and tech training is very big busines$ in the US.
--- -- - -
Give me LIBERTY, or give me a check.
But I also don't think the relationship between Xerox and PARC is much worse than that between other big companies and their research labs. AT&T and IBM research labs both have invented lots of things, and only a small fraction of their inventions have made it into products. Microsoft research is on its way of following the trend. PARC has also contributed tremendously to Xerox's core businesses. What distinguishes PARC is not the fraction of inventions that "got away", but the visible impact some of the inventions have had that did.
But to take a more general perspective, basic computer science research is, unfortunately, in trouble everywhere. In the past, much of it was basically government financed (that's what gave you the Internet and a lot of the other neat computer inventions), and there was some long-term predictability. I view much of the stellar commercial success of Internet and technology companies over the recent years as simply taking government-financed R&D and bringing it to the market. And academia seems to have gotten caught up in the commercial and entrepreneurial maelstroem as well.
The current economy is not such much a testimony to entrepreneurism and private enterprise, but rather to long-term government investments in research and technology. I see nothing wrong with that, but once the government stops financing the kind of research that leads to something like the Internet, the well will run dry in a few years, since private sources clearly aren't taking over this effort.
Well, over the last 5-10 years, just from memory: the ParcTab (wireless Palm-like device, years before the Palm), Aspect Oriented Programming, Gyricon (rewritable electric paper), digital rights management, reconfigurable robotics, extensive work on nanotechnology, to name just a few. PARC may not seem as visible anymore because every marketing group claims "groundbreaking technology", but PARC still delivers, and in terms of quality, the place hasn't lost its touch. For an institution with only a few hundred people, it's still just amazing how much is happening there.
Okay, you're a venture capitalist. PARC comes across your desk as being for sale. How is PARC going to turn a profit? They don't make anything. They learn things. And as admirable and necessary as that is, VCs have to be concerned about eventual profitability first and foremost. It's their job.
PARC could make money, by creating patentable (oooh, there's that word) technology then licensing it to other companies to develop into products. That's risky, though, since the patent process is slow and uncertain (it can take years and years between applying for and receiving a patent). Someone might simply steal your idea and productize it, and play the lawyer/stalling for time game that Certain Monopolistic Companies are so skilled at. Or, you could add a product development team to PARC, but that would dilute it into "just another tech company". You'd have a respected name, but that won't pay the rent.
It's a real shame that Xerox is considering selling PARC. Basic research is an endangered species, and in today's cutthroat corporate environment, shareholders won't tolerate money going into a black box with no clear returns (remember, the Board of Directors is elected by the shareholders, and they are bound to enact the will of their shareholders... we have met the enemy, and it is us. you DO have a 401K, right?). This leaves the government as the primary funder of basic research, and this is notoriously inefficient (when was the last time you heard of a government agency spending its money anywhere near as frugally as any corporation? Corps do have skills that the rest of us could stand to learn.)
Ah well. The end of an era. As I reach for the mouse to click "Submit", I think kindly on you, PARC.
Sorry about PARC. Another Techie's Camelot in peril of the forces of finance. It reminds me of the saying:
PARC has been great, but it is just at the wrong end of the Xerox's corperate lifecycle.
Especially when you're working at "The Document Company"!
I remember giving a resume to some Xerox recruiter at a job fair in college (mostly because I thought PARC was interesting). A few weeks later I got a letter back from them confirming that they had received it...unfortunately, my name and address were mispelled in three or four different ways! It looked like they OCR'd it sloppily and never checked the output. Not very impressive for a company which claimed to be on the cutting edge of document processing.
OTOH, I think IBM would make better use of PARC's work on little things like Nanotechnology. Some of their more interesting work lately has been on Digital Video Analysis (think motion capture without artificial cues, for example), Electronic Reusable Paper, Smart Materials, and Modular Robotics. At least, this is the stuff from the projects page that jumps out at me.
IBM is also known for innovation; They designed the first magnetic hard disk, the first realtime computer (for the military), DRAM, Fractals, Thin Film Recording Heads (yet another wonderful upgrade to hard drives), the Scanning Tunneling Microscope which could have a direct effect on Nanotechnology, and a nice impementation of high temperature superconductivity to boot.
Not to mention, IBM has money. I think we have a match here, folks.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Having worked at Xerox PARC for 2 years in the past, i know that Xerox PARC is not just the research site for Xerox Corporation. They are independent in that they just have get money from Xerox, but most of what they research is far from copiers.
Many of their projects are in human interactions with computers, thinking about how to use current or future technologies in new ways, and advanced electronics. They have always been on the forefront of computer technology design, regardless of who owns them, i don't think PARC is going to leave that role.
On the flipside, it's not like Xerox has ever capitalized on having this asset. PARC claims invention of Ethernet, laser printer ...
Xerox botched the laser printer business, sure; but even in botching it, they made billions (Brits: thousands of millions) of dollars in their big (e.g., series 9700, priced at $100K up) high volume laser printers in the early 1980s. PARC was a very profitable investment for Xerox.
Great book on PARC: Michael Hiltzik's Dealers of Lightning: Xerox PARC and the Dawn of the Computer Age (buy where ever you'd like).
Stupid job ads, weird spam, occasional insight at
Digital Paper, and a whole LOT of cool other stuff.
The digital paper is the coolest though.
There comes a time in every man's life when he must say, "No mother! I do not want any more Jell-O!"
I think that this is a death-gasp. Without Palo Alto, I fear that Xerox is going to die a slow death over time, as it looses what competitive edge it has left.
`ø,,ø`ø,,ø!
Free Software: Like love, it grows best when given away.
OK,
- B
http://www.bradheintz.com/
- updated
That actor is probably costing them a million dollars a month.
