Slashdot Mirror
U.S. Attempts to Block Oracle Bid for PeopleSoft
AliasF97 writes "Thought you all might be interested in this story about the U.S. government attempting to block Oracle's bid for PeopleSoft via a civil anti-trust lawsuit. Seems to me that the courts are going to have their work cut out for them on this one. Also, the photo of Ellison is kind of comical. If you were to throw a black cape and a tall hat on him, he could be a circus magician."
Can't they concentrate on microsoft instead? :P
"said the combination of Oracle and PeopleSoft would hurt competition in the market for software sold to large businesses."
So they would hurt large businesses... right and I am buying that microsoft not offering patches helps businesses.
30% Troll, 50% Underrated, 10% Interesting
Score:5, Troll
His picture makes him look like "the rock". The caption under the picture should say something like "can you smell what I'm cookin".....
Why isn't the /. crowd upset about this madman?
*boggle*
If you were to throw a black cape and a tall hat on him, he could be a circus magician. Now, if you but a black cape and stovepipe hat on him, he'd look exactly like Snidely Whiplash
"Freedom means freedom for everybody" -- Dick Cheney
Where's the proof? I think before the feds stomp in to throw their weight around in the business arena, they better have a damn good reason they're spending my tax dollars to mess with the free market. And they'd better be prepared to prove it.
but what does that all add up too??
ORacle + PeopleSoft - US = Good????
30% Troll, 50% Underrated, 10% Interesting
Score:5, Troll
Since the threat of takeover looms until the case is resolved, or they drop their takeover bid, Oracle gets 'vaporware' benefits from having it out there, since long-term support for Peoplesoft products is threatened by the takeover, making potential customers wary of making a decision to buy now.
Also, the photo of Ellison is kind of comical. If you were to throw a black cape and a tall hat on him, he could be a circus magician.
A circus magician...with a net worth of about $15 billion.
This space intentionally left blank.
Hey Bill,
Hadn't you better be working on XP reloaded instead of posting on slashdot? You don't want us customers to think your screwing us with your licensing scheme, do you? For a lack of a OS update?
So come on. Get on the ball. Enough with slashdot. Back to work
Your's Truly,
WankersRevenge
Bill, is that you? Shouldn't you be busy running Microsoft, instead of trolling Slashdot?
Maybe Larry doesn't contribute enough towards ... uh .. certain funding. Then again, maybe PeopleSoft has connections.
After the spying on the UN scandals in the news this morning my head is swimming.
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
I'm glad to see this! The Justice Department decision may have come after a big campaign from PeopleSoft, but that doesn't mean that blocking it is a bad thing for consumers. Working on Oracle Applications is like working in a gold mine: you've got to sift through 20 tons of mud to get 6 ounces of gold. Oracle needs healthy competition, and it could become a monopoly. I'd hate to see it become the the Microsoft of the ERP market.
I seriously someone mods this up. It's something all slashdotters need to read before they start their irate seething that perhaps Henry Ford, A&P Grocers, and even Oracle and PeopleSoft got where they are because they satisfied customers better than their competetitors.
Corporations: your universal scapegoat for all society's ills.
Orcl - 13.27 down .01 .35
PSFt - 21.78 down
I'm going to make a prediction that because of this the news, Psft's prices are going to go up and Orcl will go down.
PeopleSoft has been fighting this tooth and nail. They actually seem like they want the keep the company. As opposed to just wanting to cash out and saying screw the people.
From this prespective, it seems like a Corporation is stucking UP to the Big Guy, instead of sticking it TO the little guy.
I have to completely agree here. Microsoft is encroaching more and more on antitrust, and the US courts do nothing to stop them.
Oracle isn't anywhere near monopoly, although they are a very strong database vendor, with probably one of the best supported database systems written, but they are competed against by everyone from Microsoft (which, btw is integrating their database engine into the OS), to us open source developers... The US Courts really need to pick their priorities better..
"Victory means exit strategy, and it's important for the President to explain to us what the exit strategy is." G.W.Bush
Ellison == Hans Gruber
Ellison has always creeped me out. And not in a good way. Kinda like Gates does.
The ratio of people to cake is too big
This shouldnt happen, but for different reasons (other then I'm working with PSoft at my uni, but anyway).
Ellison and his company bungled this one big time. They badmouthed the company, and on Larry King Live, Oracle openly stated that they would kill off the PS product line after the take over (besides the kill clause in their constitution which they didnt research, it was just a bad PR move). With Sparky being the job runner in earlier PeopleSoft releases, Conway made an interesting analogy that they were going to shoot his dog, and I can remember at the 2003 Peoplesoft Conference in the fall that Conway walked out on stage with his dog (both wearing a bullet proof vest), and proclaimed that he would not let his dog be shot and the crowd went wild.
This deal was just destined not to happen after Oracle's management bungled it. Read over at itmanagersjournal for an interesting history lesson at why they bungled it.
-- Page
We don't need an "overrated" so much as we need a "you completely missed the parent's point, dumbass..."
...and I'll say it again. Ellison looks exactly like what you'd expect Satan to look like. All he needs is to add some horns.
Sometimes it's best to just let stupid people be stupid.
