Slashdot Mirror


What If Oracle Bought Sun Microsystems?

snydeq writes "Fatal Exception's Neil McAllister believes Oracle is next in line to make a play for Sun now that IBM has withdrawn its offer. Dismissing server market arguments in favor of Cisco or Dell as suitors, McAllister suggests that MySQL, ZFS, DTrace, and Java make Sun an even better asset to Oracle than to IBM. MySQL as a complement to Oracle's existing database business would make sense, given Oracle's 2005 purchase of Innobase, and with 'the long history of Oracle databases on Solaris servers, it might actually see owning Solaris as an asset,' McAllister writes. But the 'crown jewel' of the deal would be Java. 'It's almost impossible to overestimate the importance of Java to Oracle. Java has become the backbone of Oracle's middleware strategy,' McAllister contends."

49 of 237 comments (clear)

  1. Yahoo! + Sun by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    I say Yahoo and sun should merge. Just think about it, 1. Yahoo makes some cool cloud offerings, 2.sun builds the cloud. 3. ?????? 4. Profits

    1. Re:Yahoo! + Sun by Ethanol-fueled · · Score: 5, Insightful
      No, I hope you're joking. Sun's bundling Yahoo Toolbar with java is bad enough. If Oracle were to buy Sun, it would be in their best interests to stop that immediately unless they don't want to be taken seriously. Choice rant from the link:

      I find it insulting when applications bundle unrelated crapware like browser toolbars, particularly when the installation selects the extra junk by default...

      ...software upgrades need to be elegant and streamlined. Bundling in a browser toolbar cheapens the whole experience because it starts looking just like so many other crapware applications that plague the PC industry.

  2. Makes sense by religious+freak · · Score: 2, Insightful

    MySQL is the best alternative to Oracle. They could buy mySQL out for a bargain and start putting the screws to all of us that use mySQL to not pay for exorbitant Oracle licenses. Boy... I can't wait.

    --
    If you can read this... 01110101 01110010 00100000 01100001 00100000 01100111 01100101 01100101 01101011
    1. Re:Makes sense by epiphani · · Score: 3, Interesting

      No it isn't. That's Postgres.

      And with the current state of mysql, I wouldn't look at buying Sun for that reason at all. The other assets make far more sense.

      Plus, Sun and Oracle have both been major open source supporters, Oracle probably one of the single largest kernel contributor. That would be a good pairing.

      --
      .
    2. Re:Makes sense by rackserverdeals · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I agree. PostgreSQL is much closer to Oracle than MySQL is. Anyone that thinks MySQL is the best replacement for Oracle likely doesn't know much about Oracle.

      It seems that sun has done a bit with PostgreSQL as well. Too bad they bought MySQL. They should have instead invested in making PostgreSQL better, at least developing better replication and clustering. That way, PostgreSQL would have been an even stronger alternative to Oracle.

      Oracle used to have Solaris/SPARC as their main development platform, then they switched to Linux. That seems to have been a big blow to Sun. While Oracle still releases Oracle for Solaris/Sparc along with Linux, but the Solaris/x86 versions are always slow. I don't 11g has been released for Solaris/x86 yet.

      If I was Jonathan Schwartz, I would have rather put the $1bln they spent on MySQL on PostgreSQL. I don't think it would have even really taken that much either. I'm still just baffled over spending $1bln on a company that I think made $50mln in it's best year!?!?!

      Anyway... Oracle developers might not have been too happy about moving away from Solaris because they'd lose DTrace.

      I thought I heard something about there being some bad blood between Ellison and Sun but I don't know what that was about.

      I still think Cisco should be more interested.

      --
      Dual Opteron < $600
    3. Re:Makes sense by Maclir · · Score: 2, Informative

      "MySQL is the best alternative to Oracle" - that's a pretty bold statement. You don't want to add some context? What about large, high transaction databases - DB/2 would probably be the best alternative to Oracle. What about Postgress? What about SQL Server?

    4. Re:Makes sense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Oracle has no interest in Sun. Oracle just launched the Database Machine/Exadata with HP. Does anyone think that they are going to stab HP in the back and buy Sun? Definitely not.

