Slashdot Mirror

TFA is quoting Gartner. When is the last time Gartner got something right? It's full of weasel words. Lots of "If ..."

Read what Oracle wrote. They're not abandoning NetBeans.

What are Oracle's plans for NetBeans?

Oracle has a strong track record of demonstrating commitment to choice for Java developers. As such, NetBeans is expected to provide an additional open source option and complement to the two free tools Oracle already offers for enterprise Java development: Oracle JDeveloper and Oracle Enterprise Pack for Eclipse. While Oracle JDeveloper remains Oracle's strategic development tool for the broad portfolio of Oracle Fusion Middleware products and for Oracle's next generation of enterprise applications, developers will be able to use whichever free tool they are most comfortable with for pure Java and Java EE development: JDeveloper, Enterprise Pack for Eclipse, or NetBeans.

Fuck Gartner. Fuck them in the heart.

Because Oracle doesn't already offer a competing product in the same market space as Java, raising concerns about anticompetitive squashing or stifling of Java.

Really? What about jRockit from the BEA purchase they made?

http://www.oracle.com/technology/products/jrockit/index.html

SQLite dominates discussions of embedded databases these days, but Berkeley DB still has fans who don't need SQL. There are a lot of comparisons on the web.

Oracle owns Berkeley DB, from when they bought Sleepy Cat Software. Has anyone heard of _any_ useful progress in Berkeley DB, which used to rule Linux for lightweight, small databases?

Berkeley DB is still being developed with new features - such as those in version 4.8, released less than a month ago.

Anyway, Berkeley DB is a different kind of database than MySQL or Oracle Database.

I thought not: they supported it a little bit, and it's been profoundly ignored for years now, by both its owners and the open source community at large.

Surely the rise of SQLite has something to do with what you perceive to be Berkeley DB's decline?

Oracle owns Berkeley DB, from when they bought Sleepy Cat Software. Has anyone heard of _any_ useful progress in Berkeley DB, which used to rule Linux for lightweight, small databases?

Berkeley DB is still being developed with new features - such as those in version 4.8, released less than a month ago.

Anyway, Berkeley DB is a different kind of database than MySQL or Oracle Database.

I thought not: they supported it a little bit, and it's been profoundly ignored for years now, by both its owners and the open source community at large.

Surely the rise of SQLite has something to do with what you perceive to be Berkeley DB's decline?

See http://www.oracle.com/haley/index.html for info on an Australian software company once called Rule Burst which does this sort of stuff, which Oracle bought.

http://www.oracle.com/technology/products/bi/db/exadata/pdf/exadata-storage-technical-overview.pdf

Personally, what I got the biggest laugh at is that, just like Fog Creek's other software, they're wanting ridiculous amounts of money for this code. Hosted? On a shared server? 10 million page views a month (Random page on Stack Overflow, 20KB, so in other words, about 200GB)? How much would you pay? For this forum / QA software?

With Stack Exchange? A THOUSAND DOLLARS A MONTH.

Wow. Just wow. Really, Joel? You think your software is worth that much?

Or hey, you could use it on your own server. If you're willing to pay TWO AND A HALF THOUSAND DOLLARS A MONTH...

Wow, that is rediculous. Why, it's almost as much as a single MSDN subscription or an Oracle license (assuming I actually read that mess properly).

I agree with you, but I don't believe the HP Exadata setup used PA-RISC. http://www.oracle.com/us/corporate/press/017557_EN.doc

They need to produce an ultra-reliable appliance which runs Oracle -- Ugly as HP is, they had a partnership which delivered that in a unit.

Now they have the Exadata box with Sun chips, as of September 15 (press release). I for one (if I were spending such money) would want to wait a year before buying one of those.

I'm much happier with Sparc than PA-RISC, but HP makes things which just WORK. Sun has been known to roll out boxes with odd behavior. I'll need to see people very happy with their Exadata boxes for a while before I buy one.

Perhaps Oracle feels (perhaps rightly) that people will be forced to buy whatever they say. Period. And so they can push through a beta-ish time on this new equipment using their customers as guinea pigs.

It just seems wiser to co-exist for a while, then terminate the arrangement. But then Oracle has always been about squeezing people's testicles more than about being wise.

Oracle? They will: http://www.oracle.com/features/suncustomers.html

I know of great place to get the latest version of Oracle Enterprise addition for any platform, no license keys, no activation required, no trial periods, no protection at all. Just download it for your favorite platform and install it.

technet.oracle.com

Last time I checked, Oracle is pretty profitable, even though they have no copy protection of any kind. Apparently, the ACTUALLY trust their customers somewhat which puts them in a pretty rare class these days.

Microsoft is only shooting themselves in the foot:

1. Copy protection doesn't work. It didn't work in the 1980's and it won't work now.
2. WGA might not really create a disincentive for pirates, as most people who download a cracked copy off pirates bay do not always obtain the latest security patches from Microsoft.
3. These pirated copies are actually free advertising for Microsoft. It gives them the net effect which is still very important in these markets.
4. WGA definitely creates a disincentive for legitimate customers like me:
   1. I have a legal copy of MS-Office which I no longer have installed. After having to go through the activation drill twice after reinstalling Windows, it just seems too much of a hassle to do it again. Thus, I have become much more proficient in Open Office, and can pass those skills unto others.
   2. My Ubuntu Dell laptop also came with a Vista CD. I briefly considered installing it somewhere, as I figured becoming familiar with the latest version of Windows would be useful, maybe running in a VM or something. WGA nixed that idea, and whatever neat features Vista has, I have never seen them.
5. Privacy is not a straw man. It is in fact a very big deal to me. Once someone else has control over your computer, whether it is Microsoft or some Haxt0r, it is pwnd. I have moved anything important to Linux a long time ago, and no longer trust any Windows computer connected to the Internet with any important information.

Why in hell would they want to sell the Sun hardware business to HP when they have just started to advertise it? See http://www.oracle.com/features/sunoraclefaster.html [oracle.com]

Especially if, as Cringely supposes, that the whole point of the deal was to use SPARC to get a few more years out of the traditional database market (vs. Google/Hadoop-style methods).

Is this the HP Oracle Exadata Storage Server Round 2? Let's see Oracle OpenWorld and wait for Q1 2010 for more news..

"What the hell is going on at the Oracle website, for example?"

Here is a guess: The technically knowledgeable people are paid to develop products. Management considers them too expensive to document what they do.

Instead, Oracle management hires marketing people to supervise the development of the web site and documentation. The marketing people have no interest in technology -- none. They are bored with their jobs. They secretly think that technically knowledgeable people are inferior. They do, however, learn some buzz-words so that they can pretend that they understand.

The marketing people don't believe technical communication is important. They have seen numerous examples of people being able to use Oracle products even though the documentation is poor. The web site and product manuals are either almost useless or written for people who already understand the products. Editing for clarity is very limited.

The writers are hired as consultants. When a writer doesn't understand something, he or she just doesn't document it, or gives a limited explanation.

Oracle web site page chosen completely at random: Oracle Database Management Packs.

Quote (Title): "Get Maximum Performance With ROI of 100%" Translation: Meaningless.

Quote (First sentence): "Oracle provides an integrated management solution for managing Oracle database with a unique top-down application management approach." Translation: Meaningless. A "management solution for managing a management approach"? But... It's "integrated"! And, notice the grammatical error. It should be "managing Oracle databases".

When I see trash like that I feel sad. I sometimes think I should contact the board of directors and ask to be CEO, so that the company will have adult supervision. I'm being sarcastic, but I really do feel genuinely sad about corporate self-defeat.

More sarcasm: Will the combination of Oracle and Sun be called "Snoracle"?

Seriously: Will PostgreSQL eventually be the world's most popular database software? To me, those two quotes from the Oracle web site are a very effective ad for PostgreSQL.

"What the hell is going on at the Oracle website, for example?"

Here is a guess: The technically knowledgeable people are paid to develop products. Management considers them too expensive to document what they do.

Instead, Oracle management hires marketing people to supervise the development of the web site and documentation. The marketing people have no interest in technology -- none. They are bored with their jobs. They secretly think that technically knowledgeable people are inferior. They do, however, learn some buzz-words so that they can pretend that they understand.

The marketing people don't believe technical communication is important. They have seen numerous examples of people being able to use Oracle products even though the documentation is poor. The web site and product manuals are either almost useless or written for people who already understand the products. Editing for clarity is very limited.

The writers are hired as consultants. When a writer doesn't understand something, he or she just doesn't document it, or gives a limited explanation.

Oracle web site page chosen completely at random: Oracle Database Management Packs.

Quote (Title): "Get Maximum Performance With ROI of 100%" Translation: Meaningless.

Quote (First sentence): "Oracle provides an integrated management solution for managing Oracle database with a unique top-down application management approach." Translation: Meaningless. A "management solution for managing a management approach"? But... It's "integrated"! And, notice the grammatical error. It should be "managing Oracle databases".

When I see trash like that I feel sad. I sometimes think I should contact the board of directors and ask to be CEO, so that the company will have adult supervision. I'm being sarcastic, but I really do feel genuinely sad about corporate self-defeat.

More sarcasm: Will the combination of Oracle and Sun be called "Snoracle"?

Seriously: Will PostgreSQL eventually be the world's most popular database software? To me, those two quotes from the Oracle web site are a very effective ad for PostgreSQL.

That's true of a lot of tech stuff in general. What the hell is going on at the Oracle website, for example? About 40 links to some random downloads, middleware, etc.; impossible to find anything if you didn't already know exactly what you wanted.

Why in hell would they want to sell the Sun hardware business to HP when they have just started to advertise it? See http://www.oracle.com/features/sunoraclefaster.html

Then there's Java. Drains quite a bit of cash without making enough money and Oracle as a company has the wrong temperment to maintain and improve a programming language anyway. Start charging enough to make money on Java and Java dies. Nor does having Java particularly complement Oracle's product line.

http://www.oracle.com/technology/products/jrockit/index.html

This page is getting funnier by the minute. There are people who's last experience with either company is from ten years ago, people who think either company is 'not big enough for X', and people who are only familiar with one facet (if any) of the companies businesses.

So, let's get this right. the BEST that Linux can get is a murderer and a SUN REJECT? lol quality.

Excuse me, I think I'll stick to a REAL OS that features a REAL FS backed by a REAL company!

That's a common outcome when a big company acquires a product. Sun itself is a past master of this kind of self-inflicted foot shooting — remember Cobalt Networks?

But Oracle actually seems to do a lot better with its acquisitions than do other companies. Have a look at this list of recent acquisitions. Notice that each item points to a current product page. The one that fascinates me is Rdb — a relational database! — that probably would have died if Oracle hadn't acquired it and thrown resources at it.

Thank you.
All those software vendors who charge $outrageous/user to use yet another LDAP Directory bridge -- which no one in his right mind purchases so users have yet another password to memorize -- are yet another element in poor security. Despite all the posturing about the great security of their systems.

Oracle will discard the entire hardware division (of Sun), not just the processor departments.

This is called simply a bullshit. And that's why:

Oracle plans to grow the Sun hardware business after the closing, protecting Sun customersâ(TM) investments and ensuring the long-term viability of Sun products. Oracle also intends to focus the server and storage businesses on our common enterprise customers, where we believe we bring competitive advantage, relationships, and a track record of helping to reduce costs and complexity. Key to this strategy will be our plans to develop software-optimized hardware that integrates all of the enterprise components: hardware, database, middleware, and applications. After the closing, Oracle plans to be the only company that can engineer an integrated system where all the pieces fit and work together so customers do not have to do it themselves. Our customers benefit as their systems integration costs go down while system performance, reliability and security go up.

-- http://www.oracle.com/sun/sun-faq.pdf

IOW, it means they are much more serious than just kill. They want to be an IBM and seriously compete with M$ as well.

I've worked with Oracle UCM (formerly Stellent) for a few years now and would thoroughly recommend it. It's scalable into (at least) the 10s of billions of documents. A single repository for Doc Management, Records, Web Content Management, workflow, imaging. It comes with security, library services, metadata, and search OOTB. Using the WCM, you can make your documents available on an intranet, extranet or internet site, according to specified security policies.

BTW... offices on satellites... that's so cool! ;-)

How about the repository for updating Oracle. Oh wait, no...

deb http://oss.oracle.com/debian unstable main non-free
Found here

How about the repository for updating Oracle. Oh wait, no...

deb http://oss.oracle.com/debian unstable main non-free
Found here

No, there is a difference in this example between the selected and the sorted-on field. Plus, the selected field may not be unique (which is the main reason for getting an arbitrary amount of results). If I make a webapp in which I produce a subset of one or more tables that are the result of a query that I want to present to the user in the form of pages, I may, for example select on everybody in Houston (which gives me a subset), and sort on name. If I get to use offset and limit, I can do something like this:

SELECT * FROM PEOPLE WHERE CITY='Houston' ORDER BY NAME OFFSET 0 LIMIT 20;

For the next page, I would then replace '0' with '20', to give me the next 'page' of the result set. Fantastic. However, if I did this:

SELECT * FROM PEOPLE WHERE CITY='Houston' AND ROWNUM() >= 0 AND ROWNUM() < 20 ORDER BY NAME;

I would first select the first twenty (arbitrary) results from the database, and only *then* sort them. My result could contain names beginning with 'a' through 'z' for every page ! The 'solution' proposed here, says that you should be aware of your resultset.

To put it simply: no.

Look: I'm not sure if we don't understand each other, if you're teasing me around for trolling purposes or if you are genuinely uneducated on the ROW_NUMBER() windowing function (which has nothing to do with Oracle's ROWNUM pseudo-column); but it doesn't work as you say.

To prove it, you just need a copy of SQL Server 2008 (express edition should do) and the last version (available on Codeplex) of the AdventureWorks2008 sample database. Then just run this query against it and play with the numbers as you want:

SELECT *
FROM (
SELECT ROW_NUMBER() OVER (ORDER BY P1.FirstName) AS rn
, P1.FirstName, P1.LastName, A1.City
FROM Person.Person AS P1
JOIN Person.BusinessEntityAddress AS T1
ON P1.BusinessEntityID = T1.BusinessEntityID
JOIN Person.Address AS A1
ON T1.AddressID = A1.AddressID
WHERE A1.City = 'Redmond'
) AS T
WHERE rn BETWEEN 1 AND 21;

Ordering is applied right after the A1.City = 'Redmond' predicate while generating row numbers with the ROW_NUMBER() function.

So

• there's absolutely no arbitrary selection for assignment of row numbers, they are assigned base on FirstName ordering
• because of this, there can't be names beginning with 'a' through 'z' for every page (unless, of course, they all fit in a single page)

I suspect you are simply wasting my time because you don't know how windowing functions work but still you are arrogant enough to try and bend Oracle's ROWNUM into a possible behavior without simply looking up some documentation. Have you *at least* seen and contemplated that the ROW_NUMBER() function comes with an OVER (PARTITION BY ..., ORDER BY ...) clause???? And that ORDER BY clause is different from the ORDER BY clause that come at the end of a SQL statement?

Let me quote from Oracle's documentation:

A ROWNUM value is assigned to a row after it passes the predicate phase of the query but before the query does any sorting or aggregation.

This is simply *NOT* how the ROW_NUMBER() windowing function works! Look it up in both Oracle's and SQL Server's documentation.

There are some additional considerations that may apply because of determinism of the sort order or duplicates because of the chosen attributes in the partitioning/ordering clause, but these are considerations that applies also to LIMIT.

Before starting again running in circles, because you have no clue about how this windowing function works,

No, there is a difference in this example between the selected and the sorted-on field. Plus, the selected field may not be unique (which is the main reason for getting an arbitrary amount of results). If I make a webapp in which I produce a subset of one or more tables that are the result of a query that I want to present to the user in the form of pages, I may, for example select on everybody in Houston (which gives me a subset), and sort on name. If I get to use offset and limit, I can do something like this:

SELECT * FROM PEOPLE WHERE CITY='Houston' ORDER BY NAME OFFSET 0 LIMIT 20;

For the next page, I would then replace '0' with '20', to give me the next 'page' of the result set. Fantastic. However, if I did this:

SELECT * FROM PEOPLE WHERE CITY='Houston' AND ROWNUM() >= 0 AND ROWNUM() < 20 ORDER BY NAME;

I would first select the first twenty (arbitrary) results from the database, and only *then* sort them. My result could contain names beginning with 'a' through 'z' for every page ! The 'solution' proposed here, says that you should be aware of your resultset.

To put it simply: no.

Look: I'm not sure if we don't understand each other, if you're teasing me around for trolling purposes or if you are genuinely uneducated on the ROW_NUMBER() windowing function (which has nothing to do with Oracle's ROWNUM pseudo-column); but it doesn't work as you say.

To prove it, you just need a copy of SQL Server 2008 (express edition should do) and the last version (available on Codeplex) of the AdventureWorks2008 sample database. Then just run this query against it and play with the numbers as you want:

SELECT *
FROM (
SELECT ROW_NUMBER() OVER (ORDER BY P1.FirstName) AS rn
, P1.FirstName, P1.LastName, A1.City
FROM Person.Person AS P1
JOIN Person.BusinessEntityAddress AS T1
ON P1.BusinessEntityID = T1.BusinessEntityID
JOIN Person.Address AS A1
ON T1.AddressID = A1.AddressID
WHERE A1.City = 'Redmond'
) AS T
WHERE rn BETWEEN 1 AND 21;

Ordering is applied right after the A1.City = 'Redmond' predicate while generating row numbers with the ROW_NUMBER() function.

So

• there's absolutely no arbitrary selection for assignment of row numbers, they are assigned base on FirstName ordering
• because of this, there can't be names beginning with 'a' through 'z' for every page (unless, of course, they all fit in a single page)

I suspect you are simply wasting my time because you don't know how windowing functions work but still you are arrogant enough to try and bend Oracle's ROWNUM into a possible behavior without simply looking up some documentation. Have you *at least* seen and contemplated that the ROW_NUMBER() function comes with an OVER (PARTITION BY ..., ORDER BY ...) clause???? And that ORDER BY clause is different from the ORDER BY clause that come at the end of a SQL statement?

Let me quote from Oracle's documentation:

A ROWNUM value is assigned to a row after it passes the predicate phase of the query but before the query does any sorting or aggregation.

This is simply *NOT* how the ROW_NUMBER() windowing function works! Look it up in both Oracle's and SQL Server's documentation.

There are some additional considerations that may apply because of determinism of the sort order or duplicates because of the chosen attributes in the partitioning/ordering clause, but these are considerations that applies also to LIMIT.

Before starting again running in circles, because you have no clue about how this windowing function works,

... Oracle will have to regain the the trust and support of the MySQL community -- in other words, 'stop acting like Oracle.

If you go to http://www.oracle.com/technology/index.html you may notice that they give away their base products (ie RDBMS and JDeveloper among others) to developers for free, and if you go to their forum: http://forums.oracle.com/forums/main.jspa?categoryID=84 you should find that they have a large and thriving community for that very reason.

I like MySQL - but Oracle is my favourite database by a mile. I do system work daily with all of the major ones: Oracle, DB2, Informix, Adabas, Sybase, Teradata. I'm no longer an expert in any of them (used to do a lot of Oracle), but I do know that Oracle is still the standard the others are trying to reach up to, SQL-wise and with respect to scripting.

MySQL is not even in that game IMO, but it has a very simple API, so it is hugely useful for smaller applications.

... Oracle will have to regain the the trust and support of the MySQL community -- in other words, 'stop acting like Oracle.

If you go to http://www.oracle.com/technology/index.html you may notice that they give away their base products (ie RDBMS and JDeveloper among others) to developers for free, and if you go to their forum: http://forums.oracle.com/forums/main.jspa?categoryID=84 you should find that they have a large and thriving community for that very reason.

I like MySQL - but Oracle is my favourite database by a mile. I do system work daily with all of the major ones: Oracle, DB2, Informix, Adabas, Sybase, Teradata. I'm no longer an expert in any of them (used to do a lot of Oracle), but I do know that Oracle is still the standard the others are trying to reach up to, SQL-wise and with respect to scripting.

MySQL is not even in that game IMO, but it has a very simple API, so it is hugely useful for smaller applications.

Oracle doesn't have a credible product (or even a foot in the door) in any market where MySQL is already effective.

What about Oracle Express?

We've used MySQL, Oracle Express, and SQL Server express for low end customer applications, where we really only need a few hundred megabytes of data for our application. My order of preference is SQL Server, MySQL, and Oracle.

Personally it's just more of the same from MySql in general. MySql AB didn't do much of anything with it since 5.0 came out. They wasted a lot of time on a complete rebuild, on adding more features no one cared about. The thing about MyQql 5.0 is that it's really not a very good database. MyISAM sucks (but it is small and fast..) and InnoDB is bloaty. So I think that really MariaDB is going to be the future. Of the codebase. That is the nice thing about MySql is that really it's a wrapper around the Storage Engines. But the problem is the wrapper sucks. No kerberos/LDAP authenication?! What?

I could see Oracle taking one of their open databases and adding a Mysql compatibility layer so basically you can run stuff designed for Mysql on Oracle. This is really their bread and butter already, they move legacy stuff off old UNIX and IBM databases into their DB. Look at all the gateways 9i had. MySql only implements a subset of what Oracle can do. And with no support for the more modern, more object orientated practices, along with trees, etc, I don't see MySql making it out of it's current place as a cheap small database for non-critical applications.

That's not to say you can't make it quite stable and fast but it's not that out of the box. And the fact that 5.1 shipped with a crashing bug really makes me doubt Sun's desire to continue the brand. Which brings me to the forks, which are really the only thing keeping a stable 5.1 version alive out there.