Does your example extend to the RIAA? Are they satisfying their customers better than the competition? It's one thing to say that anti-trust laws are solving a problem that doesn't yet exist, but that doesn't explain away price-fixing of CDs.
Auto-reply to ACs: "Truly, you have a dizzying intellect."
Also, the photo of Ellison is kind of comical. If you were to throw a black cape and a tall hat on him, he could be a circus magician.
After recent court action regarding a distro from France, would it be legal for us to say he might be compared to M@ndr@ke the Magician in appearance?
They are defended by their laws that they have lobbied, such as the DMCA. Free markets do not really have true monopolies except 'natural' ones. The RIAA does not play by these rules.
So how many of you read the article just to see Ellison's photo?
I'll be honest. I did.
Your ideas are intriguing to me and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.
The government uses a lot of PeopleSoft. The Oracle/PeopleSoft merger would hurt them.
BTW There's no such thing as the "free market".
I work for a major university in California. We're currently implenting Peoplesoft's Student Administration product. (Which is a giant piece of crap BTW, but it's better than other products out there. I wish we had developed our own solution.) If Oracle buys out Peoplesoft, we would have to spend millions to get a new product. (We don't believe Larry when he says that Oracle will continue to support Peoplesoft's products.) If you consider that this software is used by a large number of schools in the US, you can figure out that this will be a HUGE expense (Hundreds of millions of dollars) for all these schools to switch to some new product in a few years. Who will pay this cost? You will. Either in school bonds or higher student fees. Larry ain't gonna pay for it. He's got to pay for his jet fuel.
"You know Myra, some people might think you're cute. But me, I think you're one very large baked potato."
If you were to throw a black cape and a tall hat on him, he could be a circus magician.
No no no. If he was a circus magician, then Oracle's products would be affordable.
He's clearly a Vegas Magician. Same act, but the ticket costs $120 instead of $6.
"Can of worms? The can is open... the worms are everywhere."
Off topic?!
I hope the accidental irony (correct usage? I forget) of your blanket statement isn't lost on you.
Auto-reply to ACs: "Truly, you have a dizzying intellect."
I would have to disagree. Just look at the mess that was going on in the railroad/steel industry before the trust laws were in force. If you think Billy G. is bad you should read up on J.P. Morgan. I'm usually one that is all for government staying out of private enterprise, but I would hate to imagine what kind of world we would be living in without Roosevelt and his trust-busting at the turn of the century.
No kidding... Interesting the moderation on this one. Even the main post was discussing Larry after all.
All well... funny stuff
He always looks comical to me. Like some kind of CEO-bot from the year 4000. I keep expecting his face shield to spring off to reveal metal and LEDs and servomotors. Either that or he gets a scratch on his cheek which reveals that his facial hair is actually painted on.
"A great democracy must be progressive or it will soon cease to be a great democracy." --Theodore Roosevelt
This has been bugging me for a while now, and all the articles and things I've read seem to think it's a given.
WTF does peoplesoft do? Software vendor? What software?
Mod me down with all of your hatred and your journey towards the dark side will be complete!
...who is also widely considered to be a complete nutcase and space-shot, with little credibility. He may be worth $15B, but who gets more press? He's widely ignored, because many concepts he's tried to champion have not just failed, they've imploded before they even left the launch pad. The whole thin-client netpc is a great example.
He's just too goddamned impressed with himself, and the picture is a perfect example of that attitude, and I'm sure it was selected(or provided) for that reason. The comparison to The Rock was perfect. Like Trump, Gates, Jobs, Fiorina- any time the focus shifts from someone's talents and qualifications to their personality, you've got yourselves a genuine cult figure and some serious problems. Things are all happy-shiny while the money's pouring in...but when the -water- starts leaking in, everyone's too busy looking at how great Master is to bail, and often even when the water's up to their necks they don't realize it's really time to mutiny, or jump ship altogether. One man or woman does not make an organization, and many a corporation has discovered the dangers of simply rubber-stamping and worshipping a central figure. Boards, VP's, etc all exist exactly to prevent this sort of thing.
Frankly, what amazes me the most is that there isn't a massive explosion when he and Steve Jobs are in the same room at Apple board meetings- Steve's Reality Distortion Field meets the Ellison Ego Field.
Lastly, never confuse wealth with success. Some of the world's richest people are miserable failures as human beings. I could name a dozen people I respect far more than Ellison, or any executive officer of any corporation.
Please help metamoderate.
There's something to that but pretty much everyone probably agress that some government interference in business is pretty much required to keep things in "balance" - whatever that is.
On the other hand, the underdog corporation is always the our favorite poster child for "The American Way/Dream/etc". Unless said corporation actually manages to follow through on their business plan and make it to the top. Then suddenly they become our new evil overlords and everything they do (even though they've been doing it for years) is anti-competitive.
In simplest terms, "nobody likes a winner".
Be happy. Nothing else matters.
"...that perhaps Henry Ford, A&P Grocers, and even Oracle and PeopleSoft got where they are because they satisfied customers better than their competetitors."
A problem the sex industry doesn't have.
Looks like someone forgot to grease the palms of big brother with a couple of stock certificates, egold, paypal payments, payola. Silly Ellison, when will you learn to follow others' lead to get what you want.
MoFscker
Take an elementary economics course, please.
Satisfying your customers better than your competitors in the past does not mean you will do it in the future. Only competition does that. They need a choice.
Companies has the right to compete on the product or service they sell. This makes for better products and services, with more value for the customers. When they stop competing on the value of the product then there is a problem. That problem is what antitrust laws are meant to address.
A big enough company can elumiate opposition that produces a product with a better value. They do this by making sure that product cannot be sold, through one means or another.
This has happened in the past. That is why the antitrust laws were written, to prevent what had happened from happening again.
As for the Post Office (bad example: it is not a monopoly,) If there is a product or service best served by a monopoly (and there are some) then it is the government's job to fill that role. Because then and only then is the monopoly producer accountable to the people.
'Sensible' is a curse word.
Sure tit-for-tat isn't justified, but you didn't really give me much to go on.
I'm still waiting for a reply.
Corporations: your universal scapegoat for all society's ills.
Dude, in case no one told you, Larry Ellison is the devil . Ask anyone who works there ;-)
"Also, the photo of Ellison is kind of comical. If you were to throw a black cape and a tall hat on him, he could be a circus magician."
Can you SMELL what Larry Ellison is COOKIN*' ?!!
*single eyebrow shoots up
I, for one, welcome our new Linux Dog Overlords.
Actually he kinda looks like Hank Scorpion, err Scorpio.
I'm a PeopleSoft employee, and am glad I can stop practicing my burger flipping skills.
Vonal Declosion
so now all thats gonna be left is oracle, mssql, postgresql, and mysql
somtings odd about this
Since when do companies ever stop competing? You may have a case with oligopolies and collusion, but these are extremly rare.
And how do companies 'elumiate' the opposition? Usually it's by providing a cheaper good (Wal-mart) or a better good. If they do it through legislation then that is wrong and the law should be revoked.
The Post office IS a monopoly. No one is allowed to send mail under $0.50 to post boxes. Not because they won't be able to compete, but because the government says so. Just because it's not a necessarily 'evil' monopoly, its ineffeciencies justify its liquidation.
Corporations: your universal scapegoat for all society's ills.
The government's role is to protect property rights and fraud. But you are right. Every always excuses the Big Dogs of doing something 'evil', rather than providing a much needed good to their consumers, which is largely the case.
Corporations: your universal scapegoat for all society's ills.
Oracle has made it clear their plan is to take Peoplesoft apart and get access to their customer base for Oracle software, phasing out Peoplesoft entirely. They basically want to buy Peoplesoft to eliminate a competitor, leaving the market to Oracle and SAS (the European gorilla in the field). This is not good for Peoplesoft or Peoplesoft customers (and there are a *lot* of them out there) or the market in general. This is only good for Oracle (duh). Many hear complain about Microsoft -- well, do you want another Microsoft in the tech field? Larry Ellison does. The US Government does not. By the way, the Peoplesoft stock price going down instead of jumping to 26 (the Oracle bid) says what the market thinks about the takeover happening.
Professor of Astronomy, Author of Spider Star & Star Dragon (Tor)
Be honest. You did.
Oh, god, here we go again.
Yup! The same government that created one of the most famous of all monopolies and enforces it by preventing competition. Not a very useful law.
That makes no sense. The postal service is a government function. That's why congress was given the sole authority to create a postal service in the Constitution. Don't see people raising their own for-profit armies in the US, do you?
You're not laughing.
Yes I am. You amuse me.
If it weren't so common for government schemes to backfire completely, you'd probably think this was funny too.
That's why no government program ever works, and why we live in a squalid, impoverished anarchy.
It gets better. The antitrust laws are used against companies that practice "anticompetitive practices." What counts as "anticompetitive?" Anything aimed at doing better than your competition.
No, by that twisted logic every industry leader in every field would be the target of a federal suit.
Well, here's my last and favorite part. Even assuming that the government is right about everything (I know it's hard...just pretend), the laws are still worthless. The government assumes that if a single company becomes the sole producer in a market, they might jack up the price of their product, hurting the little guy
The laws weren't created in a vacuum--they were enacted BECAUSE of how monopolies were treating consumers.
Now, the main reason Objectivists dislike these laws is because they're a blatant initiation of force.
Objectivists don't like these laws because they're humorless, incredibly naive little people.
If a single producer jacking up his price is really the problem they're trying to solve, and given that they don't care about property rights in the slightest, why not wait until a single producer actually does do that? That's right. If they're going to trample rights, why not just wait until the "bad" thing has actually happened? By their own standards, the antitrust laws are useless.
Because prevention is better than a cure. Corporations aren't people. They shouldn't get the same rights.
OMFG!!!!!
~Turd
Megahal? Is that you?
Tsunami -- You can't bring a good wave down!
Oracle's database product not withstanding, neither product is worth worrying about.
While they do have a large amount of market and $$, both products are dismal.
They are overbloated, expensive, and hard to manage. After seeing implementations from both prodcuts.. I would prefer SAP or something...
