Andreessen Interview Discusses Post-Crash Innovation 291
kevcol writes "The SF Chronicle has an interview with Netscape co-founder Marc Andreessen, talking about innovation after the dot-bomb crash, how AOL doesn't understand its own customers, his reaction to some comments by Larry Ellison, who believes that 'innovation primarily comes from big companies like Oracle', and Andreessen's post-Netscape experience as head of OpsWare (formerly LoudCloud)."
You know he is right (Score:5, Funny)
Just the other day I was reading that Microsoft is readying new technology to stop web popup's in their browser - this sort of fast paced innovation is what we can expect from leaders within an industry.
Re:You know he is right (Score:2, Informative)
Exactly (Score:4, Interesting)
While they are a 'big' company and some people distrust them based on that fact. Generally they adopt industry standards. Aren't they in our good books today? Or is that Wednesdays?
Re:Exactly (Score:2, Interesting)
having their software running on linux doesn't directly contribute to opensource software.
IMO, oracle is more of an open source whore as sun and co. is. they're ridding the bandwagon like the everybody else. "sure, we can compile this thing to run on linux, you think someone will buy?". oracle, because of your reputation with some PHB's and your overinflated/underused support contracts, you're going to sell s
Re:Exactly (Score:5, Interesting)
Its a huge thing. One of the biggest complaints of Linux is that it can't run stuff Windows does.
>how about open sourcing the admin tools?
At the heart of OpenSource is that you are not forced to do anything that you don't want to. Its "as is".
And who are you to say what Oracle should and shouldn't do? Who named you "King of OpenSource"?
Re:Exactly (Score:2, Interesting)
i'd really like to see the sales figures of oracle on microsoft platform. the point being that oracle knows that microsoft isn't stable and robust enough for mission critical stuff. they'll steer you hard twords a solaris box.
i'm not King of OpenSource (tm), i'm just saying that oracle is riding the linux bandwagon like all the other companies out there. they're not opensource. for opensource rdbms, there's
Re:Exactly (Score:5, Insightful)
Supporting their software on Linux also benefits the OS community. Oracle is a 1 point of contact for any problems on the support linux platforms. Thats a HUGE deal for companies considering moving to Linux. No matter what the problem is on a linux server Oracle will support you.
As for actual code here's a quote from an article:
Officials at the OracleWorld conference here last week said Oracle will continue to contribute development work and code in areas such as management, clustering and enterprise database to the open-source and Linux community in association with companies such as Red Hat and SuSE Linux A.G.
Full article here. [eweek.com]
Re:Exactly (Score:4, Informative)
http://oss.oracle.com/
Re:You know he is right (Score:5, Insightful)
I think the details went along the lines of "We'll buy Peoplesoft to corner the CRM market. Then we'll drive the company into the ground and leave all their customers with no choice but to buy Oracle software." Don't know if those are the exact words, but Oracle's CEO has come out to say things pretty close to that. Sorry, but evil is evil.
As for innovation only being done by big companies, I do believe Apple started out in a garage. And wasn't eBay started in a basement. Innovation is done by people with a need, or by people who see a need and want to fill it. It's not done by corporations with a desire for more money. Innovation costs money without a guarenteed return on investment. For a business, that's a risk too big for most to take.
Re:You know he is right (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:You know he is right (Score:4, Insightful)
Don't we always get mad at people for doing black box innovation? At least Larry Ellison knows what he wants, and takes initiative to make it happen, and tells us what he is up to. If I had a billion dollars I too would buy out the competition. Thats business, it makes the world go around. The competition doesn't have to bend over to the buyout, just as you can make a replacement for peoplesoft. Act! is a crappy version of peoplesoft when you get down to it, why can't symantec make it better and market it to peoplesoft customers who got burned? If Cisco bought out Linksys, and then replaced all the boxes on the shelves with 8 port Catalyst switches and a 500$ pricetag, and cut off all the old support contracts as they expired (pretend your 5 port dsl router had onsite tech support), you can bet some other company (dsl routers and switches inc.) would step up and produce a competing product. Sucks to be you, but you can just go purchase the competitions product.
