Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Oracle to buy JBoss (and others)

Posted by Zonk on from the offset-by-the-layoffs-i'm-sure dept.

tfritsch writes "According to a story at News.com it looks like Oracle's shopping spree is to continue. The JBoss acquisition could be big - what does it mean for the future of the JBoss Application Server?" From the article: "Oracle makes the majority of its revenue from its database and applications business. And it has its own line of Java middleware, which competes with JBoss' software, and a set of Java developer tools. However, Oracle has been warming up to open-source products, including Zend's PHP development tools, over the past year because its corporate customers are increasingly using open source software, according to company executives. "

6 of 162 comments (clear)

  1. Don't trust Oracle by AKAImBatman · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Don't believe for a minute that Oracle would purchase JBoss to "help it shift customers to a subscriber-based model". Oracle already has a superior J2EE server based on Orion technology. Far more likely is that Oracle wants to pull another PeopleSoft aquisition. They'll buy up JBoss, kill the company, then let the product die on the vine. All while pushing how "Open Source Friendly" they've become.

    --
    Javascript + Nintendo DSi = DSiCade
    1. Re:Don't trust Oracle by AKAImBatman · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Killing off the leading product in a high growth market is bad business. It doesn't appear logical.

      1. JBoss is not the leading product in the J2EE market. It's a competitor, but nowhere near the top.

      2. J2EE servers are not a high growth market. In fact, the market is oversaturated at this point, with servers from BEA, Sun, IBM, Novell, JBoss, Apache, Macromedia, ObjectWeb, Pramati, Borland, Orion, Oracle, Caucho, Apple (!), ATG, Compaq/HP, Fujitsu, Gemstone, Hitachi, IONA, Secant, Sybase, and quite a few others who aren't worth mentioning. Of those, Apache and ObjectWeb directly compete with JBoss to provide an open source J2EE server. Nearly the entire market competes with JBoss for support contracts.

      --
      Javascript + Nintendo DSi = DSiCade
  2. Re:Not gonna happen. by AKAImBatman · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Larry can't just write a check, get regulatory approval and be done. There is no way Marc will sell his baby...

    You might be amazed at how much power is contained within a single zero. Throw enough of them on the check, and even Marc would have a hard time resisting.

    --
    Javascript + Nintendo DSi = DSiCade
  3. A discussion on the PostgreSQL advocacy list... by tcopeland · · Score: 5, Insightful
    ....right here had an interesting comment from Bruce Momjian:
    It is interesting that they are purchasing companies that almost fully control the software but give it away free as open source: Sleepycat, JBoss, and Zend. Oracle's purchase months ago of InnoDB used by MySQL was a similar move. What they are _not_ getting involved in is software that is community controlled, like PostgreSQL or Linux, because it much harder to see how a purchase would allow tight control of the software, resulting in revenue.
    Rather well said.

    I've been pleased with Oracle's JDeveloper; writing an extension for it has been interesting and the Oracle folks have been quite helpful.
    --
    The Army reading list
  4. Re:Not gonna happen. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    > The world is moving toward software as a service. JBoss is positioned to be the king of that world.

    How so? Marc's stunning business acumen? They have a piddling little consulting service, and it's not like their app server doesn't have credible competition from the likes of IBM and Bea.

  5. Re:The JBoss deal is about Hibernate... by fupeg · · Score: 3, Insightful

    You know this same thought crossed my mind too. However, on one hand Oracle has an app server and Oracle has a EJB3-compliant O/R technology. I'm not really sure how well their app server compares to JBoss, but Toplink certainly compares pretty well to Hibernate. Hibernate does have more mindshare than JBoss, but if you compared all the technologies in Oracle's middleware suite to JBoss equivalents, it seems like the one place where Oracle would stand up best is Toplink vs. Hibernate. Maybe what would be more valuable to them would be having the Hibernate guys, particularly Gavin King, as part of Oracle. That would give them a lot more influence on the future of EJB persistence and even JDBC.

    Oracle will not practically own EJB3 persistence however. Don't forget about Kodo, a recent acquisition of BEA. They've had the best JDO implementation and now have an EJB3 implementation based on it.