That was rather uneventful. No fireworks, no memorable quotes...somewhat of a fizzl
SAP has agreed to pay Oracle $120m in connection with the intellectual property lawsuit Oracle filed against its rival over what Larry Ellison calls "industrial espionage." On Monday, the two companies filed a joint stipulation in a Northern California federal court that would see SAP pay Ellison and company $120m for "past and …
That was rather uneventful. No fireworks, no memorable quotes...somewhat of a fizzl
I don't like what he's doing to OpenOffice but you have to give him that...
Oh yes even the claims of unbreakable Oracle. He may have seen it that way and touted it as such, but this is just clear evidence that belief is a far cry from reality even for Larry
I mean, seriously, Oracle demanding $BILLIONS, settling for a lousy $120 Million????
My jaded opinion is that Ellison was afraid of what may come out in a trial, and decided it was time to settle. Now he can go out and buy another fucking yacht!!!
It sounds like Ellison read the chapter titled "Three Easy Steps to Fuck Over Your Enemies" from the (alleged) book "How I Became A [Convicted] Corporate Monopolist" by B Gates.
from blomberg news:
“Let the bastards dream of reducing their maintenance fees,” the Oracle executive wrote, according to an Aug. 5 SAP filing citing a deposition. “I just finished telling Toyota that we’re not going to reduce their bill. Not only that, but they need to buy more software from us!”
SAP said in the filing, “That attitude contributes to customers leaving plaintiffs’ support.”
Now if I am IBM sales, I would be knocking on Toyota's door...
Full disclosure... I escaped the borg some know as the Blue Pig.
Toyota runs SAP on Oracle.
Do you know how much it costs to migrate Oracle to DB2 for a zero net gain?
So if you were to weigh the cost of the migration, and then the risk to operations... Not an easy decision and you have to determine time to payback on the initial cost.
Note: Nike reportedly lost a billion dollars which they cited to their SAP migration several years ago.
Of course its also difficult because IBM sells services along with actually reselling Oracle.
What isn't known is what databases Toyota has in house. Do they know anything about DB2? DB2 on LUW? (Linux/Unix/Windows aka 'distributed' )
When IBM convinced SAP to drop IDS (Informix) support, how many of their customers migrated off IDS to DB2? (I know of only one but I suspect just a handfull).
So if you were IBM's account rep for Toyota, do you risk hurting a relationship?
I don't think so.
"...... So if you were to weigh the cost of the migration, and then the risk to operations... Not an easy decision and you have to determine time to payback on the initial cost....." Well put, that's an excellent explanation of the inertia to change generated by the business's perception of risk, and explains why so many companies out there are still running old systems and software. The IT guys say "let's look at this new tech, it could save money", but the business guys say "but what we have works, so why risk breaking it?"
".....So if you were IBM's account rep for Toyota, do you risk hurting a relationship?....." Hmmmm, but if I was the IBM rep I'd be wanting to make my figure to get my mortgage paid, and there would be nothing worse than my salesmanager coming round and demanding to know why I hadn't spoken to my account about product X if I'm not meeting those lovely growth targets I hear so much about. As a customer, whilst I don't want salesgrunts in my face 24-7, I do want them doing some intelligent thinking and showing us how they could help us (though I would run a mile at the idea of unplugging all our Oracle and replacing it with DB2). Sure, not every idea is going to work, and some could work but be unacceptably disruptive to the business, but we may never know if you don't suggest them. To be honest, if I found that the IBM rep wasn't keeping me up-to-date on IBM offerings I'd probably be looking to get IBM to replace him.
You see? Insulting is easy, even when you're not using your language. I mean your "Blue Pig" expression. Oracle is a great DB but migrating to DB2 in a SAP environment is fairly easy and a very low risk move. Of course, things can go wrong for a lot of reasons... Mostly when something has been poorly planned... SAP uses DB2 internally for development and in quite a few big production systems. I guess they will put no objection to this kind of migration. (not only because Larry is not worshipped in SAP)... Uhmm, I would definitely call Toyota if I were IBM's account rep..
Have you ever done a proposal to do such a migration, using IBM's IM Migration Services to convert someone from Oracle to DB2?
Its not so easy and not so cheap. Not to mention that if there's a lack of skills in house to support DB2 on LUW, then you have to factor training and additional support.
