Slow Oracle Merger Leads To Outflow of Sun Projects, Coders

An anonymous reader writes "Sun Microsystems might have had a chance if the Oracle merger had gone through quickly, but between the DoJ taking its time and the European Commission, which seems to get off on abusing American firms, just plain dragging its feet, that won't happen now. As Sun twists in the wind, unable to defend itself, and Oracle is unable to do anything until the deal closes, IBM is pretty much tearing Sun to shreds. By the time this deal closes, there won't be much left for Oracle. This is not how a Silicon Valley legend should end."

Comments

FUD article

[hexghost]

Stupid article - so three coders (JRuby team) quit, and Sun's losing in sales to IBM (which they were doing anyway before the merger).

Re:FUD article

[Red Flayer]

You discuss hardware and software.

Perhaps you are unaware that IBM is primarily a services company nowadays?

The hardware and software is a tool to sell services.

You know that's where Oracle is aiming for growth too, right?

For all the advantages you see for Solaris over its competition, IBM's service offering is miles ahead of Oracle right now...

Re:FUD article

[MaerD]

It isn't AIX from IBM that's burying Solaris, it's Linux.

At the fortune 100 companies I've worked with, AIX was legacy and stagnant, and being retired as quickly as possible. Solaris was losing servers to Linux starting with the web/application servers and moving into the Database space (replacing Oracle and DB2, in some cases with Mysql for smaller databases). Applications that could be run on virtualization were the next big thing to move to Linux. If they could replace large sun boxes (and expensive sun hardware/software service contracts) with a bunch of 1Us or Blades connected to a SAN, it was done.

At one financial institution it was even mandated that Linux be tested before any other Unix because of the cost savings.

Re:FUD article

[TheRaven64]

I'm confused. You're looking for an enterprise database, but you're ignoring the company that makes the best platform for running the most successful enterprise database... because it is in the process of being bought by the company that makes the most successful enterprise database? I sincerely hope I never have to work with anyone who makes decisions based on the same logic as you.

Re:European Commission SUCKS

[bhima]

Perhaps, it's just that the European Commission is just slightly less beholden to corporations than their counterparts in the US.

As far as I can tell their slowness to sign on to other corporatist things coming from the US has been a pretty good thing.

Huh?

[Jah-Wren Ryel]

This is not how a Silicon Valley legend should end.

How should they end?

Spectacular bankruptcy like Enron?

Seems like most in silicon valley do a slow fade into oblivion and are eventually acquired for peanuts and never heard from again. 3DO, Transmeta, Borland, Quarterdeck, SGI, etc...

Re:Huh?

[Sponge Bath]

How should they end?

#shutdown -h now

Re:Huh?

[sunderland56]

Normally, silicon valley companies end like this:

• As the company grows, management makes engineering work on boring projects and support issues
• The top-tier engineers jump ship to newer, smaller companies for more interesting work
• The company limps along for a while with second-tier engineering
• The shell of the former company fades into oblivion and/or is bought out
• The new, exciting companies everyone went to become larger and more successful than the original

For example, SGI may have died, but nVidia and Mozilla (to name only two) are doing quite well, thanks.

Re:Huh?

[Anonymous Coward]

We weren't in Silicon Valley, but our company ended like this: By 1999 we had grown to two offices and about 70 employees, had an award winning retail product and an online mall. We we're still private. After about 5 unsuccessful tries at getting VC, a Canadian company who processed credit card payments offered to buy us for ~$43M USD. They wanted our mall, so that they could make money in about 6 different ways from it. When the sale was announced but not complete, my stock was worth about $1.8M at their current stock price :) Unfortunately, they missed the point that our retail software was what generated the stores in the mall. As soon as the sale went through in 2000, they stopped development and sales of the retail product, laid off about 30% of us, and then gave the remaining people really stupid things to do for about a year while they slowly figured out what went wrong. At this point I was worth about $800K. :| For 6 months all I did was get paid >$100K/yr to drink coffee, smoke cigarettes, and surf the web. Eventually there was a meeting at which they admitted that their business and our business (now basically dead) were irreconcilably different, and announced they were shutting down all US operations. I was on the street Jan 1, 2001, and my stock was now worth $1200 :( Incredibly, when a group of us that had worked on the retail product approached them asking if we could retain the source, trademarks, remaining stock, etc., with the intent of reviving it, we were told that they would never allow us to do this because it "would look bad to the stockholders". As if blowing $43M didn't look bad enough? D'oh!!

Blaming the Govt. Strawman

[timeOday]

The summary places a lot of blame on regulators. But in fact, the article quotes IBM claiming the announcement of the acquisition is what drove people to IBM; that obviously has nothing to do with subsequent delays. As for talent leaving, the article provides one example of 3 employees who left because they were unsure of Oracle's commitment to their work. However, there is no reason to assume the EU or DOJ have anything to do with this. Oracle could have reassured them at any time, if they knew, and cared, which isn't a very realistic expectation for a small team in a big merger. What is motivating the story submitter to put so much unwarranted blame at the feet of the EU and DOJ?

