I was just using Glassfish as an example... but you kind of made my point: IBM is so big that there isn't much Sun has that IBM doesn't already have a competitor for. IBM uses Geronimo in IBM clothing (WAS CE) as the entry level free starter for Websphere. Now all of a sudden they're gonna tell people Glassfish is the Websphere starter kit? Oracle could (potentially) keep Glassfish as the entry level "feeder" server for Weblogic.
Likewise for MySQL... more or less everyone agrees that $$$ aside, Oracle is the best DB solution out there. But obviously many can't / won't pay what Oracle demands. So MySQL gets Oracle's foot in the door at those shops now so they can now try to sell them things like Coherence, WebLogic, etc, etc. I'm not sure but I believe IBM already has a low cost (maybe even free) scaled back version of DB2 for this very purpose. Ultimately, who knows what will happen. But at least in my eyes, there would clearly seem to be less of an overlap between Sun/Oracle product lines vs IBM/Sun... which to me implies maybe Oracle will keep more of Sun's stuff around. And IBM's track record on acquisitions is slash and burn - take the customers, cherry pick any great tech and axe everyone/thing else. A serious argument could be made that outside of owning Java, the only thing IBM was interested in buying Sun for was to eliminate a sizable competitor... IBM would have had something like 50% of the high end server market assuming they retained all Sun customers in a merger. On May 14, 11:51 am, Joe Data <[email protected]> wrote: > On May 13, 10:56 am, Sean Comerford <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > Whatever happens, I think we're all better off with Oracle buying Sun than > > IBM... an IBM acquisition would have been a complete blood bath for the Sun > > tech + employees I'd say. Something like Glassfish has at least some small > > chance of surviving at Oracle... no way IBM would have let it compete with > > their crappy cash cow Websphere. > > I think your logic is flawed - following your thinking, Oracle needs > to kill MySQL and Glassfish immediately because they compete with > their cash cows Oracle DB and Oracle Application Server (formerly BEA > Weblogic). I think Oracle will position MySQL / Glassfish as the > "entry level web software" and have their DB / App Server as the > "enterprise systems" (IBM does that with Apache Geronimo vs. > WebSphere). This probably means that MySQL / Glassfish will not get a > lot more "enterprise features" to keep the differentiation intact. > > For MySQL, Oracle already hinted at that positioning - at the MySQL > user conference last month, Ken Jacbos, vice president of product > strategy in Oracle's server technologies division, said that " MySQL > had 'done a fabulous job of capitalizing web application development' > while Oracle had 'done a fabulous job' in the enterprise and running > packaged applications" (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/04/22/ > oracle_jacbos_mysql/page2.html). --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Java Posse" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
