lotsa luck, Oracle
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| tuxchick Jul 28, 2007 6:44 PM EDT |
Supporting a Linux distribution is a totally different endeavor than application development and support. It's magnitudes more complex. Red Hat invests a lot of resources in kernel and application stack development, and has built up a large development and user community. No single company can put together those kinds of resources internally. It maybe makes sense if Oracle plans to put together a specialized, optimized Linux designed to support their database applications, rather than a general-purpose OS. But I think they're biting off more than they can chew, and I doubt that a warmed-over imitation Red Hat is going to be very successful. The FOSS world moves fast; you can't release a software product once, then coast on it for years and years like more proprietary companies do, throwing in some extra chrome and bling to entice users into updating instead of making fundamental and useful improvements. Especially since they've been on a buying binge, gobbling up other companies like they're coming off a long fast. http://www.oracle.com/products/index.html. If I were a stockholder I'd be a bit nervous about this sailor-on-leave binge behavior. |
| dinotrac Jul 28, 2007 7:01 PM EDT |
TC - Must be some good stuff in that air you're breathing -- or are you joking? I mean, it's kind of odd to think that the company that puts out Oracle release and version after release and version, aquired and puts out peopelsoft, innobase, sleepy cat's stuff, etc, etc -- a company with billions of dollars and a very nice customer base can't manage to do what Patrick Volkerding does, or a bunch of dysfunctional geeks at Debian, etc,etc, etc. Let's face it -- there are bazillions of Linux distributions. I'm guessing that a technically proficient multi-billion dollar corporation can figure it out. |
| jdixon Jul 28, 2007 7:13 PM EDT |
> I'm guessing that a technically proficient multi-billion dollar corporation can figure it out. With the lone exception of their Oracle database, I've never seen any sign that Oracle IS technically proficient. There's a reason they've been buying up all these other companies, after all. And they don't want to be just another Linux distribution. They want to replace Red Hat. That's a somewhat taller order. That said, they may succeed, but it's not a guaranteed thing. |
| Aladdin_Sane Jul 28, 2007 7:31 PM EDT |
I agree with tuxchick. As a tester in "the Enterprise Space" I see a battle between Red Hat, Novell, and Other. It's good: It's competition. OUL is nowhere. As TC points out, where is their external Developer Community? One thing I feel confident in asserting: Volkerding is having a lot more fun with his distribution than Ellison is having with his. |
| tuxchick Jul 28, 2007 7:33 PM EDT |
dino, I'm not joking. What Patrick Volkerding does isn't anywhere near as complex as what Red Hat does. Not to minimize Slackware or Patrick's achievments; Slack is very nice and well-maintained. But he does not invest the level of R&D that Red Hat does; he's a packager, and a superior one, but not a kernel or application developer. Sure, Oracle can put out a re-packaged distro just like all the other garage-based distributions supported by a small number of people. It may even be a very nice re-packaged distribution. But I don't believe they are capable of replicating what Red Hat does. Even if they have the resources, do you think they'll have the same commitment to free software? Let other people poach their code they way they're poaching Red Hat's? I could giggle myself to sleep over that one. I could be wrong, and I don't wish Oracle ill. I just don't believe they're capable of producing more than a rebranded Linux, and I'll wager dinner at the Grubsteak Inn that they'll get in hot water over licensing. Or at least cry like babies if anyone tries to build something off their brand of Linux. |
| dinotrac Jul 28, 2007 7:50 PM EDT |
>But I don't believe they are capable of replicating what Red Hat does. Even if they have the resources, do you think they'll have the same commitment to free software? No, but do they need it? What if they simply want to put out all of their products on Linux -- that is, THEIR Linux? Or, perhaps, to offer a Linux distro with support to their customers? And, really, what magical thing is Red Hat doing that Oracle can't? |
| tuxchick Jul 29, 2007 8:56 AM EDT |
Well dino, Red Hat is doing something magical that almost no one else has succeeded at: building a successful business around a 100% free operating system. SUSE and Mandriva have struggled since their inceptions. The Linux roadside is littered with the corpses of many failed commercial Linuxes. If a Windows-like experience were the magic solution Xandros would be the top Linux, because their Windows compatibility and interoperability outshine all the others by a country mile. It doesn't make sense that Oracle wants to offer their own Linux distribution just because they think they can make money on it. Red Hat does not charge for software licenses, but only support. Their source code is freely available, without shenanigans, and there are many free-beer clones such as CentOS and Pie Box and all the rest. I