Re: Oracle buying Sleepycat, JBoss, and - Mailing list pgsql-advocacy

On Fri, 10 Feb 2006, Bruce Momjian wrote:

>
> Could Oracle modify PHP and JBoss so they work poorly with open source
> databases?

Just read the article, and did I miss something?  Zend != PHP, at least
not like Java == Sun ... PHP is not closed software, so how exactly would
Oracle modify PHP to work poorly with open source databases?

Now, I just checked the PHP5 LICENSE file, and it isn't GPL or BSD, but
the license is held by 'The PHP Group', not by Zend ...

Again, did I miss something that happened recently that put PHP under
Zend's control?

  >
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Mike Ellsworth wrote:
>> Robert Treat wrote:
>>
>> <Of course I haven't figured out where PHP/Zend fits into this... maybe
>> to help make php/mysql less ubiquitous. >
>>
>> Just a guess - but it may be related to IBM's Open Ajax initiative.
>> http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1895,1917665,00.asp
>>
>> Presumably, web-apps are a big part of Oracle's future plans.  If they
>> own the better-known power tools, they'll be better able to control the
>> web app "construction process" and help hatch more Salesforce dot com's,
>> which I believe use Oracle.
>>
>> Next salvo could come from Adobe/Macromedia.  They'll need to enter the
>> fray soon.
>>
>> I think there is PG lemonade to be made from the lemons.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Fri, 2006-02-10 at 11:41, Luke Lonergan wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> Bruce,
>>>>
>>>> On 2/10/06 8:27 AM, "Bruce Momjian" <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> What they are _not_ getting involved in is software that is community
>>>>> controlled, like PostgreSQL or Linux, because it much harder to see how
>>>>> a purchase would allow tight control of the software, resulting in
>>>>> revenue.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> True.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> Or tight control resulting in killing the competition. Even with the
>>> death of great bridge, postgresql kept on going, and I'd say there is no
>>> company currently that has as much sway as great bridge did "way back
>>> when"
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> I think it's clear they're going after applications again - buying many
>>>> proven foundational elements of a software development stack in one gulp.
>>>> What I wonder is what their next step might be - did they do this (and
>>>> InnoDB) to remove competition?  Or do they expect to somehow monetize a new
>>>> stack?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> My opinion is it's all about eliminating competition. InnoDB and JBoss
>>> don't give them code that is substantially different in a market effect
>>> sense, and sleepycat has only marginal value in the embedded space
>>> compared to the $$ oracle gets in the enterprise rdbms market.  However
>>> killing JBoss would kill a competitor, and getting sleepycat puts an
>>> even tighter grip on mysql. Of course I haven't figured out where
>>> PHP/Zend fits into this... maybe to help make php/mysql less
>>> ubiquitous.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> Is Oracle trying to become an open source company?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> At best they are trying to become a services company like IBM, but I
>>> still think they are just trying to slow down competition.
>>>
>>>
>>> Robert Treat
>>>
>>>
>>
>
> --
>  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us
>  pgman@candle.pha.pa.us               |  (610) 359-1001
>  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  13 Roberts Road
>  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend
>

----
Marc G. Fournier           Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org)
Email: scrappy@hub.org           Yahoo!: yscrappy              ICQ: 7615664