On Thu, 2005-10-06 at 23:00 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> So, yeah, the above claim is just FUD. It'd be interesting to ask some
> hard questions about exactly how solid MySQL AB's finances are ... and
> how many other support options users will have if they go under.
A possibly more likely and scary option for their users is that MySQL
would just get bought out. I'm sure support wouldn't cost much per CPU
per server per year, at least at first...
IBM have previously bought Informix (who bought Illustra, RedBrick,
Cloudscape) and Oracle have previously bought DEC RDB, so both have
track record of successful competitor take-overs. None of those take-
overs has led to a product actually surviving. Oracle have spent time
running down Siebel, only to completely U-turn and buy them. Of course,
Sybase and CA might get in there first, both of whom also have
successful take-overs of RDBMS companies under their belts.
Oracle's licence sales just flat-lined in their last quarter, share
price down 4%. Their strategy is clearly one of enterprise application
dominance now.
But no, Mark, I'm not worried by the FUD. It just means there's nothing
real for them to throw at PostgreSQL.
Best Regards, Simon Riggs
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
subscribe-nomail command to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx so that your
message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
