Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Databases Programming Software Sun Microsystems IT

Sun Buys MySQL 588

Posted by CmdrTaco
from the didn't-see-that-coming dept.
Krow alerted me that MySQL has been bought by Sun. Right now there is only a brief announcement but it discusses what the acquisition will mean for the core developers, community etc.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Sun Buys MySQL

Comments Filter:
  • I wonder (Score:5, Interesting)

    by BadHaggis (1179673) on Wednesday January 16, 2008 @08:10AM (#22065376)
    One can only hope that they will be using this to replace the database that comes in Open Office.
    • Re:I wonder (Score:5, Interesting)

      by goose-incarnated (1145029) <lelanthran@gmail ... inus threevowels> on Wednesday January 16, 2008 @08:26AM (#22065536) Homepage Journal

      One can only hope that they will be using this to replace the database that comes in Open Office.

      Seconded, thoroughly - in addition I would like some decent gui tools for single-user data-storage requirements; it's annoying that any pc user who wants to maintain a list of (contacts/friends/must-see-movies/must-read-books/etc) puts everything into a spreadsheet.

      --
      Homo homini lupus

      ?Every man is a wolf?
      • Re:I wonder (Score:5, Funny)

        by Meneth (872868) on Wednesday January 16, 2008 @08:47AM (#22065714)

        Seconded, thoroughly - in addition I would like some decent gui tools for single-user data-storage requirements; it's annoying that any pc user who wants to maintain a list of (contacts/friends/must-see-movies/must-read-books/etc) puts everything into a spreadsheet.
        I like Notepad with a fixed font.
        • Re:I wonder (Score:5, Funny)

          by Shakrai (717556) * on Wednesday January 16, 2008 @10:18AM (#22066682) Journal

          I like Notepad with a fixed font.

          Notepad is a great storage system. In fact, I have at least ten "New Text Document.txt", "New Text Document (2).txt" files on my desktop right now. One of them has my address book in it.... let's see... is it (6)? Nope, that's my checking account register. Hmm.... could've sworn that was my address book.... shit, I'm overdrawn by $50!

          (Laugh, it's not that far from the truth.... got a similar situation with text files in my ~ on my Linux box.... who needs meaningful filenames and directories when you have grep?)

          • Re:I wonder (Score:5, Insightful)

            by cuban321 (644777) on Wednesday January 16, 2008 @02:59PM (#22070676) Homepage

            who needs meaningful filenames and directories when you have grep?
            Who needs grep when you have spotlight?
          • Re:I wonder (Score:4, Funny)

            by Max Littlemore (1001285) on Wednesday January 16, 2008 @05:45PM (#22072700)

            I have at least ten "New Text Document.txt", "New Text Document (2).txt" files on my desktop right now. One of them has my address book in it.... let's see... is it (6)? Nope, that's my checking account register.

            Yeah, I used to have a similar problem until I figured out the perfect solution.

            First of all, create a directory for each file on the Desktop. Next, open all of the files until you find your checking account register, right-button drag the file to your newly created "checking account register" directory and select "Create shortcut here" from the menu that appears when you drop the file.

            It will take a little bit of time to start with, but it's certainly worth it. For example, to open your checking file register, all you have to do is open "checking account register" on the desktop and the open "Shortcut to New Document (6).txt"!

            Don't thank me. The knowledge that my small insight has helped another human being is all the thanks I need.

      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by Firehed (942385)

        Seconded, thoroughly - in addition I would like some decent gui tools for single-user data-storage requirements; it's annoying that any pc user who wants to maintain a list of (contacts/friends/must-see-movies/must-read-books/etc) puts everything into a spreadsheet.

        Well, there's nothing fundamentally wrong with that. A spreadsheet is effectively just a less structured database, and given that you're talking about freeform data... and in any case those kind of lists aren't going to have enough data that a s

        • Re:I wonder (Score:5, Interesting)

          by MBGMorden (803437) on Wednesday January 16, 2008 @09:32AM (#22066094)
          The problem, from an IT department standpoint, is that such "lists" always seem to grow in their requirements. We had one department that starting keeping a "list" of incoming data for people applying for land zoning exemptions. All these were handled by a single person and she just needed to keep track of them so the spreadsheet works fine right?