Re:Blaming the Govt. Strawman

[eln]

The government comes into play because they're taking an enormously long time to approve the merger. This allows IBM and its ilk more time than they normally would have to poach customers before Oracle can step in and engage in concrete action to stop the bleeding. So, the government delays do play a role. Yes, Oracle could try (and has tried) to reassure everyone that it will be business as usual with the hardware segment, but until they're able to actually take control of that segment and do something concrete to convince people, the uncertainty remains. Where uncertainty exists, other companies can come in and exploit it.

As for the talent leaving, that happens in any merger because, once again, people hate uncertainty. If someone is facing a lot of uncertainty in his job, and has the ability to go elsewhere, he will probably do so. Ironically, the people most likely to move on are often the ones that would have been the most likely to be kept by the new company anyway, since they tend to be the top talent.

Re:Blaming the Govt. Strawman

[girlintraining]

Americans don't seem to realize what a "global economy" truly entails.

I think you're making an apples to oranges comparison. The average american doesn't know much about business. The average american also doesn't own a business that competes in a global marketplace. A business owner that does compete in a global marketplace is aware of these issues, because s/he must. his/her place of birth doesn't change this.

The European Union's economic policies are designed to benefit business owners in Europe, just as the United States' economic policies are designed to benefit business owners here. Where these interests coincide favorably, there is cooperation (intellectual property, globalization, etc.). Where they do not (monopolies, taxation, etc.) there is not cooperation. Both sides state they strive for "fair", "open", and/or "unbiased" markets, but privately they strive to provide a benefit for their members, which sometimes results in "fair", "open", and "unbiased" markets, and sometimes does not.

The issue here is that the EU is motivated by a need for cultural integrity -- whereas their competition (the United States) does not bring a need for cultural integrity to the negotiation table. The end result is that US businesses are paying for the EU member nations' need for cultural integrity as a condition of competition within the European marketplace. Evaluating the correctness of each position is left as an excercise for the reader.

Re:Meh.

[spun]

So, are you saying American businesses are too stupid to avoid bad business situations? You make it sound as if you think of Europe as our enemy, rather than our staunchest allies. I mean, how DARE they provide better health care for less money than we do and make our capitalist health care system look bad? How DARE they get 32 hour work weeks with minimum one month of vacation. Here we are, working our asses off, and we aren't any happier than them for it. The bottom 80% of our society aren't any richer for it, either. That's just not fair, and obviously, they are evil for not fellating their owning class like we do. Why, if they aren't stopped, our peasantry might just get uppity ideas on their heads and start thinking they should get a share in our increase in GDP.

Re:Really? Got any evidence?

[xaxa]

But $1.5B is in proportion to the fines given to some European companies. (And EU companies are fined by the EU, but it doesn't make the news in the USA.)

(PS Post in ~4 hours when all us Europeans are asleep, and the Americans will mod you up.)

Oracle is OK

[Doc Hopper]

My two cents: It doesn't suck to work at Oracle. Pay is fair and above market, benefits are good, employees are treated fairly, and there are a lot of exciting projects going on to choose from as a techie. If you don't like what you're doing for a living, there are numerous opportunities always available in something more suited to your interest, and telecommuting is encouraged in most "talent" positions, so relocation is largely a non-issue. The employees I work with (admittedly, we're a rack-monkey and operating system nerd crowd) are generally optimistic and excited about the merger.

Yes, as part of the M&A process there have been layoffs from time to time. With the exception of hostile takeovers, they are fairly predictable in advance, severance is decent and fair, the door remains open if you decide to rejoin the company later, and as far as a huge Fortune 500 company goes, it's a really decent place to work. If you work in some of the larger locations there are nice benefits on-site for free or at really reduced prices (gyms, cafeterias, massages, to name a few), and there is a lot of employment flexibility.

Of course there are annoyances like paperwork, lengthy project approval processes, ITIL compliance, SOX compliance, and so forth. Welcome to working for any large company. But to say "People do not want to work for Oracle, fast merge or slow merge" is simply false. By and large, it's a good company to work for, and the low turnover rate and lengthy average employment time amongst extremely talented and well-educated people speaks to overall job satisfaction.

Re:European Commission SUCKS

[Jurily]

Misquoting Yoda cry baby Jesus makes.

Re:European Commission SUCKS

[dkleinsc]

Slashdot user 1049312 tells Slashdot user 926 to hand in his geek card. I never thought I'd see the day.

Although really, the correct syntax is "Geek card you lose. Hand it over you must."