[Info-vax] Any stronger versions of the LMF planned ?, was: Re: LMF Licence

[chris]

On 08/09/21 21:35, John Dallman wrote:
> In article<serrmi$1akh$1 at gioia.aioe.org>, chris-nospam at tridac.net (chris)
> wrote:
>
>> On 08/09/21 19:04, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
>>> On 8/9/2021 1:37 PM, chris wrote:
>>>> Perhaps so, but desn't change the fact that Oracle have made a
>>>> support only business model a success, Linux or Solaris. A vast
>>>> range of s/w from that site, same business.
>
> Oracle are not primarily in the OS business. Nor were Sun.
>
> Sun were in the hardware business, and became non-viable when commodity
> hardware with Linux became far more cost-effective than their own
> hardware with Solaris.
>
> Oracle are in the database software business. The database is free to
> evaluate, but /not/ to use for commercial production work.

Of course, all that is public knowledge and here at least, have been
using Sun kit for far longer than vms. That's sad, because VMS was the
first serious OS I worked with and I really liked it. At least with
some other proprietary systems, I can evaluate at no cost and use them
without limit for non commercial purposes. More likely to find something
to recommend to clients under such conditions.

>
>> Of course, but we are not suggesting that and in any case, Oracle
>> always have, right back to the days of Sun, done all the Solaris
>> development in house, millions of $, but have made money from it
>> none the less.
>
> They seem to have rather lower levels of spending on that these days.

Yes, nothing stays the same, but still doesn't negate the point I was
trying to make about successful software licensing models...


>
> John