How either of them have survived, is beyond me.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
Only since the advent of antitrust laws, which make them illegal.
'Sensible' is a curse word.
By buying the competitor?.. If a company which grew to have 40% market share by honestly offering better product/service/value wants to buy a competitor with 30% market share, it threatens to become the monopoly, which will no longer need to put as much effort on honestly better product/service/value.
The law does not give the government an authority to break an existing monopoly, that grew by itself, but it seems sensible for the government to try to block mergers, that would lead to such a monopoly. Of course, the original poster is right about most of the things, a government does, getting done poorly...
Yes. Another monopoly protected by numerous laws is a trade union. If workers are selling their labor, their attempts at price-fixing should certainly be prosecuted by trust-busters... The deals many unions have with customers (employers) about only hiring union members are no better than the contracts Microsoft wrestles from its customers (PC manufacturers) -- about using any other vendor's OS or other software.
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
The Post office IS a monopoly. No one is allowed to send mail under $0.50 to post boxes. Not because they won't be able to compete, but because the government says so. Just because it's not a necessarily 'evil' monopoly, its ineffeciencies justify its liquidation.
The USPS owns those mailboxes. Other companies are more than welcome to convince people to install separate boxes for the competitive service if they want to. Newspapers do this in some places, and Mailboxes Etc. (now "The UPS Store") has its own PO box substitutes in its stores. The problem is convincing enough people to set up their own boxes, hire enough non-USPS mailmen to get all the mail sorted and delivered, and keep it cheaper than the USPS can do it at. There's no laws saying you can't do this, as far as I know. But undercutting the USPS just isn't feasible. The underlying infrastructure of the US Post Office is too big and efficient to compete with. That's why you don't see competitors to the USPS. FedEx and UPS sort of compete, but they're smart enough to realize that you can't do it too well with everyday mail.
there's other ways to send packages/parcels than the post office.
it makes for a bad example anyways, better examples would be copper/oil/coal whatever trusts there were, THAT WERE BAD, THAT MANIPULATED THE MARKET, THAT SAID A BIG 'FUCK YOU' TO THE CUSTOMER.
when you get enough market share then you can prevent smaller players from entering the market by being sleazy, by making it impossible for people to use that competing producers product. like in case of a pc manufacturer that in practice HAS to sell your mainstream operating system TODAY to survice, you make it impossible for them to start selling the competitors product at all, making sure that the competitors product won't be a threat to you TOMORROW(because the pc manufacturer would go belly up if it started selling only the competing product today).
you can replace the pc manufacturer with telecom or car parts dealer and the product with just about anything as well.
the laws have their purpose.. us adminstration doesn't seem too intrested in enforcing them though... you know the laws are by people and are 'supposed' to provide people with good services, not corporations, however fantasy like that might sound.
if you want ultra capitalism(that is, practically no safekeeping), please come over and move to our eastern neighbour: russia.
world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
So a company with 70% market share would no longer need to worry as much about the rabble with 30% market share? I can agree to an extent. Their current products and services will suffice for the time being. But as soon as they stop innovating, what's to stop that 30% from rapidly gaining strength?
I'm not a fan of unions either. However I see no issues with the OEM deals, in which I could write a book about and will leave out of this discussion.
Corporations: your universal scapegoat for all society's ills.
Oh! yeah, you mean that postgres clone... shure!... who cares anyhow?
NO SIG
The way I see it, at least one good thing could come out of this. If Oracle and Peoplesoft merge, you can save money on certifications. Just think, they could all merge together into Micro-People-Orcl-soft and then maybe there'd be just ONE BIG TEST. And we could all run Linux instead.
Just my $0.55 (US inflation, 1774-2008, for $0.02)
Played the part of Hank Scorpio
I totally agree, we should let business operate unhindered by stupid government laws and regulations and other red tape. In fact we should get rid of the government. Private enterprise could do a much better job. The country would be much better off if the Mafia or the Hell's Angels ran things.
Seriously though, the makers of a documentary called "The Corporation" make a pretty good arguement that corporations are psychopathic. Not amoral (like a rock). Psychopathic (like Ted Bundy). I feel the need of some protection from them just as I feel the need of protection from the worst excesses of the government. That's why we have a democracy.
F-----g idiots can't even deliver to the correct address half the time.
Its gay pornography!
....!
I am at work in a public computer lab ASSHOLE!
Lucky I do not know where you live. If I get fired
http://saveie6.com/
Please, some people are at work (or just plain don't want to see that) so at least warn people when you post a link like that. Don't mean to come across as a jerk, but it is sensitive material you're passing along (pun intended... but only after I thought about it.)
I work for a company that is in the throws of implementing PeopleSoft. When I first heard of the takeover bid from Oracle I was unhappy. (We would finish the implementation of PeopleSoft only to have to do it again with Oracle.) Now that I know PeopleSoft a little better, I no longer care. As far as I am concerned, PeopleSoft will milk the market for all its worth and provide as little in return as possible. In terms of business practices, predatary pricing is the rule at both Oracle and PeopleSoft. Both companies are basically thieves. Once you're locked in with one of these vendors you will pay ... and pay... and pay.
