Ubuntu: A feasible Oracle hedge against Windows

Oracle doesn't want to own Linux. Oracle just wants Linux to be cheap.

That's the insight an analyst shared with me the other day as we discussed why Oracle hasn't made a move to acquire Red Hat (recently, anyway). According to this source, who is familiar with Oracle's Linux plans, Oracle wins eight of 10 deals where the operating system is Linux, and only wins five of 10 where the OS is Windows, a win rate that continues to drop as Microsoft's SQL Server gets better.

Oracle's Enterprise Linux strategy is therefore not so much about neutralizing a threat from Red Hat as it is establishing its own threat against Microsoft, a thought that others have highlighted.

Indeed, Oracle's Wim Coekaerts has declared that if Red Hat Enterprise Linux were free, Oracle would exit the market for Linux entirely.

Red Hat isn't likely to drop its pricing for RHEL anytime soon, at least, not for Oracle, but the reality is that Oracle already has a way to offer a popular, enterprise-quality Linux distribution for free, or close thereto. It's called Ubuntu.

The only thing Ubuntu lacks, as I've written, is the blessing of a major enterprise software vendor. Oracle could grant that blessing. All it would need to do is start offering Ubuntu as part of its certified stacks.

Oracle wouldn't need to pay billions for Red Hat, only to undermine the value of that deal by cutting the price of RHEL. Oracle could pay exactly $0.00 to establish a partnership with Canonical, the company behind Ubuntu, and Ubuntu's already significant traction--both in personal computers and in servers--would do the rest.

If Oracle wants to beat Windows, it needs to get Windows-like distribution. Its applications help drive its databases, but if it wants a bottom-up distribution strategy to complement its sales force, it couldn't do better than Ubuntu, the leader in community Linux.

Follow me on Twitter @mjasay.

[JonathanE1701]

Didn't the French government strike some kind of deal using Ubuntu on the client side and Debian on the server side for one of its agencies? Would it not make sense for Oracle to offer the more conservative Debian as part of its product?<br /><br />What are Oracle's plans for Solaris anyways? Wouldn't it be somewhat problematic for Oracle to include yet another Linux option when most of the industry that uses linux is more or less standardized on Red Hat (correct me if I'm wrong)?<br /><br />Oracle Linux is basically Red Hat as far as I know, yet Oracle charges for it (same service model), albeit less than does Red Hat. I imagine they charge for it not because they're looking to make money on that OS but instead because they might have to offer support for the OS as part of the stack. <br /><br />Ubuntu charges for support as well, and I think they aren't that cheap either. <br /><br />If Oracle really just wanted a free linux to be part of their stack, they could give their version of Red Hat away like CentOS.<br /><br />Anyhow, please do correct me if I'm wrong.

[Random_Walk]

Nota Bene: Solaris != Linux. It smells too much like SysV and not enough like the BSD/SysV hybrid that characterises Linux :)<br /><br />My apologies if you already knew it, but that's the impression I got from the post.

[JonathanE1701]

didn't mean to give that impression... just wanted to suggest that oracle might not want to make a foray into official support for yet another OS when they have just obtained ownership of one to complement their unbreakable linux.

[Random_Walk]

"Oracle just wants Linux to be cheap."<br /><br />Heh - it would help if they didn't charge arm+leg to fully activate their own Linux distro, eh?

[eadeguzman]

Ubuntu needs much more than "blessing". They need to be able to support Ubuntu whole-heartedly which I think they don't have the political will to do so. They're simply not an operating system company. Acquiring Sun is not going to change that.<br /><br />If you're looking for a Linux "savior"... I'd look to Google's Android. There is much more hope there. Though it might take a while because their focus is more on smaller devices first.<br /><br />Since Google has it's own enormous data center, they shouldn't find it hard to sell enterprise-scale servers. Why wouldn't you want to use an OS that powers what's perceived as the world's largest data centers?

[terryandtaotao]

Oracle Database 10g XE was certified on Debian and Ubuntu years ago. It's just a matter of yes or no.<br /><br />Actually Debian (stable) is dominant and well accepted as a stable server distro. Once Debian and Ubuntu get certified, Red Hat will start to feel the pain and pressure gradually.<br /><br />BTW: Why always Ubuntu? Why? It is aiming at desktop rather than Server at this point. Though it has a server edition. It is just a modified Debian from my point of view.

[theopensourcerer]

IBM Regularly tout Ubuntu as their favoured Linux distro. They rcently ported *all* their Lotus Notes stuff to it, including the desktop and offer enterprise support.<br /><br />HP look to be going in a similar direction albeit more slowly.

[jeffromiller]

Matt - why are you so hung up on other companies "beating" Windows? I know you are an open-source proponent, but Open-Source is making significant traction without even worrying about Microsoft. Unless MS declares that all it's products will be licensed under the GNU license, I think Open-Source will do just fine not even thinking about Redmond! <br /> <br />Help us understand the Open-Source landscape and the way companies are using Open-Source today and lay off the MS bashing.

[MSSlayer]

Why is it you don't understand that Oracle or any company including Red Hat can not own Linux?

[hp-sg]

Matt - I am really puzzled when I read your posts. At times, you bash Red Hat, at other times, you bash Ubuntu, then Windows, then Oracle, then IBM etc etc etc etc. It is getting to be rather tedious. I think I shall just drop the cnet feeds from your blog. Thanks for the push. HP

[richard993]

It's not about getting Red Hat cheap... Oracle's certification process has been a money making machine right from the start. There are a lot of free Linux builds and Oracle will not certify these because it won't make money from them, but it makes a lot of money off Red Hat and Suse! The basic concept here is that Oracle will only support Linux vendors that charge a lot for their services because they would be lucrative targets for Oracle hence why it was aiming directly at Red Hat... and precisely for the reason that they charge a lot of money. Oracle targeted Red Hat not because Oracle thought they were unfair to charge so customers a large fee and not because they are doing a bad job, but because Oracle wants a slice of the pie!