Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

cancel ×

109 comments

first? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34100046)

first?

Firsrt question (2, Insightful)

Chrisq (894406) | more than 3 years ago | (#34100052)

What patents do they own?How can we moeterise them?

Re:Firsrt question (1)

Pojut (1027544) | more than 3 years ago | (#34100082)

I'm not sure, but I imagine that if they paid $1 billion (mwahahaha), ATGs patent portfolio is extensive.

Re:Firsrt question (1)

Yvanhoe (564877) | more than 3 years ago | (#34100804)

I am so waiting that the IP-bubble bursts.

Re:Firsrt question (2, Insightful)

gstoddart (321705) | more than 3 years ago | (#34100092)

What patents do they own?How can we moeterise them?

What clients do they have? Migrate them to Oracle!

Re:Firsrt question (4, Interesting)

afidel (530433) | more than 3 years ago | (#34100306)

Yep, at ~$1M per customer Oracle's obviously expecting some serious revenue generation from this acquisition.

Re:Firsrt question (1)

gstoddart (321705) | more than 3 years ago | (#34100474)

Yep, at ~$1M per customer Oracle's obviously expecting some serious revenue generation from this acquisition.

And, then once you're in the door with Oracle for the eCommerce stuff, you try to get Oracle into the rest of the company.

Then the real money starts, what with the sun hardware and support contracts and all.

Re:Firsrt question (2, Insightful)

Chrisq (894406) | more than 3 years ago | (#34101542)

Yep, at ~$1M per customer Oracle's obviously expecting some serious revenue generation from this acquisition.

And, then once you're in the door with Oracle for the eCommerce stuff, you try to get Oracle into the rest of the company.

Then the real money starts, what with the sun hardware and support contracts and all.

You mean like "The next release of the ecommerce suite runs on Oracle/Weblogic app server only".

Re:Firsrt question (3, Insightful)

gstoddart (321705) | more than 3 years ago | (#34103390)

You mean like "The next release of the ecommerce suite runs on Oracle/Weblogic app server only".

Exactly. I can guarantee that Oracle will change that software to require Oracle. That's what companies that grow through acquisition do, is move the existing customer base to use their product.

And, then once you've made them buy an Oracle for the eCommerce app, you might as well buy one for the rest of your enterprise data. And you're gonna need equipment and a maintenance agreement -- you always need a maintenance agreement.

Before long, your enterprise runs on Oracle, you have a maintenance agreement for each machine doing it -- oh, and since it's Oracle you need 3x the hardware to do what you used to do before since there is a small fleet of machines needed to support Oracle's solutions. Especially now that they are the hardware vendor.

Me, I can see some of the users of this software being on the hook for tens of millions of dollars each year once the Oracle licensing machine is through with them. Oracle will try to bleed them dry as much as they can manage.

Re:Firsrt question (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34101922)

There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.

And I thought I was so clever getting out of jury duty. Fuck, now I have to wait another 6 six years before I start shooting!

Re:Firsrt question (2, Funny)

contra_mundi (1362297) | more than 3 years ago | (#34100122)

Meteorize them?

A big solid object hurling at Earth sounds about as disruptive to society as this patent system.

+1 Accidentally Insightful.

Re:Firsrt question (1)

Dishevel (1105119) | more than 3 years ago | (#34100668)

Molesterize?

Here's the list of patents acquired: (4, Informative)

ciaran_o_riordan (662132) | more than 3 years ago | (#34100256)

Re:Here's the list of patents acquired: (0)

L4t3r4lu5 (1216702) | more than 3 years ago | (#34100488)

Mod this down, it's for the above person only.

When I mouse over your logo in the top left corner, the background image is replaced with a grey box of the same size. Checked in Chromium and Firefox on Ubuntu 10.10 and IE 8 on Windows. I say this to you as you seem quite heavily involved with the site.

Re:Here's the list of patents acquired: (1)

ciaran_o_riordan (662132) | more than 3 years ago | (#34100588)

Maybe someone can help with that css problem.

Thing is, I want text-links in the articles to have a grey background when someone hovers the mouse over them, but the only way I know to do this is by having all link-things turn fully grey backgrounded whenever the mouse is over them.

The image in the top left is part of a big link area, so the whole link area turns grey.

It irritates me too. Anyone know the html/css magic needed?

The current css is at:
http://en.swpat.org/wiki/MediaWiki:Common.css [swpat.org]
(Normal users can't edit that page but you could leave a note on its Talk: page)

Re:Here's the list of patents acquired: (1)

Serious Callers Only (1022605) | more than 3 years ago | (#34100932)

For a start, if you're using CSS, why is the logo background specified in the html doc?

a style="background-image: url(/images/swpat-logo.png);" href="/wiki/Software_patents_wiki:_home_page" title="Visit the main page"

refer to that link by the id of the element above, or give it a class/id, and set the background image in CSS, so that all your styling is in one place. Anyway, I imagine something like

#p-logo a:hover {background-image: url(/images/swpat-logo.png);}

would work for you, or (better), set the hover only on the links you want to go grey, by using the parent elements to select links only in the nav bar and the main content block - that way nothing else in the header, footer or anywhere else on your page can be affected. Your news item links don't even have the grey background at the moment anyway, so there is probably some conflict there to be fixed.

fixed, thanks. (1)

ciaran_o_riordan (662132) | more than 3 years ago | (#34104592)

Got it. Here's what worked:

#p-logo a:hover {background: none; background-repeat: no-repeat;}

The HTML is generated by Mediawiki, so I can't change that without patching the code (and the sys admins wouldn't be too happy with having to maintain a patch for each upgrade).

