Re: Oracle buying Sleepycat, JBoss, and - Mailing list pgsql-advocacy
From | Bruce Momjian |
---|---|
Subject | Re: Oracle buying Sleepycat, JBoss, and |
Date | |
Msg-id | 200602110031.k1B0VTr08117@candle.pha.pa.us Whole thread Raw |
In response to | Re: Oracle buying Sleepycat, JBoss, and (Mike Ellsworth <nhrcommu@rochester.rr.com>) |
Responses |
Re: Oracle buying Sleepycat, JBoss, and
Re: Oracle buying Sleepycat, JBoss, and |
List | pgsql-advocacy |
Could Oracle modify PHP and JBoss so they work poorly with open source databases? --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
pgsql-advocacy by date: