[FoRK] Oracle buys Sun; Now owns Java; Becomes a hardware player

Luis Villa luis at tieguy.org
Mon Apr 20 14:53:33 PDT 2009


On Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 5:40 PM, B.K. DeLong <bkdelong at pobox.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 5:23 PM, Luis Villa <luis at tieguy.org> wrote:
>> On Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 5:08 PM, Stephen Williams <sdw at lig.net> wrote:
>>> Well, not terribly surprising, since they have the money and have the same
>>> customers.  Geographically colocated practically, which makes business and
>>> culture interpolation easier.  Probably good, if they can make the right
>>> moves rather than "evil money-grubbing".  Unfortunately, the Oracle
>>> reputation is more the latter so far.
>>> MySQL and Java handling will be the interesting components.
>>>
>>> http://blogs.zdnet.com/BTL/?p=16598&tag=nl.e539
>>>
>>> I still think a purchase by Apple would have been more interesting all
>>> around.
>>
>> Apple's success is because of their razor-like focus on real
>> consumers. Apple wouldn't compromise that for roughly all the money on
>> Earth. Sun wouldn't know a real consumer if it hit them in the face.
>> Huge cultural gap there.
>
> Agreed. I don't know what Apple would do with Sun....at all.

Competent servers for all their social services/software? (e.g., a
competent mail server.) They could suddenly sell full stacks into
businesses in a way they couldn't before. A normal business would look
at that and scream SYNERGY and plunge right in, and it wouldn't be
crazy. But obviously those businesses are not Apple's core expertise
at all, and so Apple (probably wisely) has stayed away.

>>> Is IBM kicking themselves now?  I bet they buy Yahoo or something for
>>> consolation.  RedHat?
>
> I don't think so. I think it was easy for them to walk away. From the
> way I see it, I think Oracle gets more out of the acquisition than IBM
> does in some cases. From what I understand, I'm not sure if the Sun
> acquisition was more for the IAM product line or Java but it certainly
> wasn't for the hardware. Sun made the mistake of giving all the
> software away for free (or a pittance) in hopes people would buy the
> hardware and failed miserably.

Don't forget services; they definitely wanted to turn all that free
software into service revenue, as RH and IBM have. This is the one
thing that made sense to me about an IBM acquisition- IBM has a
competent services arm; Sun doesn't, and tying Sun's software into
that services arm might not be the craziest thing ever.

Luis



More information about the FoRK mailing list