Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

What Might Have Been: Microsoft Almost Bought SAP

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the increasingly-increasingly-misused dept.

steveorama writes "This article from Bloomberg indicates that 'Microsoft Corp, the world's largest software maker, approached late last year about buying the German company, a combination that would have vaulted it to the biggest seller of software for business applications.'" The talks came out in advance of likely disclosure in the ongoing merger battle involving Oracle, PeopleSoft and the U.S. Department of Justice. An anonymous reader points to this article in the Financial Times, adding "Microsoft says the discussions were halted due to the complexity involved in the transaction and in integrating the two companies. A merger with SAP would be a profound break with previous Microsoft strategy, and would likely have raised eyebrows among regulators."

208 comments

  1. Raising eyebrows is right. by jwcorder · · Score: 5, Funny

    I break wind and raise an eyebrow or two...MS buys a dumpster and the eyebrows of the DOJ raise so high they knock their own hats off.

    --
    http://jayceecorder.blogspot.com
    1. Re:Raising eyebrows is right. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      MS buys a dumpster and the eyebrows of the DOJ raise so high they knock their own hats off.

      Yup. Too bad the DOJ doesn't do anything about it though.

  2. I cannot see how that's going to fly by BigFire · · Score: 4, Interesting

    with the German anti-trust law, which are a wee bit more strigent than the US anti-trust law.

    1. Re:I cannot see how that's going to fly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      > German anti-trust law, which are a wee bit more strigent than the US anti-trust law.

      If you violate German anti-trust law, you get a slap on the wrist with a wet strudel.

    2. Re:I cannot see how that's going to fly by jonbryce · · Score: 1

      Why is that? Microsoft's presence in the ERM market is pretty small. They have Microsoft Money, which is very much the other end of the market, Navision and Great Plains which are OK but not that huge.

    3. Re:I cannot see how that's going to fly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      German anti-trust law? LOMAO!
      What is that?
      A wet blanket?
      German anti-trust law is about as effective as the Lithuainian soccer team. Its effectiveness is ZERO!

    4. Re:I cannot see how that's going to fly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful
      Why is that? Microsoft's presence in the ERM market is pretty small.

      Vertical monopolies can be just as bad as horizontal ones. Let Microsoft have both and we may as well add a line to our tax forms for them.

    5. Re:I cannot see how that's going to fly by JonnyCalcutta · · Score: 1

      Not true at all. Microsoft can do whatever they want - except go to another country and break their laws. So Microsoft can buy up all the SAPs they want so long as they don't trade in Europe.

    6. Re:I cannot see how that's going to fly by king-manic · · Score: 3, Funny

      If you violate America anti-trust law, you get a slap on the wrist with a wet noodle.

      --
      "There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy."
    7. Re:I cannot see how that's going to fly by SmilingBoy · · Score: 5, Informative

      German antitrust law would not apply. A MS/SAP merger would be subject to the European merger regulations.

    8. Re:I cannot see how that's going to fly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative
      In general, Americans have more freedom than Germans. This includes anti-trust as well as free speech.

      This is of course completely off topic, but I love this free speech rethoric so much, I have a "spot the difference"-type exercise prepared specifically for those occasions:

      U.S. Constitution, 1st Amendment:

      Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

      German Basic Law, Articles 4, 5, 8, and 17, 1st paragraphs, translated as closely to the original as possible:

      Freedom of belief, conscience, and freedom of religious and philosophical confession are inviolable.
      Everybody has the right to utter and distribute their opinion orally, written, and visually, and to gain information from publically available sources without hindrance. Freedom of the press and freedom of reporting through radio and film are guaranteed. There is no censorship.
      All Germans have the right to assemble peacefully and unarmed without the need for prior announcement or permission.
      Everybody has the right individually or together with others to petition or complain in writing to the appropriate government offices and the representatives.
    9. Re:I cannot see how that's going to fly by a20vertigo · · Score: 5, Funny

      If you violate French anti-trust law, you get a slap on the wrist with a wet poodle!

      --
      No matter where you go, there you are; even before you arrive.
    10. Re:I cannot see how that's going to fly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      If you violate Soviet antitrust law, a wet poodle gets a slap on the wrist from you!

    11. Re:I cannot see how that's going to fly by IAmMaxHarris · · Score: 0
      Let Microsoft have both and we may as well add a line to our tax forms for them.

      This is absolutely false: you have made the terrible mistake of confusing economic and political power.

      Microsoft does not have the ability to force you to use or pay for their products. Since the government has a legal monopoly on the use of force, they can force you to pay taxes.

      I would suggest that you read Rand's Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal for a better understanding of how things should work.

    12. Re:I cannot see how that's going to fly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Microsoft does not have the ability to force you to use or pay for their products. " Not yet. But MS seems to be working on the day that requires you run Windows to use a computer, phone, wristwatch, TV, etc. So, no, if you want to live in a cave and grow your own lentils you will probably be able to avoid paying for their products.

    13. Re:I cannot see how that's going to fly by IAmMaxHarris · · Score: 1

      The example you cite actually illustrates the point I made:

      People who live in a cave and grow their own lentils are not exempt from paying taxes. Such a person would eventually face government men carrying rifles if he didn't pay his taxes. Corporations don't do this.

      I certainly hope that Windows becomes more pervasive. What's the problem with that if everyone that pays for the product is apathetic or explicitly wants it? For those particularly opposed, alternative/marginal products will exist so long as there are enough paying customers to make it profitable to continue. Failing that, you can always "roll your own".

      All of the above situations involve no actual or threatened physical coercion. However, what is likely to be your intended 'solution' is one that does involve force.

      It is immoral support government intervention that would discourage others from buying any particular product or service, including Windows.

    14. Re:I cannot see how that's going to fly by Malfourmed · · Score: 1

      If you violate Italian anti-trust law, you get a slap on the wrist with a wet noodle!

      --
      a world in progress...
    15. Re:I cannot see how that's going to fly by jschrod · · Score: 1
      No, that would be Austrian law.

      And no, Austria is not the country with the kangaroos. It's the country with Apfelstrudel. And Germknödel. And Veltliner. And Welschriesling.

      I think I need a holiday.

      --

      Joachim

      People don't write Manifestos any more -- what's going on in this world? [Frank Zappa]

    16. Re:I cannot see how that's going to fly by aastanna · · Score: 1

      To be fair, and go even further offtopic, the U.S. does have more freedom of speech than Germany and even Canada (where I am right now). The U.S. is far more tolerant of hate-speech, not making any exceptions to their freedom of speech.

      In Canada you are not allowed to have any hate-speech in the media, and in Germany if you're doing anything in public related to the former Nazi party you'd better be very careful.

      Some countries believe the benifit of allowing hate speech (freedom) do not justify the potential harm. The U.S. on the other hand prefers to err on the side of freedom.

    17. Re:I cannot see how that's going to fly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Antitrust laws in a state monopoly?

    18. Re:I cannot see how that's going to fly by OwnedByTwoCats · · Score: 1
      Microsoft does not have the ability to force you to use or pay for their products.

      They've had that power before, with the per-processor licensing agreements that were found to be illegal. They want it again (see Trusted Computing).
    19. Re:I cannot see how that's going to fly by Mateito · · Score: 1
      Austria is not the country with the kangaroos.

      Oh, yes it is. (well, at least one).

      --
      Norman Cook's Ode to Sl
    20. Re:I cannot see how that's going to fly by IAmMaxHarris · · Score: 0

      There was nothing wrong with Microsoft's use of those agreements. They involved neither force nor fraud.

      For that to happen, Microsoft would have had to lie to the PC makers or threaten them in some physical, non-economic way.

      And by the way, the lawsuit you're talking about was made by Caldera (now known as SCO)! They bought the rights to a defunct OS just so they could sue Microsoft on bogus anti-trust charges. Oddly, there was no giant public outcry about this (like there is with the extremely similar SCO/Linux case right now). Hipocracy and short-sightedness, that.

      (See this article at the Ayn Rand Institute for more information.)