          Now, fast forward a year. People from 3 other departments need access to an always updated copy of this list. One of them is off-site on a different network. Some people aren't supposed to see parts of the list. Others can see all of the list but they are only supposed to be able to change parts of it.

          Now, as you can see, what this has evolved into is essentially a multi-user database app. A very basic one, but still more than a spreadsheet can handle (because a spreadsheet is meant for calculating, not data storage). If they had just come to us in the beginning we could have gotten something working setup from the start, rather than having to worry about going back and recreating it and importing data.

          That's my problem with the whole "a spreadsheet is fine" outlook. You can hammer in a nail with a crescent wrench too, but if you do so with a hammer sitting right there in the toolbox I'm gonna consider you an idiot :).
          • Re:I wonder (Score:5, Insightful)

            by squiggleslash (241428) on Wednesday January 16, 2008 @10:00AM (#22066462) Homepage Journal

            This is why IT departments need some improvement. Most are made up of hardware people who have a few programmers as friends and by and large are reactive rather than proactive in the way they deal with growth. The worst are the massively corporate entities who assume that the way to deal with any issue is to micromanage everything. I'm not blaming the people in IT for this so much as the people who create and staff IT departments.

            How do you deal with the growth of an application such that it no longer is able to serve the audience that it now has effectively? Well, if this were hardware, you'd replace it. And the same approach needs to be taken with software. But that takes people to understand the application, and others to do the time consuming work of migrating people and data over to the new application.

            There's nothing wrong with using a spreadsheet to manage an address book to start with. As more people start to use the same source, however, IT departments need to be willing to (and CTO's willing to allow them to) recommend changes, including providing the resources to move the data to a more efficient, more effective, platform. As of right now though, most IT departments don't even have the appropriate people to do that.

            • Re:I wonder (Score:5, Insightful)

              by Robert The Coward (21406) on Wednesday January 16, 2008 @10:25AM (#22066770)
              Spoken like someone who doesn't work in IT. I get request the day stuff is suppose to start with the users IDEA of what should work. Not requirements or information and what needs to be done then I get weeks of little issues tiring to make this Square Peg fit into a round whole until I figure out what is going on and replace it with something that works. The problem is IT is the last step in the process not the 1st step and that will always cause issues. Sometime we just can't do what the user thinks is simple. Just this week I had a issue with someone deciding that email made a good real time alert system from an external customer. Problem email isn't real time and/or reliable. So every hick up in email is an issue. If IT was consult we could have either a)set the expection or b)developed sometime that was real time and reliable they could use.
              • Re:I wonder (Score:4, Insightful)

                by strong_epoxy (413429) on Wednesday January 16, 2008 @01:00PM (#22069046)
                Spoken like someone who's just entered high school.

                The last people anyone wants to talk to about ad-hoc projects is IT. An employee has a need, they fill it with a reasonable tool. Per the GP post, the initial requirements were simple and the solution sufficient. No IT department needed. As the utility of the system increased, so did the requirements, and so must the solution space expand requiring IT assistance. IT should then be eager to help and congratulatory on the success of the solution to date.

                It's impossible to divine the future requirements of any system, or even it's success. That's why we iterate.
          • Re:I wonder (Score:5, Insightful)

            by ericlondaits (32714) on Wednesday January 16, 2008 @10:27AM (#22066808) Homepage
            Actually, from my experience as a programmer I'd much rather have someone come with a spreadsheet he worked with for a year, and very specific requirements such as "we want some people to be able to see these fields, some people to be able to edit these columns" and so... than to have someone with a vague notion of what he needs and then turning that into a relational database. Even if spreadsheets seem awful, a year's user experience with a fast prototyping tool (i.e. the spreadsheet) is priceless.
            • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

              by Reapy (688651)
              And by the way, I set up a meeting to show the finished [vague notion] next week, get on it!
            • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

              by epine (68316)

              Actually, from my experience as a programmer I'd much rather have someone come with a spreadsheet he worked with for a year, and very specific requirements such as "we want some people to be able to see these fields, some people to be able to edit these columns" and so... than to have someone with a vague notion of what he needs and then turning that into a relational database. Even if spreadsheets seem awful, a year's user experience with a fast prototyping tool (i.e. the spreadsheet) is priceless.

              I totally agree, as far as your post goes.

