<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	xmlns:itunes="http://www.itunes.com/dtds/podcast-1.0.dtd"
xmlns:rawvoice="http://www.rawvoice.com/rawvoiceRssModule/"
>

<channel>
	<title>I, Cringely &#187; M&amp;A</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.cringely.com/tag/ma/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.cringely.com</link>
	<description>Cringely on technology</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 07 Feb 2012 23:52:02 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
<!-- podcast_generator="Blubrry PowerPress/2.0.4" -->
	<itunes:summary>For eight years from 1987-95, Robert X. Cringely wrote the Notes From the Field column in InfoWorld, a weekly computer trade newspaper. He is also the author of the best-selling book Accidental Empires: How the Boys of Silicon Valley Make Their Millions, Battle Foreign Competition, and Still Can’t Get a Date.</itunes:summary>
	<itunes:author>Robert X. Cringely</itunes:author>
	<itunes:explicit>no</itunes:explicit>
	<itunes:image href="http://www.cringely.com/podcast/bobitunes.jpg" />
	<itunes:owner>
		<itunes:name>Robert X. Cringely</itunes:name>
		<itunes:email>bob@cringely.com</itunes:email>
	</itunes:owner>
	<managingEditor>bob@cringely.com (Robert X. Cringely)</managingEditor>
	<itunes:subtitle>Cringely on Technology</itunes:subtitle>
	<itunes:keywords>Cringely, Steve Jobs, LG, Netflix, Roku, HDTV, metal foil drive</itunes:keywords>
	
