Comments on: Oracle, Sun, the EU, and what it means http://www.thebiggertruth.com/2009/11/oracle-sun-the-eu-and-what-it-means/ Welcome to the bigger truth! I'll try to add some context around "how" or "why" things might mean more than meets the eye. Mon, 26 Jul 2010 19:11:34 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0 By: InsaneGeek http://www.thebiggertruth.com/2009/11/oracle-sun-the-eu-and-what-it-means/comment-page-1/#comment-536 InsaneGeek Tue, 10 Nov 2009 21:10:15 +0000 http://www.thebiggertruth.com/?p=443#comment-536 I don't know... I think Oracle's response is fairly telling. It should be approved because Oracle & MySQL don't compete against each other. Having both in my environment, he's correct they hardly every go head-to-head; but I have seen transitions from both environments: some smaller instances away from Oracle to MySQL and some MySQL to Oracle. What this shows me is that Oracle will intentionally keep some of the more (at least to me) critical features out of MySQL, i.e. backup to tape + incremental. Features that would actually compete on the lower tier with traditional Oracle DB's. Sure I could technically try and fork off MySQL and rename it something completely different (as I wouldn't be able to use the trademarked name held be Oracle) and add those competing features in but have fun in getting much traction in any large scale. I have limited faith that Oracle wants MySQL to succeed with more production level features as it would be detrimental to their (as you say) monopoly profit producer. I don’t know… I think Oracle’s response is fairly telling. It should be approved because Oracle & MySQL don’t compete against each other. Having both in my environment, he’s correct they hardly every go head-to-head; but I have seen transitions from both environments: some smaller instances away from Oracle to MySQL and some MySQL to Oracle. What this shows me is that Oracle will intentionally keep some of the more (at least to me) critical features out of MySQL, i.e. backup to tape + incremental. Features that would actually compete on the lower tier with traditional Oracle DB’s.

Sure I could technically try and fork off MySQL and rename it something completely different (as I wouldn’t be able to use the trademarked name held be Oracle) and add those competing features in but have fun in getting much traction in any large scale. I have limited faith that Oracle wants MySQL to succeed with more production level features as it would be detrimental to their (as you say) monopoly profit producer.

]]> By: Storagezilla http://www.thebiggertruth.com/2009/11/oracle-sun-the-eu-and-what-it-means/comment-page-1/#comment-535 Storagezilla Tue, 10 Nov 2009 20:53:49 +0000 http://www.thebiggertruth.com/?p=443#comment-535 Remember the GE/Honeywell merger? Oh wait, that never happened because they blocked it. Probably because it would annoy Rolls-Royce and Airbus too much. Larry does have a hell of a lot of money but Oracle is driven by quarter to quarter growth. Every time they need to pump the growth number they buy something and when it's added in they can say they experienced whatever % year over year growth. In 07 they said they'd grow to $50B in revenue within five years, it's a shot away from 2010 and they're at $23B. This is after buying everyone in their market that they can get their hands on and being the only one to raise prices by close to a fifth in a duff market. Unlike the DOJ who appears to change their mind every time a new first lady picks out a new set of drapes for the Oval Office the difference here is that the Eurocrats think in decades. Larry could still win the day but if the person from Brussels says Non or Nein commissioners will come and go but the answer won't change. Having been missing in action for months it would be interesting to see someone at Sun's top level appear to tell the world they are still a stand alone company if this deal fell through. It is as if they just turned the lights out and went home. Remember the GE/Honeywell merger? Oh wait, that never happened because they blocked it. Probably because it would annoy Rolls-Royce and Airbus too much.

Larry does have a hell of a lot of money but Oracle is driven by quarter to quarter growth. Every time they need to pump the growth number they buy something and when it’s added in they can say they experienced whatever % year over year growth.

In 07 they said they’d grow to $50B in revenue within five years, it’s a shot away from 2010 and they’re at $23B. This is after buying everyone in their market that they can get their hands on and being the only one to raise prices by close to a fifth in a duff market.

Unlike the DOJ who appears to change their mind every time a new first lady picks out a new set of drapes for the Oval Office the difference here is that the Eurocrats think in decades. Larry could still win the day but if the person from Brussels says Non or Nein commissioners will come and go but the answer won’t change.

Having been missing in action for months it would be interesting to see someone at Sun’s top level appear to tell the world they are still a stand alone company if this deal fell through. It is as if they just turned the lights out and went home.

]]>