The courts have a public perception problem with the indecisive nature on the MS anti-trust issue; they have deemed MS a monopoly but have no proper reparations in response. There is partial resigning that it is much easier to limit the creation of a monopoly through merger/acquisition blocking. MS was an already established monopoly when antitrust actions were late in being initiated. chris
Mods (I had mod status, but I already posted a comment on this board), please mod parent down. It's adult content, with no humor or warning. Parent is trolling, not being funny. And, more seriously, like others have stated - people read slashdot at work, and can get in serious trouble for that content.
--
http://nemilar.net - Not your grandmother's soup kitchen
I used to be good friends with Larry at one time, and I can tell you as a matter of fact that he was a circus magician in his early twenties. He then went off to do this technology thing leaving me alone to clean up the monkey dung.
Maybe work with Siegfried and Roy.
Isn't this the same guys that wanted to put a chip in everyones hand or something?
That's why no government program ever works, and why we live in a squalid, impoverished anarchy.
One thing I have to argue, here. Most government programs really are failures. Social Security, for example, is a total disaster (I don't even include it in my retirement plans). The patent office is a joke. John Ashcroft is a joke. Many defense projects are simply to funnel money to favored districts. The war on drugs is the worst thing since Prohibition. So-called free trade is not equitable. The IRS is the most politically abused organization on the planet. Subsidies and minimum wages only screw up inflation and allow people to live in denial. Schools are underfunded. Roads go unrepaird. The postal service is sort of a diamond in the rough, comparatively.
Corporations aren't people. They shouldn't get the same rights.
Agreed, however if corporate welfare ends, all the other political warm and fuzzy welfare programs should end, too. There is no justice in a world of stealing from one person to give it to another.
Vote in November. You won't regret it.
I fail to understand why the government has to butt into a private acquisition.If it was a govt firm being overshadowed or intimidated into selling out , it would have made sense.
If a company can afford to buy out another company there seems to be no logical reasoning for the govt to step into the matter.This means that with anti trust laws the govt can curb the growth of any company be it MS or Oracle or any power hungry firm which beats the whole idea of freedom of uhmm..whatever.
Besides Oracle does have the right to buy out anyone as long as they offer the right amount of $$!
Lord of the Binges.
..but I did LATFP
So moving pieces of paper around between addresses can't possibly be done by anything else then the government?
Sure they can. The problem is the nature of the logistics. Two companies purchasing large airplane and truck fleets will always find it cheaper to just buy the other company. Then you have one company, charging whatever it feels like. And you don't want that, because then there is no choice in the market. The government-run monopoly is to ensure that this position doesn't occur, by legislating the natural end-result.
Postal service is a "natural monopoly." Other services of this sort include powerline transmission, power generation, and last-mile phone cabling. We've seen what deregulation in power markets have done in states like California and Ohio.
Doing the Right Thing should not be preempted by making a buck.
Why did the US approve of Microsoft acquiring Connectix? Must be that Oracle isn't as big as Microsoft, so they have to play by the rules.
Actually, Larry Ellison reminded me of a dark demon after some little monk kid.
That, or some James Bond villain, named "Zodiac" or something (credit to Jack at As the Apple Turns for that one).
Vos teneo officium eram periculosus ut vos recipero is.
I have to say this is great news. I'm a long time employee, and I have skills that could take me to many companies, but I choose this one for many reasons.
/. praises when they hammer away at Microsoft for monopolizing the market... why would anyone here not support them on the same grounds for moving against Oracle?
Oracle started this bid and has continued it as a way of disrupting business, creating FUD, and trying to change PeopleSoft's market perception. I've worked with both products and I can tell you that there are very few who would claim Oracle's product, support or business tactics are better than PeopleSoft's. That's not saying that any ERP product doesn't have it's pitfalls, but our customers are some of the most loyal and it's not without good reason.
I'm all for the free market, but the proposed takeover would undoubtedly crush innovation and increase prices. It faces many regulatory hurdles, from a DOJ lawsuit, to a potential EU lawsuit on the same grounds and a States Attorneys General lawsuit should it go forward. These people are the same ones
I'm of the belief that anyone who wants this to go through is either paid by Oracle, has strong ties to Oracle, or is a short term investor. Larry has a magical way of using the "system" to his advantage and he has only done this to cause market confusion, disrupt PeopleSoft's business and drive up his sagging market share.
I'm of the belief he NEVER wanted to buy PeopleSoft. If Oracle truly wanted us, why not do it 2+ years prior when we were against the ropes? He would have gotten us on the cheap and had a nice chunk of customers. No, if he really wanted to buy PSoft, he would have never badmouthed the product, claim he was dropping support or any of the other shenanigans he's pulled. He's scared of the combined force of JDEdwards and PeopleSoft and the customer's he's been losing to us for years.
By the way, many PeopleSoft employees are ex-Oracle ones and every single one of them I know has said they will never work for Oracle again. Even current Oracle employees apologize for their boss... what does that tell you?
In the end, I have a feeling this will bite him on the ass.
Knowledge is of two kinds. We know a subject ourselves, or we know where we can find information upon it. -Samuel Johns
Snidley Whiplash!
myke
Mimetics Inc. Twitter
"Oracle should set its sights on BEA "
THey already have. Our oracle salesman said 6 months ago they would be going after BEA when the peoplesoft stuff is done.
