Slashdot Mirror
Oracle Continues Warming Up to Open Source
ErikPeterson writes to tell us that News.com is running a story about a partnership between IBM and Oracle. This partnership is to help "ensure that Oracle's packaged applications run natively--that is, without modification or special translators--on the majority of IBM's WebSphere-branded middleware, including its application server and portal, plus Big Blue's recently announced Process Server."
Yeah I only read the summary.
Open Source Java DAO Generator
This has nothing to do with open source, does it ??
It's just a partnership to assure that oracle will stick to a defined standard ?!?!
What, are you blaming Open Source for the Global Warming now?
Man is a slave because freedom is difficult, whereas slavery is easy.
It's the source of this information which is open, perhaps ?
The article begins with: Oracle is warming up to open-source software and IBM's middleware products.
What on earth has this go to do with open source? If they mean Linux, all this is saying is that Oracle gurantees it runs on Linux but that has been the case for 5 years. I think the editors should read and understand stories before posting.
In the last year, Oracle has swallowed up two major corporations in hostile takeovers to sell proprietary enterprise management (CRM, ERP, etc).
Larry has a serious ego issue, and cannot accept anybody being better than him (even though in a moral sense 99% of us are, but we're talking monetary here).
Is Oracle absolved from this immature behavior just because they claim to like Linux?
The answer is no.
So now IBM Websphere = Open Source? Haven't heard about that one..
Share your Knowlege - Kung-Fu Geekery
It's a purely poplularity determined phenomenon. If their customers want it for platform XYZ and Oracle sees big bucks coming from them - they will partner up with Satan himself. People have been telling me that Oracle on Linux will drive migration to Linux. I think that Oracle is just riding on Linux rather than vice versa.
Ah, all those flame wars on the LUG lists... I'm pretty sure this move doesn't have anything to do with the fact that whatever IBM has is Open Source - just a business decision based on popularity.Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum videtur
This is not a troll. If IBM wants to become an OSS company - they should open up their programs - especially DB2. It is a nightmare to use that in collaboration with Samba, LDAP etc.
So who do I see as OSS companies? Red Hat and Novell are my 2 big ones.
"Sure there's porn and piracy on the Web but there's probably a downside too."
here for your digestion is what the article did say about oracle warming up to open source:
"Release 3 of its application server will be designed to more smoothly operate with third-party products, including open-source development 'frameworks' such as Apache Spring and Hibernate, said Rick Shultz, vice president of Oracle Fusion Middleware."
Oracle is about the last software company having anything to do with altruism; period.
ich bin der musikant
mit taschenrechner in der hand
kraftwerk
It might have been a good idea in the bad old days but today when we already have a stable, production ready, rock solid, ACID-compliant open-source relational database management system of choice, Oracle will never truly succeed in "warming up to open source". It's the same mistake that the record industry has made in the early nineties all over again. They missed the train. Sad but true.
Karma: Positive (probably because of superiour intellect)
Ditto. Matter of fact - pricing of Oracle products is identical on either platform - Linux or Windows. Not sure about IBM's websphere - whether open source or not - but Oracle is definitely NOT open source. Sybase, Ingres and even Informix I believe have joined the Open Source route on Linux - Oracle is still pricey and closed-source.
This is not news at all.
If you keep throwing chairs, one day you'll break windows....
Oracle has been warming up with OSS for more than a decade. Even the nes of all the take-overs of PeopleSoft, Siebel, Retek is kinda trend people are getting tired of. What does Larry want? Should be the question. I want to hear him speak!
Java Oracle Linux Enthusiast
Are you drunk?
What exactly is open source in your submission?
Yes, the News article carries the same stupid headline, but since you decided to shamelessly copy it, you should have made sure you don't submit shit.
Not only these two apps have aren't OSS, but in most cases they will ultimately run on proprietary OS like AIX and Windows.
The only OSS-related part in TFA is: Release 3 of its application server will be designed to more smoothly operate with third-party products, including open-source development "frameworks" such as Apache Spring and Hibernate, said Rick Shultz, vice president of Oracle Fusion Middleware.
Which isn't news anyway. It's Oracle marketing crap. If you want to report on it, dive into the docs and add value (make some technical or sales analysis on significance of that move).
