Mårten Mickos
As the European Commission continues to evaluate the potentially deleterious effects of Oracle's proposed acquisition of Sun Microsystems and its open-source MySQL database, concern is rising that delay will harm MySQL without helping competition.
One who shares this concern is former MySQL CEO Mårten Mickos. On Thursday, Mickos sent a letter to Neelie Kroes, the European Union's competition commissioner, urging that the deal be approved for the good of the market and MySQL. He also spoke with CNET News' Stephen Shankland on Thursday.
Below is the edited full text of the letter.
Helsinki 8 Oct 2009
Mrs. Neelie Kroes
Commissioner for Competition
European Commission, J70
B-1049 Brussels/Brussel
BELGIQUE/BELGIE
Dear Commissioner Kroes,
I am writing to you regarding your review of Oracle's pending acquisition of Sun Microsystems. As I understand it, the EU Commission is concerned about a risk of undue concentration of power in the database market. Having been the CEO of MySQL from 2001 to 2009, and built a business that was serving a new market unmet by Oracle and others, I can agree with the questions posed, but I do not share the concerns that have been expressed. In the following, I will explain why.
In brief, my reasoning is as follows:
- Oracle has as many compelling business reasons to continue the ramp-up of the MySQL business as Sun Microsystems and MySQL previously did, or even more.
- Even if Oracle, for whatever reason, would have malicious or ignorant intent regarding MySQL (not that I think so), the positive and massive influence MySQL has on the DBMS market cannot be controlled by a single entity--not even by the owner of the MySQL assets. The users of MySQL exert a more powerful influence in the market than the owner does.
Many expected Oracle to harm MySQL as far back as 2005, when they acquired the InnoDB storage engine that plays a crucial role for many MySQL customers. And yet Oracle increased their investment in InnoDB since that time, making MySQL a stronger player in the market.
For further detail on my views on Oracle's intent, please see this interview with me in Forbes Magazine in April 2009.
It may at first blush seem counterintuitive that control of the MySQL assets does not automatically bestow control of the MySQL installed base. But the free installed base of MySQL--enormous on a planetary scale--is voluntarily but not mandatorily coupled to the commercial market of MySQL. It produces huge benefits to the MySQL business, but it is not controlled by it.
Background
The impetus to write this letter comes from my concern with the talented teams of the MySQL business unit and of Sun Microsystems in general. I am also troubled by certain factual distortions about a subject matter that I am intimately familiar with: MySQL and its business model. Open-source business models are complicated and quite different, and it took many years to fully understand and shape the one of MySQL.
A Finnish citizen, I served as chief executive officer of MySQL from early 2001 to February 2008, when Sun acquired MySQL. After that, I served as senior vice president of the database group at Sun until the end of March 2009. Being the only person to have served as the CEO of MySQL and to have attended every board meeting ever held, I believe I have unique insights into these matters.
To be clear, I resigned from my position in March 2009, and I presently have no commercial or financial interests in the MySQL ecosystem, Sun, or Oracle (or any other vendor in the DBMS market, for that matter), other than my loyalty to Sun employees in general and the MySQL team in particular.
MySQL's Markets and Installed Base
MySQL is the world's most popular open-source relational database, and potentially the most popular relational database of all. It has an enormous influence and impact on the usage and the buying patterns of relational databases (also known as RDBMSs), in particular for Web applications. One might even state that the Internet would not be what it is today, were it not for MySQL. Staffed by a highly talented team of passionate employees, the Swedish company MySQL grew the MySQL business from a small one in 2001 to a massive one in 2008.
"MySQL" refers to two things. On the one hand, there is the huge (community) phenomenon MySQL...On the other hand, there is the business of MySQL...Those two meanings of the term "MySQL" stand in a close mutually beneficial interaction with each other. But most importantly, this interaction is voluntary and cannot be directly controlled by the vendor.
In this discussion, the term "MySQL" refers to two things. On the one hand, there is the huge phenomenon MySQL--an estimated 12 million active installations under a free and open-source software license, millions, if not tens of millions, of skilled users and developers, and tens of thousands of corporations who use MySQL one way or the other.
On the other hand, there is the business of MySQL, which is growing rapidly, thus rewarding the owners of the assets (currently Sun Microsystems).
Those two meanings of the term "MySQL" stand in a close mutually beneficial interaction with each other. But most importantly, this interaction is voluntary and cannot be directly controlled by the vendor.
What I mean is that the vast and free installed base of MySQL is using it of their own free choice, unencumbered by the vendor and under no obligation or restraint. That is the nature of open source. And conversely, the MySQL business is supporting the free installed base of MySQL (by improving the product) voluntarily and in the hope of deriving benefit from the installed base.
This is the paradox of an open-source business, and it took me a long time to truly understand how powerful a force it is. It is unlike any traditional business. The key point is that both the users and the vendors of open source are engaged in a powerful free-market dynamic that cannot be contained by any single entity.