My university uses Peoplesoft as a vendor; we use them for class scheduling and managing class documents and communication. But they output some of the shoddiest HTML I've seen in a long time. It's a strange mix of HTML and CSS, and obviously hasn't been tested except on one browser. It's been published in our school's most-distributed newspaper: Use IE to avoid problems.
Our school's course management system is one of the more infuriating sites around. For instance, hitting enter in a form doesn't submit the form. Rather, it reloads the page. And blanks all of your entries. And you can't stop the reload.
I have a serious problem with Peoplesoft's products.
</rant>
I don't know or understand all of the stakes involved in the acquisition or lawsuit, but I have this to say: I can only hope that Peoplesoft cleans up its act (read: HTML output). I don't like having to use other people's computers when Firefox doesn't know how to deal the poor output.
I think he (Ellison) looks like Dr. Terminus from Pete's Dragon. (Or would with the aforementioned hat and cape.)
Oh wait! I know! The Rock has grown some hair in and a beard and gone corporate! Do you smell what (stock deal) the Rock is cookin!?
Here in europe with not-so-recently privatized post companies, I would rather happy to send mail at .50EUR!
I didn't realize BEA was a player in the applications market. I thought they sold tools and infrastructure, not ERP applications. (Newegg might use BEA to run their web server, but wouldn't go to BEA for, say, warehouse and order management software.)
Regarding why the DoJ didn't have a problem with PeopleSoft buying JD Edwards, perhaps its because that merger was arguably beneficial to the customers. PeopleSoft is weakest in areas like hard core distribution and direct sales (like what newegg does), and that's where JD Edwards really shines. JD Edwards, on the other hand, is weaker in some areas where PeopleSoft is stronger, such as with their technology infrastructure (PeopleSoft is all web based) and their HR package.
Another aspect of this is that maybe the DoJ could see this was perhaps Justice was legitimately conviced that this deal was bad for competition. More information available here, and here (Is Oracle the New Neighborhood Bully).
I worked for Oracle for three years, before they sold the division I work for.
.
Larry owns my new company too, but whatever . .
Ellison's parking space was right outside of the 500 building entrance. I saw him wandering around the parking lot, cell phone clamped to his ear, a few times. The space wasn't specially marked, just one of a bunch of reserved spaces.
Once, during a staff meeting, the boss mentioned that the division managers were trying to come up with text for a sign for Larry's spot, because people who didn't know better would park there.
The favorite suggestion:
EXIT INTERVIEW PARKING
he needs mod points or a noose, cant decide...
Unlike M$, Oracle is about the best database out there. It has some seriously cool tech.
The bigger issue though, is that what Oracle does doesn't really affect us personally in any way. I mean, how many of us are running $10,000+ ERP software on are home desktops. If we use that stuff at all, it's only for work and if it is somewhat annoying, who cares?
Microsoft's largess actually affects our lives, some of us run Windows, or have seen OSs, software and companies we like crushed by them and their mediocrity.
How many of us have a personal love of peoplesoft?
autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
He is... Tuxedo Mask!
If none of the remaining 30% has above 5% (or even if they do), they can also be aquired by the monopoly. Or, the monopoly may choose to price the product/service below the cost and wait for the competition to go under. Or whatever.
Think about it as, say, a rocking chair. As long as it is rocked within a certain range, it is safe and will come back to the right position. But tilting it too far will flip it over. Likewise, a market for a particular service/product may lose stability when one participant becomes too big. The (inherently stupid and inefficient) government is the only force available, that can prevent the chair from falling or lift it up once it falls.
One can argue, that it is better to let some chairs fall once in a while, than to constantly impede the rocking of all chairs by the threat of government interference. I'm not sure, what I prefer, to be honest. But it is, certainly, not as simple, as the anonymous starter of this thread puts it.
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
That one of the main reasons anti-trust laws came to be was that corporations became so powerful that they could threaten the US government. Standard Oil could rase and lower oil proces at will, all across the US and they used that power to get concessions out of the government.
autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
If a company decides that they will indeed operate at a loss to drive a company out of business, and let's say they are powerful enough to do this, and let's say that they actually have the financial resources to continually have negative earnings, and let's say all their shareholders don't jump ship and are some how clued into this scheme; could this drive a company out of business? Certainly. Is there one example of this happening? Not that I know of. If you know one I would love to hear it. More often then not a company drives another out of business not by operating at below cost, but by operating very close to cost. This is what Wal-mart does, and they do it very well.
But let's say this does occur and now there is only one firm left in this particular industry. And let's say they increase their prices. All the previous resources of the previous bankrupt company don't vanish, and all the knowledge of thier personnel don't vanish either. Once huge profits are made by the 'monopolizing' company another company can quite easily buy up the now discounted assets of the bankrupt company. Now the 'monopolizing' company has to cut costs again.
Of course this is all theoretical. I would have a source but no company has ever gotten past step two: Jacking up the price once there are no more competetitors.
Corporations: your universal scapegoat for all society's ills.
