We’ve all heard plenty about open source changing the dynamics of the tech industry and upsetting the old order. Open source, we’re told, is manifest destiny. Companies that ignore it will be consigned to history and CIOs who assert there’s no freebie code behind their firewalls are out of touch with devs happily humming to …
"It means you don’t need big, centralised servers like mainframes or SPARC servers; it's a gift to x86 computing."
You cannot be serious. Have you actually checked the performance of SPARC CPUs against x86 in the past decade? The performance of SPARC is beyond embarrasing and has been falling further and further behind since the turn of the century.
I was at the Big Data 2012 conference last week in London, Microsoft, SAP and Oracle all appeared to be saying that they were embedding Hadoop into their offerings and adding security extensions and extras, these would all be propriety and not likely be returned to the community.
So I would expect to see internal forks of the codebase, with these companies taking updates from the community and hardly giving anything in return.
Business as usual then.
I think you're confusing Politics with Business.
Not possible you say? Oracle has played politics before to get its way – with disastrous results for open-source projects. Oracle pulled the open-source Solaris project, OpenSolaris, back in-house in 2010 – allowing the fledgling open-source effort that had been blessed and spun up by Sun to die. Oracle’s control of OpenOffice has produced the LibreOffice fork in 2011, while Oracle's reluctance to let go of the Hudson build management system saw almost the entire community leave to create the rival Jenkins.
Oracle's actions were driven by business rather than politics, who claims that Apple's decision to end their support for clones was driven by politics?
Interesting that you focus on Microsoft and Oracle and ignore IBM
You start the article mentioning the 'Big Three' - Oracle, Microsoft and IBM and how they have embraced Hadoop.
Unfortunately, the rest of the article focuses ONLY on Oracle and Microsoft and their potential threat to what could have been. You completely chose to ignore IBM. Is that because IBM has not only embraced Hadoop, but has and is significantly contributing to it on an ongoing basis? Do you not find that worthy of mention?
What is it about IBM that seems to encourage this behavior?