Thanks. (and also to the anonymous poster just below.)

Re:Here's the list of patents acquired: (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34100938)

#p-logo a:hover{background: transparent !important;}

Seems to work. Not sure it is minimal though.

Re:Here's the list of patents acquired: (4, Insightful)

ledow (319597) | more than 3 years ago | (#34100630)

All mainly software patents, by the look of it, and generic ones at that. A 1999 patent for pushing session-state information to a backup server, to a 2001 patent for an embedded web link in a document. All crap, by the look of it, and a lot of them only filed (not issued) and all of them pretty much of the "patent bandwagon" type (i.e. "John patented a web link last week, let's see if we can patent something just as obvious and well-used!"). There's even one there for shipping out a customer's order in a different order for efficiency. Let's patent using a lever to reduce work next!

I don't see anything that holds much clout, but they are likely to have some Java patents, or at least something along those lines.

Sorry Oracle, your recent actions make me extremely suspicious and I don't even *try* to think it might be an innocent purchase any more. See what destroying reputations does? (and, really, I'm not sorry for Oracle at all).

Re:Here's the list of patents acquired: (1)

gstoddart (321705) | more than 3 years ago | (#34100866)

Sorry Oracle, your recent actions make me extremely suspicious and I don't even *try* to think it might be an innocent purchase any more. See what destroying reputations does? (and, really, I'm not sorry for Oracle at all).

But, be honest ....

Do you think Oracle is in the least bit perturbed by either your suspicion or that you don't "feel sorry for them"? Even a little? Or do you figure they're just lighting cigars with $100 bills and laughing?

Oracle will make lots of money. Larry Ellison will continue to make lots of money. The world will continue to spin. The reality of the situation is, like it or not, the companies will continue to be validated by their actions -- because it makes them money. Us feeling all smug and disapproving is a fart in a windstorm.

I fear that portfolio of "crap" patents you sneer at is actually going to translate into a fair bit of additional clout for Oracle, not to mention all of the revenue from those new customers they'll push to use Oracle.

Re:Here's the list of patents acquired: (1)

ledow (319597) | more than 3 years ago | (#34102222)

Do they care about me? Nope. I'm just a guy. Do they care about the OO.org community? Nope, it's just some guys. Eventually, though, it filters back to something they *DO* care about - they used to have a reputation among the people I speak to of high-end, quality database infrastructure. Now they have a reputation of destroying perfectly good and harmless open source products that people use every day (e.g. MySQL, Java, etc.).

Do they care about me? Nope. Do I care about them? Nope. Do I care that they aren't crying over my lost custom? Nope, I'm not even a customer.

I'm not stupid. But Oracle are, in my opinion, by pissing away a fairly substantial reputation over a couple of OS projects they could have just silently spun off and nobody would have cared. They've gone from "large database vendor" to "patent troll". And, seriously, read a couple of those patents - I'm not saying they couldn't get a settlement but trying to push those through as validated to a court? Not a chance. And in the EU they are already all void anyway.

Re:Here's the list of patents acquired: (2, Insightful)

gstoddart (321705) | more than 3 years ago | (#34103256)

Sadly, I agree with everything you said.

Except I fear that they will not end up taking any significant hit -- either financially, or in their reputation.

At which point, they will continue with business as usual, and nothing will change.

Depressing, isn't it?

Re:Here's the list of patents acquired: (1)

ColdWetDog (752185) | more than 3 years ago | (#34103830)

Depressing [blogspot.com] , isn't it?

Re:Here's the list of patents acquired: (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34102578)

How about JSP? ATG invented JHTML in the '90s, which evolved into JSP, and is now a seat on the Java Community Process as a result. Plus they both compete against IBM in applications.

Re:Here's the list of patents acquired: (1)

htdrifter (1392761) | more than 3 years ago | (#34102584)

Look at their customer list at www.atg.com Fortune 10 and Fortune 500.

Oracle will be able to supply enterprise solutions from the power connection to the end user. No finger pointing. Just like IBM did in the 60s.

Re:Here's the list of patents acquired: (1)

FormOfActionBanana (966779) | more than 3 years ago | (#34104068)

ATG were major innovators in using Java to power web applications. They created their weird droplet things long before J2EE and servlets, JSP etc became widely usable. It doesn't surprise me a bit that they have patents for web based technologies that seem simple/commonplace to us now.

Re:Here's the list of patents acquired: (1)

Raenex (947668) | more than 3 years ago | (#34105054)

Oh please. There's nothing novel in JSP or servlets. It's all just re-invention of old ideas around the new protocol/language. JSP is just templating/macros, invented a million times over. Servlets are just a pool to avoid starting a new process. Truly, there's nothing new here, though no doubt some crap patents were issued.

