RE: Metalink Fiasco (and Responses we have received)

From: Hemant K Chitale <>
Date: Sat, 14 Nov 2009 22:58:45 +0800
Message-Id: <>

The issues with Flash-MOS had been highlighted for months on and we received very few responses from the
"official" side. Mostly to say "Flash MOS is great !" or something
to that effect. See the thread "Metalink Classic - To Be Continued" at

As for Chris Warticki's blog post "Classic MetaLink:Na,na,na,Nah,na,na. Hey hey
Goodbye" at (hey, the "Na,na,na. Hey hey Goodbye" is utterly meaningless and completely unhelpful !), it seems a number of our comments / responses have NOT been allowed into that blog.

I had put in a comment:

"Hint: If your browser allows flash, there isn't an HTML option.
You'll have to figure out the rest."

What kind of attitude is that ?
Does a bank tell it's customer, "Hint : if you can walk to our branch, you HAVE to use our ATM. If you want counter services, you'll have to figure out the rest". The customer will walk .... AWAY when he sees this condescending attitude.

and got this response from him :

The published FAQ onlymentioned that the HTML version would be available, but just not how to access it. I wasn't at liberty to disclose 'hacks' that weren't in the FAQ. I was just providing a hint.
It wasn't meant to anger anyone. Seriously.

Having seen how he has been writing and responding so far .... I believe that

  1. Chris and, possibly, his manager do NOT know enough about the
    "technology" that MOS has implemented. (should I say that they are
    "clueless" ?)
  2. Inspite of survey and email and forum and blog responses, the team that decided to push through MOS has NOT understood how MetaLink is used at customer sites. Did they bother to get around and do actual site visits and talk to people "face to face" ?
  3. No or completely inadequate consideration was given to issues of data migration and scalability of the final system. It seemed to have been not tested to scale at all.

It is very disheartening that The Information Company that achieves World Record Database Performances hasn't handled information migration (accounts, profiles, CSIs, SRs) to the desired level of confidence and hasn't managed scale and performance at all.

There has been talk of whether some customers might even sue Oracle for instances when they have had Severiry -1 issues and have been unable to access Technical Support and/or Patches etc. I wonder ... these could be matched against things like a the offered $10million reward for a company that can get better performance on X hardware than Y hardware b claimed X and Y times improvements in storage costs and DBA costs and performance if using the latest Z version of the software

FACT has been merged with FICTIOUS BELIEF in recent claims by Oracle. Will customers also start making such claims against Oracle ?

I have been an Oracle Database User, Adminstrator and Lover for more than 19 years now. MOS is completely, utterly, totally at odds with what I have known about Oracle Products, Consulting and Education and Support Services. This MOS did not and could not have been delivered by the Development, Consulting, Support or Education business lines that we've known for so many years. It has been a huge and malignant transplant into Oracle. That is my opinion.

Hemant K Chitale

Received on Sat Nov 14 2009 - 08:58:45 CST

Original text of this message