Slashdot Mirror
Co-founder Joy to leave Sun
TheLinuxWarrior writes "An article
at CNET says Bill Joy, Sun Micro co-founder and chief scientist, is leaving the company." You'd think after two decades of working at Sun, they could've found a better picture!
← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)
Whatever it is, I'm going to buy stock in it. This guy is a genius, and has truly initiated world-changing technologies. I'm going to be closely watching to see where he goes, because it's going to be impressive.
I wonder, though, what this means for the future of Sun...
Whatever the excuse maybe, this is a blow to the company. That's like Ballmer leaving M$.
Lame attempts at humor notwithstanding, I found it a great joy to leave Sun. Though working with Joy up in Aspen would be a fine scenario.
When I started working with SunOS in 1992, I thought that working at the pioneering company would be a great career path. After several years, I finally got there, and was immensely distressed at the culture of "not invented here" and "zero career growth" as unspoken rules. They build lovely campuses to work in, but boy did it suck to be a minion there.
Here is a cool 20 year old interview with him, written as far as I can see just after the first Mac came out. It makes for interesting reading:
http://www.cs.pdx.edu/~kirkenda/joy84.html
The dangers of excessive individualism are nothing compared to the oppressiveness of excessive collectivism
This does not bode well for Sun. Bill Joy was truly a visionary and they are going to have to make significant changes in R&D strategy to compensate for this loss. Note that SUNW stock is reacting accordingly, I expect we'll see $2.80 before the end of '03.
Joy is such a luddite that there really is no threat of him starting another technology company. It's likely he will pursue more writing and pontificating, while Sun will flounder aimlessly as they seek a niche in this new technology market.
Eric Sarjeant
eric[@]sarjeant.com
Yeah... It only took me 3 years and a half to finally do the job I was hired to do (although on a different project).
Working at Sun sucks right now.
I'm a pro-vi (vim, actually) bigot, but I don't want to start a religious war. At least not today.
Remember to place vi exactly in its context. Vi placed a useful set of extensions on ed/ex, and so enhanced an established tool. Enhancing an established tool has advantages and brings baggage.
Pro-vi points...
- Leverages well known line editor commands (ed/ex/sed)
- CPU/memory efficient - I've heard it said that a machine that comfortably handles 20 vi users can only handle 4 emacs users
- Only requires a very simple qwerty keyboard - doesn't need special function keys or meta keys
- A touch typist will find most frequently used commands right under their fingers
- Command structure is fairly logical
Anti-vi points... I know there are some but, like I said, I use vim and vim solved alot of the glaring deficiencies of vi. I think multiple buffer support is a biggie.Plus vi represents the "Unix-way" of small efficient single purpose tools. A text editor should try to be a text editor, not an email reader, a web browser, a shell...
The greatest invention - best idea - of the corporation and they could not figure out a way to make any money with it. Lots of brainpower expended and fans and users but NO MONEY. YOU LOSE. GAME OVER.
If it were done when 'tis done, then t'were well it were done quickly... MacBeth
Article from SFGate:
Michael Dell, who built an empire selling computers based on other companies' innovations, argued Monday that the future in the technology market belongs to players who embrace industry standards, not proprietary systems.
The 38-year-old chief executive of Dell Inc. also strongly suggested that one of his company's top Silicon Valley rivals, Sun Microsystems, may never get back on its feet because it's stuck in a business model that no longer works.
"I think there are parts of the industry that will never recover, and the reason is that their business is fundamentally based on things that people aren't going to buy very much of anymore," Dell told The Chronicle after his keynote speech at OracleWorld, Oracle's annual user conference in San Francisco.
"They're waiting for (demand for proprietary systems) to come back," he added. "Sorry, it ain't going to happen."
Larry Singer, Sun's senior vice president for global market strategies, disputed Dell's view of the Santa Clara company and the trends in the technology industry.
"When Michael Dell gets up there and says those who don't follow industry standards won't make it, it's a bit disingenuous," he said in a phone interview.
"Innovation still matters. Market standards come from new innovations and new technologies."