              OTOH, fast prototyping can just as easily cause a lot problems. By the time you reach the natural limits of the prototype, who pays to extract the data into a preservation format? Did anybody even ask before the "fast" prototype was slapped together whether the data being captured will ultimately require preservation in a properly thought through archival structure? And if so, was this conversion budgeted ahead of time, or does it just show up as a problem furth

          • Re:I wonder (Score:5, Interesting)

            by tompaulco (629533) on Wednesday January 16, 2008 @11:04AM (#22067380) Homepage Journal
            You can hammer in a nail with a crescent wrench too, but if you do so with a hammer sitting right there in the toolbox I'm gonna consider you an idiot.
            Well, as long as we are on the subject, how about the overuse of SQL databases for non-relational information? MySQL is no beast, but in my company, there is a SQL Server on almost every box and many of them are storing stuff that is non-relational and could be accessed more quickly in a direct access file.
      • Spreadsheet/Database (Score:5, Interesting)

        by Kozar_The_Malignant (738483) on Wednesday January 16, 2008 @11:24AM (#22067654)
        A few thoughts about spreadsheets as databases and the like...
        • The original marketing of Lotus 123 stressed its use as a database. 123 stood for 1=spreadsheet, 2=database. and 3=word processor. Excel still has 13 choices on its |Data menu. Lotus was a bloody awful word processor. Copy Con was better.
        • Back in the early DOS days, I used to use a flat file database called Professional File a lot. dBaseIII was overkill for what I needed.
        • In the later Dos days I was using Quattro Pro a lot for my spreadsheet work. I also used it for inventory lists, but hardware limitations, both RAM and drive storage were a problem when spreadsheet databases got over 200 records. Paradox worked better both for loading in memory and for much smaller file size than Quattro Pro for the same number of records.
        • In spite of its many faults, I use Access for mail merge data rather than the @#$%ing awful thing in Word.
        • I use Access for a database more than I use Excel, but sometimes Excel is simpler.
        • I would love to see a single-user desktop database program with modest relational capabilities, intuitive query and report functions, and decent ability to import and export data.
      • Re:I wonder (Score:4, Informative)

        by MrNemesis (587188) on Wednesday January 16, 2008 @12:17PM (#22068472) Homepage Journal
        Might not be what you're looking for, but ever since I discovered Python and SQLite I've found this little tool http://sqlitebrowser.sourceforge.net/ [sourceforge.net] to be brilliant.

        Granted, I'm not using SQLite to do anything complicated - mostly just as dumb storage for non-huge cross-linked lists but it still seems remarkably capable, very fast and very low on resources, with the GUI providing a nice interface for a quick gander at the data structure.

        There's also a Ruby/GTK gizmo here http://rsqlitegui.rubyforge.org/ [rubyforge.org]
      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        [gasp]. You actually expect that Sun of all companies would be able to put a decent GUI on top of anything? Okay, well, Oracle's got an ever worse track record w.r.t. GUIs, but Sun takes a good second place. Even with a 13 year lead in the managed application space, they are only now taking the Java GUI seriously.

        Be realistic. The path MySQL is going down now would involve configuration and editing through countless sets of webservers, various inaptly layers ending on the word 'bean', 200 xml configuratio

    • Re:I wonder (Score:5, Funny)

      by Mr. Underbridge (666784) on Wednesday January 16, 2008 @08:44AM (#22065688)

      One can only hope that they will be using this to replace the database that comes in Open Office.

      I figured MS was paying them to include the current one to make Access look good by comparison.

    • Re:I wonder (Score:5, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 16, 2008 @09:20AM (#22065994)

      One can only hope that they will be using this to replace the database that comes in Open Office.
      Wouldn't SQLite [sqlite.org] be a better choice for that? MySQL is a bit to heavy for use in an office application. SQLite was designed to be embedded into applications, is quite powerful, fast, and released in the public domain [sqlite.org].
      • SQLite Gui_ (Score:3, Insightful)

        by xtracto (837672)
        Yup, I think SQLite is a great alternative against Access, however could someone suggest a good GUI for SQLite with similar properties as MS Access? I am not looking for a clone but a program in which my mom could make her simple databases without knowing SQL programming language. Access allows her to do that, but if I want to migrate to Linux there is no alternative. I know that the guys at KDE have some nice apps in developemnt, but I am looking for an application in the lines of "mature" sourceforge stat
        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          by misleb (129952)
          Question: Does your mom effectively use MS Access now?

