Oracle Isn't a Linux Company (Motley Fool) [LWN.net]

Oracle Isn't a Linux Company (Motley Fool)

Posted Oct 19, 2006 0:48 UTC (Thu) by xoddam (subscriber, #2322)
In reply to: Oracle Isn't a Linux Company (Motley Fool) by drag
Parent article: Oracle Isn't a Linux Company (Motley Fool)

> ... Oracle would take the code, improve on it, and release it as a
> closed source product. They don't even have to tell anybody what
> they did.

Have you read the Postgres licence terms? You're not allowed to remove
copyright notices. Customers with a clue would know. But frankly,
Oracle has enough developer expertise in its *own* product that it's
highly unlikely that it would respond to a free software "threat" by
taking said free software proprietary ... it has managed to keep its
offerings ahead of the commodity curve for decades, I see no reason why
it should suddenly cease to do so.

(Maybe the commodity curve will *gradually* overtake Oracle and it will
die a natural death ... but that day is a long way off; perhaps even
further than the heat death of Redmond)

(Log in to post comments)

Oracle Isn't a Linux Company (Motley Fool)

Posted Oct 19, 2006 4:22 UTC (Thu) by drag (subscriber, #31333) [Link]

I don't think it realy matters if people know if Oracle was to do this (although I agree it's very unlikely at this point)

They will still buy Oracle stuff because postgresql + Oracle's improvements would be better then postgresql by itself. They may just have to work harder to justify their pricing practices. :-)

(Maybe the commodity curve will *gradually* overtake Oracle and it will
die a natural death ... but that day is a long way off; perhaps even
further than the heat death of Redmond)

Oh ya.. A LLLOOONNNGGG way off. Not anytime this decade it looks like.