    21. Re:I cannot see how that's going to fly by BobTheLawyer · · Score: 1

      I'll concede that free speech is taken further in America than just about anywhere else (although there have been periods when that wasn't the case), but you're making a hell of a generalisation.

      When it comes to gambling, drinking, abortion and emergency contraception, Germans are undeniably more free than Americans.

      Also, it's arguable whether stronger competition law increases or reduces freedom; this point isn't the slam-dunk you seem to think it is.

  3. Makes perfect sense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Funny

    SAP and a bunch of saps.

    1. Re:Makes perfect sense by vsprintf · · Score: 1

      SAP and a bunch of saps.

      How true. Companies that have made the mistake of paying for SAP and all that it won't do will not allow you to pronounce it "sap", it must be in the contract somewhere. It is ess-aay-pee until the manager turns his back, then you've got two saps.

    2. Re:Makes perfect sense by Hognoxious · · Score: 0
      Companies that have made the mistake of paying for SAP and all that it won't do will not allow you to pronounce it "sap"
      I suppose you think it should have a big red button labelled "Look, feel and behave exactly like our old system"?
      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    3. Re:Makes perfect sense by vsprintf · · Score: 1

      I suppose you think it should have a big red button labelled "Look, feel and behave exactly like our old system"?

      I suppose you think that companies should have to change their business rules in order to adapt to SAP? I'm a software developer, and I believe it should be the other way around.

  4. Mmm right... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Would likely have raised eyebrows among regulators.


    Like that'd bother Microsoft.
    1. Re:Mmm right... by Suburbanpride · · Score: 1
      The legal headaches of a merger would be ten times that of the exsisting anti-trust cases. Microsoft was free to do whatever I wanted (and contiunes to do that) while it was under investegation. SAP would be a useless assest to microsoft as the merger spent years in the european courts, and if it ever got out of court, much of the value of the orginal merger would have been lost.

      Microsoft may be an 800 pound gorilla, but it is smart enough not to sit in quicksand.

      --
      sorry 'bout the mess...
    2. Re:Mmm right... by fmorgan · · Score: 1

      A few years ago, that company from the Pacific Northwest tried to buy Intuit and it was stopped by regulators (Money + Quicken!).

      Probably, if you can't compete with them, just buy them. "Hey, I have a few tens of billions of dollars burning in my pocket"..

    3. Re:Mmm right... by Maserati · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I was in software retail when MS MOney was launched to compete with Quicken. We had stacks of Quicken for $49.95 and stacks of MS Money for, ultimately, $5.00. We couldn't move MS Money at any price. People would walk right by the huge endcaps MS paid for to spend more on Quicken.

      In a nice demonstration of the Law of Perceived Value, sales of MS Money fell off as the price went down. People figure that if it's marked down that heavily, then it must suck. Pretty much everyone who bought it at all paid at least $39.95 for it.

      Then they tried to buy Intuit and the FTC raised an eyebrow.

      --
      Veteran, Bermuda Triangle Expeditionary Force, 1992-1951
  5. And it would have resulted by eltoyoboyo · · Score: 4, Insightful

    In a huge piece of bloat- (and until a couple of years ago vapor-) ware running on top of what is already purported to be bloatware. MS was wise to stay away from that. The Great Plains (now Microsoft CRM) does not have a ton of visibility yet. Oracle is bidding on the plum piece of CRM software in my opinion (JD Edwards snapped up by Peoplesoft!). Now who is going to pick up Lawson?

    --
    Have you Meta Moderated t
    1. Re:And it would have resulted by lucabrasi999 · · Score: 4, Interesting
      huge piece of bloat- (and until a couple of years ago vapor-) ware running on top of what is already purported to be bloatware

      Of course, but is there an ERP package that isn't bloat-ware? The fact is that MS wants to get into the market and Bill has $50 billion burning a hole in his pocket. On first-look, it made sense for Bill to at least "kick the tires".

    2. Re:And it would have resulted by cbreaker · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      " The Great Plains (now Microsoft CRM) does not have a ton of visibility yet."

      Ohh, it's got tons of visibility - to every technition that's ever had to go within 20 feet of that peice of shit.

      It was a peice of shit when it was just plain old Great Plains, now it's a peice of shit with a Microsoft sticker on it.

      They thought they could do what they did with Visio, but Visio was actually a good product to begin with.

      Apparently they are doing a major rewrite of the whole thing, so maybe it will suck a little less when they are done but it's just terrible, terrible software so I doubt even 2.0 will be worth a crap.

      --
      - It's not the Macs I hate. It's Digg users. -
    3. Re:And it would have resulted by The+Lynxpro · · Score: 1

      "Of course, but is there an ERP package that isn't bloat-ware? The fact is that MS wants to get into the market and Bill has $50 billion burning a hole in his pocket. On first-look, it made sense for Bill to at least "kick the tires"."

      That's $60 billion and counting.

      --
      "Right now, somewhere in this world, Scott Baio is plowing a woman he doesn't love," - Peter Griffin, *Family Guy*
    4. Re:And it would have resulted by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's $60 billion and counting.

      Too bad dollars are worthless, eh?

    5. Re:And it would have resulted by fatray · · Score: 4, Informative
      Of course, but is there an ERP package that isn't bloat-ware?

      My experience is that the big ERP systems are pretty bloated. One of the things that went on with these systems was that every company had to have a whole set of "modifications" to make the ERP system fit their business. These mods were often poorly done, poorly controlled and caused no end of reliability problems. These mods often contributed to the implementation projects being way over budget and way late. These mods, that almost all of their customers did, became a major obstacle to installing new versions. One of my past employers had a highly modified ERP system that they wanted to upgrade from 2.x to 3.y. They spent serverl hundred thousand dollars implementing the mods on version 3.y and finally just gave up because it was too hard. (I wasn't on that project!) They kept using 2.x until they were acquired by a competitor (who was actually using something older, more modified, and worse).

      The ERP systems companies started making their software more "customizable" or "configurable" in an attempt to prevent mods. This made these already very large programs into true behemoths. A lot of companies still want their mods and that still causes a lot of cost and grief.

      There are some systems that are not bloated--these are often called mid-range or tier 2 systems. One that I have used is Fourth Shift. It is not a perfect system, but it is low bloat and can be implemented pretty quickly and reasonably painlessly. I've installed FS into 4 businesses and each of those projects went very well. Some of these suppliers of smaller systems don't allow mods by the simple expedient of not distributing source code.

    6. Re:And it would have resulted by Hognoxious · · Score: 0
      One of the things that went on with these systems was that every company had to have a whole set of "modifications" to make the ERP system fit their business.
      They didn't have to do that at all; rather they chose to take the easy way out rather than figure out how to use SAP properly and/or retrain their workers. Of course, the Androids, Priceywhorehouse-Cowboys and their ilk aren't going to tell them it's wrong - because it's 'unprofessional' to say no to the customer ( I'm sure it's just a coincidence that it makes more billables for them too).

      As someone who actually knows something about SAP, I can say that in my experience, 80% of mods done to add/change SAP functionality are pretty stupid ideas in the first place, and another 10% are badly implemented becuase people don't approach them the right way.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  6. Merger or Buyout? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There's a difference you know. Do make up your mind.

  7. Too bad it didn't happen by ErichTheWebGuy · · Score: 4, Interesting

    If it had happened, I think we might have seen Microsoft suffer the same fate as ma bell. Oh well, M$ will still have their day.

    --
    bash: rtfm: command not found
    1. Re:Too bad it didn't happen by Saeed+al-Sahaf · · Score: 2, Interesting
      If it had happened, I think we might have seen Microsoft suffer the same fate as ma bell. Oh well, M$ will still have their day.

      I'm not so sure of this. While the regulatory powers did not see fit to break up Microsoft in the last round, it seems unlikely that they would approve of acquisitions of the SAP type either. I think truthfully, Microsoft's acquisition tentacles are to some extent being held at bay for the time being. This, of course, does not prevent them from continuing to screw everyone with the technologies that they currently control.

