PeopleSoft rejected to Oracle, How is Larry? why i feel.....

[jonreade]

I would have thought the answer was rather more obvious.
Oracle is hemorrhaging users to Microsoft's SQL Server, which is now not only faster, but much, much cheaper than Oracle. And there's an independent study to show that SQL Server DBAs are about 3x more productive than their more costly Oracle counterparts.

This is just Larry's attempt to gain control of a major vendor who based their core product on SQL Server back in 1997.
If he gets hold of it, guess which product will replace it at the core of Peoplesoft's offerings?

And guess how many customers will run from Peoplesoft as a result ?
No wonder they're not recommending the Oracle takeover, they would become Larry's whipping boy just because Oracle can't compete with Microsoft.

If you doubt this, read Craig Conway's letter at :
http://www.peoplesoft.co.uk/corp/en/...waysletter.jsp

Quote :
"Five days following our announcement "[of the acquisition of J D Edwards]" we learned of a hostile bid by Oracle Corporation to acquire PeopleSoft. Incredibly, Oracle made it clear their intention was to discontinue all PeopleSoft products, ultimately forcing customers to convert to Oracle's applications and database. As you know, this would cost each organisation tens of millions of dollars."
Unquote.

Maybe Microsoft should make a bid too - at least PeopleSoft's customer base would be happier.

Bill's got Larry on the run with SQL Server 2000 and every DBA in the business knows it, whichever "side" they're on. Businesses simply can't afford to spend mega bucks on armies of Oracle consultants like they did during the dot-com boom. The party's over for them, and for Oracle. You sign away a few hundred grand these days when there's a cheaper alternative and you'd better have a good explanation as to why, or find another job pronto.

In a recession, the better, cheaper product wins every time, it's a no brainer. Welcome to the recession.