I think that a lot of people misunderstand Oracle. As a former Product Manager there, I can safely say that Oracle only cares about development tools to the ext

I think that a lot of people misunderstand Oracle. As a former Product Manager there, I can safely say that Oracle only cares about development tools to the extent that it furthers their business interests (based on Executive Meetings I attended). And since Microsoft provides a popular and full-featured development environment, Oracle is forced to provide an alternative or they might get shut out of all development projects by Microsoft (in fact, that is Microsoft strategy as learned by some of our "spies". Or did you think that Microsoft supports development tools because they want to be in that business?). In addition, based on meetings with executives from several Fortune 50 hardware and software vendors, it is clear that transferring as many costs as possible to open source groups saves money. And, as another benefit, any bugs or shortcomings can't be blamed on the corporation who sold them their hardware or software - again saving costs and preventing many lawsuits (which account for many, many millions paid quietly.) So be careful about projecting the "myth" of open source on to the companies involved with open source. The interests they claim are not their real interests. (And since some HR readers routinely ask me "what proof" and then work to dismiss anything I write - let me say that I have no proof. Insisting on proof for all data-points leads to poor judgment. It makes more sense to collect unproven data-points and assemble those along with known data to craft good judgment. Honestly I feel sorry for those whose judgment is blinded by their insistence on legal-level proof. They are mentally disabled.)