      --
      "Who are in control, they are not in control of anything - they don't even control themselves!" - Glen Beck
    2. Re:Too bad it didn't happen by ErichTheWebGuy · · Score: 1

      Yea, true enough. But, the point was, if it had been allowed, it would only have been more ammunition for the feds.

      --
      bash: rtfm: command not found
    3. Re:Too bad it didn't happen by The+Lynxpro · · Score: 5, Interesting

      "I think truthfully, Microsoft's acquisition tentacles are to some extent being held at bay for the time being. This, of course, does not prevent them from continuing to screw everyone with the technologies that they currently control."

      And that's the problem with Microsoft. They either are downright stupid or suffer from massive hubris. They seriously need to split apart because although they apparently won the antitrust case (in the long run), their size and market strength is keeping each division from making decent acquisitions to keep them competitive with other companies.

      Microsoft seriously needs to split into at least three companies, and dump MSN outright. One company would focus on operating systems and web services technology. The second company would do applications (Office) and business software (Great Plains). The third would be the videogame division.

      Microsoft's size is curtailing the success of their videogame division. The Xbox division needs to acquire some large scale publishers and try to guarantee exclusives for the Xbox Next so they don't have to heavily subsidize each machine. Buying for example Activision, Atari (Infogrames), Midway, and UbiSoft would do just that (EA will stay independent). But if they did that currently, they'd be hit with another antitrust case.

      Separating the company into three and splitting the booty of ill gotten gains evenly ($20 billion a piece since Microsoft has $60 billion now) woudl go a long way to shoring up the companies and jettison antitrust concerns. After all, we all know Microsoft Office needs to be released for the Linux platform, but as long as Microsoft stays in tact, this will not happen out of concern of jeopardizing the Windows monopoly.

      --
      "Right now, somewhere in this world, Scott Baio is plowing a woman he doesn't love," - Peter Griffin, *Family Guy*
    4. Re:Too bad it didn't happen by mr_sas · · Score: 1

      Uhm, didn't they already buy Rare and Bungee?

    5. Re:Too bad it didn't happen by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Please $DIETY don't left Microsoft aquire rights to the Atari name. Sacrilige. The final insult to a once great gaming company. And in its own history Infogrames has put out some great titles. They were great on the Atari ST.

    6. Re:Too bad it didn't happen by thogard · · Score: 1

      So you propose having three compaines all with their own monopolies? You must be a MSFT stock holder.

      They should have been broken up like Standard Oil -- into compaines that have to fight each other for market share. That means one company would end up with a server OS and excel while a different one would end up with the home OS and word. That would result in decreased costs for consumers and increased competition in the marketplace.

    7. Re:Too bad it didn't happen by digitaleus · · Score: 1

      The main problem with the MS is: a) It had an OS monopoly. b) It used that OS monopoly to force people into using its proprietary applications. c) In the end, the only real advantage of the OS was that it ran its proprietary applications, creating a anti-competitive chicken-and-egg. Breaking up into a monopoly on OS and a monopoly on Office would help because: a) Presumably, Office for Linux would be released b) The Linux desktop would become much more viable to a lot of people, and the OS monopoly much shakier The point is that OpenOffice + Linux might eventually leech marketshare, it is currently fighting a battle on 2 fronts.

      --

      content management for designers

    8. Re:Too bad it didn't happen by thogard · · Score: 1

      unless MSFT1 had to compete with MSFT2, there is no reason to do things like an office for linix. That is only going to happen when one group has to fight another group with a similar product and that isn't going to happen in the MS world except at the OS level and maybe some of the games which they aren't making any money on anyway. Getting Word and Excel in different compaines with the require that they only share interfaces over the public internet would allow others to attempt to integrate which would never happen if Office is contorlled by one company.

      The scary thing about linux market share in the windows world is that it happens to be about the same numbers as very old things that are going away such as OS2, big iron main frames and lots of silly old things like Pyramid minis and TRS-80s.

    9. Re:Too bad it didn't happen by The+Lynxpro · · Score: 1

      "unless MSFT1 had to compete with MSFT2, there is no reason to do things like an office for linix. That is only going to happen when one group has to fight another group with a similar product and that isn't going to happen in the MS world except at the OS level and maybe some of the games which they aren't making any money on anyway."

      What??? You propose the "Baby Bill" scenario that was talked about during the Antitrust trial. You are talking about multiple Microsofts marketing different distributions of Windows, or Office. That would only confuse customers.

      The better strategy is to separate Microsoft by its divisions. If the Office division was free to make it for multiple platforms, don't you think they would do it? Certainly. Think about it. Microsoft Office on Linux would sell like crazy because the lack of an official Office port for Linux is one of the main reasons why people and corporations aren't switching in droves. A separated Office division would also make a "Palm Office" port which Senior Ballmer alluded to in an interview while the antitrust trial was still going on. As long as the Office division is a part of an intact Microsoft with the OS division, you will not get Office on Palm or Linux. The OS X version will remain because that's just gravy for Microsoft and a "see, we aren't really monopolists afterall!"

      And yes, splitting up Microsoft would be best for shareholders. Not having to deal with the Feds over retaining the company altogether would equally be as good for shareholders. But that is not what Gates wants. Its obviously an ego trip. And no, I do not own Microsoft shares; I'm a wage slave.

      --
      "Right now, somewhere in this world, Scott Baio is plowing a woman he doesn't love," - Peter Griffin, *Family Guy*
  8. Yawn... by rewt66 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Once Oracle went after PeopleSoft, it was pretty much inevitable that Microsoft would at least start looking at SAP. So, wow, Microsoft looked.

    It's not like this is a transit of Venus or something...

    1. Re:Yawn... by Mind+Booster+Noori · · Score: 1

      Hmmm...
      It's quite obvious that Microsoft didn't bought SAP because they couldn't (either because SAP didn't want it or something else).

      I just wonder if they're going to try to buy Oracle, PeopleSoft or Siebel...

      --
      Mind Booster Noori
    2. Re:Yawn... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If Microsoft had wanted SAP, SAP wouldn't have had any say in the matter.

    3. Re:Yawn... by Mind+Booster+Noori · · Score: 1
      And why do you say that?

      There were (smaller) other companies in the past that didn't sell-out to Microsoft...

      --
      Mind Booster Noori
    4. Re:Yawn... by randyest · · Score: 1

      For those who didn't get the reference, it is a transit of Venus

      OT? Maybe -- but more interesting than this story :)

      Enjoy!

      --
      everything in moderation
    5. Re:Yawn... by Moofie · · Score: 1

      How many are still in business?

      --
      Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
    6. Re:Yawn... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because their entire market cap is smaller than Microsoft's cash reserves. And Microsoft only needs to buy a controlling stake. Microsoft could effectively have paid any price necessary, if they'd wanted it.

      Those smaller companies didn't have a controlling interest owned by the public (if they had, Microsoft would have bought them on the market).

  9. Paraphrased from my friend... by The-Bus · · Score: 5, Funny

    "Only a German company would want to put a piece of software where one program controls every aspect of the organization."

    (Non-flame, I'm German!)

    --

    Small potatoes make the steak look bigger.

    1. Re:Paraphrased from my friend... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Non-flame, I'm German!
      You German mor... Wait a minute, I am a German too...

    2. Re:Paraphrased from my friend... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Flamebait, my ass.

      It's true. All western countries are in the dumps now: Germany, France, UK, USA. None have anywhere near the creative or intellectual output they one did. Why do you think that is?

    3. Re:Paraphrased from my friend... by yrch93 · · Score: 0

      One program?

      Three letters: C E O.

    4. Re:Paraphrased from my friend... by Tony-A · · Score: 1

      "Only a German company would want to put a piece of software where one program controls every aspect of the organization."

      It takes extreme organization and skill to pull it off. Done well and completely, it is extremely effective. Done less than perfectly, the imperfections are automated with predictable results.

      My impression is that SAP can make or break a company. It would be interesting, in a morbid sense, to watch the combination of Microsoft and SAP. You can automate what you understand. Automation is never a viable substitute for understanding. At the level of SAP it has some real teeth.

