Strange, they always seem so ethical...
A US judge has slammed Oracle for using "extreme, unnecessary, overheated rhetoric" in its latest submission in an ongoing court battle with HPE. Elizabeth Laporte, US magistrate judge in the court of the Northern District of California, this week issued an order (PDF) admonishing Big Red for its "tit for tat" retaliation in …
"I've always assumed that ludicrously overblown rhetoric was standard practice in US court submissions"
Really? You should take a gander at Magna Carta some time. Oft-cited as the wellspring of all civilized law* (most recently in these very e-pages) it reads like income tax instructions and waffles on about the most idiotic drivel, like the construction of fish weirs.
* If you were a baron, that is. Serfs, waifs, beggars and other riff-raff could still be headed-offed for an askance look or made to carry red-hot iron bars to prove innocence or guilt.
But is Oracle turning into the next SCO?
Seems to me, that when companies lose their innovation, they try stomp on those that still have some (Let face it Oracle lost its mojo in the early 2000's, after successfully suckering a lot of financial institutions and governments, and it still feeding on those same victims to this day).
Leisure Larry's Minions are pushing mostly one relational database. Relational databases are a well understood technology know with numerous databases available. In principle, it is possible to switch databases though there are serious issues with differences in the SQL dialects. And this does not preclude that another database model is a better fit for the data and the end user's needs (a much nastier migration to be sure). The net effect is the core product is vulnerable to market share erosion either to direct competitors or other alternatives if a customer is willing to pull the trigger.
Thus, the minions' antics in suing everyone for any slight is an attempt to staunch the bleeding. Short term it will help as they will win some cases. Long term is it a dubious strategy as they will need a basis to file a suit and those will slowly dry up and suing does fix the underlying causes.
"Long term is it a dubious strategy as they will need a basis to file a suit and those will slowly dry up and suing does fix the underlying causes"
It also sends out a bad message to potential customers - do we really want to take the risk of being reliant on an overly litigious supplier who might turn on us one day? Nah, not worth the risk.
The problem is not the database - Its the applications sat in front of it, which has the hard coded SQL, would have to be rebuild... Oracle's
customers victims then just choose the least path of resistance, which is to stump up the licensing cash.. after all, what do they care, its companies rolling in money, or its public taxes (Which we all know, os reality is actually a magic account that will be replenished it self)
"Seems to me, that when companies lose their innovation, they try stomp on those that still have some (Let face it Oracle lost its mojo in the early 2000's, after successfully suckering a lot of financial institutions and governments, and it still feeding on those same victims to this day)"
^ Exactly this. Something's gone wrong when they're still effectively reliant on their SQL database, Sun's Solaris and rebadged RHEL.
Oracle: Who's got the most money? Me, me, me!
Big Red says this as it gallivants through a field, smashing the tiny startup flowers in its wake, wildly swinging a mace with the phrases "RHEL" and "PeopleSoft" inscribed on either side. Its followers shuffle dutifully behind, faces downcast, their wallets attached by string to the foot of the red giant.
Not defending Oracle at all here, as I don't like the company (I'm still angry they bought Sun).
However, Solaris (technically SunOS...) is a propriety O/S that is not under an open source license (except for a few years towards the end of Sun as a company when they opened it with the CDDL I think it was license, and the first couple of years under Oracle, then they closed it up again).
Therefore irrespective of the merits of this case, you are comparing apples and oranges here.
The open source licenses that the Linux Kernel (GPL2) and its contributions operate under, and the other open source licenses (primarily GPL3 and LGPL, but there are others) that are used by the Red Hat contributions that Oracle sourced for its Oracle Enterprise Linux allow for this.
Solaris license doesn't - with obviously the outcome of this case and any various appeals (maybe resolved by 2025 if we are lucky) to clarify that.
yes, but those are forks of the OpenSolaris that was under CDDL by Sun. Oracle can't "close" that, but they didn't choose to continue contributing the Solaris 11 code into the project. So Oracle Solaris is closed today, but there are other Solaris based OS out there branched off the previous Open sourced Solaris version.
What Oracle does with Linux is completely legit under the licenses it is covered by. Even the CDDL was never as "open" as Linux/GPL, but there were many legal reasons for that because Sun had tons of code in Solaris that they could not unilaterally open source because it was proprietary and licensed to them by other companies, in some case by entities that no longer existed and there were plenty of murky areas where they didn't feel safe in indemnifying those pieces.
So, yes, It's certainly an apples/oranges comparison...
SCO is the UNDEAD. Their corpse is from another dimension, where the concept of rotting does not apply (nor does the concept of sanity).
Only steaks though the heart from an evil-burger, in surroundings drowning in the worst kind of kitch country music, can destroy them, and even then, only for certain values of "destroy". However, Oracle are definitely firmly placed in the same dimension. I doubt even ghost-busters can have any significant impact on them.
I am planning to contact a world-famous exorcist and an Ifa priest to address the issue of Larry the Lamb - this may require extensive human sacrifice - see my "crowd sauce" web page for details.
These included "blatant gamesmanship", "knowingly misrepresenting facts in an attempt to slander", "empty accusations", "supposed grievances" and "nonsense".
That must be Putin on the receiving end then. Expecting a dead cat and a couple of dead guinea pigs to turn up at Larry's house soon.
is that there's is (or at least was) quite a demand to run Solaris on ProLiant. This isn't something HP/Compaq looked for .... it just responded to customer demand (with the plus that it really annoyed Sun/Oracle). Perhaps Oracle should try that sometime ....
Oh yes, and HP has been unofficially supporting Solaris since it was Compaq. Just not making a BFD about it.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019