Agreed, Oracle ought to be scared because their main business seems to be milking companies who are now dependent on them (i.e. 50.000+ lines of PL/SQL) and their ridiculous licensing terms. So they must be aiming really high, for them to be doing this. There are many targets to go after (60+ members of OHA, SpringSource, Microsoft...) and I am afraid I have a hard time seeing an alternative, it truly looks as though Oracle is ready to set the bridge on fire behind them.
On Aug 17, 11:45 am, Kevin Wright <kev.lee.wri...@gmail.com> wrote: > Obviously this is totally dependant on how everything turns out, and what > Oracle really wants here, but I think that Martin has historical precedent > behind his arguments. > > The highly litigious developer-bashing attitude of Oracle is reminiscent of > Microsoft's past. > They did realise their mistake eventually, when Steve Balmer came out with > his now-infamous "developers, developers, developers" speech, and nobody > trusted him > Apple, at the same time, promised to make their machines "The best platform > for Java developers" > > The shift in mindshare from MS to Apple since then is obvious (just count > macbooks at any Java conference), and now that Apple has an Objective-C > tarpit whilst MS has channel9, the pendulum is swinging back. > > In taking ownership of Java, Oracle has now put themselves in a position of > being vulnerable to the same forces. > This will hit them in their bottom line, their cash cow database, with > technical decision makers no longer trusting them and instead migrating to > alternate vendors or NoSQL solutions by way of protest. > > Just consider Terracotta, who has a main selling point of reducing in Oracle > DB usage, and therefore license fees. They won't be the first... > > On 17 August 2010 09:33, Wildam Martin <mwil...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 09:48, Miroslav Pokorny > > <miroslav.poko...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Yes they dont exist in isolation, > > > but its not like current customers have an option, they cant just leave > > > Oracle products, its not like there are drop in replacements. Its just > > > cheaper and easier to continue as is, rather than drastically changing > > > things. > > > Of course not in the short-term. But in the long term things are > > different. You can just choose to create the next new database not on > > Oracle and five years later world may look different. > > > -- > > Martin Wildam > > >http://www.google.com/profiles/mwildam > > > -- > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > > "The Java Posse" group. > > To post to this group, send email to javapo...@googlegroups.com. > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > > javaposse+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com<javaposse%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups > > .com> > > . > > For more options, visit this group at > >http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en. > > -- > Kevin Wright > > mail/google talk: kev.lee.wri...@gmail.com > wave: kev.lee.wri...@googlewave.com > skype: kev.lee.wright > twitter: @thecoda -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Java Posse" group. To post to this group, send email to javapo...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to javaposse+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en.
