Red Hat up, Oracle down

Discussion in 'NZ Computing' started by Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Mar 29, 2008.

  1. Red Hat enjoying 30% growth, while Oracle's knockoff "Unbreakable Linux"
    languishes <http://techdirt.com/articles/20080327/195124677.shtml>.

    And I get to say "I told you so"
    <http://groups.google.co.nz/group/nz.comp/msg/e4377e0b76111a18>.
     
    Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Mar 29, 2008
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    impossible Guest

    Re: Red Hat down, Oracle up

    "Lawrence D'Oliveiro" <_zealand> wrote in message
    news:fskrm4$vrn$...
    >
    > Red Hat enjoying 30% growth, while Oracle's knockoff "Unbreakable Linux"
    > languishes <http://techdirt.com/articles/20080327/195124677.shtml>.
    >


    LOL. You should stick to script-writing and leave business developments to
    people who know what they're talking about. Oracle isn't trying to compete
    with RedHat -- it's trying to take it over -- and that propsect remains very
    much in play. RedHat's earnings figures have long been a disappointment to
    Wall Street. Profits, not sales, are what matter -- and RedHat hasn't
    demonstrated to anyone that it can consistently turn a solid profit in the
    face of even meager competition. Over the past two years, since Oracle first
    went after RedHat, RedHat's share price has fallen 25-30% -- well below the
    Dow and Nasdaq performance averages. During that same time period, Oracle's
    share price has **increased** by 50%.

    http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?t=2y&s=RHT&l=on&z=m&q=l&c=ORCL&c=^IXIC&c=^DJI

    At the current price, apparently IBM, Sun, and Google are also interested in
    snapping up RedHat, so it could be interesting.
     
    impossible, Mar 29, 2008
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    Enkidu Guest

    Re: Red Hat down, Oracle up

    impossible wrote:
    >
    > At the current price, apparently IBM, Sun, and Google are also
    > interested in snapping up RedHat, so it could be interesting.
    >

    You forgot Microsoft.

    Cheers,

    Cliff

    --

    Have you ever noticed that if something is advertised as 'amusing' or
    'hilarious', it usually isn't?
     
    Enkidu, Mar 30, 2008
    #3
  4. In article <fskrm4$vrn$>, Lawrence D'Oliveiro did write:

    > Red Hat enjoying 30% growth, while Oracle's knockoff "Unbreakable Linux"
    > languishes <http://techdirt.com/articles/20080327/195124677.shtml>.
    >
    > And I get to say "I told you so"
    > <http://groups.google.co.nz/group/nz.comp/msg/e4377e0b76111a18>.


    Further confirmation I was right: Oracle's Linux customer base falls short
    of Red Hat's by a couple of orders of magnitude
    <http://searchenterpriselinux.techtarget.com/news/article/0,289142,sid39_gci1307296,00.htm>.
     
    Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Mar 30, 2008
    #4
  5. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    impossible Guest

    Re: Red Hat Down, Oracle up

    "Lawrence D'Oliveiro" <_zealand> wrote in message
    news:fsngen$j36$...

    >
    > Further confirmation I was right: Oracle's Linux customer base falls short
    > of Red Hat's by a couple of orders of magnitude
    > <http://searchenterpriselinux.techtarget.com/news/article/0,289142,sid39_gci1307296,00.htm>.


    Still whistling past the graveyard? RedHat has been selling Linux contracts
    for 15 years -- Oracle has been doing it for just 15 months and already it's
    become a major player, snatching most of its 2000 customers directly away
    from RedHat. Clearly, you're worried , because you swore such a thing could
    never happen.

    http://groups.google.co.nz/group/nz.comp/msg/4a234c53bb99f24d

    Anyway, as I've repeatedly explained to you, Oracle isn't trying to compete
    with RedHat -- it's trying to take it over -- and that prospect remains very
    much in play. RedHat's earnings figures have long been a disappointment to
    Wall Street. Profits, not sales, are what matter -- and RedHat hasn't
    demonstrated to anyone that it can consistently turn a solid profit in the
    face of even meager competition. Over the past two years, since Oracle first
    went after RedHat, RedHat's share price has fallen 25-30% -- well below the
    Dow and Nasdaq performance averages. During that same time period, Oracle's
    share price has **increased** by 50%.

    http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?t=2y&s=RHT&l=on&z=m&q=l&c=ORCL&c=^IXIC&c=^DJI