It all has to do with campaign contributions. Ellison is a well known donor to democrats so he must be punished by Ashcroft. Just like Martha Stewart. Martha stewart is on trial because she prevented a 60 thousand dollar loss. Ken Lay and Bernie Ebbers were never even tried for ripping of tens of billions of dollars from people. Bernie Ebbers alone accounted for nine billion dollars of fraud by worldcom.
Guess who those two contributed most money to?
The best way to support the US war effort is to continue buying American products.
Don't think these companies are making unconscienable profits though. Just because the price of a US stamp is $0.50 doesn't mean it costs $0.50 to send it. They take tax payer money to make up for their inefficient price schemes.
Corporations: your universal scapegoat for all society's ills.
1st point: Capitalism can't work with corrupt governments. And Russia is amoung the worst. it has done very well with the states, and privatizing indsutry in China has done wonders for their economy. Of course it's fallible, but it's far better than the alternatives.
The OEM argument has been presented to me numerous times, and it simply doesn't hold water. I'll explain:
From what I know, computer vendors get a 70% discount on MS products if they solely ship MS products. That's a good deal. But is it 'unfair'? Once again let's take a look:
Let's say you are the manager at Dell. You can choose to only ship cpus with XP at $100 per head, or ship different computers, but any cpus that have XP will cost $300. Which do you choose? This is a trade-off with obvious pros and cons. For most managers, they stick with Microsoft. Why? Because it makes no sense to ship other operating systems that very few people want when it causes your best product to go up $200.
Now, why doesn't anyone want other operating systems? Let's look at the competetion for IBM machines: Linux and BSD, really. And who does Dell commonly ship too? Certainly not geeks, their borderline insulting advertisements show this. So all the non-geeks, also known as 99% of the population, want an operating system that is nice and user-friendly. And what falls into this category? Windows XP.
So as a manager at Dell, you COULD tell MS to take their deal and shove it, and only have Linux boxes. But you would hardly sell a single computer. Why? Because you neglected 99% of the market.
Until Linux stops catering to geeks, and starts catering to average Joes, MS will continue to dominate. Couldn't vendors solely offer Linux, which doesn't cost them a dime? It's a better O/S right? Then why don't people want it? Either because they don't know about it, they don't know enough about it, or no one has given them reason enough to switch: most are happy with XP; the poor fools.
Corporations: your universal scapegoat for all society's ills.
No, by that twisted logic every industry leader in every field would be the target of a federal suit.
Learn some history. This is precisely the argument the US Government used in an antitrust suit against Alcoa, that Alcoa was guilty of anticompetitive activities because they did their business too well.
Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
- MS is allowed off the monopoly charge.
- The Feds are trying to get EU and other countries to drop monopoly charges against MS.
- the dish/direct merger was blocked, even though, they were willing to be controlled in locations that did not have cable alternatives.
- The Feds allow the merger of the top 2 cable companies, which now controls 50% of the market.
Not what you know but who you know and pay off. Charlie Ergin, you have to pay.I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
He's widely ignored, because many concepts he's tried to champion have not just failed, they've imploded before they even left the launch pad. The whole thin-client netpc is a great example.
Bill Gates is villified on Slashdot for quashing innovation under a juggernaut of mediocrity, and now Ellison is demonized for daring to take a few risks with his business.
Let me clue you in: one time, Ellison tried a crazy idea, everyone in the existing database industry thought he was fucking crazy. That crazy idea was called the relational database. Sure IBM did a lot of the groundwork in their labs, but they thought RDBMS was an academic curiousity, nothing more. Ellison put his own cash on the line and took a RISK. Yeah, he's a little smug, but why the hell not, he's earned it. How many industries have you started?
Damn, it's a shame Slashbots are too busy guzzling Cheetos in their parents' basements to run the industry, who knows where we'd be by now?
anyone else thinks ellison looks a look like a certain hank scorpio?
http://www.rayn.net . Funny. Stuff.
Also, the photo of Ellison is kind of comical. If you were to throw a black cape and a tall hat on him, he could be a circus magician.
Funny that - also if you threw a cape and a hat on their database you might have something that was easy to install.
The laws aren't just to prevent total monopolies, but to prevent a company from getting there through unfair practices in the first place, or from using a total monopoly or near-monopoly in one area to take over another. MS surely crossed this line a while ago, and they continue to do so. They own 95% of the desktop OS market. By comparison, Standard Oil held 85% of the oil market at their peak. The issue here isn't if you agree with the anti-trust laws themselves, the issue is that they aren't applied consistently. MS uses their monopoly in that market to gain monopolies in the markets of browsers, word processing, media players... the list goes on. This would be the equivalent of Ford having 95% of the car market, and all the sudden buying up a tire company, and constructing cars so that it was highly advantageous, or down right impossible, to use any other tire.
how come larry has a fully head of hair and a beard but no eyebrows..?
abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz
If they stayed in business through all this time, it is much easier for them to cut the cost again temporarily, than for the competitor to appear out of the ashes of the past bancrupcies. And -- you are right -- they can simply sell closer to their the cost for a while, because the newcomer's costs will almost always be higher. It takes a newcomer a lot more guts and ingenuity to fight off the incumbent. Ideally, we'd like companies (and people) to continue showing such qualities forever, by preventing any of them from becoming the "king of the hill" for too long. It is just that there is no easy and efficient prevention mechanism in existence...
