Sharing

Dan Farber (whose stuff I always read and highly recommend) gently takes Scott to task for his comments on sharing — Sun owns the word ‘share’?:

McNealy said the company’s cause is to eliminate the digital divide and that the strategy is community development. “We own the word ‘share’,” McNealy said.

<snip>

Sun isn’t offering anything different than before it discovered sharing—the company profits by powering the data centers so that users can transact and interact online. What’s the alternative a strategy to community development? I don’t know, and it’s not my job, but in the end Sun succeeds or fails based on its products

True, Dan. We are a corporation, and we sell stuff to survive. But the “sharing” bit is the first ad campaign that we’ve had in a long time (ever, probably) that describes what we do, rather than spins what we do. I believe it, too. Many of us here do. And I believe Scott and Jonathan believe it, as well. I don’t like the orange we have all over the place, but I get the “sharing” bit. And I don’t think it conflicts with capitalism at all. To be honest, only selling servers is horribly boring. Helping some people along the way feels much better, especially just before you close your eyes at nite. A long time ago, I used to dig really big holes for a living and I made lots of money. Then I lost it all. Poof. Gone. It’s a long story, but what I learned from that experience was that helping people and making money don’t have to be in conflict. That’s why I like the sharing campaign. Because I believe it, and it motivates me.

Advertisements

5 thoughts on “Sharing

  1. Dan … well I’m personalizing a little (a lot, actually) with the boring bit. It is, though. To me. What I’m looking to do is to sell stuff, make money, contribute, share, and grow based on the merit of my work, not the marketing of a message. I want the message to simply reflect the work, not the other way around (which is my complain with marketing/PR). The R&D and innovation stuff is nice, I suppose, but it’s not imaginative enough for me to get excited about and to set the context for the entire company. It’s, well, boring. 🙂 Probably because some of this stuff we talk about is so complex that it blows over my head, I don’t know. I agree that the sharing ads represent a different context, but I’d argue that that context was there all along and is simply coming to the forefront. Remember, I personalize. So, this new stuff is something from Sun that I can understand and get into.

    Like

  2. Jim,
    YET another x-Islander! 🙂
    I have recommended monies be spent aiding market leaders in Solaris ‘ports’ of important software.
    After recent clientele discussion, a.k.a. ‘I HATE PC’s!’, it became clear entire industries are underserved and a ‘security risk’ employing Redmond software.
    Yogi once stated – ‘When you come to that fork in the road, take it!’
    IT’S TIME!

    Like

  3. Jim, I don’t question whether you, Scott or Jonathan or Simon or anyone at Sun believe in ‘sharing’ as in bridging the digitial divide and understanding the colonizing (not colonialism) of the Web. Is buying servers is boring to customers…because if its boring to Sun, then it will be reflected in the transaction and interaction. Previously Sun focused on its R&D muscle and innovation…it’s a different context..e.g., Niagra as the sharing chip? BTW, beautiful baby…

    Like

Comments are closed.