I have a browser and already visit news.com every day, thank you very much.
- Oracle plans to be chummy with IBM products.
- There is a passing mention of Apache and Hibernate.
- Not worth reading unless you have a strong fetish for IBM and Oracle.
Considering who we're talking about here, isn't the proper term "thawing"?
-- If no truths are spoken then no lies can hide --
Personally I will watch this and download Oracle (DB) for a play. The environment at work is MS internally, yet I was given free range on the server and we are running Apache + Tomcat. The apps are based on Hibernate and Spring (handles ALL the plumbing that you previously had to do by hand, but that is another subject). Due to the attachment to MS there was a lot of political pressure to buy SQL Server. Yet now my boss is beginning to see the benefits of open-source (now 60-70% Linux), and has openly stated that the purchase of MS-SQL was perhaps a mistake - given alternatives such as Postgres and the fact that I develop using HSQL. Oracle was considered initially, and if it will work easily with our web frontend then it certainly becomes a contender. Particularly as there are absolutely no plans to update MS-SQL 2000 to whatever it is that comes next (2005?). At the end of the day I will be there for another year or so, therefore ongoing support becomes an issue. Widely supported software has its' benefits such as a steady market
of experienced people, and given that I am in Tasmania this is one of the primary concerns.
To take over a company like Oracle did you'd have to convince the current owners to sell it to you. It's only "hostile" as far as the management of the company being taken over is concerned. But since they report to the owners and it's the owners who decided to sell, the management is SOL. Which is probably why they're hostile to the idea.
Why do you paint owner's selling their company for what they consider a fair price in such negative terms? It sounds like nothing more than knee-jerk anti-big-business attitudes with no basis in reality.
but the number of places where "when you need Oracle, you need Oracle" is rapidly dwindling.
Features added recently or upcoming in 8.1 (now in beta2) include
- transaction savepoints
- point-in-time recovery
- tablespaces
- bitmapped indexes (actually a better implementation than Oracle's)
- java stored procedures (of course, postgresql has long had perl, python, tcl, etc. SPs)
- replication
Add in that PostgreSQL's core engine has long been about 5x faster than Oracle's (not to mention orders of magnitude easier to set up and administer) and basically the only reason left to go with Oracle is their clustering. No doubt there are places that need that, but it's a pretty small niche.
http://www.enterprisedb.com/
it's basically postgresql with an oracle compatibility layer.
they seem to be doing pretty well.
We know how all charming, friendly, and compassionate computer industry big whigs are. Aren't those the first qualities you think of when you see Larry Ellison, Scot MacNeally, Steve Jobs, and Bill Gates? Ooh, I can feel the love radiating off of them now!
If buying a Mercedes-Benz were like buying Oracle, they'd sell you a big crate of parts and tell you to put it together. Oracle and Java may be powerful, but the learning curve is just atrocious. I'll stick with LAMPPP (Linux, Apache, MySQL, Perl, PHP, and Python), thank you. You can with those tools, like Larry the Cable Guy sez 'git her done!"
"You'll get nothing, and you'll like it!"
Not WebSphere itself. IBM offers Geronimo support. The Development Tools subproject is hosted on Eclipse WebTools.
I thought OC4J was licensed from Orion?
The real open source Oracle contribution is the persistence technology in the reference implementation of Java EE platform 5, under the CDDL. It will be part of Glassfish (or "SJSAS").
"...plus Big Blue's recently announced Process Server."
process-server
n : someone who personally delivers a process (a writ compelling attendance in court) or court papers to the defendant
Oh, say does that Star-Spangled Banner entwine / The myrtle of Venus with Bacchus's vine?
I find it interesting that IBM is making it easier for Oracle's IAS to work with IBM's WebSphere, since that will by extension make it easier for Oracle to sell their own db into the whole package. Won't this ultimately hurt sales of IBM's DB2, or is IBM finally capitulating to the Oracle Overlord?
Their client libraries. So that I can build them on anything "exotic" like OpenBSD/i386 or FreeBSD/amd64...
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
Oracle will get you for that purple monkey dishwashers crack.
Professional support isn't the same as a company standing fully behind their product like Oracle. Professional support is let me ask somebody a question and they might have an answer.