Re:You know he is right (Score:3, Interesting)
Yeah, like that Fulltext search feature which allows you to quickly search a database and get relevancy ratings.
Oh wait, that was Mysql.
Larry is correct... (Score:2, Funny)
The same can't be said for other area's of software.
Re:You know he is right (Score:2)
Anyone recall MS trying to put a spam filter in outlook in 1999 and then getting sued because it filtered "greeting cards". Talk about a crap lawsuit...
http://www.internetnews.com/bus-news/article.ph
Re:You know he is right (Score:4, Interesting)
"post-crash" (Score:3, Funny)
heh
Re:"post-crash" (Score:5, Insightful)
well, i hope he means the browser since he knows jack all about the economy. witness from the article:
Do you want to put up a tariff, do you want the price of Chinese goods to rise? You're taxing your own citizens, and you're paying more for the things you buy at Wal-Mart. Why would you do that?
apparently andreesen thinks economics stopped with david ricardo.
the reason you want to put up a trade barrier with china is because they compete on price by breaking the international rules: child labour, forced labour, unsafe working conditions, bad envirionmental track record. you name it. if "free trade" is going to work (a long shot) then there have to be baseline standards about what constitutes fair manufacturing practices - otherwise the "winner" in the global economy is the country most willing to exploit its citizens, fuck its environment and provide substandard or unsafre products.
bah!
Re:"post-crash" (Score:3, Insightful)
No, that would be the loser, because they would end up with angry citizens, poisoned resources, and a reputation for producing shoddy goods.
The winner would be the country with well-off people who saved a few bucks on each pair of jeans.
Re:"post-crash" (Score:2)
As more and more manufacturing is done outside the USA, what's the future look like for a country that doesn't manufacture any goods, and the few that they do aren't cost-competitive with the rest of the world?
It is possible to have a completely service-based economy? Because it looks like we've pinned our tail to that particular donkey.
And must winning come at the expense of the losers, who let's say are children working in an unsafe factory breathing pollut
Re:"post-crash" (Score:2)
this is one major argument for letting halliburton and other us companies take contracts for rebuilding iraq, even if they do it for more money than iraqis, because if the US is gonna spend a few billion dollars, we should try and keep most of those billions
Re:"post-crash" (Score:4, Interesting)
Where's the sense in keeping the poor nations down, even in markets where they are able to compete with rich nations? (agriculture, basic manufacturing, textiles)
Free trade is the best shot at raising the level for all people. You're not going to get every nation to comply with your dreams of baseline standards. Why should developing country X jump to some standard that makes their goods more expensive, when they know they'll lose their industries to country Y who ignores such standards?
Given true free trade, competition will win out. Your "winner" with the unsafe products will get driven out of the business by reputation, if not by litigation. Bought any eastern European cars in the U.S. lately??
Re:"post-crash" (Score:3, Insightful)
All I propose is that there be a tariff based on the UN Declaration of Human Rights. If people lack the freedom to form unions, then a tariff of a certain percentage be applied to items entering this (or any Western) country. Same thing with reasonable environment
Re:"post-crash" (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:"post-crash" (Score:3, Interesting)
According to Alvin Toffler, in his book War and Anti-War, Germany and Britain were each others biggest trading partners when they went to war in 1914. Which is not to say that their economies didn't collapse, only that interdependence wasn't a barrier to war.
L.Re:"post-crash" (Score:3, Funny)
No, it's free trade. "Free trade" and "capitalism" are, by definition, the system of the USA. If the USA changes that system, it's still free trade and capitalism. Trust me. I know what I'm joking about.
Dot-bomb (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Dot-bomb (Score:5, Insightful)
Surely you do realise that those very jobs were created by the dot-com boom. It was a bubble which was destined to burst. Don't blame the foreigners for faults in your own economic structure. You chose capitalism as your economy , and now you are seeing the ugly side of it.<P>Capitalism just like any other socio-economical structure has its own advantages and disadvantages.