Re:Here's the list of patents acquired: (1)

FormOfActionBanana (966779) | more than 3 years ago | (#34105508)

If you're going to disagree with me, at least say something intelligent. And address the things I actually said:
1. They innovated in using Java for websites. Remember Java, those applets for NCs?
2. They did it before JSP became widely usable.

The Romans didn't invent (or even understand) arches, but they innovated a lot of aquaducts into existence nonetheless.

Re:Here's the list of patents acquired: (1)

Raenex (947668) | more than 3 years ago | (#34105996)

They innovated in using Java for websites. Remember Java, those applets for NCs?

Perhaps you can explain what, exacty, ATG did that was so special in the applet arena. You've mentioned servlets and JSPs as following technologies, and that is what I addressed.

Re:Here's the list of patents acquired: (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34105066)

Idiots -

Patents are not Oracle's bread and butter - it is a software company - not a patent troll.

ATG makes up for Oracle's lousy ecommerce applications. Now Oracle has one of the best ecommerce apps in the world (for enterprises not your 1000 item yahoo store). ATG will be integrated with Oracle end-2-end erp applications.

Re:Here's the list of patents acquired: (1)

Raenex (947668) | more than 3 years ago | (#34105172)

Sorry Oracle, your recent actions make me extremely suspicious and I don't even *try* to think it might be an innocent purchase any more. See what destroying reputations does?

Too funny. Did Oracle have a reputation to destroy? They've always been a hardball, corporate cutthroat. If you buy Oracle, you do so because you feel like you have to, not out of some warm fuzzies.

Re:Firsrt question (1)

kernhe (114975) | more than 3 years ago | (#34100258)

My first question is: What OS projects are "driven" by ATG?

Re:Firsrt question (2, Informative)

gstoddart (321705) | more than 3 years ago | (#34100310)

My first question is: What OS projects are "driven" by ATG?

I'm betting none. From TFA ...

“The addition of ATG, which brings market-leading products used by some of the largest and most well-known retailers and brands, furthers Oracle’s strategy of delivering industry-specific enterprise applications"

This is a commercial entity which sells eCommerce software to other commercial entities.

Sometimes, the story has nothing to do with Open Source. This is one of them. So, feel free to get on with your "so why do we care" rants now.

Re:Firsrt question (2, Insightful)

Thud457 (234763) | more than 3 years ago | (#34100696)

my first question is what FOSS projects do they sponsor that are now going to get kicked to the curb?

ATG Dynamo (1)

dna_(c)(tm)(r) (618003) | more than 3 years ago | (#34100318)

ATG used to have their own J2EE Application Server, so presumably their "high end e-commerce software" is based on J2EE (or JEE) technology so that Oracle has more products to sell.

I learned about them about 5 years ago - a job offer read "ATG Dynamo developer" and I had to explain the guys they better started looking for J2EE developers instead...

Re:ATG Dynamo (1)

Mongoose Disciple (722373) | more than 3 years ago | (#34101180)

ATG was a really hot technology ten years ago... does anyone know if it's been used for much since?

I still occasionally get a call for it -- I've since taken it off my resume, since I retain almost nothing of how to use it at this point -- but it's rare.

Re:ATG Dynamo (1)

dj51d (20536) | more than 3 years ago | (#34101784)

Best Buy, Office Max, and Target are some of their larger customers that come to mind

Re:ATG Dynamo (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34104246)

They now sell 'consulting' built around implementing 'solutions' using the Dynamo stack ... big $$$ in that ...

Re:ATG Dynamo (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34104462)

It is indeed used quite heavily. Besides countless small businesses, a lot of big players use it as their choice of framework: Best Buy, Target, Walgreens, Autozone, HP, and CVS to name a few of their larger clients. Most developers, should they choose to become an employee of a company, demand salaries of 100k+, and architects might well be in the 120/130k range. Most people stick with contract work, however--you can draw in a nice paycheck that way.

Re:Firsrt question (5, Informative)

Saija (1114681) | more than 3 years ago | (#34100520)

Re:Firsrt question (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34102484)

Well those are all "uspto" things so can be completely disregarded as not of any financial worth in all honesty

Re:Firsrt question (1)

Fnord666 (889225) | more than 3 years ago | (#34100566)

What patents do they own?How can we moeterise them?

Technically that's two questions.

Re:Firsrt question (1)

treeves (963993) | more than 3 years ago | (#34104180)

Actually it is just one question, followed by a nonsense sentence that happens to end with a question mark.

my frost piss on Oracle (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34100064)

the title says it all

And? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34100076)

Is Slashdot now trying to replace the AP wire service with one-liners?

Yours In Moscow,
Kilgore Trout.

P.S.: Tea Party motto: Help us take our country BACK!!

>Back where, the 19th century? or better yet the 17th century?

Back (1, Interesting)

SuperKendall (25149) | more than 3 years ago | (#34100436)

Back where, the 19th century? or better yet the 17th century?

Back to 2008 spending levels.

Huh, doesn't sound quite so insane when you put it that way. I wonder where you get your information from...

Just because there are a few wackos at some Tea Party events does not mean that most of the people are not there for the core message of fiscal prudence and smaller government - a smaller government is naturally less corrupt, having less power attracts fewer monied predators.

You'd think, posting from Moscow, you'd know something about that...

Re:Back (1)

Nadaka (224565) | more than 3 years ago | (#34100522)

The problem is that a smaller government will be left powerless in the face of the multi-national mega corps that are paying out the ass to fund the tea party. The party and the ideas they propose are just pawns of a larger movement in class warfare by the owner class to sacrifice the American way of life to bump up next quarters profits and buy a new jet to fly over the shattered remnants of a once great nation.

Re:Back (1)

Fnord666 (889225) | more than 3 years ago | (#34100614)

"The problem is that a smaller government will be left powerless in the face of the multi-national mega corps that are paying out the ass to fund the tea party. The party and the ideas they propose are just pawns of a larger movement in class warfare by the owner class to sacrifice the American way of life to bump up next quarters profits and buy a new jet to fly over the shattered remnants of a once great nation."

Citation needed.

Re:Back (3, Insightful)

Nadaka (224565) | more than 3 years ago | (#34101200)

Citation for what?

Tea party direct funding? it is a matter of public record.

Attack advertising against tea party opponents payed for by shadow corporations? Sorry, thanks to recent supreme court cases, they no longer have to disclose that info.

Warfare for profit waged by the ultra rich against the middle class and poor? Sorry, to much information for me to cite, you just have to research it yourself.

The wealthy are growing wealthier while the middle class and poor are becoming poorer. When a FOX news pundit accuses someone of practicing class warfare, what they really mean is someone dared to resist the war waged against the American people. Jobs are slashed to boost quarterly net profit to manipulate stock prices. Fewer jobs for average people while corporations are more profitable than ever.

I am an American patriot. I am sick and tired of my country going to hell so someone that doesn't have to work can become even wealthier at my expense by sacrificing the future of the country I love for temporary boost in profit.

Republicans/tea party/democrats/libertarians are all a part of the problem, some more than others. I am not proposing a grand conspiracy, but rather a systematic flaw in the system that is creating a feedback loop that will eventually lead us to ruin.

Re:Back (1)

ColdWetDog (752185) | more than 3 years ago | (#34103898)

Here is some depressing reading for you: Collapse of Complex Civilizations [amazon.com]

If tl;dr - the take home message is that we're going the way of every complex human civilization so far - a downhill slope caused by a number of causes, but basically we need a new energy source that is really too cheap to meter. Otherwise we're in for a rather bumpy ride.

Nothing really to do with Fox, the Tea Party or the Village Idiot of the Month (I'm lookin at YOU, Sarah).

Re:Back (1)

Darby (84953) | more than 3 years ago | (#34101860)

Citation needed.

Pick up a history book. Then pull your head out of your ass and look around. We're way past the point where this isn't obvious.

Re:Back (2, Interesting)

Grishnakh (216268) | more than 3 years ago | (#34103340)

The solution is simple. We need a smaller government, because a big government wields too much power, and is too corrupt as a result. However, a small government can't effectively govern a country the size of the USA. Therefore, split up the country into smaller countries.

We need to make the USA look like the EU: lots of smaller countries, mostly sovereign, but having free trade and sharing a common currency, and cooperating on defense. Sort of like what the USA looked like before the Civil War. In addition, we should join with Canada on this project, as the differences between them and us are really negligible now. Then, each country (e.g., California, Texas, the southeast states, the southwest states, etc.) will have a smaller national government with less corruption and less power to bully other countries with their agenda. In addition, each country will be free to go in different directions; California, for instance, would be able to legalize marijuana without worrying about the Obama Administration sending DEA goons to raid everyone. Whatever country Montana becomes a part of could legalize fully-automatic weapons and not worry about the BATFE causing them problems. Whatever country New Jersey becomes a part of can ban all guns and see how that works out for them, without worrying about what people in Texas and Montana think about it. Whatever country Illinois becomes a part of can triple the size of their welfare programs, and pass a giant tax increase to pay for it, and see how that goes over with the productive people. Countries that want to pass true universal healthcare (not ObamaCare which is just a giveaway to big insurance companies) can do so, and ones that want to make healthcare available only to those who can pay can do so too.

The way things are now, no one can agree on anything, and as a result, there's no progress on anything, except issues that big corporations push through with their "campaign donations". We don't see this in Europe, because the countries there are still separate and mostly sovereign. There's no EU-wide healthcare program, for instance: some countries have socialized healthcare (France, UK, etc.), some don't (eastern European countries probably). Some countries have really nice highways with no speed limits in many places, some have shittier roads. Some countries have really open immigration policies, others don't. But by sharing a currency (which does have its problems, admittedly) and having free trade between member countries, economic efficiency is improved and the economies of all the countries improve.

Re:Back (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34104244)

governments will always be corrupt, no matter their size. all that changes is how much it costs.

Re:Back (1)

Grishnakh (216268) | more than 3 years ago | (#34104364)

Don't be fatalistic. Some governments are far more corrupt than others. Look at Mexico; their government isn't any larger than the USA's (probably a lot smaller actually), but it's one of the most corrupt in the whole world.

Then there's governments like in countries such as Sweden and Switzerland. I'm sure there's some corruption there too, but it's nothing like that of Mexico, India, Zimbabwe, or the USA, and as a result, those two countries lead the world in standard of living.

Which would you rather live under? A government so corrupt that you have to pay bribes to the cops every day just to go about your business, or a government that has a few corrupt people in it, but otherwise works decently well?

To make a silly car analogy, this is like complaining that because no car runs on free energy, that it's pointless to try to improve fuel economy in cars. Nothing is perfect, we can only try to improve things.

Re:Back (1)

ToasterMonkey (467067) | more than 3 years ago | (#34105374)

_I_ know you're joking, but to the moderators:
We have these things called States, and a Constitution that limits the Federal Government's powers, leaving all else to the States.

The only thing they agree on is you shouldn't be able to drive in TX if you owe parking fines in NH. Yay.

BTW, U.S. wouldn't be as powerful as it is in relation to the rest of the world if it were only a bunch of inward looking states. See: Eurasia

Carry on.

Re:Back (1)

Grishnakh (216268) | more than 3 years ago | (#34105622)

I'm not joking at all.

The Constitution does not limit the Federal Government's powers. That's why we have Federal healthcare laws, federal safety laws, and on and on. There's one Amendment in the Constitution that limits the Federal government's powers, and that clause is simply ignored or misinterpreted (like many other parts of the Constitution), and has been for over 100 years now. The States have very little power, and don't even do much of their own taxation; citizens pay the bulk of their taxes to the IRS, a Federal agency. We shouldn't even be paying taxes to the Federal government at all (we should be paying them to the States instead, with states free to levy taxes as they wish), but we've been paying the IRS for almost a century now.

Saying "the Constitution limits its powers" doesn't make it so, because it's not done in practice.

The only way to rectify this situation is to throw it all out and start over, this time with smaller countries. A big country simply wields too much power, and can't resist becoming corrupt, regardless of what some 200+ year old piece of paper says.

BTW, U.S. wouldn't be as powerful as it is in relation to the rest of the world if it were only a bunch of inward looking states. See: Eurasia

There's no country in Eurasia that's nearly as large and economically powerful as the USA, except maybe China. And China, if you haven't noticed, is not "inward looking" at all, but is increasingly exercising its newfound muscle and power, so that's a bit of a worry. Russia is big, but their economy is shit, so their population and geographic size doesn't count for much, and they've had a lot of republics go their own way after the fall of the Iron Curtain. Europe (EU) isn't a single country at all, and is exactly the model I'm proposing: they're populous, and economically powerful (more than the US, in aggregate), but because they're not a single nation, they don't exercise their combined power much, the way the US does.

Rendered powerless already by that force (1)

SuperKendall (25149) | more than 3 years ago | (#34104640)

The problem is that a smaller government will be left powerless in the face of the multi-national mega corps that are paying out the ass to fund the tea party.

You mean like Obama being heavily funded by companies like BP?

The government is already heavily influenced by corporations, in all parties, at all levels. The only way to reduce LEGAL corruption (really just influence if you don't want to use a scary term) of this sort is smaller government which then cannot have as much effect on YOUR life through controlling regulation.

Re:Back (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34100538)

Back to 2008 spending levels - oh when Bush created *MORE* of a deficit than Obama?

Typical teatard.

Re:Back (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34101060)

Wow one of The Digg Patriots (tm) has "honored us" with his presence.

Here to ruin the day! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34100096)

Maybe they'll do as good a job on this one as they did on Sun. ATG have anything truly fun with massive potential? Hope not, cuz it's about to get pissed on.

Re:Here to ruin the day! (1)

Chrisq (894406) | more than 3 years ago | (#34100196)

Maybe they'll do as good a job on this one as they did on Sun. ATG have anything truly fun with massive potential? Hope not, cuz it's about to get pissed on.

But there's the great job they did with MySQL [theregister.co.uk] ... oh wait

Re:Here to ruin the day! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34100330)

More crap from the lusers and whinners. Monty sold MySQL for a metric buttload of cash, then became greedy and stomped his feet and held his breath thinking he could get more. The problem is lusers didn't realize they were being taken for a ride by greedy Monty and actually thought that MySQL was an opensource project any more. Monty sold MySQL to Sun and sold the opensource community down the tubes. Oracle had nothing to do with the MySQL debacle, except in the fevered minds of the clueless

Re:Here to ruin the day! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34100450)

Larry Ellison advice generator [memegenerator.net]

The Bad news is .... (1)

Chrisq (894406) | more than 3 years ago | (#34100144)

I'm sorry Larry we accidentally brought the wrong ATG. Never mind, I am sure that we can use it for something.. Corporate hospitality perhaps? I'm sure that some of our clients would love a trip to Palestine [wikipedia.org] . No, wait - perhaps a relocation of our open-source initiatives would be in order.

ATG gets 1 Billion USD of Larry's money (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34100148)

...and they get a lawyer-proof Java license.

