3 ms·
The point I'm making is that Oracle probably measures the quality of its keynote in terms of profit, not in terms of how enjoyable or ethical it was. In these t
by 10ren 16y ago
The point I'm making is that Oracle probably measures the quality of its keynote in terms of profit, not in terms of how enjoyable or ethical it was. In these terms, perhaps the keynote was in fact good. An interesting thought experiment, no?
Of course, it's hard to measure whether this sales-pitching, partner-insulting keynote will result in greater profits, until those profits appear (and even then, hard to judge its causative role - if any.) I certainly don't approve or agree with it - I'm just saying that that is a fruitful (in a scientific sense) way to think about it. Whether it was enjoyable and/or ethical for a particular person is also important, but it's unlikely to aid understanding or prediction of Oracle, and very unlikely to make any difference.
We can however look at how Oracle has behaved in the past, and how that worked out for them. I've observed them be quite unkind and changeable, though pragmatic in providing working products etc - and to be profitable.
- rbanffy 16y agoI think we had different interpretations on who was wasting time and money on conferences like this. It seems I interpreted as the attendants were wasting time and money. It seems you interpreted as Oracle wasting time and money. I agree with you that, for Oracle, this is a good form of promotion.
- 10ren 16y agoI wasn't thinking of anyone wasting time and money, but I see now that attendants might feel that (though these things are often more about networking.) Yes, it's (probably) good promotion for Oracle. I'm thinking also that Oracle feels it is in a very powerful and dominant position, owning a whole stack, and they're letting everyone know it. It's not all bad though - like Apple and console makers, they can then integrate the stack to make a better whole product (and charge more for that greater value.) They can also charge more through lock-in, but doing that alone is a terrible long-term strategy, because it gives oxygen to new entrants. Like "paranoia" Intel and "crown-stealing" Microsoft, I think Oracle well-understands that they won't keep their success automatically
- 10ren 16y agoI see what you mean now; you can see it as a point of view change (or as a value-system change.) I feel I've been a bit callously analytical, like the "Life goes on, folks" post near the end of A Fire Upon the Deep, but I'm not happy about how Oracle is acting, or what it may do next. Like the Blight, it is very powerful.