      Oracle is not a hardware company. It doesn't want to be a hardware company. Sun has way too much hardware for Oracle to even consider them.

    5. Re:Makes sense by nicolas.kassis · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Oracle has no allegiance but to itself.

    6. Re:Makes sense by Vexar · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Feel free to use Oracle XE, which is a free for use version of the Oracle Database. I like how your comment was "MySQL is the best alternative to Oracle" instead of "DB2 is the best alternative to Oracle." Oracle won't buy Sun for a very, very specific reason: Oracle doesn't make hardware, and it isn't their business. Sun still makes boxes. Just because Oracle could buy Sun doesn't mean they want to or it is useful to them. It has to tell a meaningful story, not "we beat up the competition, bought them out, and control the market by default." Buying RedHat? Yes. All of Sun? No. Oracle did buy SleepyCat Software, which I think is great, because it shows their commitment to different solutions. Also, I think it gave them flexibility to put BerkeleyDB into a few of their products.

      Neil McAlister is a tool. Although he found a few supportive quotes to his point, he doesn't know anything about Oracle's view on software, much less what they think of Sun's "our products are so good, they're free" attitude. I think Sun has made several mistakes in the last 10 years, and Safra Catz and Charles Phillips don't particularly want to clean up the mess. Where's Neil's quotes from Oracle? Did anyone notice those were completely absent from his article? This is just foolish speculation, not based upon any analysis of Oracle itself.

      Having worked with Cisco, I don't think they want Sun, either. For the same sorts of reasons, it isn't a good fit for them. Sun is a loser bet, really. Cisco doesn't suddenly want to go from "a little software in support of their hardware" to something insanely complex like Sun. It just isn't a company that can lead it. IBM was a good fit because they can do hardware and software and operating systems pretty dang well. So, who does that leave? Anyone? Yes. SGI comes to mind for me, too. Can they? Probably not. Would they? Still not so sure. They did both try the "put our Unix on an Intel" idea and failed, so at least they screw up the same way. I sense some compatibility there.

      Oracle's money is better spent on making their current acquisitions stronger products than in acquiring a messy company. They aren't after the Sun staff. The good ones have all be competitively hired by the likes of IBM and Oracle already. I sure wish someone on Slashdot who has a friend who is a CEO would pass on the importance of not losing "intellectual capital." You can blame the economy or the 'tards in Washington, DC all you want, but when you get right down to it, a company is people. You lose the right people, you lose the magic, and the company will fail soon after. I think, therefore, that because Sun has lost their magic, and their minds for rejecting IBM's bid, They will continue in a smaller, weaker way, or soon be sliced into divided sales.

    7. Re:Makes sense by spartacus_prime · · Score: 2, Funny

      Are you gay?
      Are you a fish?
      Are you a gay fish?
      If so, then the Gay Fish Association of America may be the right place for you!

      --
      If you can read this, it means that I bothered to log in.
  3. My Thoughts by AKAImBatman · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I think the two companies have some excellent synergies*. My biggest concern with Oracle purchasing Sun (as opposed to the other way around) is that there would be a culture clash. Sun is a very dynamic environment that fosters great new ideas. But unless those core competencies bubble up through Oracle, the Sun portion of the company would be strangled to death.

    Personally, I've always wanted to see Sun purchase Oracle. But I don't think that's happening at this point.

    * Warning: Corporate buzzword!

    1. Re:My Thoughts by Red+Flayer · · Score: 2, Interesting

      But unless those core competencies bubble up through Oracle,

      What?

      the Sun portion of the company would be strangled to death.

      On what basis do you believe that?

      Personally, I've always wanted to see Sun purchase Oracle. But I don't think that's happening at this point.

      Considering that Sun is a drop in the bucket (around 5 billion market cap) compared to Oracle (~100 billion), I think you're right. Oracle's been much bigger than Sun for a very long time. Never mind the fact that Oracle's business model is very different from Sun's. It just wouldn't make sense for a traditional software business like Sun to buy a huge service-oriented business like Oracle.

