The Sun has Risen, and it’s Name is Google

I really appreciate your post and you explain each and every point very well.Thanks for sharing this information.And I’ll love to read your next post too.
Regards:
NABH

I think Google is more innovate and proactive then Sun. Instead of working on only one project, and then waiting for so long to see what the outcome will be, they introduced lots of new apps and services in very short span of time.

During Sun's time (under the sun), they created lots of good stuff, and the world is a better place because of it. Java and the architecture centric view of the world was good. Begin with the end in mind, they say. Google looks at the world through the web, Sun though one language and Apple at religiously happy users.

The focus and visions are very different and spending spare cash makes sense as long as it is in line with the revenue drive train. Sun spent their cash on Java hoping to sell more servers, and their competetion did because they did own the space. Google is proactive and will make lots of money as they webify the world, they currently "own" the space. And Apple keeps owns the space of user experience and spends their cash there.

Conclusion: Google will not follow Sun's pattern as long as they spend their cash on any artifact that makes the Web more relevant.

I have to wonder if Google is what Sun wanted to be but couldn't. As you point out, the spirit seems the same. But Google is standing on the shoulders of those giants of the early software era, having the opportunity to learn from past successes and mistakes in a way that costs only a trip to the library (or consulting fees to the greybeards who lived through it).

I also wonder if Apple is following the mold of Microsoft (hard-core closed source) but being creatively different after nearly going bankrupt in direct competition for the desktop. Again, standing on the shoulders of giants. (It is ironic that Bill Gates through Microsoft bought $250 million in Apple preferred stock in the mid 90's to stave off Apple's looming bankruptcy. What a turnaround Apple has made since then!)

Apple open sources far more than Microsoft ever has so I'm not sure how you can call them 'hard-core closed source'. The core of OS X is open source (Darwin) ... the UI layer is not. That goes along with Android being open source but many of Google's apps for the phone being closed source. The core of Safari is open source (WebKit) and used by Google. Apple open sourced Grand Central Dispatch, etc, etc, etc. Apple hired the guy who created LLVM at U of Illinois and all that work is open source. So I'm not getting your 'hard-core closed source' comment....

Clarification: Microsoft is hard-core closed source. Your evidence shows that Apple is taking a hybrid approach.

Just because they came later, and others had payed the price of breaking ground, does not always imply that they learned from those before.

Apple just wants to make the best possible product according to their vision. That is very different than Microsoft's approach.

Google may be able to be what Sun wanted to be. I wonder what percentage of Googlers are X Sun employees.

But what set apart Google from Sun is the execution of plans. Sun had more that 100 projects in queue that never made in to the market like 3D desktop etc .But when Google announces some project it rigorously over see its development. Just compare Java vs Android . Java evolved very slowly over the years but Andorid saw 7 updates in one year. So i think execution of ideas what make Google different.

Well, Sun executed JavaME pretty well, too. I think it may have been the only profitable part of Java.

In fact, if you look at Google's 20% time, they likely have quite a bit more non-revenue projects than Sun ever had. Frankly, I think sun had major problems in sales and marketing. Google does not have that problem. Google's management structure is different (flatter, more Japanese style). So, that helps. Also, having the 20% rule allows people to work on their pet projects without having to lobby for funding. So, it likely helps reduce politics. So, maybe they have learned. From a business perspective, though, will they be more successful? Or, will they, too, burn out.

1. Without Java (as robust as it was) would there have been a Dot-Com boom? Even if you say there would have been it would have been diminished.

2. Sun's approach to hardware was a BIG Iron mentality. Commodity Linux boxes running on Intel chips killed their hardware business more than anything. IBM, Digital, Apollo, Prime and host of others used to sell the same sort on UNIX boxes Sun did. Except for IBM...

3. If Android/Chrome OS fail...Google might be in trouble

I totally disagree. Google is not a "search" company and it's main line of business is not search. It is basically a media company that is generating more 90% of its cash from advertising. Hence, it uses other products (Android, Docs, etc) to build more ad revenue.

I remember analysts saying "iPod cannot save Apple", and look where it has taken them.

Yes, thank God, someone else thought the same thing. I was getting a little worried that I'm the only one. Ever since I first started working with Java, I had the exact feeling that SUN made it with the developer in mind, the engineer, not the consumer. They never made flashy statements ment to seduce grand-ma into loving java, they never even pretended such falashy grand-ma loved things can really be done in java, or that that what java's for. They always cared about ease of development, ease of use of the development language, and basically tried to eliminate as much as possible the things that would drive a developer to drink, even if that might cut short the flashy crap that a every day user might get a kick out of. They did all that, and they keep doing it, and truly they have advanced software development all in all with it.