          I would question whether it is even possible to make a GUI for any database that a) is easy to use, b) provides enough options to make a wide variety of applications, and c) requires no knowledge of SQL or database design. This is one of those "pick two" situations. Even Access requires a fair amount of skill to use properly... far more than Word or Excel. And even with a modicum of skill, databases produced in MS Access tend to be horrible abominations
          • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

            by xtracto (837672)
            Question: Does your mom effectively use MS Access now?

            The answer is Yes. But of course the answer depends on what you mean by "effectively". My mom uses access effectively for her needs. She can start a database with one of the wizards and then modify it a bit using the GUI. She has a *very very* small knowledge of keys and tables and overal database structure (which I taught her). Overall, she knows whatever is necessary to know to acomplish her tasks.

            The idea of a GUI is to make it easy and intuitive to e
    • Re:I wonder (Score:5, Informative)

      by ozmanjusri (601766) <aussie_bobNO@SPAMhotmail.com> on Wednesday January 16, 2008 @09:22AM (#22066014) Journal
      One can only hope that they will be using this to replace the database that comes in Open Office.

      You can already use MySQL as the database engine for Open Office.

      The development environment in OOo (Base) is a database client, not a database engine. Base does bundle the HSQLDB database engine, but even that is just XML tables, and shouldn't be used for anything serious.

      As far as the quality of Base, yep it's rough, but it's also brand new for OOo v2. It's being actively developed, and there are plans [openoffice.org]to use it to allow users to share data from several FOSS packages within the suite.

      * Btw, I know you were just trolling, but I thought this was worth an answer, since desktop databases are a badly misunderstood class of software.

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by kestasjk (933987)
      I just hope they don't change anything.. I don't get how this fits in to their strategy.

      Will they try and make it more Solaris-oriented, or what? It's not like they had to buy MySQL to improve its ability to run on Solaris.
      How will this affect MySQL's upcoming Falcon engine? How is this going to impact Oracle?

      They used to be all about PostgreSQL, putting it in Solaris by default if memory serves. PostgreSQL's BSD license would have let them fork and develop it as they pleased, so why would they want
  • Im a sun employee (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Mark Atwood (19301) on Wednesday January 16, 2008 @08:10AM (#22065378) Homepage
    First post!

    So now I'm a Sun employee. Interesting. No more BK at MySQL.

    What all this means, I'm sure I'll be learning the hard way very soon.
  • Licenses (Score:5, Interesting)

    by ilovegeorgebush (923173) on Wednesday January 16, 2008 @08:12AM (#22065398) Homepage
    Interesting surprise! I wonder if Sun will streamline the licensing madness that MySQL has become...
    • Re:Licenses (Score:5, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 16, 2008 @08:25AM (#22065526)

      I wonder if Sun will streamline the licensing madness that MySQL has become...
      I'm sure that's part of the plan. Streamlined madness is what I've come to expect from Sun.
    • Re:Licenses (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Martian_Kyo (1161137) on Wednesday January 16, 2008 @08:27AM (#22065546)
      mysql license is real mess, it can be interpreted in so many ways.
      • Re:Licenses (Score:5, Interesting)

        by Spy der Mann (805235) <[spydermann.slashdot] [at] [gmail.com]> on Wednesday January 16, 2008 @08:55AM (#22065782) Homepage Journal
        mysql license is real mess, it can be interpreted in so many ways.

        Mod parent insightful, please!

        I recall reading that MySQL AB really didn't stand a chance to force the GPL (and therefore, move to their proprietary license) on programs that connected to the database because that was "dynamically linking". Dude, WTF? Using protocols to communicate to a program or service is NOT linking! I got so angry when I read the news on the License change, that I wanted to tag the story "greedybastards".
        But if MySQL AB told the truth, then nobody would buy their ultra-expensive license.

        On the other hand, Sun and their promotion of Open Office (and open formats) is a proper example of Free software.

        Let's hope things change for the good (for example, re-releasing the MySQL client software to LGPL or GPL+linking exception).

        • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

          by zdzichu (100333)
          Did your program really communicated using MySQL protocol over TCP or unix socket? Is this protocol even documented?
          Almost all software uses implementation of this protocol from libmysqlclient. Linking to this library. Hence, GPL.
        • Re:Licenses (Score:5, Informative)

          by djtack (545324) on Wednesday January 16, 2008 @10:02AM (#22066480)
          Using protocols to communicate to a program or service is NOT linking!

          I understand where you're coming from, which is why I moved to Postgres for all my new applications last year. However, as it stands now, I think MySQL is within their rights to use the GPL for the client. As far as I know, there is no way to communicate with a MySQL server without linking to their client library (i.e., libmysqlclient.a). At one time there was an attempt to maintain a fork of the old LGPL MySQL 3, but it never took off. Now, merely linking to the client library doesn't automatically create a derived worked (see Linus's explanation [lkml.org]), however, in the absence of some other compatible library you could have linked with instead, it's pretty much impossible to say your linked program is independent of MySQL. And since independence is a requirement to have a non-derived work (i.e. the ability for a program to live a separate life, do something useful without the linked library), the program ends up being derived from the MySQL client, and has to abide by the GPL.
          There is still plenty of argument around this topic, but again, it can be avoided by using Postgres, which IMHO is a better database anyway.
          • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

            by photon317 (208409)

            I agree about PostgreSQL being a better option for so many reasons (and this new Sun thing is just yet another on the list). The only thing PostgreSQL really needs is some kind of asynch multimaster replication. That's one place where you can get "forced" to use MySQL because Pg can't do what you need. MySQL's implementation of asynch multimaster replication sucks anyways, I'm sure the Pg community can do it better eventually.

            Back to the topic at hand though, one way around the libmysqlclient GPL thing i
  • Not a rash move (Score:5, Informative)

    by Now15 (9715) on Wednesday January 16, 2008 @08:12AM (#22065404) Homepage
    Sun has been thinking about this for a while
    http://www.news.com/2100-7344_3-5562799.html [news.com]
    • Re:Not a rash move (Score:4, Interesting)

      by morgan_greywolf (835522) on Wednesday January 16, 2008 @08:26AM (#22065538) Homepage Journal
      Yeah, I remember the 'Sun DB' remark. I expect we'll see a Sun-branded version of MySQL (SunSQL? MySunDB? StarSQL? OpenSQL.org?). I also expect to see Sun packaging MySQL with OpenOffice.org, with smoother OOo Base integration.
    • Re:Not a rash move (Score:5, Interesting)

      by canuck57 (662392) on Wednesday January 16, 2008 @08:30AM (#22065566)

      But I think most people thought Sun might push PostgreSQL [sun.com] which is a nice database. Not sure why Sun would purchase MySQL, seems like an expensive PR move. I for one have seen Sun's product support deteriorate over the years, and hope they keep support for MySQL independent of the main line support. Or maybe this plays into Oracle as Oracle had or has an alliance with Sun. Is this alliance strained?

  • Wow! (Score:4, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 16, 2008 @08:12AM (#22065406)

    I hear they paid an astronomical amount for MySQL. In fairness though, the code is stellar. The developers must be beaming with pride. If I were a shareholder, it would certainly brighten up my day.

    PS: Sorry.

  • Here is the PR (Score:5, Informative)

    by kill-1 (36256) on Wednesday January 16, 2008 @08:12AM (#22065410)
    http://biz.yahoo.com/bw/080116/20080116005349.html?.v=1 [yahoo.com]

    "As part of the transaction, Sun will pay approximately $800 million in cash in exchange for all MySQL stock and assume approximately $200 million in options."

    • Re:Here is the PR (Score:5, Interesting)

      by superskippy (772852) on Wednesday January 16, 2008 @10:31AM (#22066888)
      I am delighted that the second best Unix flavour has bought the second best open-source database.
  • Yes! (Score:4, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 16, 2008 @08:13AM (#22065418)
    I've been waiting SOO long for OpenJySQL 19!
  • Only one question (Score:4, Insightful)

    by pieterh (196118) on Wednesday January 16, 2008 @08:16AM (#22065444) Homepage
    Will it blend?

    Not that I distrust Sun's motives when it comes to free software. I mean they did a stellar job on OpenOffice.org, didn't they?