"Ancillary does not mean you get to rule the world." --U.S. Circuit Judge Harry Edwards, speaking to the FCC's lawyer
Just list it on eBay!
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum viditur.
On the flipside, it's not like Xerox has ever capitalized on having this asset. PARC claims invention of Ethernet, laser printer, first pc (the Altos), the mouse and GUI; they let these go and the benefits fell on such companies as 3Com, HP, IBM, and Apple. Hopefully this wonderful institution won't end up in the "trash," but in the hands of someone who understands PARC's visions.
"My mother works for Microsoft now. A whole other cult."
There is a lot of talk about PARC's historical accomplishments, and they are significant. But what have they produced recently? I don't mean to malign anyone still working there (it's not always the people, it's often the organization), but is the PARC of today the same as the PARC of yesterday?
--
Sometimes it's best to just let stupid people be stupid.
As long as they don't see a massive brain drain from the buyout, they should be doing fine. Despite what you say, there still exist companies like Microsoft and IBM who have enormous R&D departments and budgets. A buyout would be a shoe-in.
Besides that, they still have other products waiting in the wing (which haven't fled to other companies yet). Digital paper, for one. There are enormous untapped markets and potentials for growth, if they could get some competent management in there.
It may be bleak for us nostalgics, but it isn't half as bad for PARC as the naysayers would have us believe.
-- Anne Marie
The best thing Xerox PARC ever gave us was....
.....drum roll.....
LambdaMOO!!!!!
I'll grant that PARC "gave" us all the things we associate with contemporary computers.
But what have they done lately? Is anyone privy to anything "cool" coming out of PARC? Have they come up with some new quantum leap in computing/imaging/communications lately that makes them seem vital or even interesting in the same way that their previous developments did?
It strikes me as tough for them to do or be that way in the midst of the pc/internet/communications/electronics/etc "revolution". Not only do their ideas get lost in the shuffle, but there are so many opporunties for people with that kind of a vision already, it's hard to see why or how they could all end up in a place owned by one of the old-economy refugees of information technology age (at least in the sense of products).
Maybe I'm wrong here, but it seems that Xerox may be trading on the past rather than the future potential of PARC.
If Microsoft were to buy PARC, it'd likely be the end of a great thing. Remember, decades before Bill Gates had his house wired for infrared badges to customize the displays from room to room, PARC had already been doing it.
If the oil well of "cool companies to steal from" dries up, it could be like another '76 energy crisis! ;-)
...these days, the land PARC's sitting on is worth more than the business unit. I wouldn't be surprised to see it sell to some company wanting office space in Palo Alto, or to a developer (the kind that builds buildings and sells/leases them) looking to tear down the old buildings, build a new office park, and rent it out.
Only half-kidding,
-Isaac
I am not a lawyer, and this is not legal advice. For Entertainment Purposes Only.
Quantity: 1
The Palo Alto Research Center (or PARC) has innovated much of modern computing technology - from the Mouse, to Ethernet, to the Graphical User Interface. PARC was part of Xerox for over 25 years, but now it can be YOURS!
Think of it! You could own the research center that brought us Laser Printing!
Low Reserve, serious bidders only please! Acceptable payment forms include Cash, Visa, MasterCard, American Express, and shares of stock.
BUYER IS SOLELY RESPONSIBLE FOR SHIPPING.
Opening Bid: $8 Billion
Your maximum bid: [ 
(Minimum bid: $8 Billion)
Your bid is a contract - Place a bid only if you're serious about buying the item. If you are the winning bidder, you will enter into a legally binding contract to purchase the item from the seller. Plus, it looks like Xerox could use the cash.
-- Give him Head? Be a Beacon?
-- Give him Head? Be a Beacon? :P)
(If you can't figure out how to E-Mail me, Don't.
but if it were me, I'd rather go bankrupt then sell a kickass place like PARC
--
Peace,
Lord Omlette
ICQ# 77863057
[o]_O
XRX management let PARCS's accomplishments wither on the vine. If Lucent was smart, and not currently busy with spin-offs and watching their stock dive, they would buy PARC and merge in into Bell Labs.
"Obtuse Anger is that which is greater than Right Anger" - Lewis Carroll
I heard from someone who works at Xerox that pretty much everyone in the company is looking for a new job, and has been for the past few months. This is just a rumor, of course, but I would be surprised if Xerox did NOT go Bankrupt. Someone said he helped his boss's boss print out a resume. I guess things don't bode very well for the company...
And remember, you heard it on Slashdot, so it must be true!
-Ted
Perhaps Sun should buy them. They already have SPARC, so why not PARC?
Or maybe HP should buy them. Then they could change the name of their PA-RISC chip to PARC.
Seriously, whoever buys them would probably be someone large like Sun or HP who could eventually use the technology. Although HP has already spun off most of their R&D to Agilent.
Alternatively, they might be able to spin PARC off as a separate company. Look at Lucent and Agilent. They don't really need to sell anything as long as they have a large enough patent portfolio.
Software sucks. Open Source sucks less.
Xerox PARC ceased being "the future" when the Smalltalk crew bolted for ParcPlace in 1988 and it was essentially dead when Paul Allen acquired David Liddel and moved him a quarter mile north to Interval Research in 1992. But now, after $100 million of free-wheeling capital, even Interval Research is dead.
Seastead this.
anyone who thinks that kind of lightning will strike in a startup, the symbol of innovation in "this" era, misunderstands the nature of real innovation and basic research.
Here is the non-registration version of the story link.
OK?
--- Will in Seattle - What are you doing to fight the War?
If they do get sucked up by a real company that needs them to produce products, it will be gone in 3 to 5 years.
"Well, good luck finding a judge that doesn't run a bestiality site."
Bruce
Bruce Perens.