can't see Oracle being comfortable with this sort of arrangement- they're going to try to find ways to handcuff their Oracle Linux users. There are dozens of "open source" commercial software vendors, but most of them have hooks in the bait, like free-beer open source editions that are dumbed-down from their paid versions, which typically include sizable chunks of closed proprietary code, EULAs, per-seat licenses that do not include support, and all those fun things that are more typical of the proprietary, closed-source world. I'm not saying these are bad or wrong, just contrasting with Red Hat. Red Hat is a major contributor to Linux R&D- they're far more than just a distribution packager. How can Oracle match that? If billions of dollars were all it took to produce a superior operating system, would we be amusing ourselves with true tales of how awful Windows is? It's hard to understand what Oracle is really aiming to do- are they intending to deliver a high-quality customized Linux distribution that is optimized for their application stack? If that was their real goal I think they would go for rPath, which is designed just for this sort of thing and does it very well. It's sleek and efficient and very customizable, far more so than your average general-purpose Linux distribution. Or they could just glom CentOS and Debian or Ubuntu, as a lot of other companies do, and base their software "appliances" on them. Their public announcements are so boastful and gloating it's hard to see this as anything other than a shot at taking out Red Hat. If all they really wanted was a special Linux to support their application stack they wouldn't be mouthing off about Red Hat so much. |
| jsusanka Jul 29, 2007 11:06 AM EDT |
I think TC is correct - there is something more going on between oracle and redhat than meets the eye. I don't know if it is something that oracle wants and redhat told them to get lost or what but to me there is something.
I don't believe oracle will be successful and I wish they put more resources into supporting their database product. Which is pretty trouble free for the most part because I have a lot boxes that use oracle. Their kernel settings are a pain and their installation process needs work but once it is set up it seems like it is trouble free - at least from the os standpoint - I am no dba. postrgres on redhat is a pretty darn powerful combination too and that would be my first choice as deployment instead of paying for oracle. who knows maybe larry wanted redhat to stop shipping postrgres with its os. do like redhat's slogan "truth happens". |
| dinotrac Jul 29, 2007 11:24 AM EDT |
>building a successful business around a 100% free operating system. SUSE and Mandriva have struggled since their inceptions So, if I understand you correctly, the magic is not about the distribution. The magic is about the business. I can accept that. I can also accept that Oracle can find a way to make money with a Linux distribution. IBM has made a ton of money from Linux without even rolling out a distribution. I'll bet Oracle can manage to make a few dollars too. |
| jdixon Jul 29, 2007 11:56 AM EDT |
> I'll bet Oracle can manage to make a few dollars too. Oracle is already making money on Linux. By selling what they know how to do, a database. Why they think they have to compete in everything else, when the database is the only thing they're really good at, I have no idea. |
| dinotrac Jul 29, 2007 12:01 PM EDT |
>when the database is the only thing they're really good at Ummm...Oracle sells a lot more than a database. They sell business applications also, and do very well there. |
| jdixon Jul 29, 2007 4:29 PM EDT |
> They sell business applications also, and do very well there. Note: Pure opinion follows. I've seen their business applications in use. There's a reason they bought Peoplesoft, and SAP still beats them easily. Oracle's business applications are competitive, but that's all you can say about them. They're nowhere near the top of the class. Their database, on the other hand, is. |
| dinotrac Jul 29, 2007 4:34 PM EDT |
>They're nowhere near the top of the class. Their database, on the other hand, is. More important: They make money. |
| jdixon Jul 29, 2007 4:37 PM EDT |
> More important: They make money. Yes, they do. And if Oracle feels the database market is saturated, then I guess it makes sense to expand into other fields. Given the quality of their other products however, I don't really expect them to challenge Red Hat, any more than they challenge SAP. Standard disclaimers about having been wrong more times than I can count should apply here. :) |
| dinotrac Jul 29, 2007 4:53 PM EDT |
> I don't really expect them to challenge Red Hat Do they even need to challenge Red Hat? I would bet that there are business doors open to Oracle that aren't open to Red Hat. The net result of an Oracle Linux might just be more Linux out there in businessland. |
| jdixon Jul 30, 2007 5:38 AM EDT |
> The net result of an Oracle Linux might just be more Linux out there in businessland. Valid point, and it would be difficult to make an argument against that. |
Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [ForumMods, SITEADMINS, MEMBERS.]
Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!