  • Great news!! (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Slashidiot (1179447) on Wednesday January 16, 2008 @08:17AM (#22065448) Journal
    ... I think. Are these great news? It's hard to know in which direction will big companies move. But if Sun keeps it's current track, I would say these are great news.
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by b100dian (771163)
      I think it's long-term bye-bye LAMP, since Sun may "empower" MySQL with Java stored procedures, may obfuscate the documentation(like Oracle does), or remove the transactions altogether and replace them with soft ones (JTA),... or anything you can expect (if you've seen a Java programmer using 1% of databases' features..)
  • by LiquidCoooled (634315) on Wednesday January 16, 2008 @08:18AM (#22065460) Homepage Journal
    Didn't they know they could just download it and run without paying?
  • by IYagami (136831) on Wednesday January 16, 2008 @08:19AM (#22065474)
    Right now Sun supports PostgreSQL on Solaris (http://www.sun.com/software/products/postgresql/index.jsp) and Oracle is one of the main applications used in Solaris.

    I think this is a move to sell support to their customers, like asking: "Do you need an Oracle Database?"
    - If the answer is "YES", then we will sell you our servers and OS support
    - If the answer is "NO", then we will sell you our servers and OS support AND MySQL / PostgreSQL support

    There is a very good entry on a Sun blog about the cost of propietary databases and the "commodization" of this market:
    http://blogs.sun.com/jkshah/entry/cost_of_proprietary_database [sun.com]
  • by KeyserDK (301544) on Wednesday January 16, 2008 @08:23AM (#22065500) Homepage
    Read the subject.
    I thought SUN was currently bundling postgresql guess that wasn't good enough...
    So up for discussion why buy mysql?

      * Well you can't buy postgresql.....(Who to buy?)
      * Wanting to hurt redhat
      * You get ownership of the code (Since mysql has)

    The "hurting redhat" is more for journalists "lets find a conflict thinking" ...
    What else are the reasons?
    • by theskipper (461997) on Wednesday January 16, 2008 @08:54AM (#22065772)
      Ulterior motives aside, looking at it from the marketing perspective it presents a nice unified package for the big boys. On the golf course the sales drones will have clear tit-for-tat competition with MS's offerings.

      From the official blog [sun.com]:

      So why is this important for the internet? Until now, no platform vendor has assembled all the core elements of a completely open source operating system for the internet. No company has been able to deliver a comprehensive alternative to the leading proprietary OS. With this acquisition, we will have done just that - positioned Sun at the center of the web, as the definitive provider of high performance platforms for the web economy. For startups and web 2.0 companies, to government agencies and traditional enterprises. This creates enormous potential for Sun, for the global free software community, and for our partners and customers across the globe. There's opportunity everywhere.

  • by sucker_muts (776572) <sucker_pvn@@@hotmail...com> on Wednesday January 16, 2008 @08:26AM (#22065540) Homepage Journal
    This is quite interesting news! Check out what Jonathan Schwartz has to say about this:

    http://blogs.sun.com/jonathan/ [sun.com]

    • The Dot in .com (Score:3, Insightful)

      by PineHall (206441)
      From the blog it looks like Sun is trying to own a complete web solution. The blog makes a big deal out of getting the 'M' in LAMP. I think they want to be known as the dot in .com again, the place to go for web solutions.
  • by hughk (248126) on Wednesday January 16, 2008 @08:32AM (#22065578) Journal
    I have worked at a lot of big banks. Open Source has been slowly finding its way in, but it is incredibly difficult to deploy an open source database like MySQL or Postgres. The banks says they want safety and security - and you answer that your database isn't enterprise critical so why pay for Oracle? Management then says, ah well, how about MS SQL Server....
  • OpenOffice (Score:3, Informative)

    by XB-70 (812342) on Wednesday January 16, 2008 @08:36AM (#22065616)
    Base in OpenOffice has always been a disappointment - sadly sidelined as an 'afterthought', base lurches along..

    Enter MySQL - combine it with OpenOffice and you finally have a real, integrated database that MS Office can't match. All we need now is a RAD front end for the consumer...