Re:Dot-bomb (Score:2)
Why not listen to what Andreesen has to say, instead of waiting for him to say what you WANT him to say?
Amazingly enough, an interview cannot cover every conceivable topic that exists.
former co-founder? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:former co-founder? (Score:5, Funny)
Perhaps the article was written by revisionist historians.
Remember, Mr. Ellison... (Score:5, Insightful)
Even your company was once an "innovative startup."
Re:Remember, Mr. Ellison... (Score:2)
Re:Remember, Mr. Ellison... (Score:2)
Rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic (Score:5, Funny)
Actually building a secure server - now that would be innovation.
Here's (Score:2, Informative)
Actually... (Score:5, Insightful)
Cheers,
IT
But Michaelangelo ACTUALLY was the artist (Score:3, Insightful)
And this is a charitable description of his contributions. I have heard much more scathing indictments of his level of contribution.
Its also worth noting that his company was completely crushed in every incarnation (browser firm, server firm, suite en
Imposter Boy? (Score:5, Interesting)
http://www.chrispy.net/marca/gqarticle.html [chrispy.net]
or is he really the great Entrepreneur:
http://www.fortunecity.com/campus/alfred/290/andr
Re:Imposter Boy? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Editing indicates editorial activity (Score:4, Insightful)
Yes, please do. Please point out spelling mistakes made by Sir Winston or the Framers. Of course, I'm sure someone else will gladly point out that American standard and British standard English have different spelling conventions, so what you think are spelling mistakes are probably actually correct. Also remember that American standard English wasn't formalized until after the Revolution, so presumed spelling mistakes in the Constitution are probably also correct.
I can't speak for anyone else, but I didn't bother reading the second linked article because the first was so bad, I assumed the second would just be more of the same. That's what happens when you post something with no credibility, it directly impacts totally unrelated items just because they happen to be referenced together. This is why professional editors are so careful about fact checking and spelling errors: one bad article can tarnish an entire organization (witness the recent problems the NY Times has had because of one bad journalist faking datelines).
Re:Imposter Boy? (Score:3, Insightful)
1. Marc Andreesen did not invent either the Web or the browser. Mosaic was based on the idea and codes of others. Nor was he a programmer. Nor did he have a significant management role at Netscape.
2. Despite Andreesen's admiration of the Google founders creating something of value and long-lasting, he and Jim Clark did not do the same. Netscape was one big air-bubble, the beginning of the
It's true, for the most part (Score:4, Interesting)
While there have been significant gains in innovation that have come out of OSS, the movement largely remains a follower rather than leader of technology, choosing to re-implement already-existing technology for the sake of software freedom.
Small companies these days do not find it so easy to get financial backing for their ideas (which are usually cutting edge stuff), so the days of Yahoo!, Amazon, and other current mainstream companies who were once just gleams in their creators' eyes but grew to enormous proportions are long gone.
Re:It's true, for the most part (Score:5, Interesting)
In the software world, a 13 year old in his basement with a old P-III 500 and linux has the same tools available to him as the entire microsfot corperation does.
The Basement/garage Electronics inventor Also has the abilities/tools available.. I can solder BGA chips to the home made 4 layer circuit boards I can make (have a board house do it for you for $100.00 is much easier though) A large number of chip makers gladly dole out single or a 3 pack of samples to small companies or hobbiests.
Right now the single person has the same capabilities available to them that the largest companies in the world do. Hell we have the "rock-star programmer" building a fricking rocket to launch himself into space.
you will see this trend accelerate as technology is advanced. I can print and bind a book in my home, I can manufacture my own electronic devices, i can write my own software and I can publish/sell it to millions of people easily.
Re:It's true, for the most part (Score:2, Funny)
Re:It's true, for the most part (Score:3, Insightful)
The Basement/garage Electronics inventor Also has the abilities/tools available..
