> Plausible, but, then, Oracle would end up in a > bidding war with IBM. BEA and the other smaller > players would get to sit nearby and watch the > suspensful action.
I do not think so. Oracle and IBM follows the "there is room enough" principle.
Oracle would strenghten Java's DB capabilities and make sure Oracle's DB server is the best for Java (and vice versa). Oracle would not dare to close up Java to cut out IBM and others: they know they will all get eaten by Microsoft.
Slashdot Mirror
Thank you for explaining, I'm sure no one got my point except you ;)
10 years ago there was no Apache server. There was NCSA and CERN httpds
> http://info-uri.niso.org/info-uri-policy
.com or .net or else Verisign could set up an on-the-fly registrar site for info: URIs :))
it does not resolve to anything
(luckily it wasn't
> The filesystem will be based on SQL Server 2003, but it won't be a fully functional version of SQL Server.
:)
you mean it will be a standard version of SQL server?
if 14 minutes of that uptime is much, the one who need viagra is you :))
ok, dude, please close your vnc client and stop watching what I am posting to ./ :)
No way, 14 minutes of uptime surely mean WinME.
> Plausible, but, then, Oracle would end up in a
> bidding war with IBM. BEA and the other smaller
> players would get to sit nearby and watch the
> suspensful action.
I do not think so. Oracle and IBM follows the "there is room enough" principle.
Oracle would strenghten Java's DB capabilities and make sure Oracle's DB server is the best for Java (and vice versa). Oracle would not dare to close up Java to cut out IBM and others: they know they will all get eaten by Microsoft.
/me sighs at wasted irony
I think the only reason Oracle would want to buy Sun is to control Java.
> our sun goes supernova
Sun is not going to last long, rumors say it will be bought by Oracle
Click on the link!
you should be in Venezuela.
First post! WOAH! (I should do nightly updates at customers' sites more often)
Italy is too warm for trolls to survive *grin*