Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

A Story of O(racle)

tbray.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 64 posts

Re: A Story of O(racle)

#21

Post by [deleted] »

Jun8 wrote: post #20
abeppu wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is there an allusion or metaphor implicit here that I'm not getting?

On a tangential note, if you think The Story of O is about an abusive relationship, I'd say you haven't read the book or watched the movie: (i) O willingly enters the relationship (ordeal may be a better word here) and (ii) it's not your usual S&M or Belle de Jour story either, because she also gains power over her lover, e.g. see the last scene in the movie. So, the analogy may be more apt than the crude master-slav…

[deleted]

Re: A Story of O(racle)

#22

Post by gvb »

jrockway wrote: post #18
maukdaddy wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

^ More hackers need to understand this. When you go pubic with an IPO, the shareholders are in charge. The Board and CEO are elected on behalf of those shareholders. The Board and CEO's function is to maximize shareholder value. If a CEO doesn't consider an extremely generous bid then he is breaking his fiduciary duty to those shareholders, and will be out of a job.

How did Oracle maximize their value by buying Sun? Sun has Solaris, Java, and VirtualBox. All are free. When Oracle took over, everyone that worked for Sun quit. So Oracle paid a lot of money for a bunch of free stuff. Why?

Recent history suggests for Sun's patents, not their software.

Oracle has claimed they bought Sun for their hardware (e.g. so they could do vertical integration selling like IBM), but that remains to be seen if it is true or not.

Re: A Story of O(racle)

#23

Post by msg »

[deleted] wrote: post #21
Jun8 wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On a tangential note, if you think The Story of O is about an abusive relationship, I'd say you haven't read the book or watched the movie: (i) O willingly enters the relationship (ordeal may be a better word here) and (ii) it's not your usual S&M or Belle de Jour story either, because she also gains power over her lover, e.g. see the last scene in the movie. So, the analogy may be more apt than the crude master-slav…

[deleted]

There is such a thing as getting more than you bargained for.

Re: A Story of O(racle)

#24

Post by kscaldef »

jrockway wrote: post #19
j_baker wrote: post #14

Much as I dislike this as a developer, this is a smart business strategy for Oracle. Let's face it: at the companies that use Oracle, the developers aren't the one making the call as to what database to use. That's the call of much higher-ups. About the only solution I can suggest is to avoid working for such companies, but I'm be preaching to the choir to say that.

That's true. The higher-ups can say which database to use and hire a bunch of people to set it up. But if the developers ignore them, they have no way of actually determining this. (Which is what's so great about mandates from Higher Up.)

Relying on a conspiracy of the entire technical staff to keep your job seems like a bad idea to me.

Re: A Story of O(racle)

#25

Post by maukdaddy »

jrockway wrote: post #18
maukdaddy wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

^ More hackers need to understand this. When you go pubic with an IPO, the shareholders are in charge. The Board and CEO are elected on behalf of those shareholders. The Board and CEO's function is to maximize shareholder value. If a CEO doesn't consider an extremely generous bid then he is breaking his fiduciary duty to those shareholders, and will be out of a job.

How did Oracle maximize their value by buying Sun? Sun has Solaris, Java, and VirtualBox. All are free. When Oracle took over, everyone that worked for Sun quit. So Oracle paid a lot of money for a bunch of free stuff. Why?

I wasn't claiming that Oracle maximized their shareholder value ;) In fact I'd argue that Oracle simply burned cash.

Re: A Story of O(racle)

#26

Post by euroclydon »

jrockway wrote: post #19
j_baker wrote: post #14

Much as I dislike this as a developer, this is a smart business strategy for Oracle. Let's face it: at the companies that use Oracle, the developers aren't the one making the call as to what database to use. That's the call of much higher-ups. About the only solution I can suggest is to avoid working for such companies, but I'm be preaching to the choir to say that.

That's true. The higher-ups can say which database to use and hire a bunch of people to set it up. But if the developers ignore them, they have no way of actually determining this. (Which is what's so great about mandates from Higher Up.)

I worked at a place that had a huge Oracle RAC license. We ran non-mission-critical data collection apps on it, but the app which dispensed drugs in real-time, all over the world, not only ran Postgres, but 90% of the business logic was in DB functions.

Re: A Story of O(racle)

#27

Post by brown9-2 »

bad_user wrote: post #4
protomyth wrote: post #2

> The central relationship between Oracle and its customers is a business relationship ... The concerns of developers are just not material at the level of that conversation Sadly, this is why Oracle could buy Sun and not the other way around.

Having an engineering culture and fostering developer mindshare ... hasn't been a bad business choice for companies like Google or Apple or Microsoft (at least in their early days). And last time I checked, all 3 companies mentioned are bigger in market cap then Oracle. What strikes me is ... how the fuck did Jonathan Schwartz allow the selling of Sun to a company who's culture is so different?

"Allow"?

In a public company the CEO typically can only recommend to the Board that an acquisition go through. The board can then put it to a shareholder vote.

The real question is "why did he recommend it?" and the answer is because the company had no other options if it wanted to survive.

Re: A Story of O(racle)

#28

Post by pkaler »

How is this a bad thing? It's all about building the best applications for your customers.

In the enterprise space the customer is other businesses. Apple does essentially the same thing in the consumer space. The user is more important than the developer.

This is a good thing.

Imagine if airlines treated their relationship with the flier as the most important. Imagine if politicians treated their relationship with constituents as most important.

Re: A Story of O(racle)

#29

Post by cageface »

j_baker wrote: post #14

Much as I dislike this as a developer, this is a smart business strategy for Oracle. Let's face it: at the companies that use Oracle, the developers aren't the one making the call as to what database to use. That's the call of much higher-ups. About the only solution I can suggest is to avoid working for such companies, but I'm be preaching to the choir to say that.

Maybe. Maybe not. I've had nothing but bad experiences with Oracle in several jobs now and will emphatically advise against it at every opportunity. Postgres may not be a drop-in replacement for every Oracle use case but for those that are I'll recommend it first any day of the week. Oracle in a job description is a big red flag for me.

Re: A Story of O(racle)

#30

Post by sandGorgon »

euroclydon wrote: post #26
jrockway wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's true. The higher-ups can say which database to use and hire a bunch of people to set it up. But if the developers ignore them, they have no way of actually determining this. (Which is what's so great about mandates from Higher Up.)

I worked at a place that had a huge Oracle RAC license. We ran non-mission-critical data collection apps on it, but the app which dispensed drugs in real-time, all over the world, not only ran Postgres, but 90% of the business logic was in DB functions.

I sometimes think that the lack of books for Postgres is because someone is paying to keep them off the market.

Every few days on pgsql.general mailing lists, there is someone asking for a good Postgresql book (the "High Performance MySQL" kind)

Less books = one more tick mark for Oracle.

Post reply on HN