    At the current price, apparently IBM, Sun, and Google are also interested in
    snapping up RedHat, so it could be interesting.
     
    impossible, Mar 30, 2008
    #5
  6. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    thingy Guest

    Re: Red Hat down, Oracle up

    impossible wrote:
    > "Lawrence D'Oliveiro" <_zealand> wrote in message
    > news:fskrm4$vrn$...
    >> Red Hat enjoying 30% growth, while Oracle's knockoff "Unbreakable Linux"
    >> languishes <http://techdirt.com/articles/20080327/195124677.shtml>.
    >>

    >
    > LOL. You should stick to script-writing and leave business developments to
    > people who know what they're talking about. Oracle isn't trying to compete
    > with RedHat -- it's trying to take it over -- and that propsect remains very
    > much in play. RedHat's earnings figures have long been a disappointment to
    > Wall Street. Profits, not sales, are what matter -- and RedHat hasn't
    > demonstrated to anyone that it can consistently turn a solid profit in the
    > face of even meager competition. Over the past two years, since Oracle first
    > went after RedHat, RedHat's share price has fallen 25-30% -- well below the
    > Dow and Nasdaq performance averages. During that same time period, Oracle's
    > share price has **increased** by 50%.
    >
    > http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?t=2y&s=RHT&l=on&z=m&q=l&c=ORCL&c=^IXIC&c=^DJI
    >
    > At the current price, apparently IBM, Sun, and Google are also interested in
    > snapping up RedHat, so it could be interesting.
    >
    >


    Faulty assumptions....and pretty much shows up your bias, terminally so.

    When RH IPO'd wall street got greedy and over priced it by a huge
    margin, since then the share value has trended downward to what it
    should be for the amount of profit they are making. Its not RH's fault
    if greedy, ignorant and short sighted ppl bought in at an inflated
    price...and got their fingers burned.

    Oracle has sold diddly Oracle Linux, its a non-event. Most sensible
    organisations realise Oracle's support is in-different and over-priced
    so they would have to be nuts to move...unless Oracle was doing an end
    to end and the customer didnt care about the $ cost, and there are not
    many of those.

    RH is pretty much making a decent profit and expanding, and often the
    profit is being plowed back into that expansion, so no fat cheques for
    the lazies so they run.

    So to sum up, to compare an established business share price like
    Oracle's to a startup is plain silly, troll.

    regards

    Thing
     
    thingy, Mar 30, 2008
    #6
  7. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    thingy Guest

    Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
    > In article <fskrm4$vrn$>, Lawrence D'Oliveiro did write:
    >
    >> Red Hat enjoying 30% growth, while Oracle's knockoff "Unbreakable Linux"
    >> languishes <http://techdirt.com/articles/20080327/195124677.shtml>.
    >>
    >> And I get to say "I told you so"
    >> <http://groups.google.co.nz/group/nz.comp/msg/e4377e0b76111a18>.

    >
    > Further confirmation I was right: Oracle's Linux customer base falls short
    > of Red Hat's by a couple of orders of magnitude
    > <http://searchenterpriselinux.techtarget.com/news/article/0,289142,sid39_gci1307296,00.htm>.


    RH's v Oracle's customer support........

    "As for customer support, Red Hat has topped CIO Insight's annual vendor
    value study for three years in a row, Kazmierski said. By contrast, in
    2006 Oracle ranked 30th; and in 2007, it ranked 29th she said."

    Pretty much sums up Oracle's chances....2000 customers running RAC, I
    wonder if any are non-oracle uses...

    regards

    thing
     
    thingy, Mar 30, 2008
    #7
  8. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    impossible Guest

    Re: Red Hat down, Oracle up

    "thingy" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > impossible wrote:
    >> "Lawrence D'Oliveiro" <_zealand> wrote in message
    >> news:fskrm4$vrn$...
    >>> Red Hat enjoying 30% growth, while Oracle's knockoff "Unbreakable Linux"
    >>> languishes <http://techdirt.com/articles/20080327/195124677.shtml>.
    >>>

    >>
    >> LOL. You should stick to script-writing and leave business developments
    >> to people who know what they're talking about. Oracle isn't trying to
    >> compete with RedHat -- it's trying to take it over -- and that propsect
    >> remains very much in play. RedHat's earnings figures have long been a
    >> disappointment to Wall Street. Profits, not sales, are what matter -- and
    >> RedHat hasn't demonstrated to anyone that it can consistently turn a
    >> solid profit in the face of even meager competition. Over the past two
    >> years, since Oracle first went after RedHat, RedHat's share price has
    >> fallen 25-30% -- well below the Dow and Nasdaq performance averages.
    >> During that same time period, Oracle's share price has **increased** by
    >> 50%.
    >>
    >> http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?t=2y&s=RHT&l=on&z=m&q=l&c=ORCL&c=^IXIC&c=^DJI
    >>
    >> At the current price, apparently IBM, Sun, and Google are also interested
    >> in snapping up RedHat, so it could be interesting.