    5. Re:Paraphrased from my friend... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sehr, sehr lustig!

  10. Oh my by xintegerx · · Score: 1

    It's true, Microsoft REALLY has to make sure the company strategies of the ones they buy are inline with theirs. Otherwise, they would be setting themselves up to lose MILLIONS of dollars.

    --

    Cover your eyes and click this link!
    1. Re:Oh my by OutRigged · · Score: 1

      Why lose millions... ..when you could lose billions!

      --
      RaGe
      We're all just noise on the wires..
  11. Merger??? Yeah, right! by Weaselmancer · · Score: 5, Funny

    Microsoft would merge with SAP the same way I merge with a cheeseburger.

    Weaselmancer

    --
    Weaselmancer
    rediculous.
    1. Re:Merger??? Yeah, right! by lpangelrob2 · · Score: 2, Funny
      Hot, sticky, and greasy?

      I don't get it...

      --
      -Rob
      Marriage doesn't have to suck!
    2. Re:Merger??? Yeah, right! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I read "cheeseburger" as "cheerleader" at first, and was disgusted with the imagery.

      Cheers.

    3. Re:Merger??? Yeah, right! by eggstasy · · Score: 4, Funny

      More like, chop it into pieces, swallow it, and turn it into crap.

    4. Re:Merger??? Yeah, right! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Heeeeyyyy.....I, however, and far from disgusted by that image ;) I'm off checking to see if cheerleadermergers.com is a site.

    5. Re:Merger??? Yeah, right! by justMichael · · Score: 1
      I don't get it...
      You don't merge with a cheeseburger, you consume it, turn it into a waste product and dump it ;)
    6. Re:Merger??? Yeah, right! by Moofie · · Score: 1

      You've done an excellent job of homing in on the point, not getting it, and turning it unfunny. Gold star for you.

      --
      Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
    7. Re:Merger??? Yeah, right! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How does one turn crap into crap btw? :)

    8. Re:Merger??? Yeah, right! by /dev/trash · · Score: 1

      Taht assuems that the burger (SAP) is not already crap.

  12. Monopolies and mergers by mrchaotica · · Score: 4, Interesting

    It seems pretty counterintuitive to me that a monopoly would be allowed to merge with anything, even a small company.

    --

    "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

    1. Re:Monopolies and mergers by vmircea · · Score: 2

      yeah.. one would certainly hope that a monopoly wouldn't be allowed to expand horizontally and or vertically by merging with another company, I mean M$ already has a huge market share in many fields and huge revenues... they don't need to get more in my honest opinion

    2. Re:Monopolies and mergers by CommieOverlord · · Score: 1

      I don't get it? What's counterintuitive about a monopoly merging with something? Why is that against common sense?

    3. Re:Monopolies and mergers by The+Lynxpro · · Score: 1

      "It seems pretty counterintuitive to me that a monopoly would be allowed to merge with anything, even a small company."

      That didn't stop Microsoft from buying Bungie or Rare. Bullfrog too, if I remember correctly.

      --
      "Right now, somewhere in this world, Scott Baio is plowing a woman he doesn't love," - Peter Griffin, *Family Guy*
    4. Re:Monopolies and mergers by vmircea · · Score: 1

      Well as I said above, it is generally counterintuitive (at least to some people) for it to BE ALLOWED for the rich to get richer and the poor to get bought up by the rich. This isn't very fair, it discourages competition. And it hurts our countries economy... Which is why it makes it counterintuitive for this to be allowed, as it causes several bad things. Even if it is only with small companies it is still bad because it sets a precedent for a big company merging with a smaller once, which could be used in the future to the big company's advantage as there is precedent. That's my train of thought, just trying to clarify.

    5. Re:Monopolies and mergers by mrchaotica · · Score: 1
      That didn't stop Microsoft from buying Bungie...
      Yeah, and I'm particularly upset about that - the PC might have had Halo a lot sooner if Microsoft hadn't wanted to leverage (there's that word again!) it for Xbox.
      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

  13. Wow, what a story. by Mike+Hawk · · Score: 5, Funny

    Microsoft does nothing. Details at 11.

  14. Re:MSSAP ... by Timesprout · · Score: 4, Funny

    worst attempt at an anagram .... ever

    --
    Do not try to read the dupe, thats impossible. Instead, only try to realize the truth
    What truth?
    There is no dupe
  15. Bullshit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Pure bullshit.

    MS want ERP vendors to think they almost acquired SAP. Then ERP vendors will think wow that could be us. How can we make ourselves more attractive to MS for buyout. I know, we'll program a bunch of .net crap in.

    This gets vendors to try to play extra nice with .net when the business market place has pretty much said J2EE is what we want.

    1. Re:Bullshit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is exacltly it. Thanks for posting it, so I don't have to.

      MS cannot buy SAP. SAP's margin are much less than MS, so the resulting company would have a lower return than MS.

      But, with such move, ERP's cannot ignore MS technologies, as MS /may/ buy their competitor, which will lower their share price. Hence, ERP have to do things that make them appear like a potential buyout target, or their market value will suffer.

      So .net, MS partnership, Windows Server installations, etc, etc...
      And more mindshare/marketshare/money for MS.

  16. In related news... by k4_pacific · · Score: 4, Funny
    Red Hat announced today that they almost bought TAR.

    --
    Unknown host pong.
  17. Sounds from Linux Business Week as if... by jg21 · · Score: 1

    ...MSFT did themselves a favor looking at SAP and not Computer Associates!

    1. Re:Sounds from Linux Business Week as if... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      LOL - You dummy. This happened some time ago. Do you think it might have something to do with a little thingy called court? It was an attempted PR save plain and simple.

  18. Isn't it ironic... by Kurt+Gray · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ...that two companies that claim to be leaders of business process simplification found that merging there operations was too complex to be feasible?

  19. It might have actually made SAP usable by mks113 · · Score: 4, Informative

    SAP has about the worst User Interface I've ever seen. The only exception might be old IBM terminals running on mainframes.

    For all the negative we say about microsoft, they have done a lot for generating a consistant user interface. On SAP, sometimes you have to hit enter, sometimes you click the green checkmark (in "random" locations), sometimes you click the clock icon, sometimes you hit f8.

    Unless you use it every day, you forget how to use the basic functions.

    You forget how nice it is to use Windows until you use SAP!

    1. Re:It might have actually made SAP usable by drinkypoo · · Score: 1, Interesting
      I've seen applications running on mainframes that have been quite pleasant. The problem is that most mainframe application developers neglect to put any kind of help into the programs so you just have to 'know' what they're expecting you to do and how to use it.

      With that said, I used to work for Tivoli, an IBM subsidiary, and we used RETAIN for problem tracking so that we could be tied into IBM global operations and receive support calls internationally, So I know all about crappy mainframe applications. Still, using raw RETAIN (which I did through x3270 on my linux desktop) was better than using ACME CCM, a screen scraper interface to retain which ran on OS/2. It was SOP at Tivoli to have an OS/2 system to run ACME, and whatever other system to do all the rest of your work on - like running Notes for email. (I didn't do THAT, either, I only used Notes for processes for which it was mandatory, like filling out some types of forms.)

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    2. Re:It might have actually made SAP usable by Penguinshit · · Score: 1, Funny


      a consistent user interface

      Yeah, a blue screen...

      --

      I have something in common with Stephen Hawking...

    3. Re:It might have actually made SAP usable by Monkelectric · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Complicated interfaces are a sure sign a German was inovled in the design process. Germans culturally have much higher expectations of their users. I have a Waldorf synthseizer (uQ for those interested) which has a CRAZY interface, it has a matrix of lights which have to be mainpulatd by knobs and buttons to edit paramaters of the synthesizer. Its crazy compared to a british synthesizer like the Supernova II which has neatly partitioned sections and buttons with well defined meanings.

      --

      Religion is a gateway psychosis. -- Dave Foley

    4. Re:It might have actually made SAP usable by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Having just spent a day trying to edit a Korg Wavestation SR from the front panel, your comment neatly extrapolates into an explanation for why there is no internationally successful Japanese software product outside of games.

    5. Re:It might have actually made SAP usable by Monkelectric · · Score: 1
      Having just spent a day trying to edit a Korg Wavestation SR from the front panel, your comment neatly extrapolates into an explanation for why there is no internationally successful Japanese software product outside of games.

      Yes! I have the triton rack as well. Evil machine, but it sounds damn good:)

      --

      Religion is a gateway psychosis. -- Dave Foley

    6. Re:It might have actually made SAP usable by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thank you for lowering the /. average IQ :(

    7. Re:It might have actually made SAP usable by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      We implemented SAP here late last year. I am firmly convinced that someone thawed a bunch of brain-damaged mainframe programmers frozen since 1970, gave them a box of icons (without explaining what any of them meant), and told them to build a windowing interface.

      Kludge does not even begin to describe it.

      Even that wouldn't be so bad if it actually worked. Somewhere, SAP salesmen are laughing all the way to the bank.

    8. Re:It might have actually made SAP usable by rmosenf · · Score: 1

      >...filling out some types of forms.

      TPS reports?

    9. Re:It might have actually made SAP usable by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thank you for lowering the /. average IQ :(

      With a name like Penguinshit, what can you expect?

    10. Re:It might have actually made SAP usable by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Let me add my two cents to what others have said about the pathetic UI of SAP and its operation in general.

      I work for a state where we have implemented SAP for most everything we have to do. Every day we have to sign in and input our time codes so we get paid. In my case I have 7 different codes to put in because my work is actually funded my 7 different agencies.

      If you happen to work overtime you put in the amount of time you worked, manually calculating the correct percentage of time allocated to each funding agency because SAP won't do it for you AND still have to call your timekeeper to let them know you worked overtime so they can input the time you worked because SAP won't recognize the time you've already put in.

      To get to your timesheet you have to click an expandable menu tree 4 times just so you can input the current date so SAP knows which time period you are dealing with.

      When certain agencies have to generate reports they have to choose between a report which either has the correct number of columns or the correct number of rows but never both at the same time. When I helped someone create a helpdesk ticket regarding this matter (I know the helpdesk guys for other reasons) the response came back that the report formats were created before the system became implemented and there were no plans at the current time to go back and redo them.

      There are numerous other issues involving SAP but I won't bore you with the details. Suffice to say the amount of money spent on this abomination could have been used to give the state employees their union negotiated annual COLAs which the union then threw away for 2 years because of cost saving measures.

      The one nice thing is that the governor, senate, house and their attendant staff don't have to deal with this mess. They continue to tout the virtues of having SAP without actually having to use it on a daily basis.

      Oh, the guy who started this whole fiasco? He is currently the head of the Homeland Security Department. Now everyone in the nation gets to suffer as much as we have.

      Cheers

    11. Re:It might have actually made SAP usable by Rasta+Prefect · · Score: 1
      For all the negative we say about microsoft, they have done a lot for generating a consistant user interface. On SAP, sometimes you have to hit enter, sometimes you click the green checkmark (in "random" locations), sometimes you click the clock icon, sometimes you hit f8.

      No, Apple has done a lot for consistent user interfaces. Microsoft has provided a widget set and a set of programming tools, but their own programs aren't even consistent. Having just been introduced to Visual Studio.NET, I'm a lot less than impressed.

      --
      Why?
    12. Re:It might have actually made SAP usable by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It sounds like the programmer who wrote the application did a poor job. Just because it is SAP based, does NOT mean that it was written by SAP. I've worked with SAP for 9+ years, and almost every time I want to cry from using a program...it's a "customer developed" program that's to blame.

      Of course, it's easier for the masses to just assume it is the company's fault.

      Just to be consistent every time one finds a dead link on a website -- blame the browser.

    13. Re:It might have actually made SAP usable by Penguinshit · · Score: 1


      This, from an AC? buwahahahahahahahahah!

      --

      I have something in common with Stephen Hawking...

  20. Has anyone noticed by zymano · · Score: 3, Interesting

    That corporate mergers have increased(Peoplesoft&Oracle,Clearchannel) under the Bush administration and no one really cares until you turn on the Cnn/moneyline and notice that the corporations aren't hiring because of HIGH productivity by their businesses. Most hirings come from small business. To me mergers mean only one thing , an attempt to monopolize.

    1. Re:Has anyone noticed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      zymano: "until you turn on the Cnn/moneyline and notice that the corporations aren't hiring"

      What are you smoking?
      Over 1 million new jobs created in the last 3 months alone, including the just released 250,000 new jobs for May alone.
      Stop spewing out John Kerry disinformation, propaganda and dirty tricks, boy!

    2. Re:Has anyone noticed by SmilingBoy · · Score: 1

      What does not hiring have to do with monopolising? The main reason for mergers is the possibility of economies of scale or scope - i.e. cost cutting. This is not good for the people working at this company, but it is good for everyone else.

    3. Re:Has anyone noticed by The+Lynxpro · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      "That corporate mergers have increased(Peoplesoft&Oracle,Clearchannel) under the Bush administration and no one really cares until you turn on the Cnn/moneyline and notice that the corporations aren't hiring because of HIGH productivity by their businesses. Most hirings come from small business. To me mergers mean only one thing , an attempt to monopolize."

      You blame the (George W.) Bush Administration for that? Which political party has catered to the interests of *small business* for twenty plus years? I do think it is the Republican Party. Every time a new *progressive* labor law is unveiled in Congress, it is the Republicans that challenge it until concessions are made for small business tax deductions to make up for the increasing costs.

      Which administration did the Time Warner/Turner merger take place in? Which administration was the AOL Time Warner merger first proposed? Which administration allowed SBC to gobble up the majority of the former Baby Bell telcos? T'was not the George W. Bush Administration.

      Get your facts straight.

      --
      "Right now, somewhere in this world, Scott Baio is plowing a woman he doesn't love," - Peter Griffin, *Family Guy*
    4. Re:Has anyone noticed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      While I agree with the spirit of your argument, Lynxpro, I must point out (before someone else does) that it is not very well constructed. The poster pointed out the increase of big business mergers during George W. Bush's administration; he said nothing about the Republican party or its historical protection of small business interests. In fact, while one could "read between the lines" and find him critical of the Republican party as a whole, he never says that. By turning it into a partisan issue, you're arguing with a point the poster didn't actually make. A logical fallacy, that.

      Furthermore, in defending the Bush Administration and the republican party as a whole, you go "negative", to use political jingo: you critisize the Democratic party in order to make the Republican party look good, rather than leaving the Democratic party (at least mostly) out of it and explaning why the Republican party doesn't do these things. This looks very good to Republicans but not so great to Democrats (whom you are obstensibly trying to convince.) It's rather like when Europeans accuse us of human rights abuses and we say, "But, China is worse!" Who cares? Do we want to be in the same league as China?

      But like I said, I agree with the spirit of your post. Just phrase it a little bit more convincingly next time, and we might actually get some converts rather than a lot of people ridiculing you on one hand and a lot of braindead "me too" posts from the other.

    5. Re:Has anyone noticed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "To me mergers mean only one thing , an attempt to monopolize."

      Duh.

      All businesses have the goal to be a monopoly. All businesses want to be the only supplier for the product they sell. Almost anything a business does is to be THE unique, special, single source for the product they have. Mergers may be one way to do that. But all businesses, large or samll, would love to be a monopoly in the market they sell to!

      "Augh! I can't see!"
      "Looks like another blinding flash of the obvious, sir."

    6. Re:Has anyone noticed by Fulcrum+of+Evil · · Score: 1

      Which administration did the Time Warner/Turner merger take place in? Which administration was the AOL Time Warner merger first proposed? Which administration allowed SBC to gobble up the majority of the former Baby Bell telcos? T'was not the George W. Bush Administration.

      When did the infamous freshman Republicans show up and halt the federal budget for a month? What year did congress declare that profit was the only measure of corporate success? Just because a democrat is in the whitehouse doesn't mean that there aren't a big pile on congresscritters doing everything they can to take him down (along with their usual antics).