      I'm not sure even when it would have been possible for Sun to acquire Oracle. The late 90s? I don't think they could have afforded it even then.

      --
      "Trolls they were, but filled with the evil will of their master: a fell race..." -- J.R.R. Tolkien on Olog-hai
    2. Re:My Thoughts by AKAImBatman · · Score: 2, Informative

      Sun can't market their way out of a paper bag. And that's just the God's honest truth. There's nothing inherently wrong with the company besides that.

    3. Re:My Thoughts by ZachPruckowski · · Score: 2, Funny

      * Warning: Corporate buzzword!

      GAAH!! Put the warning (or at least the asterisk) before the word! It's well documented that overexposure to corporate buzzwords causes headaches, confusion, and eventually IQ loss.

  4. What direction will Oracle take Java? by goltzc · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I work at an Oracle shop. Most of my job is writing web apps that obfuscate base Oracle (applications) craziness. On the rare occasion I've had to actually dig into Oracle's Java code I have found my self trying to figure what kind of strange world they are living in. Most of their code seems to not only defy best practices but any semblance of good design.

    Maybe its just that the code I've seen has been outsourced stuff that came back in as unclean globs of code but it makes me a little leery to see where Oracle would take Java.

    --
    Our bugs are smarter than your test scripts.
    1. Re:What direction will Oracle take Java? by Unordained · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Have you worked with contractors? It's not about what country they're from -- it's about their contractor status. Of the ones I had, the foreigners were better coders, though poorer communicators. But in all cases, the lack of ownership in the product, of knowledge of the history, business purpose, and architecture of the product, the lack of sense of long-term commitment, of common goal, of responsibility for the outcome (in terms of ongoing maintenance, not just "going live") ... all made my life a lot harder. It's difficult work to get good, solid work out of contractors, and not because they don't mean well. They do. They're great people, sometimes even great coders, but their "wanderer" status has its drawbacks and you have to learn special skills to manage them.

      So the GP is correct to worry about the quality of outsourced code.

    2. Re:What direction will Oracle take Java? by timeOday · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Show me a developer who doesn't think everybody else's code is crap.

    3. Re:What direction will Oracle take Java? by ClosedSource · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I agree. Developers today (at least the vocal ones) seem to be a lot more interested in putting down the work of others than improving their own. That's why there are sites like The Daily WTF.

    4. Re:What direction will Oracle take Java? by Belial6 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You are absolutely correct. It isn't even always 'bad' that the contractor produces more short term code. I have been a full time contractor to a single company for 10 years now. There is plenty of long term code that I write now for them that I would never have considered writing in the first year I was working for them. Why? Because they had gone through a dozen contractors before me, and much of the long term code I write doesn't get implemented for a couple of years. I have learned the company culture, and can tell what directions the applications will evolve, and thus, I can spend a few extra days writing the parts of the application to be configurable so that when the business requirements (or a person with clout's whim changes) we can just go in and flip a switch to get the new required functionality.

      Burning hours/money to make those options configurable would be irresponsible for someone that doesn't know the company culture, or if it is unlikely that they will be used because the next contractor isn't even going to be aware that it is there. This becomes even more so when you implement half of a feature because you are already making a change to that part of an application suite, and you know that a year or two down the line the functionality will be needed for work you will be doing on another piece of the suite.

    5. Re:What direction will Oracle take Java? by D-Cypell · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Me! Actually most developers I think.

      The reason we think that (almost) everybody else's code is crap is because much of it is. The mistake that we make is to assume it is crap because the original coder was an idiot, when in most cases it is crap because of unrealistic time pressures placed on the developer, or some basic mistake in the foundation that acts like a ball of crap that radiates outwards.

      I have seen quite a few pieces of open source code that I would regard as awesome in terms of code quality (not in a way that is too subjective either, good naming conventions, good structure, good comments etc), these are the projects I contribute to. People pay me to wade through a quagmire of crappy code, when I do it for free, I want to work with the good stuff.

      I suggest that you would be better to say... "Show me a developer who understands *why* everybody else's code is crap"... generally it is not down to idiocy.