Yup, and it has always been this way. Gateway, Dell, and HP all got their start as a couple of guys building computers in barns/garages/sheds.
Re:It's true, for the most part (Score:5, Insightful)
One person can't possible explore as much as a 5 man R&D team can. A well equipped R&D team researching the same idea a one man show is researching is bound to do better due to the amount of collaboration etc (Assuming the five people are equally skilled as individuals when compared to the one person). There ARE diminishing returns on development projects when you add more developers. There is a sweet spot, and anything more than that gets you less and less. However, that five man team has more raw man hours than the lone hobbiest, which can make a huge difference in the net results.
I do feel there is significant room for innovation from one guy with a great idea and the grit to see it through to the end, but it is always important to remember that the big company has money/time that one individual may not possess. Hopefully technology can equalize this gap, but it will take time for technology to do this.
Jeremy
You forgot the corp environment (Score:3, Insightful)
The corporate research world (in which I have had the dubious pleasure of working) spends 4 weeks planning and meeting for every one spent actually working... the 5:1 ratio of the team to the individual is quickly lost there... and then the passionate inventor will willingly work 18 hour da
Re:It's true, for the most part (Score:5, Insightful)
In the software world, a 13 year old in his basement with a old P-III 500 and linux has the same tools available to him as the entire microsfot corperation does.
Erm, not exactly. Microsoft has huge resources available in terms of testing and coding and stuff. A 13-year-old with linux doesn't have those things. He does have a lot of great tools, and he's certainly in a good position to "innovate", but he still can't match Microsoft or any other large corporation for resources. One important thing he's missing is the ability to determine if his "innovation" is going to make money. Large corporations have millions (billions?) of dollars to spend on market research to determine if their innovation will sell.
The Basement/garage Electronics inventor Also has the abilities/tools available.. I can solder BGA chips to the home made 4 layer circuit boards I can make (have a board house do it for you for $100.00 is much easier though) A large number of chip makers gladly dole out single or a 3 pack of samples to small companies or hobbiests.
Can you make a processor? More importantly, can you make one that will be "innovative" compared to current bleeding-edge processor technology? For any other electronics project, the issues will be the same. How much do your failures cost you in time and money? How much time and money do you have to spend? For every Jobs and the others that existed in the '80s (the Amiga was designed by a team in their garage as well) there were hundreds of failed garage computers. Even after you've built your innovative piece of electronics, whatever it is, it takes money to manufacture it, and even more to market it. Jobs and Gates and all those guys had a HUGE advantage in their market that we don't have now: there were no PCs. Home computers didn't really exist. As much as I hate to admit it, Jobs and Gates (and Commodore, but they're not around anymore for anybody to remember their significant contributions) made computers available for home users.
Right now the single person has the same capabilities available to them that the largest companies in the world do. Hell we have the "rock-star programmer" building a fricking rocket to launch himself into space.
The first statement is just plain wrong. :) Total up your net worth and then compare it to IBMs net worth and then tell me a single person has the same capabilities as the "largest companies in the world". Your "rock-star programmer" building his X-prize contender just happens also to have a significant personal fortune to put into the project. Can you build a rocket that costs a million dollars? Do you have the resources to do all the R&D required to build a rocket? Check out the Armadillo pages to see the failures they have. Can you even afford to have one of their failures?
Yes, individuals can and will innovate. They will also continue to get rich doing so. But that's not the same as having the same resources available that a large corporation has. It's still David and Goliath no matter how you slice it.
Re:It's true, for the most part (Score:5, Informative)
Re:It's true, for the most part (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Innovations are made by people, not companies (Score:3, Interesting)
I am not saying people inside a corporation can not innovate or change the world. I am saying people with great idea's are not constrained by company inertia.