Postgres is really not a viable replacement because it's a database nerd's database. I like it, but the data analysts at work won't be able to deal with its quirks. It does do a lot, but not small and fast like MySql. It comes from a long line of great database researchers, all of whom are well known around the Valley. A lot of all the major players' databases in the valley are based on ideas from Ingres including Oracle.

Personally, I think SQLite3 (4) is going to be the database of choice for small web hosts very soon. Small, portable, fast enough. At that point MySql will no longer have a purpose unless they can move into the middle tier dominated by MS-SQL.

Slashdot:
http://developers.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=09/04/20/128246

Sun:
http://www.sun.com/third-party/global/oracle/

Oracle:
http://www.oracle.com/sun/index.html

Chicago Tribune:
http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/yourmoney/sns-yourmoney-0503leckeyfile,0,5105395.story

Those are fine and good for fun and hobbies. I'm talking about business, work and making $$...the prime directive in life.

Some have mentioned CAD and CAM application. I'm looking at things like Quickbooks Pro (a MUST if you are in business for yourself), and until just recently....any kind of real data modelling tool you could use like ERwin. That however, has changed...oracle has a nice one out now that is java, and looks VERY nice so far, and is free. Oracle Data Modeller ...but, that is a very recent one.

I think more and more, as VM's become easy to install/integrate/use for Joe User...then this will all disappear. If he can use any app he wants and it seems seamless to him, then the OS truly has become commodity. Which isn't necessarily a bad thing IMHO.

HP and Oracle came out with the Exadata storage server. That's not a "high-end database machine".

No, but this is.

Glassfish - This will become the reference implementation for J2EE and Oracle will kill (as best they can) development on large scalability features out of it.

Just a nitpick, but Glassfish already IS the reference implementation of J2EE.

Having said that, I don't disagree that Oracle will stop adding features to it to encourage the use of WebLogic or Application Server.

Sounds like what a typical politician or an administrator would say.

Nonetheless, here are "Oracle's Technical Contributions to Linux" [contributions sounds so much better than develop]

http://www.oracle.com/technologies/linux/linux-tech-leadership-contributions.html

and a link to Oracle's "Free and Open Source Software" http://oss.oracle.com/

looks extensive

Sounds like what a typical politician or an administrator would say.

Nonetheless, here are "Oracle's Technical Contributions to Linux" [contributions sounds so much better than develop]

http://www.oracle.com/technologies/linux/linux-tech-leadership-contributions.html

and a link to Oracle's "Free and Open Source Software" http://oss.oracle.com/

looks extensive

And also consider that Oracle also has the Sleepycat Berkeley DB engine, which you really have to know where to find to get.

Hidden prominently on the main database page (http://www.oracle.com/database), is a link to Berkeley DB, as well as why it might be the right tool for the job.

And also consider that Oracle also has the Sleepycat Berkeley DB engine, which you really have to know where to find to get.

Hidden prominently on the main database page (http://www.oracle.com/database), is a link to Berkeley DB, as well as why it might be the right tool for the job.

Now, with the Sun purchase, I have to wonder whether they'll drop UL in favour of pushing Solaris & OpenSolaris

I'm not sure where you are seeing T2 performing poorly against Power?

http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/archives/3962-UltraSPARC-T2-vs.-Power6-today-Siebel-CRM.html

Do you have a reference? Here is oracle's report: http://www.oracle.com/apps_benchmark/doc/Sun_Siebel8_10000_PSPP_On_Solaris.pdf

Every article I can find shows that T2's are clearly ahead in terms of price vs performance.

This information for chronic trollers and all interested parties at Slashdot. So before you talk about what you do not know, here's a link:

To which product(s) are you referring?

all the other ones. All the application servers, Peoplesoft, Siebel (ugh)

To which product(s) are you referring?

all the other ones. All the application servers, Peoplesoft, Siebel (ugh)

To which product(s) are you referring?

all the other ones. All the application servers, Peoplesoft, Siebel (ugh)

I'm listening to the conference call now.

Conference call can be accessed from here: http://www.oracle.com/sun/index.html Login required for web access, or call +1.719.884.8882 and use passcode 923645

They've already got a starter database "Oracle Database 10g Express" or Oracle Database XE and it is similar to MSDE or SQL 2005 Express.

http://www.oracle.com/technology/products/database/xe/index.html

was my reaction when I read the title. Oracle is a closed-source company, Sun has a lot of open-source projects. They will probably go EOL.

By the way, the article link doesn't open. It sais "Content Server Error". They are probably melting right now.

It will just join berkley DB in the "its still around if you want it" class.