  5. Am I the only one? by More_Cowbell · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Am I the only one that hopes Sun changes it's mind about selling itself and succeeds on its own? I know they have made some big strategic errors that have gotten them where they are now, but it is a solid company (imho) with, from what I've seen, superior products. Grossly undervalued for some time now.

    --
    Experience teaches only the teachable. -AH
    1. Re:Am I the only one? by phantomfive · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Yes, I agree completely. However, the only way it will happen is if they become a more customer oriented company. Right now they make amazing things that no one really wants, and try to convince people to buy it. They need to figure out what people actually do want, and build it for them. If they can figure out how to do that and still make amazing things, they will succeed.

      --
      Qxe4
    2. Re:Am I the only one? by downix · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I'm with you here.  Sun is very lean, and can survive the downturn with the cash reserve they have as/is.  If I was Sun, I'd redouble efforts into bringing more in-house, and consolidating positions of strength.  I'd also work on diminishing, or eliminating the departmental infighting that continues to plague them.

      --
      Karma Whoring for Fun and Profit.
    3. Re:Am I the only one? by blind+biker · · Score: 5, Interesting

      NO, absolutely not the only one - that's my hope as well. But the truth is, Sun is a company that gave a lot to the world in which it exists, and monetized very little of it. It's the greatest open source contributor (Solaris, Java, OpenOffice, the SPARC architecture itself, NetBeans, ZFS... and I'm sure missing some, as Sun gave away HUGE amounts of stuff).

      Such companies don't usually succeed in a commercial sense. I'm tempted to say that Sun should cease to be a for-profit publicly traded company, and become either a state-sponsored institution, or private foundation, for the development of high-tech.

      --
      "The agriculture ministry is not in charge of Gundam" - Japanese ministry official.
    4. Re:Am I the only one? by goltzc · · Score: 5, Funny

      I find your ideas intriguing and wish to subscribe to your newsletter.

      --
      Our bugs are smarter than your test scripts.
  6. Everytime I see this phrase... by mooingyak · · Score: 4, Funny

    It's almost impossible to overestimate the importance of Java to Oracle

    Java will help Oracle colonize the entire solar system.

    --
    William of Ockham had no beard. The most likely explanation is that it was chewed off by squirrels every morning.
    1. Re:Everytime I see this phrase... by GPLDAN · · Score: 3, Funny

      You get to landing on Titan, only to find out you have the wrong JRE installed.

      Picture of spaceship crater, with caption: FAIL

  7. Slashdot shoud buy Sun . . . by PolygamousRanchKid+ · · Score: 4, Insightful

    . . . if we can get all those Anonymous Cowards and folks with ridiculous names like mine to chip in $10 each.

    The company's direction and strategy could be guided by a Slashdot thread. A potent brew of "Informative, Interesting, Troll . . ."

    Hell, maybe we could even patent that business model . . . crowd governance . . . or mod governance?

    --
    Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
    1. Re:Slashdot shoud buy Sun . . . by HiThere · · Score: 2, Informative

      No. Linux is written by committee, but the design is by Linus. Similarly with Python, except the design is by BFDL Guido. Other projects have other heads...but the heads tend to be singular.

      Note that the nominal authority of the FOSS project heads tends to be considerably more absolute than we would tolerate in most other areas. They can toss code on a whim. But this is restrained in the successful project because they mustn't alienate their developers...and they can't offer anything except acceptance (and a minimal bit of self-promotion).

      Note also that anyone can fork a FOSS project, but very few such projects ever get far enough to even be noticed, much less release anything useful. Managing a FOSS project is a difficult art, and somehow you've got to fund both yourself and the project. It's cheap as things go, but it sure isn't free.

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
  8. What if Oracle owned MySQL? by IGnatius+T+Foobar · · Score: 3, Interesting

    It would be quite ironic ... MySQL has had to deal with Oracle acquiring InnoDB and then Sleepycat (Berkeley DB) ... multiple times they had to rework MySQL's underpinnings because they didn't want Oracle to own key parts of the platform. If Oracle were to be in control of MySQL they'd be able to "un-deprecate" (reprecate?) those engines.

