

Larry Ellison reveals shared Oracle database - esalazar
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/10/01/ellison_oow_2012_database_cloud/

======
Zenst
Having read the article it refers to how Oracle in the early days of Cloud
said it was was crap in far different words and now offer a cloud solution.

"Ellison has come a long way in a short time on cloud computing. In 2008, when
cloud hype was rapidly inflating, Oracle's chief rightly highlighted the
term's relativity and meaninglessness, skewering Silicon Valley's mindless
recategorising of everything as "cloud".

Saliant part being: "At that time, Ellison reckoned he couldn't see how Oracle
could change what it was making or selling in order to capitalise on cloud: "I
don't understand what we have to do different, other than change the wording
on some our ads," he said (<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0FacYAI6DY0>)."

Having heard that original insight on youtube I don't blame him/Oracle, he
does make some good points back then and now for a `database` vendors
perspective. Now they have got the head around there hardware Sun purchase
things have changed.

~~~
achille2
This is the right direction for Oracle. Kudos to Larry for doing a Jobs-esque
180.

------
btilly
Remember, Oracle is the master at trying to charge everyone the most that they
will bear. If Oracle is managing your database, I guarantee that they will use
the data they collect in doing so to attempt to figure out how much they can
charge you. I would not touch this offer with a 10' pole.

~~~
hnriot
You're defining capitalism, charging what the market will bear is basis of the
western economy.

Using the data stored in a cloud database as you suggest would be illegal.

~~~
btilly
No, not charging what the market will bear. Charging each customer what that
customer will bear.

Before claiming that it would be illegal for Oracle to use the information
that it collects while running a database to figure out how much that customer
can afford, I would like you to specify what exactly you consider illegal
about it. If you're basing that on a vague notion that discrimination is
illegal, then you're wrong. Businesses, by law, are not allowed to
discriminate directly or indirectly on a set of protected classes. The
standard list is race, gender, religion, national origin, and age. _ANYTHING
ELSE_ (eg evidence that you have oodles and oodles of money) is fair game.

------
ZoFreX
I don't like the title. I realise it hasn't been editorialised, I don't like
the original. There is _nothing_ wrong about doing a u-turn.

~~~
viraptor
It depends on the style really. It's one thing to say: "We've improved on
what's already available, solved problems A, B, C and can demonstrate how.
Previous solutions were lacking, but we're giving you something new now".

It's another one to go from: "This just doesn't work" to "This is the first
solution that works. Because we've done it this time and we're that good." I
know they don't have to respect their competition... and it probably doesn't
matter for them what people like me think. But that doesn't mean we can't
disagree with the way they're phrasing their announcement (especially when
it's incorrect - there were many shared solutions before theirs)

------
dwj
After using Oracle 15 years ago, then mostly using mysql, I had to use Oracle
again last year and you know what? It's crap! OCI is a ridiculous, error-prone
API that takes a bunch of code to do anything at all.

~~~
hnriot
"takes a bunch of code to do anything at all."

I presume you mean the boilerplate code to bind variables and such. If you're
not a fan of OCI why not use JDBC, ODBC, cx_Oracle etc, you don't need to use
OCI, there are many other interfaces that make life easier. OCI is the low
level interface for programmers not scared of a few lines of code. You'll find
that you quickly abstract away the boilerplate in your application, and it's
really not that hard. OCI has been around for a long time...

~~~
dwj
Oh, if you knew me you'd know that I'm not afraid of a few lines of code, and
I'm not afraid of low-level stuff :)

My point is that when you compare OCI to the C API for mysql, it takes a lot
less code to use the mysql C API, and it is much less error prone. And it
doesn't make sense to either use a wrapper or figure out some framework when
it's a one-time project that I'm charging at an hour or two of my time.

------
arethuza
"We own it. We manage it. We upgrade it. You only pay for what you use"

That might actually be a pretty good model for organisations who have a
limited requirement to run the Oracle DB internally (for Oracle applications)
without investing in specialized support teams just for that one technology.

~~~
iwwr
We are talking about Oracle here, so chances are it's going to cost the same
or more than the traditional on-site db server and admins.

~~~
ibejoeb
I'm sure it's not cheap (I haven't been able to find the details yet), but you
might be underestimating the cost of operating a large database. Even if we
get to amortize and capitalize the expense, there's still a ton of cash that
needs to go out the door today. Today, I can license and operate Oracle by the
hour with AWS, and I don't need any staff. That's been _huge_ for me. No
financing, no cashflow worries.

On Larry's about-face: Oracle's been in SaaS for a while. Now they're getting
into IaaS. He's right, though. When it comes to SaaS, going "cloud" meant
changing the ad copy. IaaS means self-provisioning and metered billing. That
took a little doing. It's a step forward. It may not be compelling for
everyone, but there's a market.

