* Posts by John Hanson

3 posts • joined 14 Nov 2007

Opera screeches at Mozilla over security disclosure

John Hanson

The message is...

Disclosure can be performed when you have the information. Opera had the information so they could have disclosed. The delay of disclosure more often works for the software manufacturer than it does for the malcontent community...admittedly when a writer gets caught well then there is a different message it sends. It says 'we don;t have the staff, the organization, or place the same importance on 'it' than 'others'.

Opera instead needed to get the message out that they were not to blame but that 'irresponsible disclosure' was to blame. That way Opera users will have the ability to claim they are especially discriminated against and the reverse of that is how special Macintosh users feel because they are not vulnerable to the mass of vulnerabilities that the rest of the world is!!!! Huh!

Stop the whining and establish your reputation as one of the fighters for open and safe computing on all platforms. Do it now, quickly, and those of us that have an opinion based on fact will take notice.

Is Oracle really the next Microsoft?

John Hanson

Microsoft wants to be in the enterprise space, Oracle doesn't know how to be in the SME space

BEA was probably being marginalized out of effective leadership in the space during the takeover. Its likley that Oracle and/or IBM are infringing on some of BEA's patents. BEA is not BizTalk, nor is the Oracle database Microsoft SQL Server. Perhaps the only people that have time to comment on this event are looking at it from the enterprise perspective.

As an IT leader for a large corporation I would likely operate an Oracle database first and DB2 second. In the SME space I would select Microsoft SQL Server because this purchase would characterize support resources I can attract and afford.

In the enterprise space I would couple world-class financials with specialized ERP systems that support my business. Oracle has world-class financials as does SAP. Microsoft has integrated ERPs and tools that do not have extensive word of mouth adoption in the enterprise space. But Microsoft does have a very good SME channel refined through the velocity and quantity of desktop, business and consumer technology marketing and delivery.

SAP is having difficulty coming down-market, Oracle is not down-market except for perhaps JDE. Microsoft has the SME market covered but by no means is it dominating.

Each Microsoft, Oracle,and IBM will look to isolate their clients through database and tools including BizTalk/BEA/WebSphere/. Oracle can win if they can package an offering for SMEs coupled with a 'lite' version of ERP.

Oracle needs more consulting horsepower to compete with IBM and SAP, Microsoft needs more expertise in the sales and delivery of their ERPs, and IBM can continue to be themselves.

Greatest opportunity of the next 5 years goes to Oracle. Microsoft will continue to have the largest impact and most consistent profitability and IBM will be IBM. Microsoft isn't ready to buy SAP and IBM can't (remember Sybase and PowerBuilder).

Oracle should chew slowly and digest carefully and build their global brand in the applications space.

There is plenty of room for innovation admittedly these areas are not clearly defined today.

Oracle has commitment issues over Fusion

John Hanson

Holiday time for Fusion engineers?

Enforcing analysts sign non-disclosures to view something they don't understand and then not report on what they see is a little confusing to me. Let's see what analysts that refer to BEA as a 'middleware' manufacturer were likely not to have seen, or if seen at least not understood.

In order to provide a migration platform Oracle will have to develop (should I say re-develop if they don't purchase BEA) transformation services for multiple versions of three large ERP platforms. Application level transformation of data may involve as many as 3x(number of versions of each ERP) X (up to a posssible 200x199x198x197x etc possible number of permutations) touch points. By involve I mean design, develop, test, and package these scripts or objects. The difficulty of course is one of significant complexity because Oracle ERP, PeopleSoft, and JDE evolved their internal workings over time and without a complete understanding of the outputs (workings) of the touchpoint internal processes, the interfaces will fail.

Migration is much simpler than 'integration'.

For integration the objects or scripts would be required to meet migration standards but would also have to contain embodied knowledge of the identity of the user and their role (RBAC) in an organization, the business processes, the message exchange method (remember the AS-400 and JDE and backward binary compatibility?), as well as targeted protocols for databases and reporting (future standards?).

Let's omit any consideration of how to deal with past client customizations and how they would be accommodated, protocols for SOA, and securing the Intranet EAI clouds required for the Fusion framework to operate safe from the incessant risk of multiple ports or multiple threads on a well publicized port being referenced before the client's competitor makes any important decision of their own. To not omit this from current Fusion planning and execution (imagining that I am there) would risk some kind of madness within the engineers faced with the prodigous task of bringing this new universe to material form.

Getting back to my original point only stated a different way...what would an analyst see of what Fusion is that they WOULD understand? Signing a non-disclosure only means that we will continue to hear BEA (and therefore Oracle Fusion) described as middle-ware by analysts being secretive.

It makes me cringe whenever I hear the word middle-ware attached to this couple, but then again I don't own Oracle or BEA stock. That would make me a not so good analyst.


Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2022