Oracle’s Cloudy Future
stratechery.com
Oracle’s Cloudy Future
1–10 of 154 posts
Re: Oracle’s Cloudy Future
#2Oracle has IaaS and PaaS solutions now....
Re: Oracle’s Cloudy Future
#3I am happy Oracle is losing this battle (edit: or at least feeling the heat), one sort of personal reason is that they have killed/crippled many open source projects.
Other reason, they are gaining money mainly because there are enough fools around running big corps, who can conveniently pass the buck if something goes wrong. Similar is true for MS too.
But if you really want to see your money well spent, Oracle is not at all the way. The recent decision by Yandex to shift from Oracle to Postgres should be seen here. [1]
[1] https://www.pgcon.org/2016/schedule/attachments/426_2016.05....
Re: Oracle’s Cloudy Future
#4I am happy Oracle is losing this battle (edit: or at least feeling the heat), one sort of personal reason is that they have killed/crippled many open source projects. Other reason, they are gaining money mainly because there are enough fools around running big corps, who can conveniently pass the buck if something goes wrong. Similar is true for MS too. But if you really want to see your money well spent, Oracle is n…
> Other reason, they are gaining money mainly because there are enough fools around running big corps, who can conveniently pass the buck if something goes wrong.
Well, this can be said for any big business software company. It's the same story with SAP, IBM and friends. Business software is simply not about spending money well.
Re: Oracle’s Cloudy Future
#5I am happy Oracle is losing this battle (edit: or at least feeling the heat), one sort of personal reason is that they have killed/crippled many open source projects. Other reason, they are gaining money mainly because there are enough fools around running big corps, who can conveniently pass the buck if something goes wrong. Similar is true for MS too. But if you really want to see your money well spent, Oracle is n…
> Other reason, they are gaining money mainly because there are enough fools around running big corps, who can conveniently pass the buck if something goes wrong. Similar is true for MS too.
This is also the sole reason IBM still exists, at least in services.
"Oh our system is an overengineered pile of garbage that takes two weeks to deploy an update to a static asset? It's (cue dramatic music) their fault!"
CTO proceeds to get bonus
IBM Consultants are brought in
Re: Oracle’s Cloudy Future
#6This is a wonderful explanation of the original rationale for relational databases. Periodically poeple re-invent IMS' hierarchical design only to rediscover why relations are important. MongoDB's "document database" is a current example.
Re: Oracle’s Cloudy Future
#7[deleted]
Re: Oracle’s Cloudy Future
#8I am happy Oracle is losing this battle (edit: or at least feeling the heat), one sort of personal reason is that they have killed/crippled many open source projects. Other reason, they are gaining money mainly because there are enough fools around running big corps, who can conveniently pass the buck if something goes wrong. Similar is true for MS too. But if you really want to see your money well spent, Oracle is n…
> Other reason, they are gaining money mainly because there are enough fools around running big corps, who can conveniently pass the buck if something goes wrong. Well, this can be said for any big business software company. It's the same story with SAP, IBM and friends. Business software is simply not about spending money well.
Business software is about regulatory compliance. That is the baked in value that these behemoths offer.
Re: Oracle’s Cloudy Future
#9Oracle has IaaS and PaaS solutions now....
and the point of the article is that they're light and provide no where near the optionality and features of AWS.
Re: Oracle’s Cloudy Future
#10I am happy Oracle is losing this battle (edit: or at least feeling the heat), one sort of personal reason is that they have killed/crippled many open source projects. Other reason, they are gaining money mainly because there are enough fools around running big corps, who can conveniently pass the buck if something goes wrong. Similar is true for MS too. But if you really want to see your money well spent, Oracle is n…
> Other reason, they are gaining money mainly because there are enough fools around running big corps, who can conveniently pass the buck if something goes wrong. Similar is true for MS too. This is also the sole reason IBM still exists, at least in services. "Oh our system is an overengineered pile of garbage that takes two weeks to deploy an update to a static asset? It's (cue dramatic music) their fault !" CTO pro…
For many people in IT, generally not the Hacker News crowd, but the guys in the trenches of [insert corporation name here] with ops in many countries, The Money is NOT really the important thing. Risk mitigation by having a passthrough to the big IT vendors is what they are paying for specifically. I work in the IT consulting / business research space. In our surveys, "vendor viability" is a frequent concern, and the more critical the workload, the more weight is given to wondering whether the vendor will be around, unchanged, in the next 3 years.
The risk mitigation factor from large vendors comes not from performance but from reliability. You can trust that old mainframe code will continue to be supported for many years. You can trust that your COBOL workload will be continue to run, and that the 20 years of updates, patches, and tweaks have made it reliable and predictable in a way that precludes rip and replace in all but the most extenuating circumstances.
IT budgets tend to be governed by an 80/20 rule - maintenance vs innovation. Sometimes, its more of a 95/5 in practicality due to shrinking budgets. My experience says that the innovation side is drastically shifting away from these big vendors, but that the maintenance side has a lot more riding on it still.