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.

Reply via email to