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

[David Froble]

Phillip Helbig---undress to reply wrote:
> In article <kfjnok$1qa$1 at dont-email.me>, David Froble
> <davef at tsoft-inc.com> writes: 
> 
>> First, I'll assume that Oracle is written in C, 
> 
> Rdb is written in Bliss.

I know that, but that wasn't the issue addressed by my post.

What I don't know is whether HP still supports Bliss.  If not, then we 
have Oracle seeing enough profit in RDB to continue to offer a product 
based upon an unsupported language.

>> Consider RDB.  Oracle continues to develop and sell this database 
>> product.  If there would be any product easy to kill off, it would be 
>> something that runs on VMS, as HP for sure, and DEC I think, and maybe 
>> even Compaq have made noises about VMS users being expected to migrate 
>> to Unix.  It's also quite likely that there are some languages other 
>> than C used in RDB, 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?
> 
> Perhaps most customers wouldn't pay for it without support, and support 
> would be expensive so no-one would buy it.
> 

Huh???

Oracle and it's support are rather expensive, though lots of people 
still buy it.  On all kinds of systems.  So why would HP customers be 
any different?