Oracle FAQ Your Portal to the Oracle Knowledge Grid

Home -> Community -> Usenet -> c.d.o.server -> Re: Article about supposed "murky" future for Oracle

Re: Article about supposed "murky" future for Oracle

From: Daniel Morgan <>
Date: Wed, 31 Mar 2004 21:42:14 -0800
Message-ID: <1080798116.435276@yasure>

rkusenet wrote:

> "Daniel Morgan" <> wrote

>>I have the dollar figure too, and it is well into six figures just
>>for last year, but that also wouldn't persuade you. What you want
>>is the names of two people that would immediately lose their jobs
>>for disclosing confidential information. Not sorry and not going to

> This really takes the cake. What u are suggesting is that everyone
> from MS is lying in public except ur two good 'friends' from MS.
> Is that a good material for a film screenplay.

No I'm not suggesting everyone is lying. I'm not suggesting that anyone is lying. I am suggesting that you have not seen a statement from Microsoft saying that they don't run some portion of their financial package, perhaps a very large one, on Oracle software.

Reconsider what they ask a witness to declare in a courtoom.

I will tell the truth
The whole truth
And nothing but the truth

I'm not suggesting that anyone is a liar. What I'm suggesting is that there is that the portion of the truth being told is the portion of the truth Microsoft's P/R machine believes will be beneficial.

> rk-
> ps: I am sure Oracle would have entered into non disclosure agreement
> with MS to not disclose this information and embarrass MS :-). I
> always knew Oracle to be a very ethical company, but never knew they
> are this much. Well u learn something new each day.

You are correct in your presumption. Which is why no Oracle employee will ever say anything one way or the other. I do because (A) I'm not and never have been an Oracle employee and (B) academic freedom allows me to say what I choose.

Were I an Oracle employee I too would do what is ethically consistent with my employment.

Daniel Morgan
(replace 'x' with a 'u' to reply)
Received on Wed Mar 31 2004 - 23:42:14 CST

Original text of this message