http://realmoney.thestreet.com/articles/09/15/2016/oracles-c...
Time will tell if they manage to met BofA or a similar ultrabig FI and that could be called a success, but short of that all they can do is pay folks to write wrongheaded quarterly analysis and say "gosh isn't this better than Amazon?"
Which is totally absurd. Comically so.
And from the perspective of actually using their tech, you're better off scooping a mug of old compost and dumping it in a sizzling pan of oil and letting the oil spatter burn you. It will be a more enjoyable experience.
$800 million from their cloud offering in a single quarter is nonsense?
New customers are being forced into Cloud by the Oracle sales team. The sales reps literally receive no compensation for on-prem (EBS) deals, and they must go through a lengthy approval process just to offer a prospect the on-prem solution. Thus everyone is being guided to Cloud, whether or not it is the right solution for the customer.
Also, maybe Oracle's "lock your customers in and then extract as much profit as possible" history is guiding decisions? If there's a rearchitecture cost to migrate to cloud, then why would you do it with a company who already $&#@ed you over?
Sorry for being a grammar nazi, but this one is a serious pet peeve. The singular of "premises" isn't "premise", it's "premises".
Either way "on-premises licenses" sounds weird so I'm likely to stick with "on-premise licenses" regardless. Sorry.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/on%20premises
Premise (singular) is a presupposition. The premise is that we can get this done in 3 weeks.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/premise
I agree, it sounds weird. I'd avoid it all together and use on-site.
Edit to add: or, as uncle-comment (?) pointed out with the Wikipedia article, on-premises software is a thing. On-prem might be a good compromise, depending on your penchant for shortening like that.
Downvoted for expressing contempt for the English language and common decency, but then failing to add in the obvious "irregardless."
I hear they are desperately pushing new cloud offerings, but they are having lots of problems with customer retention, as their cloud technology is really not ready so they are actually just selling hosted versions of the existing products that lack any cost advantage.
Ha, if that were true, it wouldn't even be that bad. In the niche I work for, what they sell is not even as powerful as their existing on-premises product.
Not that it matters: they simply won't sell or even develop new on-premises, so you either go to their crappy cloud services or you just migrate away. There are now entire companies based on "move your existing Oracle solutions to our product with the minimum fuss and enjoy real power, not a cut-down version of what you already had three years ago".
https://blogs.oracle.com/solaris/entry/oracle_solaris_moving...
Personally, I'd say this is similar to Microsoft's decisions around Windows 10.
Staffing levels in some areas was changed as was publicly announced.
See also http://www.esteem.co.uk/news-events/oracle-solaris-whats-goi...
Disclaimer: these are my opinions and not those of my employer.