  • Dificult to say... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by mlwmohawk (801821) on Wednesday January 16, 2008 @08:40AM (#22065654)
    As a long term PostgreSQL proponent, I'm not sure this is good news or bad. Many of the software stacks in open source, regrettably, use only MySQL. This makes it hard for PostgreSQL at times, but it puts the "owners" of MySQL in an excellent position to help some projects while ignoring others.

    Sun owns Java. Sun will soon own MySQL. If you have a Tomcat/J2EE environment running open source, you will soon be having to deal with a single vendor with control over your environment, because most systems only give lip service to PostgreSQL but fully support MySQL. Expect the support bills to go up.

    On to RedHat and IBM, I think it is time for them to start funding the PostgreSQL project for real. Setup a more corporate entity to guide it and REALLY compensate the guys like Tom, Bruce, et. al. for so much hard work, which IMHO is above and beyond a standard pay check.
    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by imipak (254310)
      Thank the Flying Spaghetti Monster that Microsoft swallowed that ESR crap about "you can't defeat open source by buying the company". Imagine if they'd seen the light (a black light...) and started shopping for open source or Free software companies. *shudder*
  • Oracle in Java (Score:5, Interesting)

    by wikinerd (809585) on Wednesday January 16, 2008 @08:40AM (#22065658) Journal
    This means that now more people may prefer to use MySQL rather than Oracle with Java, as they will see it as the most "compatible" database to be used within Java.
  • Licensing (Score:3, Insightful)

    by sribe (304414) on Wednesday January 16, 2008 @09:04AM (#22065856)
    Wow, MySQL owned by a company that doesn't lie about the GPL! This is welcome news!
  • Short version - Oracle offered 19.23 or so, and BEA said yes this morning. Big impact on a lot of Java EE developers out there.
  • Great news (Score:5, Funny)

    by Lisandro (799651) on Wednesday January 16, 2008 @09:12AM (#22065916)
    I can't wait for them to rewrite it in Java!
  • This is *good* news. (Score:4, Informative)

    by Qbertino (265505) on Wednesday January 16, 2008 @01:30PM (#22069426)
    The truth is:
    Sun can't possibly screw around more than MySQL AB has been doing ever since they went IPO. Just the other day I looked for MySQL Workbench - expecting it to be delayed yet another 2 years. Only to discover something worse: A beta is out and they've written in in DOt-f*cking-NET! Can you believe it? They've rewritten MySQLs core selling argument to many people in a prorpietary plattform that is owned by MS. MySQLs core design tool only runs on MS 2k SP4 and above! Unbelievable.
    Suns marketing is just as shoddy as that of MySQL, so that's a perfect fit. But I sure do hope Sun will bring back some technical oper-source superiority to MySQL, which it once shared with many mature OSS projects.
  • What is Sun up to? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by walterbyrd (182728) on Wednesday January 16, 2008 @01:31PM (#22069444)
    Web-hosting of sorts, would be my quess. I don't mean hosting like dreamhost. I mean more along the lines of utility computing [wikipedia.org]. Sun won't just sell web-space, sun will work closely with it's clients.

    Sun has been going open source lately. To make money in F/OSS you sell services, not products. Sun has also announced that sun will be outsourcing their data centers. I think Sun means to expand their data centers a lot, and wants to save money.

    A lot of major companies already contract with Sun to run database apps on Sun servers. Those servers are located in Sun's buildings. Sun then contracts with EDS to do the hands-on administration of servers. EDS often contracts with other companies, including a lot of off-shore companies. The datacenters do not have to be offshore, just the people who monitor the systems, and do all the admin work that does not have to be hands-on.

    I think Sun may be targeting smaller company, not just banks and the like.

    So let's say I want to start a SaaS company to offer hotel management software. Since I don't have a lot money, and I don't want to pay for a lot of computer resources, to get started, I decide to use PHP and MySQL to develop my product. Since this is a commercial offering, I will need to have a commercial version of MySQL, this is where Sun will have me covered. Sun itself will do very little, Sun will contract with other companies to provide back-end support. Sun will hold the licenses to the OS, and the database, and maybe the language - if you decide to use Java. Sun will be the middle-man, the deal maker. Sun will change it's focus from selling hw/sw, to contracting for sevices, and those services will be provided by others.

    Or something along those lines, is what I'm guessing.

Innovation is hard to schedule. -- Dan Fylstra

Working...