The IBM Client Rep is responsible for Hardware/Software/Services sales. So if they make a bundle selling Oracle support, and a partial blue stack... they'll do it because it means making their numbers while only sacrificing a pillar's product line and keeping the customer happy. (Gee, like I hadn't seen that happen before.)
IBM is known as the borg, or the Blue Pig. Its not a DB2 vs Oracle expression. Just ask anyone who came in from the PWC acquisition or other companies swallowed up by them.
SAP actually used Informix's software not DB2. It wasn't until Janet P 'convinced' SAP to discontinue support for IDS and then pushed DB2 down their throats that they started tuning towards DB2.
Since you think you're in the know... How many SAP/Informix customers moved to DB2? I know of only one customer in the US. The rest went to Oracle. Does that make me an 'Oracle Bigot' for saying the truth?
Yeah sparky, I may be posting Anon, but from what I've said, there are a lot of people still working within the blue pig that know who I am.
But hey! What do I know? Its not like I ever did work on migration proposals... Or worked within IBM's Information Mangement pillar. Oh wait, I did.
The larger the project, the larger the risk of failure, hence the more inertia to change.
The same is true to the investment. The more money you have invested in to a project, the more cost savings you have to show that the new technology will provide, or the more revenue it will add.
The sad fact that people forget is that the Client Rep controls the relationship with the customer. The SSR represents the software pillars, however they report to the Client Rep on the account.
If a dedicated IM rep is assigned the account, they can't say 'boo' without the Client Rep's approval.
So if Client rep makes money reselling Oracle, selling IBM Services to support SAP on Oracle, along with other projects, IBM hardware (or not), and some of the blue stack... He/She is less likely to rock the boat and risk his projected revenue stream because of a tiff between SAP and Oracle.
Its really that simple.
And of course if there are hiccups or glitches on the migration... that's a bad thing.
Then you have to remember the migration is a zero sum gain. You're ripping out the guts of one system and replacing it with another so there is no net new features gained by the migration. So you just spend oodles of money for what? Not to mention you either have to purchase new hardware or lease hardware so you have business continuity. That's right boys and girls, you have to keep your SAP/Oracle system running while you get your SAP/DB2 system up, then migrate over. If you're buying/leasing new hardware... you do this once. If you're planning on using the old hardware... you have to rent kit for the period of migrating off Oracle and then doing the second migration to your existing hardware.
So how intelligent is it to recommend the migration?
Like I said... migrations aint cheap, easy, or without risk.
But what do I know?
Poor winner, comes to mind. People won't cheer him for his attitude.
Now, as I see it, he only has a single goose to turn his attention to -Google. Let's hope they have more success than SAP.
There have been so many horror stories about failed SAP installs that I don't understand how they stay in business. Even though SAP brought HP to its knees a few years ago http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/09/24/hp_saphell_over/ HP hires Apotheker from SAP, do they brainwash the customers or what?
Well, when you get the SAP in and working, it actually does what it says on the tin quite well and in a predictable manner, hence it is popular with management. Of course, seeing as it is usually looking after the core parts of your business, when it's not working it generates masses of management stress and hence the horror stories. It's pretty fair to say that if you don't put in the planning time required, don't allocate the right people, and don't listen to their advice, then you will end up in a mess. From the SAP projects I've been involved in, I'd say the problems start early with an unrealistic view of the implenetation phase, or because management have poorly defined the requirements, and you end up with design-by-prototype during the implementation phase as everyone tried to shoehorn the SAP design into the changing business requirement. On projects where all the planning has been done well and then set in stone, with an experienced team (and especially an experienced SAP project manager), it can be a zero problem task. Our last SAP upgrade went so smoothly that we were actually asked if we'd started yet, all because we planned it for almost a year in advance!
Drive up cost of do business for M/L Ent - give IT bad name.
December 2004 Orafice buy PeopleSoft for U$10.3 billion
October 2007 $AP buy Business Objects for U$ 6.5 billon
July 2010 $AP buy Sybase for U$ 5.8 billion
Perpetual developer and consultant fee, on top of high lic/maint fee - good for who?
"...SAP's true loyalty was to its systems integrators and consultants. These companies make a lot of money customizing the notoriously complicated set of modules that comprise SAP, tailoring it to customers' needs. Often, if you hear of an ERP implementation going awry, it's an SAP implementation. And by "awry," we mean late and over budget – and quite probably scrapped."
(pick your pocket blind)