Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Oracle to buy Sun for 7.5 billion

Z

zz5555

macrumors newbie
Jun 25, 2005
9
0
BTW said:
If Oracle is smart they'd take all the software and sell-off the hardware business to the likes of IBM, HP, Dell, or even :eek: Apple. I'm sure Larry and Steve are still buds. ;)
Click to expand...

Why they heck would they do something that silly? The HW part of Sun makes a _lot_ of money. It's the SW that loses us money (yeah, I work for Sun). From Oracle's public statements (and that's all the information I have), it appears that one of the main reasons Oracle is buying us is to get the HW part.
 
C

cube

Suspended
May 10, 2004
17,011
4,973
applecultvictim said:
Imo they should make open office, closed office, put a good team of engineers on it, revamp it and sell it at fractions of ms office prices while agressively marketing it and offering training on it, so that we finally see someone putting the nail on that money grabbing vampire that is ms office.
Click to expand...

That's called StarOffice.
 
belvdr

belvdr

macrumors 603
Aug 15, 2005
5,945
1,372
zz5555 said:
Why they heck would they do something that silly? The HW part of Sun makes a _lot_ of money. It's the SW that loses us money (yeah, I work for Sun). From Oracle's public statements (and that's all the information I have), it appears that one of the main reasons Oracle is buying us is to get the HW part.
Click to expand...

But Oracle has done just the opposite. Everything is practically given away, and the margin is high on their database and application software.

This has worked well for them, and I doubt they'll flip positions based on Sun (and how their revenue has dropped). Honestly, I fail to see why Oracle would keep some of Sun's storage arrays or their servers. The server hardware is expensive from an R&D standpoint, and Oracle just isn't in the hardware business full throttle. Sure, they can use the storage and tape libraries, but the servers are a no-go. There's a reason why Oracle develops primarily on Linux these days then ports to other operating systems.
 
C

cube

Suspended
May 10, 2004
17,011
4,973
belvdr said:
But Oracle has done just the opposite. Everything is practically given away, and the margin is high on their database and application software.

This has worked well for them, and I doubt they'll flip positions based on Sun (and how their revenue has dropped). Honestly, I fail to see why Oracle would keep some of Sun's storage arrays or their servers. The server hardware is expensive from an R&D standpoint, and Oracle just isn't in the hardware business full throttle. Sure, they can use the storage and tape libraries, but the servers are a no-go. There's a reason why Oracle develops primarily on Linux these days then ports to other operating systems.
Click to expand...

Forget about Oracle as a software company. This is a transformational acquisition. They become a one-stop shop for IT solutions. The only thing comparable is IBM.
 
belvdr

belvdr

macrumors 603
Aug 15, 2005
5,945
1,372
cube said:
Forget about Oracle as a software company. This is a transformational acquisition. They become a one-stop shop for IT solutions. The only thing comparable is IBM.
Click to expand...

I don't think that's going to happen really. I believe that would divert their attention from the existing main stream products and would cause issues with cash flow. Their RDBMS software is second-to-none and I don't think it is worth the risk to become a hardware player.

There are other Sun software specialties where Oracle can get a big boost.
 
C

cube

Suspended
May 10, 2004
17,011
4,973
belvdr said:
I don't think that's going to happen really. I believe that would divert their attention from the existing main stream products and would cause issues with cash flow. Their RDBMS software is second-to-none and I don't think it is worth the risk to become a hardware player.

There are other Sun software specialties where Oracle can get a big boost.
Click to expand...

They are not only selling software. They are also selling services. The hardware is needed to compete against HP and IBM.

And the Oracle/Sun FAQ states that they are "100% commited to customer satisfaction". And Sun's customers won't be satisfied if the hardware is left to die.
 
S

scottishwildcat

macrumors 6502
Oct 24, 2007
294
365
kastenbrust said:
no offence as your a Sun employee, but isnt that what makes most Sun technology actually successful?
Click to expand...
Depends on your definition of success. Open source software has certainly been a successful way to get Sun technology into many new hands, just like iPods have been a successful way to get Apple products into many more hands than Macs ever did. But it's certainly not where most of Sun's revenue comes from.

Contributions from Sun to its open source projects like OpenOffice, Java, Netbeans, dtrace and ZFS, in general, still greatly outweigh those contributions that come from outside Sun. So if Sun/Oracle was suddenly to decide to stop any involvement with, say, OpenOffice, and turn it over entirely to the community, all I'm saying is that development would inevitably slow way down for a while, and may stop altogether if there weren't enough people interested in doing the work to keep it alive.

