4 ms·

If you're talking kids and toys : Oracle is the new kid who is sitting in the corner writing his name in marker all over 'his toys'. The Libre kids just want

by mdda 16y ago

If you're talking kids and toys : Oracle is the new kid who is sitting in the corner writing his name in marker all over 'his toys'. The Libre kids just want to share toys, and think the new kid is a bully. Maybe one day they'll all play together. But it'll probably take the new kid realizing that the kids that share each get to play with shiny new toys.

gaius 16y ago
Forking the code is absolutely fine. Wanting the name too to pretend that the shareholders who underwrote all this development aren't part of it is just plain rude.
- davidw 16y ago
  Do you think the Oracle shareholders really care much one way or the other about the OpenOffice name? I think if anything, the more profit-minded amongst them would simply be happy to cut loose a project that is probably not bringing in any direct revenues. The argument for keeping it might be to develop it as "Project Stick It To Microsoft", and attempt to undercut the office revenues. Even that, though, doesn't really gain anything for Oracle in the short term.
  - gaius 16y ago
    Yes. It is an asset that Sun paid cash money for, and Oracle paid cash money for in turn. So of course they care. My personal opinion is that eventually we'll see OO Calc getting the same integration with Oracle that Excel has with MSAS/SQL Server, and possibly OO Writer will form the core of a report writing engine.
    - davidw 16y ago
      > Yes. It is an asset that Sun paid cash money for, and Oracle paid cash money for in turn. So of course they care. "Paid cash for" is a sunk cost. They care about what it's going to do for them now and in the future. How much revenue did it bring in for Sun? Maybe they can hack at it to make what you describe, but at that point do you think Oracle will care much about what it's called? I think it'd have a new name, myself. Oracle something, most likely. I just don't see Oracle caring that much about it one way or the other. They wanted the server stuff, supposedly, and Java, most certainly. I can't see OO having figured much one way or the other, really.
      - gaius 16y ago
        Oracle Open Office dot Org. OOOO.

by mdda 16y ago

gaius 16y ago

Forking the code is absolutely fine. Wanting the name too to pretend that the shareholders who underwrote all this development aren't part of it is just plain rude.

davidw 16y ago
Do you think the Oracle shareholders really care much one way or the other about the OpenOffice name? I think if anything, the more profit-minded amongst them would simply be happy to cut loose a project that is probably not bringing in any direct revenues. The argument for keeping it might be to develop it as "Project Stick It To Microsoft", and attempt to undercut the office revenues. Even that, though, doesn't really gain anything for Oracle in the short term.
- gaius 16y ago
  Yes. It is an asset that Sun paid cash money for, and Oracle paid cash money for in turn. So of course they care. My personal opinion is that eventually we'll see OO Calc getting the same integration with Oracle that Excel has with MSAS/SQL Server, and possibly OO Writer will form the core of a report writing engine.
  - davidw 16y ago
    > Yes. It is an asset that Sun paid cash money for, and Oracle paid cash money for in turn. So of course they care. "Paid cash for" is a sunk cost. They care about what it's going to do for them now and in the future. How much revenue did it bring in for Sun? Maybe they can hack at it to make what you describe, but at that point do you think Oracle will care much about what it's called? I think it'd have a new name, myself. Oracle something, most likely. I just don't see Oracle caring that much about it one way or the other. They wanted the server stuff, supposedly, and Java, most certainly. I can't see OO having figured much one way or the other, really.
    - gaius 16y ago
      Oracle Open Office dot Org. OOOO.