|
Page 4 of 7
Turnabout Is Fair Play
The reversals of fortune in public image for Sun and IBM were dramatic. Sun was now widely seen as a winner, while IBM was seen as the loser.
For example, The Industry Standard's report proclaimed, "Oracle-Sun deal: Schwartz shows up pundits, IBM ends up the loser." Likewise, the headline on VARBose of ITWorldCanada read: "IBM may be the biggest loser in the Oracle/Sun deal."
Ditto a headline on the 8th Voyager, which proclaimed: "IBM the Loser in Oracle Sun-Deal."
In its coverage, The New York Times reported that, "Among industry rivals, the Oracle-Sun deal, analysts say, has the greatest potential impact on I.B.M. and H.P."
"This deal promises to revitalize a systems competitor that I.B.M. and H.P. were writing off as dead," Gordon Haff, an analyst at Illuminata, told The New York Times.
Wrote Stuart Williams, an analyst at Technology Business Research, in a note released on April 21, 2009:
"Oracle is the new hardware/software/services powerhouse. This deal directly threatens the dominance of IBM and Microsoft on the software side and IBM and HP on the hardware side."
Scores of pundits across the Internet were tallying winners and losers in the deal. Alan Zeichnick, in his "Zeichnick's Take" column on the Software Development Times site opined:
"Loser: IBM. For years I've speculated that IBM would purchase Sun just to secure a tight control over Java, which is a core technology that IBM depends upon. Now that technology, as well as the Java Community Process, is going to fall into enemy hands. Bummer, Big Blue."
On the JavaLobby site, commenting on the news report of the deal, Don Strawsburg agreed, writing, "All in All, I think this is good for all involved, Oracle, Sun and the Java community, the only loser I see in this is IBM."
|