Like other major companies such as Hewlett-Packard and IBM, the Texas firm sells computers, servers and other hardware based on widely used technologies developed by such companies as Intel and Microsoft.
On the other hand, Sun, which was once recognized as the top provider of corporate computing, has been a major industry player by offering products based mainly on its proprietary systems.
Asked if he believed that the struggling Sun would never recover, Dell, who typically shies away from comments on competitors, answered: "I sort of said that, but I didn't say that.
"But if you look at their peak revenues and where they are now, it's a pretty big difference, right?" he added. "And if you look at what people are buying now and what they were buying then, it's a big difference."
Singer defended Sun's strategy and performance.
"For Michael Dell, his definition of a market standard is the company that's selling the most today, and that's a pretty easy standard to pick," Singer said. Citing the rapid expansion of Sun's Java technology, particularly in mobile computing, he added, "The definition of what a standard is is beginning to change."
Dell's remarks underscored the debate over the role of innovation and research and development in the tech industry as top players, such as Dell, Sun and HP, maneuver for advantage in the anticipated rise in corporate spending on technology.
Dell Inc. became a tech behemoth by selling directly to consumers and keeping its spending on research and development down.
But rivals like HP and Sun have portrayed the Texas firm as a technological lightweight that grew on the backs of other companies' hard work in research and development.
Dell Inc. has made inroads in the low-end server market, defined as systems under $100,000 each.
But its critics scoff at the company's bid to move up the corporate technology market, arguing that only companies that invest in innovation can afford to compete in the mid-range and higher-end corporate markets.
Sun lost $2.38 billion in its fiscal year that ended in June, compared with a loss of $587 million the previous year. But the company has remained a respected technology innovator, particularly in the high-end market.
"The companies that will survive will be those that innovate technologies," and that means spending on research and development, Singer said.
But Dell has been unfazed by such criticism. In the interview, he reaffirmed his belief that hefty R&D budgets can be overrated and don't necessarily lead to hi
Sun has lost over 95% of its shareholders' non-cash equity the last 3 years. More importantly, McNealy has lost serious credibility. I worked at Sun as a contractor for 2 years 10 years ago. Sun had a collection of really bright people, but the decision making process was flawed even then. McNealy had aspect of a class act. Unlike many Silicon Valley execs, he actually worked to be visible. The basic problem here though: the old guard that made these guys has largely been booted or is horribly demoralized(at least the Sun employees/alumni I've kept in touch with). Furthermore, Sun has no process for spotting the folks that are right even when it means being unpopular-which in a highly competitive business is just plain deadly. McNealy just hasn't been able to resist surrounding himself with a bunch of yes-men.
I dont know Bill Joy at all but from his accomplishments and his contributions like this one http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/8.04/joy_pr.htm l he seems like a great mind. He admits that he is not a scientist as someone in the previous postings have indicated. He is more a computer architect. His view is that scientists have a bigger role to play in advancement of computing than computer engineers.
But most importantly he has pointed to the much needed change to human ideal of a utopian world. He urges us to change ultimate human goal to compassion from blind pursuit of scientific knowledge. In fact, I think he quit his pursuit of technology and he is going to be in the realm of fighting battles against unbridled pursuit of scientific excellence which has the potential of a larger destruction than the current dystopia of nuclear, chemical and biological weapons.
all the best in the pursuit Bill. Its great to see people believe in and pursue goals that are aligned with the bigger objective than most can see or comprehend but reap the benefits of. Carl Sagan in his book Cosmos had a chapter called "Who thinks of Mother Earth?" which showed human parochialism. Bill has echoed this sentiment quite strongly and persuasively in his articles and work which talks about maximising narrow gains at the expense of larger humanity wide goals.
After several years, I finally got there, and was immensely distressed at the culture of "not invented here" and "zero career growth" as unspoken rules.
Same with nearly all companies. There are two philosophies of running companies.
Method #1: "Core Technology Group" - Form your core technology group with experienced staff. Then recruit project managers to manage software engineers. Any strangers will only get offered the dead-end jobs while nieces/nephews and trusted staff get the good software engineering jobs. This is great if you're an senior engineer/architect. The advantage of this method is you keep your senior staff. The disadvantage is that you keep losing your junior staff.