      --
      "We returned the General to El Salvador, or maybe Guatemala, it's difficult to tell from 10,000 feet"
    7. Re:Has anyone noticed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dude its summer and there are always millions of new jobs created every summer except this one its only about a million and the latest results aren't seasonably adjusted. What the whitehouse is doing is as stupid as the Irish govt not releasing any job figures since the quarter before the dot-bomb.

    8. Re:Has anyone noticed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      me too

    9. Re:Has anyone noticed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      John Kerry propaganda shill : "Dude its summer and there are always millions of new jobs created every summer except this one its only about a million and the latest results aren't seasonably adjusted."

      HUGE numbers of jobs have been created every single month for the last NINE months, stretching back to the Winter of last year .
      So much for your "jobs are always created in summer" rant!
      Plus of course no new jobs were created in summer 2002 after 9/11, so even then your propaganda fails woefuly.

      AND, the jobs figues for March and April HAVE just been seasonally adjusted..and there werwe adjusted massively UP.
      If anything , when the May jobs figures are adjusted they are probably going to be adjusted UP as well.
      Take that and smoke upon it, loser!
      Take your disinformation elsewhere dude!

    10. Re:Has anyone noticed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fulcrum Evil :"Just because a democrat is in the whitehouse doesn't mean that there aren't a big pile on congresscritters doing everything they can to take him down (along with their usual antics)."

      When did the Justice department hand over corporate takeovers and anti-trust to congress?
      I must have missed that. Please remind me.
      Bottom line : ALL the worst corporate abuses from Enron to Tyco to Martha Stewart to Computer Associates ALL took place under the super sleazy, super corrupt Democratic Party Clinton administration.
      Its the great Goerge Bush who's had to come in and clean up the terrible mess left by the Clinton sleaze bucket.
      Your pathetic attempt to wiggle the Clinton/John Kerry Democratic Party out of responsibility for their weasel actions are doomed to failure, dude

    11. Re:Has anyone noticed by Fulcrum+of+Evil · · Score: 1

      Bottom line : ALL the worst corporate abuses from Enron to Tyco to Martha Stewart to Computer Associates ALL took place under the super sleazy, super corrupt Democratic Party Clinton administration.

      One name: Michael Milken.

      Its the great Goerge Bush who's had to come in and clean up the terrible mess left by the Clinton sleaze bucket.

      Is this the same guy who doesn't read newspapers, or even his father's book? He certainly proved his dad right, though.

      --
      "We returned the General to El Salvador, or maybe Guatemala, it's difficult to tell from 10,000 feet"
  21. Which is complex? by roccothegreat · · Score: 3, Funny

    Microsoft says the discussions were halted due to the complexity involved in the transaction and in integrating the two companies

    I think it was more a COMPLEXITY of the SAP code that M$ did not understand!

    Rocco

    1. Re:Which is complex? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think it was more a COMPLEXITY of the SAP code that M$ did not understand!

      Yeah... SAP code is written in German! Scheisse!

  22. Re:MSSAP ... by OgdEnigmaX · · Score: 5, Funny

    Worst attempt to remember the word acronym ...ever

  23. Obligatory Joke by Ann+Elk · · Score: 4, Funny

    Q: What do you get when you merge Microsoft and SAP?
    A: Microsoft

    1. Re:Obligatory Joke by The+Lynxpro · · Score: 1

      "Q: What do you get when you merge Microsoft and SAP?
      A: Microsoft"

      Q. How do you pronounce BP Amoco?
      A. BP...the "Amoco" is silent.

      Which reminds me, Arco is now displaying logos telling its customers that it is part of the BP family.

      --
      "Right now, somewhere in this world, Scott Baio is plowing a woman he doesn't love," - Peter Griffin, *Family Guy*
    2. Re:Obligatory Joke by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Umm Arco was bought out by BP in like '99 or '00. I should know, as my dad was laid off in the 'merger' along with everyone else at his office.

    3. Re:Obligatory Joke by name773 · · Score: 1

      there's a mathematical description too...
      where f(x) = c/x and c is any constant
      as x approaches infinity, f(x) approaches 0

      (sorry, i'm taking a break from studying for a math exam)

  24. Too bad this didn't happen by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    MS would have been tied up, defocused, defanged, and out of our hair for YEARS with this acquisition. Gates and Ballmer (unfortunately) were wise and disciplined to pass it up. Historically, most big-company mergers wind up losing value (witness Daimler-Chrysler, a $40B abortion). Still, it's a pleasant thought :-)

  25. Obligatory pun? by Altima(BoB) · · Score: 4, Funny

    Nuts. I was looking forward to MicroSap. Yes yes yes, minus one, redundant, but much like Everest, One has to because it was there.

    --
    Yup...
    1. Re:Obligatory pun? by TechnologyX · · Score: 1

      Don't worry, I'm the only one that gets marked redundant for using those stupid in Soviet Russia jokes, whilst everyone else gets a +5

      --
      Slashdot sucks
  26. ms bashing, without reading the whole story... by cball2k · · Score: 0, Insightful

    MS looked, said no, due to complexity of a merger that could cause DOJ brow raising...(they have learned this is a bad thing)

    MS did nothing wrong, yet the slashdot bashing occurs...seems the bashers CAN learn from MS after all...the bashers can learn to READ THE DETAILS, and not to make up FUD!

    --
    karma, hah...
    1. Re:ms bashing, without reading the whole story... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      "MS did nothing wrong..."

      At some point in their history, they have done something right?

  27. re: your sig (OT) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    and if feel like re-arranging the letters, there is a ME

  28. Re:Not really an acronym anyways. by cbreaker · · Score: 1

    Technically, it wasn't an acronym either, because an acronym is supposed to be a word created from the initial letters. You know, like ANSI and ASCII. MSSQL isn't an acronym because you can't pronounce it.

    Maybe he meant "MSSAP" as in "Miss Hap" but I don't think he's that whitty.

    --
    - It's not the Macs I hate. It's Digg users. -
  29. At least MS ran away in time... by GoRK · · Score: 4, Funny

    At least Microsoft ran away in time and were smart enough to realize that even they could not integrate with SAP.

    This is in sharp contrast to most companies who deal with SAP that end up spending up to 2 billion dollars for a product that doesn't even work.

    1. Re:At least MS ran away in time... by Trejkaz · · Score: 1

      But on the other hand, they could have grabbed SAP for just long enough to shut down their open source database, and then thrown it out again. :-)

      --
      Karma: It's all a bunch of tree-huggin' hippy crap!
    2. Re:At least MS ran away in time... by willabr · · Score: 0

      I think they (MS) use SAP in house for all there ERP and CRM.

      As they are now dependent on SAP Maybe being dependent on an outside company gives them the hebe jebes. kind of kike the US with mideast oil countries.

    3. Re:At least MS ran away in time... by GoRK · · Score: 1

      Haha Microsoft got the SAP virus!

      Now they must give SAP 2 Billion dollars to fix it!

  30. Mirror , just in case by mirror_dude · · Score: 0, Redundant

    Just in case the server crashes and burns (like they usually do),I have put up a mirror.
    The mirror of http://quote.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=10000103& sid=a8yRk1nepHpM&refer=news_index is at http://mirrorit.demonmoo.com/r_8/quote.bloomberg.c om/apps/news%3fpid=10000103&amp%3bsid=a8yRk1nepHpM &amp%3brefer=news_index
    The mirror of http://news.ft.com/servlet/ContentServer?pagename= FT.com/StoryFT/FullStory&c=StoryFT&cid=10864454784 82&p=1012571727088 is at http://mirrorit.demonmoo.com/r_8/news.ft.com/servl et/ContentServer%3fpagename=FT.com/StoryFT/FullSto ry&c=StoryFT&cid=1086445478482&p=1012571727088

    --
    Note to Mods: When I post mirrors, it's a best guess. I don't know for certain whether or not the site will go down!
  31. SAP? Who? by fire-eyes · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Uh yeah?