I also started feeling recentlly that Google has the same basic approach to dev. They have this huge ton of money, with wich they could do all kind of crappy marketing stunts and trick grand-ma into buying some flashy crap that they might make, and triple that mega-wad of money every 5 minutes. But they don't do that, what they do instead is take care of developers. GWT is magic, jquery also, Chrome has one hell of a dev console, Google App Engine is a dream come true. Especially Google App engine. I remember it was only 2-3 years ago that I was looking into prices for deployment a java ee web app, and it was ridicoulous. A lot of money per month for a crappy server that was shared by 1000 other people. Now google gives all this for free, the servers are boom fast, with persistence support. And if you really want to have a megaton of resources, you do have to pay, but it's really a decent price.

Having this view of things also makes me despise Apple. And the human fart that is Steve Jobs. I mean not just hate, but trully wishing they'd all die and never be spoken of again. What they're trying to do to software dev now might be the evilest thing ever done. With their control and anal retention, and their business model complettly 200 % focused on creating a flashy stupid thing that can be easily advertised and bought by an eternal segment of gulible consumers, which really just wacks the head of anyone trying to actually do something software-wise. The latest Apple poop is the so called "gaming API" for the iphone sdk (latest version, 4 i think, who cares). I actually looked into that thinking, hey this might actually be cool they might give me some sort of application server where I can deploy components that can then be used by games on an iphone, to like do multiplayer stuff, or keep recors like highscores and so on. WEll guess what, the fist and most tooted feature of the "gamining API" was how easily it lets you integrate commercials into your iphone games, and how cool they open for the user to see, and for you to earn and extra 15 cents or something. WTF, nough said.

Several things... GWT is not magic...and in fact can be a real pain in the ass. Having done several projects with it I'd rather have dedicated HTML/CSS/Javascript people on hand because eventually you need those types of people to debug issues anyhow. JQuery isn't a Google project and Chrome's dev console is mostly from WebKit (take a look at Safari on the Mac to see what I mean...the buttons, etc. are identical).

And your comments about Apple are way off-base. Idiotic even. What you said boils down to being jealous of what they've accomplished (and you completely ignore what they've given back to the software community...including WebKit and its dev tools which you just praised in the previous paragraph). Not only that but you can't apparently comprehend what you read or hear because you've somehow combined the Apple advertising API with the gaming API. The gaming API does *exactly* what you talked about. The ad API is totally different and while you pass off earning ad dollars as no big deal ad dollars is what allows Google to provide all of those wonderful tools you keep crowing about.

I don't see this as a religion. I think Apple has done a remarkably good job of servicing the consumer. In my opinion, better than anyone else in the computer industry has done to this point. They have some good development tools, but they could really use a language and a tool overhaul. Apple, to me, does a fantastic job of not overbuilding things. They pick a core feature set, perfect it, and release it. The difference with Apple is they are one of the few large computer companies that does not release until they feel it is ready. Everyone else releases when it is feature complete. That is a very big difference in my mind.

Google on the other hand, does a great job of catering to us developers. They have developed some really good technology. What they have done on the web front is nothing short of remarkable. I would argue that Apple should grab V8 from google, just as Google has grabbed webkit from Apple. I do believe that all of the efforts Google is undertaking are in their interest. In fact, they are in a different place than Sun. Sun was trying to raise the level of the tide to float all the boats. They were trying to create a market. Google is petrified of a non-web world where they loose a grip on their revenue stream (no web advertising). So, they are doing these projects to try to keep the web in the lead, to keep it relevant. This is a defensive position, not offensive.

Both are great companies. I just think that Google is in danger of following Sun. Unfortunately, I'm not sure if they have a choice.

Hello - I work for Les Stroud Productions. Sorry for the non-related post but I was looking for a way to contact you and this seemed to be the easiest way. I was wondering if you would be willing to speak with me. My email address is ryan[at]lesstroudonline.com.

Best Regards and feel free to delete this from your message board.

Ryan

Will Larry buy google next?

Google should have bought Sun. It would have been a better cultural and technical fit. It would have been better for developers. Unfortunately, it didn't make business sense. Larry, is going to, ultimately, be the end of Java. Just stopping the blogging has had a dramatic effect already. Oracle's bottom line driven approach will make Java less relevant, imho.