    >
    > Faulty assumptions....and pretty much shows up your bias, terminally so.
    >


    I've made no assumptions whatsoever here. Facts are facts, and I've
    documented everything. Let's see if you can do half as well.


    > When RH IPO'd wall street got greedy and over priced it by a huge margin,
    > since then the share value has trended downward to what it should be for
    > the amount of profit they are making. Its not RH's fault if greedy,
    > ignorant and short sighted ppl bought in at an inflated price...and got
    > their fingers burned.
    >


    Well, that's just dead wrong. When you revise the chart of RedHat's share
    price to include the IP, yes, there was a collapse from 2000 to 2001 that
    largely corresponded to to the docom bust. But then RedHat hit its boom
    years when the share price moved steadily up. Only after Oracle's launch of
    its own Linux product did RedHat's share price start to free-fall again --
    just as I showed previously.

    http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?s=RHT&t=my&l=on&z=m&q=l&c=ORCL,^IXIC,^DJI

    Your sentimental attachment to RedHat seems to be getting the best of you.
    Surely, investors have every right to a meximum return on their investment.
    If RedHat's business model is under-performing, then something has to
    change.

    > Oracle has sold diddly Oracle Linux, its a non-event. Most sensible
    > organisations realise Oracle's support is in-different and over-priced so
    > they would have to be nuts to move...unless Oracle was doing an end to end
    > and the customer didnt care about the $ cost, and there are not many of
    > those.
    >


    2000 new Oracle customers say differntly. In any case, why are you so
    blindly loyal to RedHat and so bitterly opposed to Oracle? This makes no
    sense. I thought the whole idea of open-source development was to give
    customer's a choice. Surely if RedHat isn't meeting a customer's need,
    they'll be turning to Suse or Ubuntu or Oracle.... and vice-versa of course.
    Is there a problem here?

    > RH is pretty much making a decent profit and expanding, and often the
    > profit is being plowed back into that expansion, so no fat cheques for the
    > lazies so they run.
    >


    Yes, they do. When a company's share price goes down, that's an indication
    that it's performance is poor relative to investment opportunities
    elsewhere. Investors arte not interested in sustaining some tech's favorite
    hobby -- either RedHat management gets the job done in a way that earn's at
    least average profits or soomeone else will.

    > So to sum up, to compare an established business share price like Oracle's
    > to a startup is plain silly, troll.

    ...

    Did you miss the class on how tro read graphs? The ones I referenced are
    plus-minus performance graphs measured in percent of share-price change. It
    makes no difference what the "established" price of RedHat or Oracle was
    when Oracle launched its Linux products. Since that time, RedHat has simply
    performed worse -- both relative to its own previous performance and
    relative to Oracle's. The market has spoken, even if you are ideologically
    indisposed to see that.
     
    impossible, Mar 31, 2008
    #8
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. dave fucko

    Red Hat icons

    dave fucko, Oct 27, 2003, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    3,523
    dave fucko
    Oct 28, 2003
  2. Tim Kettring

    Red Hat Linux 9 or fedora 10

    Tim Kettring, Feb 24, 2004, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    2,661
    Blinky the Shark
    Feb 24, 2004
  3. steve

    Red Hat Defines end of Red Hat Linux

    steve, Nov 3, 2003, in forum: NZ Computing
    Replies:
    14
    Views:
    593
    T.N.O.
    Nov 6, 2003
  4. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    Red Hat up, Oracle down

    Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Dec 23, 2008, in forum: NZ Computing
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    366
    Lawrence D'Oliveiro
    Dec 27, 2008
  5. impossible

    Sun down, Red Hat to go?

    impossible, Jun 25, 2009, in forum: NZ Computing
    Replies:
    11
    Views:
    647
    Biggles
    Jun 28, 2009
Loading...

Share This Page