[Info-vax] Oracle loses appeal in HP/Oracle Lawsuit

[Paul Sture]

In article <kfjqb9$bnd$1 at news.albasani.net>,
 Jan-Erik Soderholm <jan-erik.soderholm at telia.com> wrote:

> 
> There is Bliss in Rdb. Lack of official support for Bliss on Windows NT
> made Oracle to withdraw the Rdb7/Windows product lately in the process.
> 
> Note also that Rdb creates executable machine code for the target
> architecture on the fly when running "Dynamic SQL" statements.
> 

Given the discussions about the complexity of compilers for Itanium, 
generating machine code probably requires a fair bit of expertise, and 
that probably doesn't come cheap.

> 
> 
> > and
> > Oracle would have to retain some expertise there that isn't required on any
> > other platform.
> >
> > So my question is, if Oracle sees value (profits) in continuing to sell
> > RDB, with it's unique (VMS only) requirements in doing so, then just what
> > the hell would be so expensive in continuing to sell Oracle Classic on
> > HP-UX, and VMS?
> 
> Note that Rdb was never realy part of the move from Oracle to stop
> development on Itanium. At least not if you listen to the (Rdb) folks
> from Oracle themselfs.

But for the aeroplane magazine reading CEOs Oracle is Oracle.

In an interview for a role in the nineties I made the mistake of saying 
"Rdb" and was immediately corrected by the director of IT with 
"Oracle/Rdb".  I took that to mean that he had sold it to the board as 
being a name they knew.  This was also a big mainframe shop.

-- 
Paul Sture