    --
    -- Note: If you don't agree with me, don't bother replying. I won't read it.
  32. Re:For God's sake by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Don't knock them, I bet their spelling is better than yours?

    "loosers"???!!!

    And you can't blame your spell checker for that one!

  33. Re:Not really an acronym anyways. by chris_mahan · · Score: 1

    Yeah, it was an initialism.

    see http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=initialis m

    --

    "Piter, too, is dead."

  34. merger battle by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    the ongoing merger battle involving Oracle, PeopleSoft and the U.S. Department of Justice

    Am I the only one who read that as Microsoft merging with the DOJ?

    -Posting AC for obvious reasons.

    1. Re:merger battle by Decaff · · Score: 1

      Am I the only one who read that as Microsoft merging with the DOJ?

      Didn't you realise that had already happened?

  35. Re:Not really an acronym anyways. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Technically. The meaning of acronym has shifted over the years however. In common usage it means both.

  36. Techdirt.com covers this without the hype by isoga · · Score: 1

    I found it more reliable and often has stories before /. dave

  37. Not invented here by sapbasisnerd · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Oh yea, that will work. Take the two companies in the industry most infected with 'not invented here' disease and try to put them together.

    Does explain the SAPDB sale to MySQL a little more rationally though. That was one piece of baggage MS would not have tolerated.

    I also suspect that WGIII and Uncle Fester took a hard look at the install base, evaluated their chances of actually converting some of the largest customers, overestimated it by at least double and still realized they'd be buying into supporting a product on competitive operating system platforms and databases for a basically a decade at least. Further noticed that many of these customers have ahem connections that they'd rather not mess with (it's rumoured that Haliburton is or was the largest single instance SAP system in the world, this appeared on a chart at one SAP conference and then disappeared for future appearances of the same presentation).

    1. Re:Not invented here by Sique · · Score: 1
      Does explain the SAPDB sale to MySQL a little more rationally though. That was one piece of baggage MS would not have tolerated.
      SAPDB itself is not an original SAP product, it was developped from Adabas database (by Software AG), which is still supported by SAP R/3 as RDBMS. Adabas also came with StarOffice (up until 5.*, don't know for now, I am using OpenOffice since then.)
      --
      .sig: Sique *sigh*
    2. Re:Not invented here by sapbasisnerd · · Score: 1
      Well actually before it was an Adabas product (Called Adabas-D, it was NOT the flagship Adabas database) it was a Nixdorf product.

      Doesn't change the fact that until recently SAP owned the commercial rights and SAP execs in Europe were using SAPDB to openly attack Oracle and IBM and Microsoft saying in effect that databases were a commodity so use our product which is "good enough". A message that disappeared suspisciously about the time these talks were going on.

  38. Re:MSSAP ... by number · · Score: 1

    I thought you meant anagram as in MSSAP ~> SPASM.

    --
    - HOORAY!
  39. In other news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Once i almost merged with a woman...oh so close!

  40. A limitation of the moderation system by TimmyDee · · Score: 1

    and would likely have raised eyebrows among regulators. Article moderated -1 redundant.

    --
    Per Square Mile, a blog about density
  41. MS bought Navision instead by /Wegge · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I've always had the impression that the policy from Remond was to find the "sweet spot" for their back office applications. In this case, the best target is probably a notch or two down from the customers who are willing to bay a SAP solution.

    Whatever the reasons might be, MS in fact went ahead and bought Navision Financials instead, which probably was better for the overall backoffice strategy.

    --
    //Wegge
  42. Re:MSSAP ... by KayakFun · · Score: 2, Informative

    They would be a perfect match:
    SAP = Sanduhr Anschau Programma (German for eggtimer watching application)
    MS is not known for speedy software either.

  43. Microsoft asks SAP out for a date by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Interesting

    After eyeing up SAP for a year or two Microsoft plucks up the courage and asks SAP for a date.. they both have dinner together in a fancy restaurant but conversation is dull and they avoid eye contact all night, SAP looks bored, Microsoft eyes up the waitress all night while SAP eyes up the bartender.
    Microsoft pays the bill and SAP contributes to the tip.
    Both go home alone, end of story.

    1. Re:Microsoft asks SAP out for a date by MoronGames · · Score: 1

      Only on Slashdot would the fictional story of a bad date get modded up as "Interesting".

      --
      hey!
  44. Instead by boatboy · · Score: 2, Informative

    A merger with SAP would be a profound break with previous Microsoft strategy
    Not sure how it would have been much different than strategy in other markets, but it should be pointed out they did buy out another large ERP company.

  45. Wow. Microsoft is that big by rainer_d · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Look at the market-capitalisation of SAP:

    http://finance.yahoo.com/q?s=SAP:

    Market Cap: 51.18B


    It would have cost them all their cash, but they'd have bought a company that works very much against all the way different than MSFT:

    • Linux is a Tier 1 platform for SAP
    • as someone else pointed out, they have a large installed base on non-Win32 platforms that are just going to stay that way as long as the hardware works

    --
    Windows 2000 - from the guys who brought us edlin
    1. Re:Wow. Microsoft is that big by egghat · · Score: 3, Insightful

      IMHO if a company can buy one of the few remaining competitors IN CASH, everyone should be really worried :-(

      Bye egghat.

      --
      -- "As a human being I claim the right to be widely inconsistent", John Peel
  46. Microsoft's SOP for merger "talks" by runenfool · · Score: 3, Interesting

    This sounds like what Microsoft did with Intuit and some other companies who's names escape me right now (I believe Novell in the 80s was another). They send all sorts of people over to "investigate a merger", when in reality what they are doing is learning how you do business and who your key people are.

    Perhaps this is what Microsoft's intent was with SAP?

    1. Re:Microsoft's SOP for merger "talks" by narsiman · · Score: 1

      Yeah and the guys came back confused this time. Even SAP did not know who their key people were. So confused they have a Peoplesoft HR system for backup which fails 3 times an afternnon.

  47. How would it have worked? by Decaff · · Score: 4, Insightful

    What would Microsoft have done with it? SAP is widely used, and profitable, but does not match Microsoft's language and operating system strategy: SAP has always been a strongly cross-platform systems and in recent years has including significant support for Java.

    It would have been astonishing for Microsoft to end up supporting J2EE applications for Sap on RedHat, at least for existing SAP users. Any move to close down the portability or application language support for an acquired SAP would surely have led to serious monopoly issues.

    1. Re:How would it have worked? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I for one cannot imagine the implications on the operating systems especially on *nix. If MS were to take over SAP, it could force everyone to use Windows for the backend servers' OS. That could spell the end of *nix.

      While SAP is just the apps. SAP needs an RDBMS to run on. For most companies, it's Oracle's RDBMS. If MS takes over SAP, can you imagine they'll force everyone to run MS SQL?

      It's a good thing they didn't do that.

    2. Re:How would it have worked? by Decaff · · Score: 3, Insightful

      ....it could force everyone to use Windows for the backend servers' OS....

      I think you have very little idea about the attitude of IT professionals with 15-20 years experience; the sort of people who implement SAP solutions. We are not the sort of people who can be forced to do anything. We trust no-one. If a company does not supply vendor-independent products and solutions they are history as far as we are concerned.

  48. AMEN - mod up by Atario · · Score: 1

    SAP's UI is a seizure-inducing nightmare. Pretty, but completely inconsistent. Not to mention completely lacking in a text-based query facility where one is clearly called for. Type in a 100-line query you easily generated in VIm? Hell no! You're clicking through 5 dialogs times 100 "key figures", Sparky!

    --
    "A great democracy must be progressive or it will soon cease to be a great democracy." --Theodore Roosevelt
  49. MightySloth would have done it.... by buss_error · · Score: 1

    but no one could figure out how to make even the DOJ believe that the OS really needs a database enigine AND a browser intergrated with it.

    --
    Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.
  50. Re:Not really an acronym anyways. by Nasarius · · Score: 1
    MSSQL isn't an acronym because you can't pronounce it.

    Not the best example, because SQL is an acronym (pronounced 'sequel'), depending on who you ask.

