'We had to educate Oracle about our contract,' CIO says after Big Red audit
1–10 of 152 posts
Re: 'We had to educate Oracle about our contract,' CIO says after Big Red audit
#2Oracle's favourite phrase seems to be "You're out of compliance", and their only solution is for you to pay more.
Re: 'We had to educate Oracle about our contract,' CIO says after Big Red audit
#3Oracle's favourite phrase seems to be "You're out of compliance", and their only solution is for you to pay more.
And if they can’t say that (ie when it’s not true), they will intimate that you might be out of compliance, and hope you’re worried enough to just pay more anyway.
Re: 'We had to educate Oracle about our contract,' CIO says after Big Red audit
#4> Earlier last year, it made changes to the Oracle Java SE subscription model, basing it on a per-employee metric many said would increase costs for users.
Would running Java under Corretto 21 change this?
Re: 'We had to educate Oracle about our contract,' CIO says after Big Red audit
#5"a specialist advisory company helping clients deal with Oracle licenses"
I would (naively, I know) imagine that if you need to hire a third party to help you sort out your licenses with a vendor, you would do whatever it takes to get rid of that vendor. It's almost as if Oracle wants their customers to ditch them the first chance they get.
Re: 'We had to educate Oracle about our contract,' CIO says after Big Red audit
#6A few years ago, my then-employer (a smallish company, < 150 employees) had to deal with an Oracle compliance audit. I was shocked at the time to learn that there are companies (like Palisade Compliance mentioned in this article) that specialize in Oracle license compliance. We made it through just fine (in fact I believe we managed to get a small refund!), but having been through that (though not in any way directly involved), my take is that no one should ever do business with Oracle if they can possibly avoid it.
Re: 'We had to educate Oracle about our contract,' CIO says after Big Red audit
#7Oracle's favourite phrase seems to be "You're out of compliance", and their only solution is for you to pay more.
Used to work there due to acquihire (throwaway acct since regular can out me).
Engineers were walked through how to interact with clients; don’t say this or that because of laws and treaties. But also to listen for customer language that suggests a customer is cheating Oracle; let Oracle know and they will send the lawyers.
It was a very paranoia driven environment.
Re: 'We had to educate Oracle about our contract,' CIO says after Big Red audit
#8"a specialist advisory company helping clients deal with Oracle licenses" I would (naively, I know) imagine that if you need to hire a third party to help you sort out your licenses with a vendor, you would do whatever it takes to get rid of that vendor. It's almost as if Oracle wants their customers to ditch them the first chance they get.
Once you're using an Oracle database, you are probably using proprietary Oracle features, SQL syntax, client libraries, etc. The first chance you get might be a while. I once worked on a project porting an app from Oracle to another commercial DB. When Oracle is deeply embedded in your applications, it's easier said than done.
Re: 'We had to educate Oracle about our contract,' CIO says after Big Red audit
#9I know, I know, but hear me (far) out.. didn't Snowflake start out from ex Oracle people?
Re: 'We had to educate Oracle about our contract,' CIO says after Big Red audit
#10> Earlier last year, it made changes to the Oracle Java SE subscription model, basing it on a per-employee metric many said would increase costs for users. Would running Java under Corretto 21 change this?
Yes, all of this Oracle Java licensing drama only applies if you're using the Oracle JDK.
The vast majority of people can just use a JDK from any of the other vendors and tell Oracle to pound sand.
Even if you do need paid support, you should pay Azul instead of Oracle, just out of principle.