Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Oracle Continues Warming Up to Open Source

Posted by ScuttleMonkey on from the the-more-the-merrier dept.

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."

23 of 79 comments (clear)

  1. Finallly!!!!! by njcoder · · Score: 2, Insightful
    Finally, IBM is putting it's money where it's mouth is. "Oracle warming up to open source..." "oracle applications to run on WebSphere" Guess that means IBM is open sourcing WebSphere?? I must have missed that bit of news.

    Yeah I only read the summary.

    --
    Open Source Java DAO Generator
    1. Re:Finallly!!!!! by njcoder · · Score: 5, Informative
      If anyone missed the sarcastic tone, the point is the summary doesn't reflect the headline. Hell the article headline doesn't reflect the article. There's one small line how Oracle is going to make it easier to integrate Sprinng and Hybernate into their app server. That's the only Open Source bit.

      It shouldn't be a big deal to use Oracle's J2EE applications on WebSphere. Had they written their applications to use only J2EE specified classes/methods/packages there shouldn't be a major problem porting one application to another app server. Unfortunately a lot of App Server vendors write their own extensions to the specification that if used causes this problem. It's good that the vendors are inovating before something even becomes a JSR but it can cause portability problems.

      Oracle's app server hasn't gotten much momentum behind it. Some people may use it if they already are using Oracle and don't care too much about their app server but the App server market leaders are BEA and IBM. Some of the cool features in Oracle RAC depend on an Oracle App server. So if you're commited to a different app server then you're going to have some issues to work with. I think some of their transaction failover stuff depends on OAS.

      What Oracle should do is make modifications to their application so that it's a pure J2EE application that can run on any certified app server. That seems like the better thing to do. Hopefully that's what they do and this is just some PR bullshit with IBM.

      When Oracle announcces they're apps will run on JBoss and any other open source appservers that have been certified then you can say Oracle is warming up to open source.

      --
      Open Source Java DAO Generator
    2. Re:Finallly!!!!! by Adult+film+producer · · Score: 4, Insightful

      As well, you might say that Microsoft is warming up to Open Source because they included some OSS utilities with VISTA or whatever their latest operating system incarnation is...

    3. Re:Finallly!!!!! by iwan-nl · · Score: 3, Informative

      No. Eclipse is the open-source version of Websphere Studio (the IDE), not Websphere (the application server).

      --
      I'm trying to improve my English. Please correct me on any spelling/grammar errors in this post.
    4. Re:Finallly!!!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

      (declared interest - I used to be a product manager for Oracle)

      Oracle used to have one product that made money - a database. Now Oracle Apps is being taken more seriously Oracle has become a one and a half product company. All other Oracle products only exist to support database sales. Many long standing Oracle products have never been directly profitable. I believe Developer, JDeveloper and Designer all fall into this category.

      Oracle have always been a reluctant party in the Application Server marketplace. The original OAS was ditched for an Apache based bundle. More support for IBM could be a signal that Oracle are getting ready to pull the plug on OAS altogether. More likely is that the oracle product stack is getting close enough to J2EE compliant that having a proprietary Application Server is considered no longer strategically important.

      Pure speculation, but I wonder if Oracle have hit middle tier scalability problems with very large e-business suite deployments. Supporting other Application Servers might be easier than improving OAS for those implementations.

  2. nothing to do with open source by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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 ?!?!

    1. Re:nothing to do with open source by GeorgeMcBay · · Score: 4, Funny

      Microsoft bad. Oracle hate Microsoft. Oracle good. Praise Oracle. Even if nothing to do with Open Source. Hooray!

    2. Re:nothing to do with open source by Daytona955i · · Score: 4, Informative

      While I do think your post is funny, Oracle is doing good things for open source. Not only have they contributed code to the linux kernel, they currently have their unbreakable linux campaign where if you are running a trusted version of linux (basically if you run Enterprise Red Hat, SuSE, and one other version I can't remember right now) and you find a serious bug in the linux kernel (ie. not Oracle's software) they will fix it and submit the patch.

      There's a little more to it than that but they are doing a lot for the open source community.

  3. Marketing speak - and 5 years old by gtoomey · · Score: 5, Informative

    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.

