|
|
|
| Authored by: SpaceLifeForm on Sunday, August 19 2012 @ 06:56 PM EDT |
They bought his thinktime so that he was constrained
from commenting positively about other companies.
I still think they overpaid.
---
You are being MICROattacked, from various angles, in a SOFT manner.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: hardmath on Sunday, August 19 2012 @ 07:52 PM EDT |
Given FM's track record, I see no obligation to assume the
accuracy of things he opines about. However let's take him
and Oracle at their word about the history of their mutual
interaction.
Back in the day FM was critical of Oracle's acquisition of
Sun, and with it the mySQL open source database. Among
other reasons he gave, it would give Oracle every incentive
to slow development to a point where customers might think
twice about dropping their commitment to Oracle's database
product.
At some point (we are never told when), FM becomes a paid
consultant to Oracle. We only are told when FM _disclosed_
the by-then signed and sealed arrangement, and that this
occurred by inference after FM had made a similar
arrangement with Microsoft. Certainly both FM and Oracle
have direct knowledge of when they contracted for the
services and what specifically the basis for payment going
forward would be. The fact that nothing _not already public
knowledge_ is provided about their arrangement speaks
volumes.
Finally it is not contested that in place of FM's criticism
of Oracle, we have heard nothing but the rosiest of
assessments from him of Oracle's litigation and IP claims.
I don't think taking these admissions at face value impairs
in any way one's natural suspicions about FM's purported
independence. Indeed I cannot imagine a clearer
demonstration that FM's boosterism and fawning over Oracle
is a direct result of paid self-interest, something that
deserves mention every time his "expert" opinion is cited by
a journalist.
regards, hm
---
Hate the math. Don't hate the mathematician![ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
