[Info-vax] Trial Phase 2 (was Re: HP wins Oracle Itanium case)

[David Froble]

JF Mezei wrote:

> If the court used imprecise wording, then it is normal for Oracle to
> request changes/clarification to be precise in the wording. Oracle needs
> to tell its shareholders how much this folly will cost it, so they need
> to find out about all the dots on the "i"s  so they can properly
> calculate exactly what their obligation is.

This suggestion of "how much this folly will cost them" really has no merit.

Would HP really care about Oracle, if their customers were not buying 
and using Oracle?  I doubt it.

So, Oracle is a company that offers a product, and charges large amounts 
of money for it.  If HP customers continue to purchase Oracle, then 
isn't that what Oracle is in business to do, sell product for profit?

Only if you can show that the investment in selling to HP customers is 
greater than the income from HP customers could anyone make a case for 
Oracle dropping HP customers.  I seriously doubt you can do so.  If the 
market was that small, HP never would have cared what Oracle did.

So, if selling to HP customers is not a money losing business, then 
what's this all about?

1) Oracle buys Sun, and wants to hurt a Sun competitor ?

2) HP fires Larrys good buddy Hurd, and Larry is going to punish HP ?

3) ?????

Frankly, while it doesn't make business sense, I'll choose door #2. 
Hell, Larry just bought himself an island, and will most likely have his 
own private airstrip for his jet.  You got to wonder just how much he 
needs the money.  Exercising his ego might be more important to him.