    I'd like to see that, actually -- Berkeley DB is an amazingly robust data store. It worked well with MySQL.

    --
    Tired of FB/Google censorship? Visit UNCENSORED!
  9. Re:Strange Database Merge... by AKAImBatman · · Score: 5, Insightful

    So what's left of the database market if Oracle and Sun merged together?

    I don't see anything changing. Right now we have a 3-way fight between three heavyweights: Oracle, IBM, and Microsoft. Everyone else is unimportant.

    However, IBM and Microsoft have other competencies and sources of revenue. Oracle does not. In result, Oracle has been looking for new ways to enter the low-end market. So owning MySQL could be a boon for them, but it wouldn't significantly change the market.

  10. Mom! Dad! Don't touch it! It's EEEeeeevil! by drinkypoo · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I am so not comfortable with Oracle being in charge of one of the remaining UNIX vendors... Better to see another UNIX license holder get them than that.

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    1. Re:Mom! Dad! Don't touch it! It's EEEeeeevil! by lotho+brandybuck · · Score: 2, Insightful
      I agree completely.. IBM would've been great.

      Code can fork. Licenses can generate lawsuits and intimidation forever.

  11. A Strategic Solution by Hangtime · · Score: 5, Interesting

    If they could both bury the hatchet for about 5 minutes, a joint bid by Oracle and IBM would actually make much more sense. IBM would take the Solaris platform and hardware, Oracle would take the ZFS, MySQL, and DTrace. They could then both jointly purchase and spin-off Java into an Open Source project or its own firm with each company taking a stake. Since both rely so heavily on Java and neither would enjoy the other firm owning the platform it makes perfect sense for it to continue as an independent entity.

  12. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  13. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 2, Informative

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  14. Re:Strange Database Merge... by Chris+Mattern · · Score: 4, Funny

    Oracle vs. Access

    So, what's next on your fight card? Space Marines vs. Pee-Wee Herman? Guillermo Jones vs. 6-year-old Timmy from down the block?

  15. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  16. PostgreSQL by Civil_Disobedient · · Score: 4, Insightful

    PostgreSQL is still a *huge* player (in fact, they're pretty-much the only open-source, fully-transactional DB available).

    Also, Access isn't MS's DB offering... MS SQLServer is the real player. Access is as much a database as a go-cart is a race car (which is to say, kinda-sorta, but not really).

  17. personally i think Sun is done for by alen · · Score: 2, Informative

    i think their support is crap. every time i call for netbackup support it takes them a week to get back to me. place i work for was scammed into buying netbackup from Sun instead of Veritas years ago.

    i'm trying to get the latest media for netbackup and it's insane trying to register just to download it.

    we looked at the SL500 a few months ago and it was overpriced. everything Sun sells seems overpriced compared to HP, including the servers.

  18. Re:So where does this leave Open Souce? by joe_bruin · · Score: 4, Informative

    While Sun may not be the strongest FOSS advocate, they've made many adjustments over the past few years to open up several products.

    Stop right there. Sun is one of the biggest corporate contributors to open source. Go ahead, count lines of code. I'm betting Sun will be in the top two if not #1.

    Here's a brief list of things Sun has open sourced:
    Solaris - Their entire OS, including ZFS and Dtrace
    SPARC - Their CPU line
    Java - Maybe you've heard of it.
    OpenOffice - The office suite that ships with every desktop Linux distribution.
    VirtualBox - A GPL desktop virtual machine.
    NetBeans IDE - A multi-platform IDE.
    OpenDS - LDAP Directory Server
    High Availability Cluster

    Honorable mention:
    NFS - The Network File System
    vi - developed by Sun founder Bill Joy
    MySQL - Now owned and maintained by Sun-paid engineers

    So, next time you say Sun hadn't done much for open source, look again. It would be a shame if Sun was bought by Oracle and all of their valuable contributions were abandoned.

  19. Re:Strange Database Merge... by afidel · · Score: 2, Informative

    What?!? Oracle has 3 of the top 5 ERP platforms, 2 of the top 3 middleware platforms, and a few of the top BI platforms. In fact at this point Oracle probably makes as much or more of their revenue from application and middleware licensing than they do from database licensing. They also have a 10,000+ employee consulting arm.

    --
    There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
  20. Re:Not Oracle, Microsoft.. by gbjbaanb · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I doubt it, why would they bother with MySQL (unless its part of an 'upgrade' path to SQL Server).

    MS already has SQL Server express, and developer edition versions so I'm not sure why they'd want to take MySQL on. I'm sure they're just waiting for Access to die naturally, or only keeping it around for legacy reasons.

    And as for Java, they made J++ so this is 5 years too late for them, they don;t want Java now - they're more interested in converting Java devs to C# (and Windows lock-in, obviously)

  21. Re:RedHat should make the purchase by GNUbuntu · · Score: 2, Informative

    I don't know if RedHat has the capital,

    They don't. They only have about 1.7 billion in assets and less than 700 million in cash. They'd have to get some pretty hefty financing to buy Sun and I doubt anyone is going to loan them money that would amount to 12-15 times their total revenue last year.

  22. Long thought IBM or Oracle would Buy Sun by olddotter · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I have long thought that IBM or Oracle would buy Sun to control Java. Yes there are innovations that come out of Sun, but hold long can Sparc compete with Intel/AMD and Solaris compete with Linux. Sun just doesn't have the resources to win both of those battles. Java is their trump card, and they don't know how to monetize it. Unless they figure out how to profit off of Java, I see them dieing a slow death.

  23. Sun + Oracle = Yay by adpe · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Let me tell you a story. I work in a professional environment in a 10k+ Person Organization. We decided we want to implement Identity Management. We chose the (Open Source) Sun Identity Manager, one of their enterprise products, based on J2EE.

    The documentation is horrible, but that's not what it's about. Our development machines run on a JBoss AS with a Mysql Repository. The performance is horrible, and I mean it. It's beyond bad, MySql gobbles up the whole server. It takes 95% CPU time and 2 gb ram for our (rather complex) queries.

    On our staging machine (running Oracle as a repository), the same tasks take 10% CPU and we hardly notice it happening.

    Needles to say, SUN thought it might be a good idea (for political reason obv) to include Mysql in their documentation as "supported", although no sane person would actually use it.

    I kinda forgot what my post has to do with this story. I just read "Oracle + Sun" and it clicked. I'm conditioned to think it's a perfect combination.

  24. Re:And... not going to happen. by BitZtream · · Score: 2, Insightful

    When your share of the market is the 23% that doesn't buy anything, then your share of the market doesn't matter. Sorry, no one buys FOSS because of market share, they buy it because people are stupid and like buzz words. People who use FREE software generally are the people who don't PAY for software, so its of little value to anyone.

    I really wish you people could it into your thick heads, companies don't want something thats free, they want something they can sell.

    --
    Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
  25. That comparison chart is really wrong by tlambert · · Score: 3, Informative

    That comparison chart is really wrong; I think it was done by someone who either never actually used DTrace, didn't know how DTrace works, or just hasn't used it well enough to be familiar with it.

    DTrace instruments by placing an INT 3 (on other platforms, it's an illegal instruction) at the probe point and remembering where that was done. The trap handler then has a code path that knows about this, and shunts it over to DTrace for a probe lookup.

    Pretty clearly, whoever wrote that chart has only used fbt (Function Boundary Tracing), and is not familiar with the fact that the trace points can pretty much be put at any instruction location where the instrumentation would not involve reentering the trap handler. This means any instruction, and it's done *without* using break points.

    I really don't have time to fix this for them (and I doubt I'd get edit rights if it started making DTrace look relatively better anyway), but someone involved in the project should actually take a real look at the software they are trying to compete with before they so casually (and incorrectly) dismiss it.

    -- Terry

  26. Re:And... not going to happen. by kv9 · · Score: 2

    People who use FREE software generally are the people who don't PAY for software, so its of little value to anyone.

    it's not free as in beer, you imbecile.