Oracle has brought top talent from Amazon and MS, including Deepak Patil who launched Microsoft Azure: http://agetimes.net/tech/enterprise/this-is-how-oracle-lured...
Oracle’s Cloudy Future
21–30 of 154 posts
Re: Oracle’s Cloudy Future
#22A genuine question: If you have worked with any fortune 500/1000 companies (Lets pick non software based companies) either directly or if they are your customers, how many of them use Oracle database or SQL Server? Some of the reasons why this trend WILL continue: 1. Critical software like databases needs support. To the point where there should be someone who can come on premise to fix things. 2. We need to use X be…
4. You can buy/hire expertise in their products in pretty much any location you want to do business.
Re: Oracle’s Cloudy Future
#23What a lot of these analysts overlook is why Oracle is trying to take on Amazon, despite being years late to the party. I believe it's a defensive move: Oracle is seeing long-time customers deploy new applications in AWS, and that customer starts to realize, "hey, that went pretty well, why not move more of my stuff to AWS?" Their Oracle sales rep comes calling, and suddenly a once-reliable customer needs fewer Oracl…
> why Oracle is trying to take on Amazon, despite being years late to the party. I believe it's a defensive move
Ellison is all about the money. When "the cloud" started, he quietly bankrolled a bunch of companies spearheading the space, so he didn't have to risk his cash-cow. Once the space was proven, he's steered the whole company - and he didn't do it yesterday, he's done it about 6 years ago. You're seeing results today because Oracle is large, it takes a while to release stuff that has almost been rewritten from scratch to fit the new paradigm, and it takes even more to sell it to Oracle's very conservative userbase.
If it succeeds, the subscription model will make Oracle even more money than before. However, they are effectively rewriting from scratch a large number of their products; this is why they are very limited. It will take another 5 years before they can reach feature-parity with on-premise solutions, assuming on-prem doesn't get anything new in the meantime. Performance is also pretty dismal for some cloud products at the moment.
Re: Oracle’s Cloudy Future
#24Oracle has brought top talent from Amazon and MS, including Deepak Patil who launched Microsoft Azure: http://agetimes.net/tech/enterprise/this-is-how-oracle-lured...
What a terrible article, and written in such layman language:
"it comes as “bare metal,” a attention tenure for servers with no program installed"
Re: Oracle’s Cloudy Future
#25A genuine question: If you have worked with any fortune 500/1000 companies (Lets pick non software based companies) either directly or if they are your customers, how many of them use Oracle database or SQL Server? Some of the reasons why this trend WILL continue: 1. Critical software like databases needs support. To the point where there should be someone who can come on premise to fix things. 2. We need to use X be…
4. You can buy/hire expertise in their products in pretty much any location you want to do business.
5. you can buy/hire accredited expertise as well, which is something BigCo risk-averse management often prefers over competent-but-unaccredited people.
Re: Oracle’s Cloudy Future
#26A genuine question: If you have worked with any fortune 500/1000 companies (Lets pick non software based companies) either directly or if they are your customers, how many of them use Oracle database or SQL Server? Some of the reasons why this trend WILL continue: 1. Critical software like databases needs support. To the point where there should be someone who can come on premise to fix things. 2. We need to use X be…
> how many of them use Oracle database or SQL Server?
All of them on our portfolio, which are all non software based companies, rather telecomunications, manufacturing, healthcare, commerce, and so on.
Sometimes there are a few projects using Postgres or MySQL, but usually those are small department experiments that either stay small or are eventually migrated to Oracle/SQL Server.
Also I am yet to work in any NoSQL project.
Re: Oracle’s Cloudy Future
#27> Software Development Laboratories implemented it and called it Oracle, and in 1979 sold it to the CIA...
I've long suspected that Oracle's success was due to becoming the de facto RDBMS for any and all government TLA's. I think this is part of Ellison's legendary arrogance. He knows he has the US government by the short hairs when it comes to IT.
I think it also ties well with Sun CEO Scott McNealy's famous, "You have no privacy; get over it," comment. McNealy understood that the CIA (and NSA, FBI, et. al.) were running big data mining operations -- with Oracle, as that was the only game in town, at that point -- on his hardware, but he couldn't just come out and say that.
Re: Oracle’s Cloudy Future
#28Earlier quoted context omitted.
> 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…
Well, thing is, Open Source is changing that proposition. As long as you're prepared to be conservative in your choices, something like Debian + Apache + OSS programming language will likely be around 20-40 years from now.
When is the last time an OSS programming language that took off actually died? For example, even though it's not as popular Perl 5 is still used professionally in many environments and as far as I know the ecosystem actually went through a sort of renaissance a few years back.
And these days I think it's even easier for OSS ecosystems to achieve critical mass and sustain themselves for decades since communication is easier (a lot more broadband internet in the world) and there's a lot more programmers around. Python, Ruby, PHP & co will probably be around long after I'm dead.
Re: Oracle’s Cloudy Future
#29I 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…
Don't forget the original reason: backward compatibility with complicated, mission-critical software on weird hardware nobody can legally clone. These businesses would have to port all their stuff to avoid IBM. They probably don't even know what it does. So, they stick with them to mitigate that risk.
Re: Oracle’s Cloudy Future
#30A genuine question: If you have worked with any fortune 500/1000 companies (Lets pick non software based companies) either directly or if they are your customers, how many of them use Oracle database or SQL Server? Some of the reasons why this trend WILL continue: 1. Critical software like databases needs support. To the point where there should be someone who can come on premise to fix things. 2. We need to use X be…
In my experience (adding to your list):
4. We are paying big bucks to license industry-specific commercial software that forces Oracle or SQL Server.
5. We already have the licenses available via an EA, so why not keep using the same tech for other projects?
6. We can't find highly qualified offshore labor to support FOSS software/platforms (this isn't really true anymore, but it definitely was 10 years ago).
7. We have various data interchanges with our trading partners and using X makes it easier.
8. We already have all this ingrained experience with X and we're a thin margin company already. We can't afford the switching costs. Another angle for this argument is CapEx (big purchases) vs OpEx (labor), and how corps handle IT budgeting.