Oracle intersted in buying Ubunutu

[Alexander Jacob Tsykin]

On Thursday 20 April 2006 04:57, Anders Karlsson wrote:
> On Thu, 2006-04-20 at 00:03 +1000, Alexander Jacob Tsykin wrote:
> > On Wednesday 19 April 2006 19:38, Chanchao wrote:
> > > I'm not sure that 'beating Microsoft' should be a goal in itself.  And
> > > Canonical *IS* a commercial backer.
> >
> > but should not be the only one. I was talking here about Linux generally,
> > not just Ubuntu
>
> Right, so RedHat, Novell and the other for-profit Linux Distribution
> vendors don't count then? And considering that voluntary best-effort
> distributions like Slackware, Gentoo and Debian are still alive and
> kicking, it would appear that the Linux distribution space is not
> exactly rolling over playing dead when faced with the might of
> corporations.
>
> Also, it'd be helpful if you stopped moving the goalposts all the time,
> just a posting or two ago, you were adamant that Ubuntu required more
> financial backers. Now it is Linux in general. Would that be the kernel,
> distributions or both?
>
I was not. Some people, like you (I think, please correct me if I misrepresent 
you), said that any commercial backers buying into Linux would make you leave 
the distribution that they back. Leaving aside that you then contradict 
yourself by pointing out that Canonical IS a commercial backer and you have 
not noticeably left Ubuntu (again, correct me if I'm wrong ;)), but you made 
the argument more general. And I would say that the current commercial 
backers are not enough. No matter howmany commercial backers Linux has, it 
will NEVER be enough, there will always be a need for more. I would further 
suggest that if Ubuntu had the backing of another company, this would be 
positive, not negative.
> > > I dislike Oracle almost as much as Microsoft.. perhaps more so. Their
> > > software quality and support quality is atrocious.  That currently
> > > Microsoft is on top doesn't mean that Oracle can't be just as evil.
> >
> > Microsoft is not evil in my opinion. They make good and easy-to-use
> > software. There are plenty of circumstances I could not recommend the use
> > of Linux for, because it is simply not ready. And when criticising the
> > quality of Oracle's software, consider that they essentially own the
> > database market, so they must be doing something right.
>
> No, Microsoft is not evil, I agree with you on that. What they are is a
> greedy, backstabbing, excellent at marketing, poor at quality and
> delivery corporation. They are convicted monopolists in the USA, under
> intense scrutiny in the EU and closely monitored elsewhere in the world
> due to their business practises.
>
That the are greedy, backstabbing is common to most major commercial entities, 
not reason to single them out. Their practices too are far from unique, yet I 
only hear about Microsoft. I disagree with you that they do not present a 
product of good quality. They had a goal, to make it easy to use, and 
succeeded admirably. It is difficult to criticise them thenon that front. 
> What they have got right, is a reasonable consistency of the user
> interface, but security was an ill-fitting afterthought of a bolt-on.
> Their arrogance is astonishing in itself, but they have to be admired
> for becoming the biggest OS vendor out there with one of the worst
> products to ever have hit the market.
>
again, I say check how you are rating their product. For most people it is 
perfect.
> Also, Oracle *want* you to believe that they 'own' the database market.
> They are big, but they hardly own the market. In many ways, DB2 is a
> superior product and is well liked and used by financial institutions.
>
It may be superior and well liked (I don't know), but if you look at the 
market share statistics, then you must realise that this not just what they 
say.

On Linux, Oracle has an 80.5% market share 
(http://www.oracle.com/database/feature_db_dbleadership.html)

I did not have time to search for other figures
> As always, use the *best* tool for the job, rather than shape the job
> around the tool.
again, that is a platitude.

Sasha