Disclaimer: Just to make it clear, I have absolutely no knowledge whatsoever of what Oracle expects to do with OpenOffice or any other open source project should the acquisition be completed, so this is pure speculation on my part :)
 
Doctor Q

Doctor Q

Administrator
Staff member
Sep 19, 2002
40,101
8,376
Los Angeles
cube said:
Forget about Oracle as a software company. This is a transformational acquisition. They become a one-stop shop for IT solutions. The only thing comparable is IBM.
Click to expand...
I think that's a key goal: being able to delivering the whole package, a database server ready to go and fine-tuned for an enterprise operation. It matches the trend toward outsourcing I.T. operations (which waxes and wanes if you wait long enough) will let Oracle meet competitive challenges, and maybe even get their foot in the door at shops that use Sun systems but not Oracle software.

belvdr said:
I don't think that's going to happen really. I believe that would divert their attention from the existing main stream products and would cause issues with cash flow. Their RDBMS software is second-to-none and I don't think it is worth the risk to become a hardware player.
Click to expand...
There's always a risk of moving ahead, a risk of getting behind, and a risk of staying in the same place. For better or worse, Oracle is making their move by acquiring a major hardware maker. Now we get to see what they do with it.

cube said:
And the Oracle/Sun FAQ states that they are "100% commited to customer satisfaction". And Sun's customers won't be satisfied if the hardware is left to die.
Click to expand...
I'm afraid that any sensible business would make that promise at the time of an acquisition, to avoid scaring customers away, no matter what is planned down the road.
 
iPhoneNYC

iPhoneNYC

macrumors 6502a
Nov 25, 2007
549
0
Oracle stepped in so quickly after IBM I wonder if they had time to do a full accounted of Sun's worth. IBM kept lowering their offer so one wonders if this a good deal. Apparently, Sun rejected the lower IBM offer because it didn't have enough cash for the executives to fly away with...
 
belvdr

belvdr

macrumors 603
Aug 15, 2005
5,945
1,372
cube said:
This is a real bargain. The market does not understand Sun's true worth.
Click to expand...

Good OS, some overpriced workstations, and decent servers, but support has gone in the crapper. I noticed a huge difference in support when Sun bought StorageTek. Given that, I think the market is dead on, as any product is only good as the support for it.

cube said:
And here we go:

http://www.sun.com/aboutsun/pr/2009-04/sunflash.20090421.1.xml

http://www.sun.com/aboutsun/pr/2009-04/sunflash.20090421.2.xml

http://www.sun.com/aboutsun/pr/2009-04/sunflash.20090421.3.xml
Click to expand...

Still, it's not an Oracle RDBMS. I guess Oracle could sell this to the little guys, but it is still nowhere close to Oracle in any sense. Maybe Oracle could pump a bit of their feature set into MySQL.
 
belvdr

belvdr

macrumors 603
Aug 15, 2005
5,945
1,372
cube said:
They are not only selling software. They are also selling services. The hardware is needed to compete against HP and IBM.
Click to expand...

True, but who says Oracle is wanting to go up against the big hardware vendors on a hardware basis only? HP sells hardware but doesn't really step into the software services that Oracle offers.

Oracle may just want a small portion of Sun's hardware business and not develop those monstrous servers. It seems it didn't work well for Sun.

cube said:
And the Oracle/Sun FAQ states that they are "100% commited to customer satisfaction". And Sun's customers won't be satisfied if the hardware is left to die.
Click to expand...

How many companies do you know of that state they don't care about customer satisfaction, especially during an acquisition?
 
bobr1952

bobr1952

macrumors 68020
Jan 21, 2008
2,040
39
Melbourne, FL
Well since Oracle is the only bright spot in my dismal choice for IT stocks I bought in the late 90s--I guess I have to wish them all the best! Maybe I'll finally get something out of the Sun shares I have.
 
A

ALUOp

macrumors member
Oct 14, 2008
58
2
hooch said:
Sparc chips are very very good chips imo. We are in the process of ordering two 5240s with the T2 chips to consolidate about 20 servers down to two. Should really save the company money on power consumption and Oracle licensing. Solaris containers are really cool and I am still a bigger fan of Solaris than Linux. I know I am in the minority, but I just don't see the lovefest with moving everything to linux.
Click to expand...


I agree, very few people realize this.
 
PinkyMacGodess

PinkyMacGodess

Suspended
Mar 7, 2007
10,271
6,228
Midwest America.
Innovation

Sun also came up with what they call their 'blackbox project' which is an entire server farm mounted in a large shipping container which can be dropped off and wired up for disaster recovery. A company can get their IT assets back running quickly and they could even be used for foreign countries too.

I got a chance to tour a couple of them and was impressed.

I'm sad to see them go. Just like Cobalt when Sun ate them...
 
Eric S.

Eric S.

macrumors 68040
Feb 1, 2008
3,599
0
Santa Cruz Mountains, California
iPhoneNYC said:
Oracle stepped in so quickly after IBM I wonder if they had time to do a full accounted of Sun's worth. IBM kept lowering their offer so one wonders if this a good deal. Apparently, Sun rejected the lower IBM offer because it didn't have enough cash for the executives to fly away with...
Click to expand...

They may say it took three days but this deal has been in the works since the IBM deal fell through. Sun's books were already prepared from the negotiations with IBM, so that probably didn't take long. Compensation for the executives may have been a sticking point for IBM, but the bigger issue was the potential antitrust action. Sun wanted IBM to go to the mat for the deal if the government tried to kill it; IBM wasn't willing to give assurances on that point. An Oracle/Sun deal doesn't pose the same risk of antitrust action. The government will look it over but it's unlikely they will try to stop it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom