Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 13th Aug 2013 11:48 UTC
Oracle and SUN

Business magnate Larry Ellison thinks that without Steve Jobs -- "our Edison" and "our Picasso" -- Apple corporation is in trouble.

Larry Ellison was one of Jobs' closest friends. Then again, this is the same Ellison who presided over one of the most idiotic and - for Oracle - disastrous lawsuits in technology history.

Update: A few new tidbits from the interview: Google is "completely evil" because of Java, and the mass surveillance by the US government is "absolutely necessary". So, aside from being utterly delusional (the Google and Java thing), he also does not believe in civil rights, and would much rather everyone give up their privacy and right to free speech.

What a tool. No wonder nobody cares about Oracle.

Order by: Score:
wow
by mistersoft on Tue 13th Aug 2013 12:35 UTC
mistersoft
Member since:
2011-01-05

what an egotistical fantasist - he even extends it to his deads friends. Let him go Larry

Reply Score: 4

RE: wow
by bitwelder on Sat 17th Aug 2013 19:47 UTC in reply to "wow"
bitwelder Member since:
2010-04-27

Let him go Larry

I'd say the opposite: Steve, come to get your buddy with you!

Reply Score: 2

v Meh
by peteo on Tue 13th Aug 2013 12:44 UTC
RE: Meh
by kwan_e on Tue 13th Aug 2013 15:21 UTC in reply to "Meh"
kwan_e Member since:
2007-02-18

Apple is on a downhill slope unless they pull out a rabbit very soon.


If they hit that bullseye, the rest of the dominoes should fall like a house of cards. Checkmate.

Reply Score: 9

RE[2]: Meh
by galvanash on Tue 13th Aug 2013 18:39 UTC in reply to "RE: Meh"
galvanash Member since:
2006-01-25

If they hit that bullseye, the rest of the dominoes should fall like a house of cards. Checkmate.


Stringing together a bunch of idioms is a piece of cake... But you hit the nail on the head - if Apple lets the cat out of the bag (assuming the cat doesn't cost and arm and a leg), well the rest of the tech sector may have to come to grips with the fact that they might have bitten off more than they can chew.

I hope Larry Ellison breaks a leg (in this case not an idiom).

Edited 2013-08-13 18:40 UTC

Reply Score: 6

I agree.
by moondevil on Tue 13th Aug 2013 12:58 UTC
moondevil
Member since:
2005-07-08

Apple won't go away tomorrow, there is too much money in the bank.

However I don't expect any kind of market breaking idea, as Apple used to present when it was under Jobs control both times, before and after Sculley.

Reply Score: 3

RE: I agree.
by kaiwai on Thu 15th Aug 2013 02:31 UTC in reply to "I agree."
kaiwai Member since:
2005-07-06

Apple won't go away tomorrow, there is too much money in the bank.

However I don't expect any kind of market breaking idea, as Apple used to present when it was under Jobs control both times, before and after Sculley.


Even when he was alive it was getting increasingly more difficult to hype up otherwise evolutionary changes as major revolutions/innovations. End of the day the IT sector is very much mature and the days of massive innovations (real innovations and not just novelty devices such as 'Google Glass') are pretty hard to come by. Most vendors I see have their focus on the cloud, services and generating re-occuring revenue through subscriptions or AppStore-like models.

Don't get me wrong, I think the new MacBook Air is gorgeous and when the new RRAM based flash comes out or in the medium term the new flash from Samsung is made available that we'll see a possibly hard disks being replaced on Mac across the board but something like that is evolutionary rather than having a 'wow' factor. With that being said I do think that us geeks over play the innovation card and ignore that end users just want things that work - allow them to do what they want to do with minimum fuss and drama.

As for Larry's point regarding 'history repeating itself' - too bad he ignores all the problems that existed and the roll Tim Cook played in actually helping Steve Jobs fix the mess; is Larry so ignorant to ignore the fact that Mac OS 9 was an out of date POS when compared to Windows 95/98? the truly over priced nature of entry level Mac's (in New Zealand the entry level model would set you back $4,500) when Jobs arrived back (before launching the iMac)? it seems that Larry is very open to mouthing off but spends little time studying the past as to find out why it all happened. It was a team effort by Steve, Johnny and Tim (not to mention all the engineers that worked at a rapid pace to get OS X ready) - to place it all on Steve's shoulders is to belittle all the work others in the organisation contributed.

Reply Score: 5

Comment by Fergy
by Fergy on Tue 13th Aug 2013 13:03 UTC
Fergy
Member since:
2006-04-10

You know there are a few corporations that never had Steve Jobs lead them. I wonder how they were so successful without Jobs?

Reply Score: 12

RE: Comment by Fergy
by moondevil on Tue 13th Aug 2013 13:08 UTC in reply to "Comment by Fergy"
moondevil Member since:
2005-07-08

Most corporations had a founder in some way similar to him in some form.

Then it is a question how long a given corporation is able to keep existing on inertia and funds when those class of founders are no longer around.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Comment by Fergy
by Fergy on Tue 13th Aug 2013 13:14 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by Fergy"
Fergy Member since:
2006-04-10

Most corporations had a founder in some way similar to him in some form.

Then it is a question how long a given corporation is able to keep existing on inertia and funds when those class of founders are no longer around.

I think you only need that innovator until the company has proven itself.

Reply Score: 3

RE[3]: Comment by Fergy
by cdude on Tue 13th Aug 2013 15:41 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by Fergy"
cdude Member since:
2008-09-21

A company never stops proving itself. Just cause you got it once doesn't mean you get it forever. See HTC, Nokia, Microsoft.

Edited 2013-08-13 15:43 UTC

Reply Score: 4

RE[2]: Comment by Fergy
by jackastor on Tue 13th Aug 2013 13:51 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by Fergy"
jackastor Member since:
2009-05-05

Isn't that how Radio Shack still stays in business?

Reply Score: 2

v RE: Comment by Fergy
by peteo on Tue 13th Aug 2013 13:26 UTC in reply to "Comment by Fergy"
RE: Comment by Fergy
by Hiev on Tue 13th Aug 2013 16:25 UTC in reply to "Comment by Fergy"
Hiev Member since:
2005-09-27

Simple.

Copying what Jobs was doing.

Reply Score: 0

RE: Comment by Fergy
by Soulbender on Tue 13th Aug 2013 19:07 UTC in reply to "Comment by Fergy"
Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

Duh! Dumb luck. I mean, it's obvious.

Reply Score: 2

Pot Kettle
by RobG on Tue 13th Aug 2013 13:37 UTC
RobG
Member since:
2012-10-17

Are just two words that spring to mind.

Reply Score: 4

*yawn*
by ishtar on Tue 13th Aug 2013 14:13 UTC
ishtar
Member since:
2013-07-30

Jobs was too implicated in the company - until the end - to not have the biggest effect on the company. As a long time Apple product user, I can clearly see the quality of the devices going downhill. The quality of their support is also going down. Sales of their products are going WAY down.

I can honestly say I probably won't be buying Apple products in the next couple of years unless things change drastically. Paying overpriced products is good when the quality is in it; now Apple are just turning into Sony (ouch!).

Reply Score: 4

gan17
Member since:
2008-06-03

... and I see a dark future for a world with Larry Ellison.

Reply Score: 16

pepa Member since:
2005-07-08

"Larry Ellison was one of Jobs' closest friends."
What a horrible thing to say about someone who's passed away...

Reply Score: 7

pepa Member since:
2005-07-08

I was just realizing what the above statement really meant, considering the 'bad' things we know about Larry's character. My initial response is obscure -- an attempt at humour I guess...

Edited 2013-08-14 13:53 UTC

Reply Score: 2

Comment by MOS6510
by MOS6510 on Tue 13th Aug 2013 14:36 UTC
MOS6510
Member since:
2011-05-12

A lot of people have done very well somewhere and failed elsewhere. This includes Apple employees and even Steve Jobs. He nearly destroyed Apple on his first tour and NeXT never got anywhere.

I guess it's a case of the right person at the right place at the right time.

Reply Score: 6

RE: Comment by MOS6510
by christian on Tue 13th Aug 2013 15:16 UTC in reply to "Comment by MOS6510"
christian Member since:
2005-07-06

A lot of people have done very well somewhere and failed elsewhere. This includes Apple employees and even Steve Jobs. He nearly destroyed Apple on his first tour and NeXT never got anywhere.


NeXT did very well flogging itself to Apple.

But sure, without the Apple intervention, NeXT and OPENSTEP would have died. I wonder how the world would be now had the favorite at the time, BeOS, been snapped up as MacOS X.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Comment by MOS6510
by jazman777 on Tue 13th Aug 2013 15:54 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by MOS6510"
jazman777 Member since:
2013-02-27

I wonder how the world would be now had the favorite at the time, BeOS, been snapped up as MacOS X.


Please don't torture Thom.

Reply Score: 9

RE[2]: Comment by MOS6510
by v_bobok on Tue 13th Aug 2013 16:46 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by MOS6510"
v_bobok Member since:
2008-08-01

On the surface you wouldn't see any change anyway. BeOS's kernel and internals as foundation for OS X would've been much MUCH faster on the same old hardware and like a Warp Drive on the new ones.

In another parallel universe somewhere, perhaps.

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: Comment by MOS6510
by Thom_Holwerda on Tue 13th Aug 2013 16:51 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by MOS6510"
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

It would also suck a whole lot more.

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: Comment by MOS6510
by galvanash on Tue 13th Aug 2013 23:23 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by MOS6510"
galvanash Member since:
2006-01-25

On the surface you wouldn't see any change anyway.


You should actually spend more than 5 minutes using OSX before making statements like this...

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Comment by MOS6510
by moondevil on Wed 14th Aug 2013 06:26 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by MOS6510"
moondevil Member since:
2005-07-08

But sure, without the Apple intervention, NeXT and OPENSTEP would have died. I wonder how the world would be now had the favorite at the time, BeOS, been snapped up as MacOS X.


Opening the what if box:

- Jobs wouldn't have joined Apple again

- All the nice iDevices might not have been created

- Objective-C would be an history footnote

- I doubt effort would be spent making Mac OS X (BeOS) UNIX compatible

- Hackers might have not jumped ship to Mac OS X from GNU/Linux as UNIX support wouldn't be available and the system language would be C++ (hated by all Linus followers).

So looking how things happened with Jobs on board, and being old enough to know the old Apple, I imagine buying BeOS instead might have lead to Apple joining Commodore, Atari, Acorn and friends.

Reply Score: 3

RE: Comment by MOS6510
by Soulbender on Tue 13th Aug 2013 19:19 UTC in reply to "Comment by MOS6510"
Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

I guess it's a case of the right person at the right place at the right time.


Also known as "luck".

Reply Score: 4

Larry's right
by cjcox on Tue 13th Aug 2013 16:00 UTC
cjcox
Member since:
2006-12-21

If Apple isn't careful, it'll become the next Oracle.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Larry's right
by Delgarde on Tue 13th Aug 2013 23:23 UTC in reply to "Larry's right"
Delgarde Member since:
2008-08-19

If Apple isn't careful, it'll become the next Oracle.


What, one of the most successful IT companies on the planet?

Because seriously - people worried about the Microsoft monopoly, but the Oracle one is *far* more concerning as a developer... they own a major hardware platform, the only serious enterprise database, Java, several Java app servers (Weblogic, Glassfish), etc. The list goes on...

When I started with my current employer ten years ago, none of our techstack was owned by Oracle. Now, almost all of it is - *and* they bought one of our competitors to add to their application suite...

Reply Score: 5

Not a good comparison
by jared_wilkes on Tue 13th Aug 2013 16:09 UTC
jared_wilkes
Member since:
2011-04-25

It seems very unwise to compare how Steve led and then left (unwillingly) Apple from 1977-1985 and how Steve led and then left (unwillingly) Apple from 1997-2011. I would hope the reasons for why this is unwise would be quite obvious but apparently not.

Reply Score: 0

RE: Not a good comparison
by Soulbender on Tue 13th Aug 2013 19:12 UTC in reply to "Not a good comparison"
Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

I would hope the reasons for why this is unwise would be quite obvious but apparently not


Yes, because it isn't obvious. Two periods of leadership, one significantly more globally successful than the other. Obviously he's not infallible and obviously he learned something from his mistakes. A comparison would actually be very interesting.

Reply Score: 4

RE[2]: Not a good comparison
by jared_wilkes on Tue 13th Aug 2013 20:16 UTC in reply to "RE: Not a good comparison"
jared_wilkes Member since:
2011-04-25

It's not obvious that a kid in his twenties leading a company from a garage to attracting major corporate growth over its first seven years (the first wave of the new Silicon Valley) -- and leaving in his wake control to MBA/corporate types rather than trusted, experienced, tech-focused generals -- is a lot different than a much more mature man leading the same but very different company more than a decade later, after a great deal of maturing and learning experiences at new enterprises, for a decade and a half and turning it into the most profitable technology company in the world led by the same core group that Jobs has been grooming for leadership for 5-15 years?

I feel bad for the people who can't see the obvious differences and only see similarities.

Edited 2013-08-13 20:18 UTC

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: Not a good comparison
by Soulbender on Wed 14th Aug 2013 07:56 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Not a good comparison"
Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

I feel bad for people who don't understand why it's an interesting and instructive comparison.

Reply Score: 6

RE[3]: Not a good comparison
by BallmerKnowsBest on Wed 14th Aug 2013 17:45 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Not a good comparison"
BallmerKnowsBest Member since:
2008-06-02

It's not obvious that a kid in his twenties leading a company from a garage to attracting major corporate growth over its first seven years (the first wave of the new Silicon Valley) -- and leaving in his wake control to MBA/corporate types rather than trusted, experienced, tech-focused generals -- is a lot different than a much more mature man leading the same but very different company more than a decade later, after a great deal of maturing and learning experiences at new enterprises, for a decade and a half and turning it into the most profitable technology company in the world led by the same core group that Jobs has been grooming for leadership for 5-15 years?

I feel bad for the people who can't see the obvious differences and only see similarities.


Funny, because I feel bad for anyone who tried to parse your 120-word run-on sentence. But yes, he was clearly a different person - for example, during his first tenure at Apple, Jobs didn't mastermind any illegal pricing-fixing arrangements with publishers.

Reply Score: 4

Comment by v_bobok
by v_bobok on Tue 13th Aug 2013 16:36 UTC
v_bobok
Member since:
2008-08-01

Trolling at it's best.

Reply Score: 2

So Larry is a complete asshole...
by Soulbender on Tue 13th Aug 2013 19:17 UTC
Soulbender
Member since:
2005-08-18

...what else is new? Remember, this is the company that more or less successfully tried to make it "illegal" for uses of their product to publish negative reviews and benchmarks.

Unfortunately people do care about Oracle though and way too many decision makers have been fooled into thinking they're some kind of gold standard for relational databases.

Reply Score: 4

So much for
by Soulbender on Tue 13th Aug 2013 19:27 UTC
Soulbender
Member since:
2005-08-18

big business having to be coerced into spying on the citizens.

Reply Score: 2

RE: So much for
by zima on Tue 13th Aug 2013 19:41 UTC in reply to "So much for"
zima Member since:
2005-07-06

I guess a lot of that mass surveillance systems depends on Oracle databases...

So, "he also does not believe in civil rights, and would much rather everyone give up their privacy and right to free speech" would be for the simple reason of: more spying = more money for Oracle.

Reply Score: 5

RE[2]: So much for
by tylerdurden on Tue 13th Aug 2013 20:05 UTC in reply to "RE: So much for"
tylerdurden Member since:
2009-03-17

This should be of no surprise. Oracle has always had massive ties with the 3-letter agency soup in the US. Even their name is derived from the original DB project their founders worked on for the CIA.

Edit: oops someone beat me to the punch.

Edited 2013-08-13 20:08 UTC

Reply Score: 3

RE[3]: So much for
by organgtool on Wed 14th Aug 2013 02:42 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: So much for"
organgtool Member since:
2010-02-25

Even their name is derived from the original DB project their founders worked on for the CIA.

I thought it was an acronym for One Rich Asshole Called Larry Ellison.

Reply Score: 6

RE: So much for
by lucas_maximus on Thu 15th Aug 2013 18:51 UTC in reply to "So much for"
lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

I actually watched the full interview.

He said that it would be wrong to use the information for anything other than catching terrorists.

http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=50152857n

Thom's roundup wasn't what he said at all.

He dodged the real meat of the question for sure, but at no point did he say what was summed up.

But it is easy to twist people's words to suite your agenda.

Edited 2013-08-15 18:53 UTC

Reply Score: 2

Once CIA, Always CIA
by jazman777 on Tue 13th Aug 2013 19:42 UTC
jazman777
Member since:
2013-02-27

Re: the update. It's in his DNA. Oracle got its start as a CIA project. Hey, no deep dark secret government ties there!

Reply Score: 5

RE: Once CIA, Always CIA
by Bill Shooter of Bul on Wed 14th Aug 2013 19:52 UTC in reply to "Once CIA, Always CIA"
Bill Shooter of Bul Member since:
2006-07-14

It kind of crazy. Without the NSA surveillance, we wouldn't be able to stop the Boston Bombings? Well, we the NSA *was* spying on everyone, and they *still* didn't prevent it. So I don't buy the claim that its essential to prevent them.

Reply Score: 4

PRISM
by jal_ on Wed 14th Aug 2013 09:30 UTC
jal_
Member since:
2006-11-02

"It's essential if we want to minimize the kind of strikes we had in Boston." - Yeah, since PRISM was already full in place at the time of the Boston bombing, and luckily we stopped those bombers before they could do any harm. Oh wait...

Reply Score: 5

RE: PRISM
by lucas_maximus on Thu 15th Aug 2013 13:20 UTC in reply to "PRISM"
lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

He said minimize, implying that he believes it would be worse.

Reply Score: 2

Comment by MOS6510
by MOS6510 on Wed 14th Aug 2013 10:22 UTC
MOS6510
Member since:
2011-05-12

I don't care much for Oracle, but it's a shame they bought Sun Microsystems. Now that was an interesting company. Oracle is rather boring.

BTW both Larry and Steve's boat were parked illegally in front of our company (not at the same time). But when I arrived with my camera to snap Steve's boat it had already left. Bastards.

Reply Score: 3

RE: Comment by MOS6510
by BallmerKnowsBest on Wed 14th Aug 2013 17:40 UTC in reply to "Comment by MOS6510"
BallmerKnowsBest Member since:
2008-06-02

BTW both Larry and Steve's boat were parked illegally in front of our company (not at the same time). But when I arrived with my camera to snap Steve's boat it had already left. Bastards.


Figures, Jobs was notorious for illegally parking his little-man-compensation-devices (AKA Mercedes) in handicapped parking spots:

http://www.folklore.org/StoryView.py?story=Handicapped.txt

one day Apple executive Jean-Louis Gassee, who had recently transferred to Cupertino from Paris, had just parked his car and was walking toward the entrance of the main office at Apple when Steve buzzed by him in his silver Mercedes and pulled into the handicapped space near the front of the building.

As Steve walked brusquely past him, Jean-Louis was heard to declare, to no one in particular - "Oh, I never realized that those spaces were for the emotionally handicapped...".


And apparently that particular emotional handicap plagued Jobs right up until the end:

http://www.cultofmac.com/2613/steve-jobs-still-parking-in-handicapp...

Edited 2013-08-14 17:45 UTC

Reply Score: 4

A few corrections
by lucas_maximus on Thu 15th Aug 2013 19:16 UTC
lucas_maximus
Member since:
2009-08-18

Firstly he didn't say Google was Evil. He said they did an "Evil Thing".

He also didn't say that spying was okay. He actually said that if the information was used for anything other than terrorism it would be wrong and that credit card companies already know so much more.

But I actually watched the whole televised interview rather than incorrectly summarising it.

http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=50152857n

Edited 2013-08-15 19:19 UTC

Reply Score: 2