Method #2: "Everyone gets pushed up into management". In this method, the philosophy is to get the new graduates to bring in new ideas. Whenever somebody comes along and has experience (from another company or an university project) an existing member of staff is promoted to team leader. After several pushes they get pushed into a project manager (and promptly leave to set up their own company). In some states/countries management will slap on a Non-Compete-Agreement if they can get off with it. This usually ends up with the brightest entry-level graduates not applying to the company. The disadvantage is that even if you are loyal to the company you'll more often than not get bogged down in some tedious but critical part of a project, only to see new graduates get to work on the latest technology.
This is great when you're an entry level graduate. The disadvantage to the company is that they keep losing their senior staff. Smaller companies seem to be run this way.
Be lucky you haven't applied to a company which uses grad-fighting as an interview technique: Invite 10-12 graduates to an interview session and sit them around a table for a debate. Tell them that there are several positions available and that these will go to the individuals who make the most contribution to the debate. Then sit back and watch the fight take place.
Same with nearly all companies...
Yes, sad but true. I'm sure everyone has their own dead end career stories, but here's mine: A few years ago I was hired as a UNIX systems administrator. I came into the company as a senior UNIX systems administrator. With the typical corporate downsizing, most of the middle management was cut and we're more a flat manangement style with only a few higher ups and alot of peers. Anyway, during my raise review this year I was informed that I was being overpaid and hence wouldn't get a raise. I would have been satisfied with the "no raise" comment. In this sad economy, I'm just glad to have a job, but the rationale or excuse for not getting a raise bothered me. My manager then felt it was necessary to describe how based on their company point scale I was like a 2 out of 5 (my interpretation of being one better than a janitor). Based on that information, the company felt that a level 2 admin only should make so much. I realized at this point it was an apples to oranges comparison going on here. My skill set puts me way beyond the "junior level" admin status. And by the way, junior level was the term he used.
I don't know if anyone else can relate to such a situation. Having a stagnant career is one thing, but being downgraded in career status? In my former job, I was a senior UNIX administrator for Cantor Fitzgerald installing trading systems around the world. I come to work for Eastman Kodak and after a few years I'm a junior admin?
Based on my rants, it sounds like my crappy company falls under Method #1 and the obvious thing to do is quit and get a new job. But therein the company has me by the nutz (and they know it). The unemployment in my city is one of the worst in the US. Leaving the city isn't much of an option either.
When I first came to Eastman Kodak, I was told that most of the good people have left. This I feel is true. I suppose the very fact that I stayed directly implies I must be some kind of idiot. In that light, I can only agree with my management.
McNealy is beyond a doubt one of the most schizoid people in the industry.
On one hand he is doing mad hatter using Linux, but Sun is backing SCO on their attack on Linux.
He stopped all development of Solaris on x86, but then brings it back to sell sun x86 boxes.
Scott comes out to Colorado to deliver a keynote speech to Colorado's government, but it does not hit him that the governor is solidly behind replacing all Sun, HP, and IBM boxes with MS (this at a time when Ownes has helped kill our economy).
If you ask McNealy where Sun is headed, he will rant and rave about MS and occaisionly throw in Linux as well.
I suspect that Joy is tired of all the shit going on in the company and is tired of a rudderless company.
Not to be too harsh, but your mistake was joining Eastman Kodak. From what I've seen, that company has been on life-support for several years.
Sun make a considerable amount of money from Java. They sell support, they sell IDEs, they sell J2EE licences. They give the low-end stuff (J2SE and Forte community edition) away free to encourage widespread use of the language.
Lately, Sun has has two really big problems holding it back. Those problems are named Scott McNealy and Bill Joy. Stuck in unixland. They were the only "minicomputer" company that didn't jump to Windows NT back in the early 1990's, and they won big time on that bet. Unisys, Data General, etc. where are they now?
Sun stuck with Unix and it turned out to be a good play for them. Now the big man on campus is Linux, and the Sun top brass think they can make the same play again. But this time it's different:
I would also hate to see OpenOffice orphaned. We need this package.
Tired of FB/Google censorship? Visit UNCENSORED!