In the letter, Milunovich suggests that Sun's recent attempts to reinvent itself don't go far enough, and he offers McNealy advice on how to bridge the remaining gap. At the top of the list is an attitude adjustment for McNealy and a 7,000-person workforce reduction. After the latest announced cut, approximately 35,000 employees will remain. (For a contrasting financial analyst viewpoint, Mark Stahlman of American Technology Research, which provides independent research to institutional investors, believes that Sun has a sound strategy moving forward.)
Now that everyone who's affected by Sun has had time to digest both the financial news and Milunovich's letter, one fundamental question remains. With $5.5bn of cash still in the bank, should McNealy bypass the makeover altogether and simply step aside? It's such an obvious question that I'm surprised Milunovich, who called McNealy an "impediment", didn't take his castigation that one extra step (although he did suggest the installation of a Yin-like COO to balance the Yang of McNealy). For whatever reasons, Milunovich stopped short of calling for McNealy's resignation. To find out why, I called Milunovich's offices but was unable to penetrate his call screeners and was told that "Steve Milunovich's office has declined to comment."
Since Milunovich wasn't willing to comment on the McNealy question (and McNealy turned down the opportunity as well), I thought I'd give the Gartner analysts a call. Each time I attend one of its semi-annual conferences, Gartner rolls out an army of Sun experts that seem to know the company inside and out. To find out where the research company stands on the Sun leadership apparatus, I got a hold of Gartner vice president and distinguished analyst Yefim Natis.
Natis made it clear that neither he nor his company would go on record as saying that McNealy needs to go, but questioned his leadership. "We have questioned if he is able to continue to lead without changing the vision for the IT industry that he has had. The vision has been successful over the years, but it has now become a barrier. We do believe that radical change in the company's management approach is needed. Whether that means McNealy should appoint a replacement, or should find a partner in leadership, or should step down and leave the decision to Sun's board of directors, I can't say. Those are the various options."
Talkback
Sun's current sales numbers show they need to learn how to "hoover some wallets."
Sun's numbers reflect problems in the market more than they do any lack of leadership bu McNealy.
I suppose buisness analysts would feel more comfortable with a generic leader who doesn't make waves, but that's a great way to end up like DEC or Compaq.
Advancing in technology is all about making waves. Both in bucking ignorant conventional wisdom & in actualy innovating.
Sun innovates, and they continue to do so. Their latest OS release, in beta shows this well. Clocking on at %30 better performance on x86 than Linux, it runs even better on quality hardware. And that's only one aspect of the new release, much less a better pricing and support model than other vendors.
Anyone nay-saying Sun is simply not paying attention to the technology, & is just wrapping themselves up in a lot of mindless drama. The IT industry through the IT press often resembles a soap opera more than it does technology coverage, with technology being overshadowed by what amounts to drivel.