    1. Re:Marketing speak - and 5 years old by plumby · · Score: 2, Interesting

      It's quite funny really - they've taken the headline, chopped out one word (IBM) and then only quoted from the part of the article that refers to the word that they've removed.

      The reference to open source is actually that they are designing their app server to operate more smoothly with open source frameworks like Spring and Hibernate, which in my view is a good thing (although not having really played much with the previous versions, I'm not sure what was preventing this in the first place, so it could just be throwing a few trendy buzzwords arounds).

  4. Let's see by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    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.

  5. Re:Wrong summary by Anonymous+Crowhead · · Score: 5, Funny

    This is Slashdot. Here, if all As are Bs and all Bs are Cs, then logically, all As are purple monkey dishwashers.

  6. Has nothing to do with Open Source... by Gopal.V · · Score: 4, Interesting

    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
    1. Re:Has nothing to do with Open Source... by Neil+Blender · · Score: 5, Interesting

      IBM has Open Source - just a business decision based on popularity.

      IBM is heavily investing in life science. A lot of life science, especially at the university level, is using linux. I have been to a number of life science meetings/user groups/etc hosted all or in part by IBM. The minute a rep gets whiff that you are not a decision maker - a buyer, they turn tail on you, immediately. I have seen it happen a number of times (not to me, but I have seen a number of people outright snubbed right in the middle of conversations when they reveal something so horrid as they are a graduate student or post doc.) They don't give two shits about science and they make no bones about showing it. They just want to sell servers.

    2. Re:Has nothing to do with Open Source... by daigu · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Personally, I find I'm not a decision maker is a great way to start (and potentially end) a conversation - especially with vendors. It cuts through the BS beautifully.

  7. IBM = Open Source? by zaguar · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Hate to be Captain Obvious, but IBM /= Open Source. Sure, it has made many contributions to OSS, but to say Oracle integration with IBM is a move to support OSS is a logical fallacy.

    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."
  8. Oracle is about profit by CaptainZapp · · Score: 4, Insightful
    And if there's profit to be made then open source is Oracles best friend.

    Oracle is about the last software company having anything to do with altruism; period.

    --
    ich bin der musikant

    mit taschenrechner in der hand

    kraftwerk

    1. Re:Oracle is about profit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Why is the parent a troll? Because he is telling the truth? IBM make a significant amount of money on their global services division, and much of that is through supporting open source software. IBM also resells other vendors opensource software, weather it's Redhat, or SUSE/Novel. They also resell others proprietary software to run on opensource software of course with support contract in toe. IBM hasn't stoped selling AIX, nor has it open sourced DB2 or *cough cough* WebSphere. Werther you like it or not IBM is not or has never been in the business of altruism. Not that there is anything wrong with making money of of open source software, lets just not pretend it's altruism. If it was truly altrusim wouldn't they prefer a BSD like licences?

  9. A better summary for readers by standards · · Score: 2, Informative

    - 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.

  10. Re:Too little too late by Tim+C · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Postgres is a worthy RDBMS in its own right, but it's no Oracle. Of course, a lot of people use Oracle's RDBMS when postgres or MySQL would do just as well, but when you need Oracle, you need Oracle, and postgres (currently) just won't do.

    --
    It's official. Most of you are morons.
  11. Has benefits possibly by NotAgent86 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    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.

  12. I'll believe it, when I see them open-source by mi · · Score: 2, Interesting

    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.
  13. Re:What About DB2? by UnapprovedThought · · Score: 2, Interesting
    that will by extension make it easier for Oracle to sell their own db into the whole package

    Sure, they may lose some DB2 deals, but they also stand to gain Websphere deals from many Oracle clients who were using a competing product that they now realize is exposing them to single-sourcing risk. The wiser clients will be looking at the technologies on the horizon and how that will play out in terms of the flexibility they will have in future upgrades. They may be worried that a specific technology will work to lock them in and take away their option to walk away from a future licensing negotiation. Basically, what IBM is saying here is "See, we are willing to leave your options more open than the other solution." ...And what's to say that some Oracle clients, after moving to Websphere, won't then be convinced to switch to DB2 if Oracle puts them on the treadmill? So, from the vendors' perspective it is mostly a wash, and from the clients' perspective, it leaves room for viable options (possibly Sun java) or a positioning that allows them to partly (or completely) switch to open source as a future option.