Look at Mosiac and Linux as examples. Both started with little financial resources. If you read the article Anderson mentions this. Lets say for example a highly profitable company like IBM came out with the next big thing. It would hardly be a blip on their radar profit wise. Big companies
Of course... (Score:5, Insightful)
And the example of such innovations would be...? (Score:3)
Re:And the example of such innovations would be... (Score:3)
Re:And the example of such innovations would be... (Score:3, Insightful)
This is the next direction for the real innovations in computing. The UI needs to be designed, more research needs to be made, and new designs need to be investigated.
university of Toronto, MIT, U of Georgia. these are the three hotbeds of wearable computing right now.
18-year olds don't own garages. (Score:2)
Re:18-year olds don't own garages. (Score:2)
Re:And the example of such innovations would be... (Score:3, Insightful)
Infamous young gentleman, Thomas Alva Edison, was inventing without a degree, or a marketing/college firm guidance. Many many open source programmers are doin
Re:Of course... (Score:3, Insightful)
Well, from my over thirty perspective I'll tell you this: at nineteen I thought I was a pretty hotshot programmer, but I didn't have anywhere near the focus or discipline that I have now: qualities that have allowed me to work independently from home making a decent living without worrying about a commute, "vacation" time or having a boss.
Being ninetee
It's all in a capitalist context! (Score:5, Insightful)
The entire, long interview only mentions the word Linux once, and none of it takes place in the context of open source -- it's like something out of a 1999 BusinessWeek, when Linux/OSS was considered a joke and a non-factor.
It seems as if he's just pitting small businesses -- 19 year old wonder kid startups that often fail and caused the dot-com crash-- against brick and mortar computer companies, and COMPLETELY giving the cold shoulder to the open source and free software movement that's currently making all the difference and leading the way in innovation in the computing world.
Either this guy feels threatened by the free software revolution of the 21st century, or is still stuck in the past.
Re:It's all in a capitalist context! (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:It's all in a capitalist context! (Score:2)
Those startups can revolutionize an industry - or the world. And they HAVE. The key difference being, when that has happened, money wasn't being dispensed as easily as candy.
I'd have to admit.... (Score:5, Insightful)
I say this as an evil Microsoft developer who just loaded the latest Debian package on his system. To quote Magneto in XMen2 "It has begun...."
Re:I'd have to admit.... (Score:2)
Re:I'd have to admit.... (Score:2, Insightful)
Or another good measure of success, my mom could tell me who Bill Gates is, but Andreesen? Probably not....
Re:I'd have to admit.... (Score:3, Funny)
I mean, sure, he's a pioneer.
But on the other hand, there's other people who are also pioneers, who now have vast wealth and can have any woman they want.
Just sayin'.
Pot Calling Kettle (Score:5, Interesting)
I don't think most users wanted netscape to develop into the most buggy, bloated browser in the market!
I remember way back when netscape was actually great alternative to IE... all the geeks used it. Then they started trying to build the great palace of netscape on top of it... and it crumbled.
If they would have listened to their users, they would have stayed small... and probably done a lot better moneywise.
Now they are having to build a small browser from the beginnings up--after the money is gone.
Davak
Re:Pot Calling Kettle (Score:2, Informative)
Netscape was THE browser, until IE 4.0 was out for a while. that's when the tides really started to turn. People actually installed browsers on their system. they knew a little how it worked. IE (3.0) was some pre-installed browser that didn't work on 1/2 the sites, and crashed often.
and today... today, moz (and its variants) is a great browser that all the geeks use. those that don't, they're not hard core.
Re:Pot Calling Kettle (Score:3, Insightful)
Someone had to point it out.. (Score:5, Funny)
here [google.com]??
Right?
Mosaic = first easy-to-use Web browser? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Mosaic = first easy-to-use Web browser? (Score:2)
Re:Mosaic = first easy-to-use Web browser? (Score:3, Insightful)
The only guy I even knew with a NeXT (Turbo Slab) ran Mosaic on it for a web browser. I don't know if that helps you any, but it is a nice anecdotal data point.