	<itunes:category text="Technology">
		<itunes:category text="Tech News" />
	</itunes:category>
		<item>
		<title>Sunset</title>
		<link>http://www.cringely.com/2009/04/sunset/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=sunset</link>
		<comments>http://www.cringely.com/2009/04/sunset/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 25 Apr 2009 04:04:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Robert X. Cringely</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[IBM]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[M&A]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Oracle]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sun]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cringely.com/?p=415</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[So Oracle ends up owning Sun Microsystems.  I couldn&#8217;t believe it at first, thinking somehow that it was all just a ploy to get IBM to pull out the Big Checkbook.  And while the deal may have begun with that thought glowing in the mind of Jonathan Schwartz, it ends with the heart of Sun [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><img class="alignleft size-medium wp-image-416" title="sunset" src="http://www.cringely.com/wp-content/uploads/sunset-300x192.jpg" alt="sunset" width="300" height="192" />So Oracle ends up owning Sun Microsystems.  I couldn&#8217;t believe it at first, thinking somehow that it was all just a ploy to get IBM to pull out the Big Checkbook.  And while the deal may have begun with that thought glowing in the mind of Jonathan Schwartz, it ends with the heart of Sun moving a few miles up 101 to where it will certainly die.</p>
<p>IBM doesn&#8217;t want Sun and is gleeful with the idea of Oracle taking over, as you&#8217;ll learn if you read the internal IBM memo copied below.  Big Blue does a very good job here of explaining its thinking and most of it makes sense.  No white knight.</p>
<p>But what will Oracle DO with Sun?  Make a lot of trouble for IBM, or try to, I think, but even doing that will be a challenge.  Java is deliberately unprotected by patents and subject to enough industry oversight that Larry Ellison can&#8217;t just kill it or somehow make it proprietary overnight.  MySQL could be killed, but for Open Source that just means it would branch and be reborn a day or a week later mostly intact and protected by nerds who would by then be very, very angry.  On a positive side Oracle will undoubtedly make some very useful database appliances and may well come to dominate that as yet non-existent product space.</p>
<p>But for the most part what Oracle will do with Sun is show a quick and dirty profit by slashing and burning at a produgious rate, cutting the plenty of fat (and a fair amount of muscle) still at Sun.  If you read the Oracle press release, the company is quite confident it is going to make a lot of money on this deal starting right away.  How can they be so sure?</p>
<p>It&#8217;s easy.  First drop all the bits of Sun that don&#8217;t make money.  Then drop all the bits that don&#8217;t fit in Oracle&#8217;s strategic vision.  Bring the back office entirely into Redwood Shores.  The cut what overhead is left to match the restructured business.  Sell SPARQ to some Asian OEM.  Cut R&amp;D by 80 percent, saving $2.4 billion per year.  I&#8217;m guessing sell StorageTek, maybe even to IBM.  And on and on.  Gut Sun and milk what remains.</p>
<p>The plan has to have been on the table since last Fall when Andy Bechtolsheim, the mine canary of Sun&#8217;s executive suite, left the company for the second time.  Even then it was clear that the options were a good sale or murder-suicide.</p>
<p>I blame Schwartz, of course, but I don&#8217;t blame him, too, because I think he had little choice.  He just wasn&#8217;t a lucky guy, it turned out.</p>
<p>So what&#8217;s next for Sun?  Nothing, I think.</p>
<p>Here&#8217;s the internal IBM memo on the deal:</p>
<p>PPublished on 21 April 2009<br />
News home &gt; Top stories &gt;<br />
Oracle enters a twilight zone</p>
<p>The acquistion of Sun creates opportunities for IBM.<br />
The surprise announcement of the Oracle deal to buy Sun Microsystems creates<br />
some new opportunities for IBM. Since its days as a bright star in the dot-com<br />
era, Sun gradually lost its place in the UNIX server market it once dominated.<br />
How does IBM stand to gain, if and when this transaction closes?<br />
Momentum<br />
First, momentum. According to IDC’s latest report, IBM’s share of the $17 billion<br />
UNIX server market grew to more than 37% in 2008 while Sun’s share fell to 28<br />
percent; since 2000 IBM has gained 19 points of share, while Sun has lost 7<br />
points.<br />
Since 2006, the number of clients that have migrated from Sun to IBM Power<br />
Systems has grown 10% annually to more than 750 clients as of 1Q 2009. IBM’s<br />
Migration Factory has eased the transition for these Sun clients to the Power<br />
platform with its leadership performance and virtualization technologies. In<br />
addition, IBM technologies such as its Infosphere Information Server have enabled<br />
a steady stream of Oracle clients to migrate from Oracle&#8217;s high-maintenenace-fee<br />
database to IBM DB2 and Informix data servers. The fact that Oracle and Sun will<br />
share the same address does nothing to change these trends.<br />
Openness<br />
Second, openness. IBM offers every client the greatest choice and best value in<br />
both hardware and software to meet their business needs. IBM will continue to<br />
support Power Systems clients that have chosen Oracle&#8217;s middleware or database,<br />
just as we will continue to support the IBM middleware and data server needs of<br />
Sun server clients.<br />
Oracle, after acquiring many software vendors partial to IBM server platforms, has<br />
long promised to protect the compatibility of IBM servers, notably Power; Oracle<br />
clients will continue to demand this compatibility moving forward.<br />
Oracle’s self-serving interpretation of “open” sharply contrasts with IBM’s<br />
championing of Linux and the broad open source community. Despite this, clients<br />
committed to IBM middleware have forced Oracle to maintain long-term<br />
compatibility with IBM software through previous Oracle acquisitions of IBM<br />
Business Partners such as PeopleSoft and Siebel, and this bodes well for Java</p>
<p>News<br />
4/21/2009</p>
<p>http://w3.ibm.com/news/w3news/top_stories/2009/04/stgswg_sunoracle.html</p>
<p>technology. Oracle is unlikely to make sweeping changes – it&#8217;s the subtle changes<br />
we&#8217;ll watch for. MySQL, an open-source competitor to Oracle&#8217;s database that was<br />
acquired by Sun last year, should pose an interesting test of Oracle&#8217;s openness.<br />
Sun&#8217;s billion-dollar acquisition was hurting Oracle. If they kill MySQL they could<br />
alienate the open-source community, which loved Sun. If they keep it, they may<br />
not have the ability to capitalize on it.<br />
Client confidence<br />
Third, client confidence. IBM’s consistent roadmaps and disciplined delivery enable<br />
clients to effectively gauge the long-term value of their investments in systems,<br />
middleware and services. Sun’s much-publicized business problems will not be<br />
erased in the minds of clients by the Oracle acquisition. If anything, significant<br />
questions are raised. For instance, the omission of any mention of SPARC in<br />
yesterday’s statements from Sun and Oracle is certain to make Sun hardware<br />
loyalists very anxious about a future where Oracle is calling the shots.<br />
Earlier this month the latest of a long line of executive departures from Sun was<br />
its lead processor designer who headed development of Sun’s long-promised and<br />
much-delayed next-gen RISC processor, codenamed “Rock.” The future direction<br />
of Solaris in the hands of Oracle is also unknown, while IBM’s substantial<br />
investments in the future of AIX and Linux are ongoing and well known.<br />
Cost advantage<br />
Finally, cost advantage. In today&#8217;s economy, clients are looking to reduce the<br />
heavy maintenance costs associated with Oracle database use. IBM hardware and<br />
software technologies together provide a significantly lower total cost of<br />
ownership.<br />
Several Wall Street analyst reports yesterday saw Oracle&#8217;s move as defensive in<br />
response to a dwindling ecosystem. Other observers see the Sun deal as an<br />
attempt to emulate IBM’s successful solutions strategy. However, Oracle’s ability<br />
to manage this type of integration is unproven. Oracle&#8217;s remains an application-<br />
led play while IBM has a thriving software ecosystem of application developers<br />
and a much different acquisition style.<br />
Whatever changes take place within Oracle and Sun, one thing that remains<br />
unchanged is IBM’s position of strength and our proven ability to win against both<br />
these competitors.<br />
More details on the Oracle-Sun announcement are posted on the Market Insights<br />
Web site .<br />
For more information concerning this article, please contact Smith, Bruce P.<br />
(brucesmi@us.ibm.com).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.cringely.com/2009/04/sunset/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>72</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

Minified using disk: basic
Page Caching using disk: enhanced
Database Caching 1/9 queries in 0.006 seconds using disk: basic
Object Caching 229/240 objects using disk: basic

Served from: www.cringely.com @ 2012-02-07 19:45:34 -->