Why would they buy Andre the Giant? (3, Funny)

digitaldc (879047) | more than 3 years ago | (#34100220)

Is this their new database code name?

Re:Why would they buy Andre the Giant? (1)

Archangel Michael (180766) | more than 3 years ago | (#34101906)

Its Obvious!

Oracle wants to be the Brute Squad.

Re:Why would they buy Andre the Giant? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34102244)

OBEY

Re:Why would they buy Andre the Giant? (1)

Dogtanian (588974) | more than 3 years ago | (#34104526)

Is this their new database code name?

They only bought Andre the Giant because they wanted to get their hands on his posse.

Brand value. (3, Insightful)

zrbyte (1666979) | more than 3 years ago | (#34100274)

By combining forces, Oracle and ATG expect to help businesses grow revenue, strengthen customer loyalty, improve brand value, achieve better operating results, and increase business agility across online and traditional commerce environments...

I just wish they cared this much for the Open Office brand. Oh, wait that doesn't make money for Mr. Shareholder. Too bad.

Re:Brand value. (1)

andersenep (944566) | more than 3 years ago | (#34100918)

You should buy some shares in Oracle. Then you would have some say in how they conduct business.

Re:Brand value. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34101858)

lol! subtle, very good

Using ATG in 1998... (4, Interesting)

dmorin (25609) | more than 3 years ago | (#34100332)

I was using ATG's products back in 1998. This was before even Java Server Pages had caught on (one of my great regrets in life was having the opportunity to write a JSP book and turning it down :( ). If I remember correctly they even told us that Sun used some of their patents in developing JSP (though don't hold me to that, it was a long time ago). Their technology was very ColdFusion-like, trying to create an entire programming language complete with conditionals and looping structures all inside a markup syntax. But once you got used to it, it was very powerful. We ran our entire ecommerce platform on it for buying and selling mutual funds, encompassing 16 business units. It was a fun company, founded by some wanna-be rockstars (Jeet, really - not so much Joe). They threw a heck of a party. At least one of them ended with a shirtless Jeet playing guitar inside a gogo-dancer's cage. Ah, memories. I think that was the party that took place in New Orleans, where I bumped into my very drunk "customer advocate" coming down Bourbon Street, who asked me if I was having a good time. Apparently not as good as he was. Funny story - I got a tour of the place once. This was during a time when we were trying to use their brand new adapter for the content management system Documentum, and it was not going well. During the tour, before being shown engineering, my tour guide (Hi, Katja!) paused and asked me if I could identify my technical contact by sight. I said no, so the tour continued. I honestly think they were afraid I was going to make a scene. I used to own some stock, I'll have to go see if I ever dumped it.

Re:Using ATG in 1998... (4, Interesting)

AtlantaSteve (965777) | more than 3 years ago | (#34100576)

I think that was the party that took place in New Orleans...

Ah, yes. Around 2000 or 2001, my then-employer rewarded some overtime by sending me to New Orleans for the "ATG Open"... ATG's version of Java One. ATG hired a hundred or so jazz musicians to stand around the hallways of the hotel playing music all day. They hired a few dozen more people to dress up as the company mascot (a square with a dot in the center), just to stand around the hallways for the hell of it waving to everyone. Free booze was everywhere, and at night the hotel conference rooms were turned into dance parties with half-naked women suspended from the ceilings in cages.

On the last day, they closed off Bourbon Street for a parade with all the musicians and weird "dot" mascots. That night they rented out the freaking Superdome for a jazz/rock concert, along with carnival rides and a field goal kicking contest (NOTE: Football kickers deserve respect, 25 yards is a LONG way!). On our way out, they gave each attendee hundreds of dollars worth of premium-quality swag... designer pens, football jerseys, and a weekend luggage bag that I still take to the gym today.

I miss the dot-com years.

Re:Using ATG in 1998... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34101032)

yes they do have patents in developing JSP

OFFTOPIC (1)

mapkinase (958129) | more than 3 years ago | (#34100454)

The first thought that comes to mind is that ATG is the most common start codon in translation of genomic sequences. Symbolism?

Good thing about it.... (3, Insightful)

mseeger (40923) | more than 3 years ago | (#34100516)

The good thing about this deal? No OSS community to be driven off....

Re:Good thing about it.... (1)

yoshi_mon (172895) | more than 3 years ago | (#34101038)

I think there is a real corporate culture within Oracle that has a disdain for the idea behind FSF/OSS. And having worked with plenty of authoritative right-wing corporate types that see anything that is 'free' as bad even if it is the best technical solution I know when to suggest using FSF/OSS software and when to just let some narrow minded authoritarian pay more because that is what they are comfortable with.

As I've witnessed the brain-drain at Oracle it has become pretty clear to me that they do have such a corporate culture and hey, that is fine. They are 100% within their rights to run their company as they see fit and use whatever IP that they own as such. But they should be, and most likely are aware, that the OSS community has noted their actions and will respond accordingly.

My outsider view is that Oracle has made that calculation of losing the OSS community support and they are ok with that. That vs a company like IBM who likely has a ton of authoritative right-wing MBAs who keep wondering why every quarter something they don't understand keeps putting black dollars in their bottom line; because they have a few people who do get it and make sure to keep those who would mess with such things out of the way.

I see Oracle likely has little to no such people like that and as such they will piss away some of the things that they acquired via Sun because they simply don't understand them. Now this whole post might have come off as a slam at what I've called right-wing authoritarians but keep in mind that is only because that is the best way I can describe what I've seen in the current corporate culture. The idea that short term profit is the main goal and anything that detracts from that must be cut has been the mantra sadly.

Re:Good thing about it.... (4, Insightful)

mseeger (40923) | more than 3 years ago | (#34101360)

I have been a Sun Partner for nearly 20 years. Those Oracle types managed to break the relationship it without breaking any sweat within less than 12 months.

I don't think it's FOSS that is the problem with Oracle. My guess is more about the sales type. There are hunter and farmers. Oracle is 100% hunter. FOSS guys tend to be farmer

CU, Martin

Re:Good thing about it.... (1)

yoshi_mon (172895) | more than 3 years ago | (#34101802)

But don't you think that is part of what the corporate culture is all about within Oracle? That they view the FOSS model as something to be discarded rather than used as a tool to enable more sales?

When you pick up a hardware company that has put resources into FOSS to foster that line and then toss all of that FOSS to the wind it seems to me that they just don't get it.

Re:Good thing about it.... (1)

mseeger (40923) | more than 3 years ago | (#34102160)

That they view the FOSS model as something to be discarded rather than used as a tool to enable more sales?

That is the very definition of the "hunter model". All that counts is the current deal. The next deal is not a matter of interest right now.

CU, Martin

Re:Good thing about it.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34103894)

I tend to agree but how did FOSS work out for Sun?

Buying companies for their software patents? (1)

erroneus (253617) | more than 3 years ago | (#34100580)

I am thinking with the current movement against software patents, now isn't the best time to spend a billion dollars trying to acquire them. If court cases eventually overturn all software patents as they should, that money will wind up being a huge waste and a huge loss on Oracle's reports.

Re:Buying companies for their software patents? (2, Informative)

BuddaLicious (1628555) | more than 3 years ago | (#34101562)

ATG makes over $50 million a year in REVENUE.
They grew by 16% last year.

Even if this growth rate slows (more likely to accelerate as market improves) Oracle will still get a FULL return on their investment in 15 years or so.
That's much better than the 20 P/E ratio that Buffet always swore by and got so rich on.

Oracle is buying a profitable company that produces a commerce package that allows complex transactions, like the poster above mentioned.
ATG also has a customer base of 1000 large Orgs, that are likely not a duplicate list of Oracle shops. (Meaning Oracle now has contacts and inroads into several more large orgs)
THIS is why Oracle bought ATG: A commerce package they can bolt onto their vertical platform offerings, a customer base, and a solid revenue stream.
The bogus IP patents are just icing on the cake to help Oracle defend itself from MS, Google, Apple etc.

Smart thing would be to avoid using their products if you don't like their business model. Other than outright war its the only affect you can hope to have on them.

FTC and SEC should do their jobs and not rubber stamp their approval UNLESS Oracle can show HOW THIS WILL BE OF BENEFIT TO CONSUMERS. otherwise deny it!

Re:Buying companies for their software patents? (1)

kill-1 (36256) | more than 3 years ago | (#34102774)

They made $50 million in the last quarter, not year.

Re:Buying companies for their software patents? (1)

Amouth (879122) | more than 3 years ago | (#34103622)

50 million in REVENUE is easy to do..

i bet if i had the money in had i could get it too..

hey give me 1$ and i'll give you 2$.. i bet i can get 50 million given to me..

REVENUE is a very bad metric to use for buying a company.. Profit? earnings? Net-Income.. they are much better numbers to use.

REVENUE only shows cash coming in and nothing about the rest which is exceptionally important.

1 billion dollars (1)

roman_mir (125474) | more than 3 years ago | (#34100822)

so for a cool billion Ellison got himself a bunch [swpat.org] of generic patents (such as "Flexible order structure", "Method and system for constructing personalized result sets" and "System and method for interfacing and separating formatted content and program code", you get the picture) and he also now is a proud owner of some sort of 'in house' web based IM system and some sort of a rules engine on top of a knowledge base.

Obviously I am not mentioning the 1000 or so clients that ATG supposedly has.

I suppose this is a somewhat meaningful purchase, though obviously the company in question has over 942M market capitalization (per Yahoo) and this year revenue is just over $50 million, which doesn't say much about their profit. Ellison can do whatever he wants with his money but I think he is overpaying for this company by at least a factor of 2.

Re:1 billion dollars (1)

Red Flayer (890720) | more than 3 years ago | (#34101508)

I suppose this is a somewhat meaningful purchase, though obviously the company in question has over 942M market capitalization (per Yahoo) and this year revenue is just over $50 million, which doesn't say much about their profit. Ellison can do whatever he wants with his money but I think he is overpaying for this company by at least a factor of 2.

Wait, the market cap is just under 1 BN, and Oracle paid 1 BN... so, you're saying that in your expert opinion, the stock price of ATG was overvalued by a factor of 2 by those who owned the stock prior to acquisition??

and this year revenue is just over $50 million

No, their quarterly revenue for the past quarter was just over $50 million.

Your google-fu needs some work.

What this is really about is Oracle being able to tap into the growing market of mobile computing.

Re:1 billion dollars (2, Insightful)

roman_mir (125474) | more than 3 years ago | (#34101754)

You are right, but it's not about 'google fu', it's about me paying attention to the article, which I actually opened. It does say 50M, but later adds it's for a quarter. That makes more sense then, though market capitalization is still a lousy indicator about the company, what was capitalization of Nortel or GM before their steep declines?

Also, while the revenue is 50M for the last quarter, what's their profit out of that? 50M revenue with profit under 5M, so profit under 20M/year (probably closer to 10M per year), is that worth 1Billion in immediate cash? I mean, 20M is 2% of 1Billion, so there has to be more reason than profit here to buy the company for that money.

Re:1 billion dollars (1)

Red Flayer (890720) | more than 3 years ago | (#34104350)

Also, while the revenue is 50M for the last quarter, what's their profit out of that?

According to their 10k, it's around 30M a quarter, and rising over the past several quarters.

I mean, 20M is 2% of 1Billion, so there has to be more reason than profit here to buy the company for that money.

Correct, which I mentioned in my first reply :)

This is about getting onto mobile platforms, which ATG is doing quite a bit of. Oracle can use ATG's penetration onto mobile platform e-commerce to sell more of the stack -- Oracle can provide the e-commerce solution, the DB it runs on, even the hardware in conjunction with their partners -- and get the licensing and support contracts that come along with it.

Keep in mind also that Oracle can almost definitely improve the profitability of ATG, since they can eliminate a lot of overhead -- and they get to leverage their sales force (a known strength of Oracle) in training/replacing ATG salespeople.

Next up (2, Insightful)

Haedrian (1676506) | more than 3 years ago | (#34101028)

"Oracle Sues a bunch of people for 1 billion dollars"

Oracle is like a plague. It 'captures' companies for their patents, and does pretty much nothing for their products.

Re:Next up (1)

Capt.DrumkenBum (1173011) | more than 3 years ago | (#34104958)

Am I the only one who read that with a Dr. Evil voice?

Screw Oracle... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34101334)

Screw Oracle before Oracle screws you!

Oracle's plans (1)

zygwin (1091281) | more than 3 years ago | (#34102974)

My guess is they want to complete the hardware and software stack to complete head on with IBM and SAP.

This is not about patents. (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34103078)

This acquisition is definitely not about software patents, it's about further penetrating IBM's hold on the eCommerce market and saturating large enterprises with more Oracle products across the board. I've worked as an IBM WebSphere Commerce architect for many years and Oracle has always tried to fight off these sales. A large eCommerce installation costs anywhere from 200K to 15Mil in just software licenses, let alone the professional services fees which start at 350K for a small implementation. IBM has been the top dog in this space for many years with ATG and Hybris coming behind. Now that Oracle has ATG they can compete at another level against IBM.

Further, the eCommerce business exploding right now in the B2B sector. All the major B2C players have eCommerce installations, most based on WebSphere Commerce or ATG. The B2C market couldn't afford not to be in this place over the past ten years. However the B2B market has been slow to adopt electronic commerce, but with the economy recovering and pressure from customers to have these services B2B resellers are investing heavily in this space right now. I haven't even touched a new B2C project in a year, everything is B2B. Another aspect that is attractive to Oracle is that the B2B customers have much more complicated requirements than B2C retailers which means more SOA components, more complicated data analytics, extensive business process automation and much more. These are all areas which Oracle and IBM compete in everyday, and with more integrated solutions Oracle has a better sales pitch to the enterprise to be their one stop shop.

If you've worked in a large enterprise you have no doubt found that enterprises typically lean towards either IBM or Oracle for their software infrastructure. With the previous acquisition of Sun and now ATG Oracle is positioning them selves to take on IBM in all areas. Patents are just a very small part of large technology companies, software licensing, maintenance costs and professional services bring a huge amount of revenue.

Corporate personhood and slavery (1)

macraig (621737) | more than 3 years ago | (#34103440)

If corporations are indeed equivalent to aggregate persons, then why isn't it considered slavery when one corporation "acquires" another?

$1B ? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34103926)

when reading the headline on my rss reader on my old screen and little crufty fonts... I read $18.

for $18 it would be funny ... for $1B it's just pathetic.

ATG's one of the stronger eCommerce app out there (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34104118)

ATG has a pretty strong commerce suite. It is ranked at the top in the eCommerce offering along with IBM WebSphere Commerce (as per Gartner ranking). They are just v.closed off (you can't even get to the documentation unless you have a contract with them).

  www.atg.com/gartner-ecommerce-magic-quadrant

(i know its atg's site itself, blah blah, but it's gartner's analysis of the eCommerce product offering).

Getting ahead of themselves (1)

Arancaytar (966377) | more than 3 years ago | (#34105102)

Oracle should slow down; they haven't even finished digesting and ruining Sun yet.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...