Has Oracle been a disaster for Sun's open source? | Hacker News Reader

Has Oracle been a disaster for Sun's open source?

h-online.com

25 pointsbensummers16 comments

Actually, I thought the article winds up making the opposite argument from what it thinks it is making.

To be clear, the blame for this situation for this lands on Sun. It isn't Oracle's fault that Sun withered away to the point where it needed to be acquired.

The article seems to show that Oracle is doing just fine by ignoring Sun's open source assets. This line in the article "They also need to start to think more seriously about how Oracle can contribute to Sun's open source products, and not just the other way around." needs substantiation. If I were Larry Ellison, I see no reason to do that right now. Especially when Sun's contributions to open source didn't do them (Sun) a world of good in pure financial terms.

The other interesting statement is this one "The problem is that Oracle is naturally trying to optimise its acquisition of Sun for its own shareholders, but seems to have forgotten that there are other stakeholders too". As a public company, Oracle has a fiduciary obligation to protect its shareholders interests. It has no such obligation towards the open source world at large.

Most of Sun's open source strategy didn't make them a lot of money, but letting Java languish was not a smart move then and is not a smart move now. (I dislike the language, but it fits well with Oracle's enterprisey business.)

a plan based on your last paragraph: to truly influence a company's behavior, crowd-buy a lot of stock and then ask for what you want.

Oracle is paving the way to turn MySQL into (essentially) SQL Server Express: a free hobbled version of an otherwise commercial database, designed to do one thing and one thing only: pressure existing MySQL developers into moving to (and paying for) a commercial Oracle license. MySQL is nothing more than an onramp to Oracle. This was obvious when Sun was acquired. It's obvious now. Every word I've heard from Oracle regarding MySQL confirms this.

This is what Oracle means by "integration".

You think the number one commercial database provider in the world is going to help build and improve a free, robust, industrial strength database for the good of the open source community? Like they could care less whether you use a free DB or shell out for an Oracle license? Please. Oracle sees MySQL as a huge potential market, nothing more. And this is how the evisceration begins.

Just in case you didn't know, Oracle already has an Express version of the Oracle db. It has several limitations (mainly memory and a 5gb storage limit), but it is completely free.

http://www.oracle.com/technology/products/database/xe/index....

It's currently 10g, but from rumors I've heard, the 11gR2 Express version isn't too far away.

We're running a project on it right now. I'm not sure why my comment was downvoted-- shoot the messenger, I suppose-- but how is this relevant to the disposition of MySql as a payramp into commercial Oracle licenses? Or are you saying MySQL users have nothing to fear because Oracle already has a free "express" DB?

I was simply stating that Oracle already has an Express edition, since you mentioned you thought they were going to turn MySQL into a SQLServer Express-type product. I actually agree with your overall point. It's definitely not in Oracle's favor to improve MySQL or attempt to increase its use. If anything, they will continue to have a free, community edition, of MySQL, and then probably also spin off a commercial version targeted to those that don't need the full power of an Oracle database.

Oracle seems to make a majority of its money in support contracts, not licensing. I think they could do quite well if they released a commercial version of MySQL and sold support for it. (They may already do this, I'm not sure.)

Good point, and it all comes down to whether Oracle wants to play hardball. I saw a good discussion of this a while back, even touching on the disposition of some of the MySQL forks. Can't seem to find it anymore.

It's probably obvious to say this but Java 7 will be very telling for how Oracle is going to proceed. Java needs some punching-up if it's going to continue as a go-to language (yes, I'm well aware of the trends away from Java and the general opinions here on HN - that doesn't change the fact that Java is one of the most deployed production languages around and will continue to be used/maintained for years to come).

> but Java 7 will be very telling for how Oracle is going to proceed

Considering how the Java7 milestones / OpenJDK developments are going right now, I think you're going to be disappointed.

Would you care to elaborate?

I'm about to move to a Java shop and for a long time I've just been taking the criticism of Java at face value. Now that I will have a stake in it I am really interested in what people who have been with Java a long time are seeing as the trends.

I'll venture a guess - there hasn't been enough clear focus on what Java7 will be and there's been a long gap between 6 & 7 (4yrs versus 2yrs for previous versions). Combined with Oracle's acquisition of Sun, there are a lot of questions in the air. Hopefully, JavaOne in September will provide some answers.

That said, Java is a good enough language and still quite powerful. You can do a lot of things that are possible in other languages, but the code isn't as concise. There are open-source libraries and frameworks for just about everything. Spring and Google have both taken up Sun's slack.

Java's not going away any time soon because it's too widely used.

If it suits your needs, you don't need trends to use it. And nonetheless, it has a vibrant open-source ecosystem.

That said, in order for it to evolve, I fear a fork is needed (which for mobile apps, has already happened with Android).

Of course, if Java 7 tanks Oracle can just say that all the wrong decisions were made by Sun before the acquisition. Then Java 8 becomes the real test.

Also, I think most open source people are happy with OpenJDK; only a small minority appear to care about the Harmony hypocrisy.

In spite of other products, Oracle seem to be committed to an Open Source Virtualbox.

Sun's failing has been a disaster for its open source assets, not Oracle buying them out.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com