The level of BS in Oracle marketing is without equal. In any cloud service, availability and security are the provider's responsibility and customers only care about the vendor meeting the SLA. Nobody cares HOW AWS or Google patch or secure anything. In the cloud, customers care about SLAs. What a bunch of camel dung.
Posts by aazmi615@gmail.com
15 publicly visible posts • joined 3 Mar 2016
What's going great for Oracle? Cloud. What's not great? Just about everything else
Tuesday 20th March 2018 19:10 GMT
The difference between fully autonomous and fully managed is TITANIC.
AWS, Microsoft, and Google already offer very competitively priced fully managed Oracle database cloud services.
A fully autonomous database is different because it can, in real time and without any human action, detect and respond to security threats. Take the most basic scenario. In case of a DoS attack, the database will detect a usage spike, distinguish between a legitimate spike caused by seasonality or a sales promotion AND a spike caused by an attack.
This capability is achieved in one of two ways: either a rule based engine, which needs to be constantly maintained and updated by humans just like a virus detection program. Or via machine learning models which require training on large sets of historical attack profile data.
If Oracle's autonomous database uses machine learning, WHO supplies the threat detection model training data? Oracle or the customer? Also, is the cost of continuous model training (to handle emerging threats) bundled in the price of the service or requires a renewable paid professional services contract?
Oracle keeps shooting themselves in the foot with BS marketing. The only people left working there are the dead beats who can't get a job at a real tech company. Oracle is DEAD.
HPE CEO Meg Whitman QUITS, MAN! Neri to replace chief exec in Feb
Wednesday 22nd November 2017 21:39 GMT
What's the difference between a CEO with industry vision and a career bureaucrat? When handed a struggling company, the first will successfully pivot the talent pool to competitiveness and profitability. The second will layoff staff to cut cost at a higher rate than revenues decline to report false profit. Microsoft's Satya is an example of the former, HP's M Hurd & M Whiteman are examples of the latter.
HPE sharpening the axe for 5,000 heads – report
Saturday 23rd September 2017 22:50 GMT
Adding technology IP!
Adding technology IP from Bangalore? or maybe fresh grads from Eastern Europe who can barely speak English. No. It's about cutting cost to stay profitable in the short term. The future of the business and the quality of the products and services are going to be someone else's problem after she's long gone with a $300 million package.
HPE UK preps the redundancy ride as Chrimbo looms
Monday 5th December 2016 18:01 GMT
@CDD I am one of those Egyptians you refer to in your post. Let me set the record straight for all.
- nobody gets flown to the U.K. for up to 2 years. Wave one got to train with U.K. staff for 2 weeks then we were expected to train others when we got back.
- The training was useless. The U.K. staff knew they were training their replacements. I don't blame them because I would have done the same thing. They resented us and the day they joined that shit hole.
- No we are not as good as the U.K. or U.S staff. Not even close. These guys had years of technical and business experience under their belt. Most of them were truly subject matter experts. Most of us were younger and much less experienced. Many never used the product as a business user and most did not know the functional applications of the technology.
Not only that but most of us had severe communication problems and I don't just mean language but communication problems related to the culture gap between us and the U.K. or U.S. business or IT staff.
This model is a failure. Cheap labor is bad for everyone and customers hate it because they know they are paying premium prices for poor quality of service. The truth behind cost cutting is this: CEO's who need to keep their jobs for one more year resort to cutting costs instead of creating revenue growth (that actually requires vision and imagination). This way the financials look good and they get to make that $200 million in stock options and bonuses.
That is the truth.
IBM swings axe through staff, humming contently about cloud and AI
Friday 2nd September 2016 22:40 GMT
Re: The American Dream
IBM was IBM when they hired and retained the best design and technology talent a long time ago.
Once IBM turned to outsourcing everything to cheap labor, the edge was lost along with quality and customer loyalty. When IBM started laying off people with 20 years of service with 4 week severance, it lost the loyalty of their own employees as well.
IT is about creative problem solving, communication, and value innovation. You don't get this from cheap inexperienced labor who can not write a single paragraph to convey a clear idea.
Biting the hand that feeds IT