    --
    LOAD "SIG",8,1
  51. Ah-ha! by SphericalCrusher · · Score: 2, Funny

    "Microsoft says the discussions were halted due to the complexity involved in the transaction and in integrating the two companies."

    Wow. Microsoft halts due to any sort of complexity, eh? No wonder their software is so user friendly...

    --
    "Instant gratification takes too long." - Carrie Fisher
  52. Always a Brides Maid Never a Bride by gremlins · · Score: 1

    It would seem as there are alot of near misses when microsoft is involved. First Google now this.

    --
    just because your a schizophrenic doesn't mean people arn't really out to get you
    1. Re:Always a Brides Maid Never a Bride by Canberra+Bob · · Score: 1

      Yes, being the largest software vendor on the planet and having a monopoly on the desktop market is a pretty big miss isnt it?

      Look no further than Windows and Office. Absolute failures.

    2. Re:Always a Brides Maid Never a Bride by gremlins · · Score: 1

      I never said there OWN products were fauilures I am mearly commenting on the fact they failed to buy two companies recently.

      --
      just because your a schizophrenic doesn't mean people arn't really out to get you
  53. Wellington Bear calculator, too... by Tokerat · · Score: 1


    "We are Trapper-Keeper, we are one."

    --
    CAn'T CompreHend SARcaSm?
  54. Good M$ joke by a typical American by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You are sooooo teh funny

    You said M$! Have you considered a career in stand up comedy?

    Typical American - think you are so funny by using tired old jokes.

    I am wondering, do you yanks think that jokes become funnier the more often you repeat them?

    1. Re:Good M$ joke by a typical American by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The only funny thing in this whole thread is that you think a joke was made. What's even funnier is that you tried, in vain, to slam Americans at the same time. You also assumed that M$ was said by an American. I really did laugh out loud. LOL ROFL LMAO ROFLMAO etc.

      Pray tell, in what country do you reside? Remind me never to visit, as it is obvious that the population of whatever place you're from has near zero intelligence.

    2. Re:Good M$ joke by a typical American by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What is worse than using 'M$' in a joke? Using it seriously as if it is a valid term.

      Only on /. can you use that term without readers thinking you are some kind of weirdo.

      What is worse than an American? A wannabe American like yourself

  55. Typical American ignorance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And what do you know about Germany?

  56. You are teh l337 funny! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You are soooo teh funny!

    But you did not use M$.

    So YOU FAIL IT

  57. SAP's user clients are so AWFUL.... by callipygian-showsyst · · Score: 1
    ...that MICROSOFT could only be an improvement!

    SAP has a great racket! I'm sure their software saves time for the accounting dep't---at the expense of everone else!

    I spend about 30 minutes/week dealing with SAP. Multiply that by 50,000 employees and you'll see how expen$ive SAP really is.

    Microsoft may be an improvement!

    --
    Best Buy can have you arrested
    1. Re:SAP's user clients are so AWFUL.... by callipygian-showsyst · · Score: 1

      I can't say I don't agree with you.

      --
      Best Buy can have you arrested
  58. hehe by Tangurena · · Score: 1

    More than a few companies have IT policies that prohibit them from purchasing software that CA sells, and to divest any product if CA acquires the company. MS can't afford to have that much hate on them.

  59. M$ already has SAP... by kiwi_damo · · Score: 1

    at least I had heard that Microsoft runs one SAP instance globally for it's financial accounting.

    A case of not eating your own dog food or perhaps liking it so much they wanted the company?

    1. Re:M$ already has SAP... by BCW2 · · Score: 1

      'liking it so much they wanted the company'

      The history of M$ is full of this. They buy out any competitor they can, remember stacker? That was useful until hard drives became so cheap that compressing a hard drive is a waste of time. This has happened to many companies that brought out products that did something better than the original. M$ buys company, faces no more competition in that area.

      Then again maybe they got stuck with that one. Pay millions for a company and watch it become useless in four years. Someone might have smiled all the way to the bank.

      --
      Professional Politicians are not the solution, they ARE the problem.
    2. Re:M$ already has SAP... by Swootech · · Score: 1

      sure they do...since none of M$'s own ERP product are targeted at the CAS market.

      Not yet anyway... ;)

  60. In case you're wondering by Ancil · · Score: 1

    ..the ongoing merger battle involving Oracle, PeopleSoft and the U.S. Department of Justice.
    For those not familiar, Oracle and PeopleSoft are in a bidding war to purchase the Department of Justice.
    1. Re:In case you're wondering by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I thought the DOJ was a strategic partner of Microsoft.

  61. Microsoft CRM and Great Plains by melted · · Score: 1

    Are two different things. MS CRM has their own product, named CRM Server. It merely integrates with GP products, but does not replace them.

  62. it did make sense. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The merger would have made sense.
    Both companies have costly and crappy products which do not work and which leave you wondering why you spent so much money on them.

  63. too bad. They would have choked on it. by samantha · · Score: 1

    What little experience I have had with SAP is that it is the king of archaic over-priced bloatware. Microsoft would have choked and died attempting to absorb it. This would have gotten rid of two ugly giant blights on the industry at once. Too bad it didn't go through.

  64. Navision was two years ago by theolein · · Score: 2, Informative

    I supported Navision on Windows in my last job. I was concerned when, in somewhere around May 2002, Microsoft bought Navision that there would be problems, but there weren't. Navision is also meant for smaller comapnies than SAP and has some critical problems on Windows servers, such as having no database replication capability, no live backup capability and a seriously fucked interface (it originally comes from a DOS and UNIX commandline type environment and they even had their own non standard GUI elements).

  65. The merger of evel by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If this merger ever happen, it would be the merger of two most evel companies in software business. Both of them have worst attitude toward the competition. Joint team of their managements would probably stay together for a long... in both Earth and Hell.

  66. Re:Typical German ignorance and arrogance! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I know as much about Germany at least as much as you do, having lived in Fankfurt for 10 years before coming to New York

  67. Microsoft's Shopping Policies by solprovider · · Score: 1

    Microsoft Chairman Bill Gates and Ballmer have said they dislike large purchases because of the difficulty of integrating the businesses. In July 2002, Gates told attendees at an analyst meeting that 'there's a lot of hurdles that any type of acquisition has to get over.'

    Technology company merges rarely work. The techies that make a company worth having tend to find new jobs during the uncertainty of a merger. The rest have have more difficulty merging different corporate cultures than merging product lines. Microsoft solves this by only buying companies that they want to eliminate from the market, avoiding any worries about integration.

    Gates said at that meeting that he and Ballmer 'kind of look' at buying 30 to 40 different companies every day and do 'a lot of what-if scenarios.'

    I read this as "Would we do better if that company no longer existed? Can we steal their technology outright, or should we pay off the owners? Should we just kill the market because it might threaten us someday? How about announcing some vaporware; would that be enough?" They act like the music companies putting all the artists in a certain genre under long contracts, and then never promoting them.

    The scale of their efforts impresses me. 250 business days per year * 30 companies per day = 7500 companies reviewed per year. If they average 10 minutes per company, that is greater than 5 hours per day just thinking about eliminating possible competition. At least we know where they get their ideas for "innovation".

    --
    I spend my life entertaining my brain.
  68. Not MS, EA by DeadScreenSky · · Score: 1

    Bullfrog was purchased by EA, way back when.

    Likewise Origin, Westwood, Maxis, etc.

    --
    There is no excellent beauty that hath not some strangeness in the proportion. -- Francis Bacon
  69. what law of percieved value? by galacticdruid · · Score: 1

    I did a google search for 'Law of Perceived Value' and it returned 0 results. Is there really such a thing?

    --
    we are all one consciousness experiencing itself subjectively - bill hicks
    1. Re:what law of percieved value? by Hognoxious · · Score: 0

      Try something like "recursive demand curve"?

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  70. Remember Hotmail? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hotmail used to run BSDs before took over by M$. Now they run M$ stuffs.

    I wonder how long will it takes for SAP to run .NET and MSSQL...