News Buyout? (Score:5, Funny)
When AOL's market cap was at $170 billion, the executives added up the parent companies of the five major newspapers in the country -- the Wall Street Journal, New York Times, L.A. Times, Washington Post and USA Today.
They could have bought all five for about 10 percent of their outstanding equity at the time. And they almost did it, except for the fact that they didn't think they could get antitrust clearance. But they thought that would be a good thing to do.
Nothing like unbiased news sources owned by a gigantic conglomorate of everything evil in the world.
Tv News reporter
Today in news CEO/CTO of AOLTimeWarnerNetscapeNewYorkLATimes...commerical.
AOL doesn't understand its own customers (Score:5, Funny)
Re:AOL doesn't understand its own customers (Score:2, Funny)
Re:AOL doesn't understand its own customers (Score:2)
Big companies and innovation (Score:5, Insightful)
And if it is a truly revolutionary innovation, it will destroy the business of the units of the company the currently make all of the company's money
Why is this guy so important? (Score:5, Funny)
I guess management is the only place where successive failures enhance your fame. If he were an ordinary "worker", with that record, he would be out on the streets.
Re:Why is this guy so important? (Score:2)
Re:Why is this guy so important? (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Why is this guy so important? (Score:2)
I never claimed to be better than him (or anyone for that matter), so I don't understand your point about me. Again, RTFP.
In this society, we seem to be enamored by CEOs. It all started with Iacocca, I think. Even if they successively ran companies into the ground, wasted opportunities and hurt emnployees and shareholders due to
...waiting for the dot-com coredump. (Score:5, Funny)
Didn't he die in 9/11? (Score:2)
Re:Didn't he die in 9/11? (Score:3, Informative)
Akamai Technologies, the Cambridge Internet company whose 31-year-old cofounder Daniel Lewin died when Los Angeles-bound American Airlines Flight 11 became the first hijacked jet to slam into a World Trade Center tower, held a private service but also remembered Lewin with a tribute at its Web page.
Story [boston.com]
uhh (Score:2, Funny)
I wish my employer wasn't "very big" too.
Andreessen and Innovation (Score:2)
Why does anyone listen to Mark Andreessen? (Score:5, Insightful)
Ellison is correct! (Score:2, Insightful)
In summary: the necessary (if not sufficient) condition for true progress beyond the 'known' is the existance of gifted Individuals.
Innovation is heralded by big companies. (Score:3, Interesting)
Innovation is heralded by big companies. Sometimes they come from smaller companies. Sometimes they come from large companies. Xerox PARC has many examples of innovation from a large company. The internet browser came from a small company, Netscape. Of course, there's those many small companies that MS absorbs to acquire their technology. Then MS displays the technology as their own creations.
Some innovation is led by a big company. Take the PC, for example. Before IBM decided to offer the PC, the market was dominated by smaller, niche players. Many companies ran mainframes at the time. When IBM began to sell the PC, it was a signal to companies that it was okay to use a PC in the business world.
In some examples, an innovation is ignored by one company and used by another. RCA sold the patent to Sony for the VCR and the rest is history. USB was developed by Intel but was not really implemented until Apple replaced their proprietary APC connections with USB.
Innovation (Score:4, Insightful)
UIUC nailed (Score:3, Insightful)
Oh come on, Marc: it's really only like that in the summer, when the wind's out of the south! In the winter the wind comes howling off the prairie bringing the odiferous delights of burnt soybean oil from the Kraft plant.
He's also right about the brainpower around this place. Awesome.
Loren Heal, lheal at uiuc
Mr Andreessen (Score:5, Funny)
(I'm so sorry)
How you define "innovation" (Score:4, Informative)
Big companies produce patents, not innovation (Score:5, Insightful)
Innovation used to actually mean something a few years ago. *sigh*
And Andreesen's post-crash contributions .... (Score:3, Interesting)
Understandin customers (Score:3, Funny)
That's ok. I don't unerstand AOL customers either.
Re:Millions of dollars in after the fact. (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Troll)
Re:Don't turn on Central Air (Score:2)