What about Standard Oil? I thought, they were accused/found guilty of doing just that, no?
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
I know this isn't Fark . . .
I guess it isn't common knowledge that he used to be known as The Amazing Larry.
-Peter
You'll find the government's complaint here. They weren't being punished for their success UNTIL they tried to merge. Find me a company which has had an anti-trust suit just because they had a high market share.
I find it funny how slashdotters are so concerned for the poor little companies, defenseless against the big mean government. The government's protecting you as a consumer in these cases, though you don't seem to understand it.
He's also very entertaining to listen to... At openworld I always look forward to his keynote.. It usually has a mix of comedy and bashing other vendors (mostly MS but a few jabs at IBM).
Another thing I like about Oracle is that they are pushing Linux in the Business world. If it wasn't for them there would be no way I could get linux in at my company. Having one point of contact for my linux and oracle issues is pricesless and makes linux easier to sell to management.
"Thanks to the remote control I have the attention span of a gerbil."
We are speaking of the CRM/ERP/etc application product of Oracle absorbing the related product of peoplesoft.. NOT their database server product. ( which peoplesoft doesnt have anyway, they are actually the biggest Oracle database customers out there. )
Both companies' application suites suck, not oracle's database product..
that is why I specifically, and clearly, excluded that in my first post..
---- Booth was a patriot ----
Social Security, for example, is a total disaster (I don't even include it in my retirement plans).
Social security works. If you paid into it your entire life, you get a check every month now. Where's the disaster?
The IRS is the most politically abused organization on the planet.
How so?
Well, the DoD in past couple years, for the DIMHRS project has made MAJOR expenditures on People Soft....this may have something to do with all this...they may be worried about their investment.
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
the DOJ wishes to preserve and maintain competition, but when one of the competitors is about to win, they don't let them?
doesn't the concept of "competition" imply the possibility of victory?
If I could make this sig kill you, I would.
Umm, the post office runs independently - they don't take your tax dollars.
Also first class mail costs 37 cents here, not 50.
I think he would look more like Snidely from the old Dudley Doright cartoon.
Where's the disaster?
It is managed by politicians. It has returns worse than most bank accounts. Sure, I pay into it my whole life (several percent of my income) to get back only a few measly thousand dollars per year. What Social Security really is is a forced bed-mattress savings account for people too uneducated to live within their means.
The tax code is so complex with exclusions, credits, and allowances for all sorts of favored groups of people that it is disgusting. Congress uses the IRS to screw with the economy to get votes in their districts. Quite perverse.
Vote in November. You won't regret it.
What Social Security really is is a forced bed-mattress savings account for people too uneducated to live within their means.
Yep. So what's the problem with that? Ignorance isn't a capital offense, and no, to cut off the typical slashdot reply, it shouldn't be.
You mean that libertarian philosophy created by that third-rate intellectual Ayn Rand? Yea, I read some of her other works and I couldn't understand what was so great about her. "Atlas Shrugged" - she takes one idea and blows it so ridiculously out of proportion as to defy logic and then uses this crappy base to spout her philosophy. Bah.
That's actually a very common misconception. The railroads had to essentially buy their freedom (through bribes) after laws were passed to hurt them. In other words, the politicians wanted to make a buck so they passed antitrust laws to hurt the railroads. The railroads then were basically forced to bribe the government so that they could stay in business! Antitrust laws are basically "fluid", in that instead of a well defined, objective definition an illegal action, these laws are subjective to a court's whim.
It means I'm further taxed for the fact that schools don't teach a lick about personal finance and responsibility. It gives people a false sense of security (oh, the government will take care of me, sure it will). With the government is so far into debt and another recession hits, we'll see just how secure Social Security really is.
Vote in November. You won't regret it.
"If you were to throw a black cape
and a tall hat on him, he could be a circus magician."
You misspelt "Mandrake the Magician."
HTH
-Rich
It was said before and I'll say it again:
Arguing on Slashdot is like participating in the special olympics. It doesn't matter who wins, because in the end, everyone is still a retard.
my (perhaps naive) business mind cannot imagine any reason for SAP to
support oracle's takover other than that oracle and SAP must have
relatively different and well defined markets, and that peoplesoft is in
both of them.
i really don't care if there is a monopoly in the database market, because
[1]just like with windows and associated crapola tools and dev
environments vs. open source, it will make it easier for us (as in people
like you and i) to compete since we are using cheaper, more robust, and
more easily deployable tools [2] i (perhaps naively) am seeing a real
trend in terms of increased corporate scrutiny and mistrust these days,
and this will contrubute to an environment where people will be even more
motivated to apply that attitude and develop better policies. martha
steward is going to jail! so are enron people! somewhat separately, we are
also seeing linux begin to reach critical mass in some markets... and when
the shit hits the fan in the sco case i think linux will get loads of
press, ibm will go to bed with it (it already has to some extent... but i
see it becoming a huge contributer in the coming years), et cetera.