It is in everybody's interest that the two sides of MySQL produce benefit for and derive benefit from each other. But neither group can mandate or control the other one. This is a core philosophy of open-source software and more generally of the "architecture of participation" (as defined by Tim O'Reilly). There is a mutually beneficial voluntary relationship, but there is no control by one group over the other. In more colloquial terms: the owners of MySQL cannot force MySQL users to pay up, and the nonpaying users cannot force the business to subsidize them.
Anyone acquiring the MySQL assets will therefore acquire an ability to control the business aspect, i.e., meaning how MySQL is licensed commercially, but only an opportunity (and no free reign) to derive benefit from the free user base.
This explains how the MySQL business can be valued highly in the market ($1 billion, when acquired by Sun in February 2008) while at the same time providing no way of controlling its installed base. This unusual relationship between market share and installed base is at the core of the topic. The market share is small but controllable, to some degree. The installed base is enormous but not controllable. The installed base is, and can be, hugely beneficial to the owner of MySQL, but only to the extent and for as long as this owner of MySQL enjoys the trust of the installed base.
To put it in numbers, it may be useful to see the usage of MySQL, as divided into three categories:
... Read moreThere are lots of reasons to love MySQL, the leading open-source database that Sun bought in 2008: it's inexpensive, perfect for Web applications (among other things), and boasts high performance.
According to Brian Aker, a principal engineer at Sun Microsystems, however, the real secret to MySQL's success is ease of use:
The thing that MySQL brought to the table when it came out was the ease of use and the ease of installation. MySQL came out in an era where comparable products were really complex and required a lot of knowledge to be able to use and install. With MySQL, the user is able to take the database, download it, install it, understand it, and then apply it to their application.
This is one reason that MySQL skills are in hot demand. On the Elance recruiting Web site, for example, MySQL skills are the third-most demanded skill.
The next phase for MySQL and other open-source technologies, however, needs to take that ease of use that is characteristic of Ruby, Drupal, and other leading open-source projects, and translate it into business-friendly terms that make it easier for enterprises to consume open source.
Marten Mickos, departing senior vice president of Sun's database group, calls this out in a recent interview:
If we want open source to be "the right choice for business"...we also must make open source suitable for business. It is a strength that the open-source community has passionate members who have no business interest themselves, but we must also find those who are passionate about building a business.
This means an expansion of the original meaning of open source--and a healthy one, I might add. The more business success we have in and around open source, the more open source we will have.
I've been arguing this point for years, and founded the Open Source Business Conference to help tackle the issue. The more money we make in open source, the more open-source software will be written. This is a very good thing.
It will be particularly good if the software written is as easy-to-use as MySQL. MySQL has earned its reputation as an exceptional database. Now it must figure out how to pay back profits on the $1 billion investment Sun made in MySQL. Indeed, this is the next big test for all commercial open-source software.
Follow me on Twitter at mjasay.
I don't have any scientific proof of this, but it strikes me that open-source CEOs are different. Not just because some sport ponytails (Sun CEO Jonathan Schwartz), or some speak with a light Southern drawl (Red Hat CEO Jim Whitehurst), or even that some swear in Italian (Funambol CEO Fabrizio Capobianco).
No, what really makes them different, at least as compared to their enterprise software counterparts, is their cutting-edge adoption of technology.
In this they're no different (and probably a bit behind) the Web 2.0 crowd, but compared to an HP, IBM, or SAP CEO, the CEOs of open-source companies set new standards for connectedness and communication transparency. Perhaps it's the relative youth of open-source CEOs, but perhaps it's also a love of technology that stems from having to live so close to source code in an open-source company.
I first thought of this when I received notice that Whitehurst is following me on Twitter. I can't imagine Steve Ballmer following anyone on Twitter. Then I thought to how actively Schwartz blogs, providing useful information on Sun and its place in the larger enterprise computing ecosystem.
It also reminded me that I get text messages as often as emails from Whitehurst, and the same used to be true of Marten Mickos, former CEO of MySQL, as well as others (except Capobianco at Funambol, because his company does email sync, so he's not a big SMS user :-).
Enterprises should take note. I think company leadership has a material impact on the kind of technology that gets created within a technology vendor. If your vendor's CEO is stuck in the Stone Ages of technology, perhaps its products are, too?
This can only be taken so far, of course, but I wonder if there's something to it....
Marten Mickos, former MySQL chief executive and current senior vice president of Sun Microsystems' database group, is transitioning out of the company in a planned reorganization.
Marten Mickos
(Credit: Sun Microsystems)I reached Mickos this morning for confirmation: he is definitely leaving. This move is not prompted by weakness in MySQL's business, which just closed an exceptional quarter, as he told me by phone.
"There is nothing in the MySQL business that is prompting me to leave," Mickos said. "Business is great. We just closed a multimillion-dollar deal recently that confirms much of the momentum we've made. We just closed our best quarter ever."
But Mickos grew disaffected with the larger bureaucracy that Sun brought to MySQL's business, a factor hinted at in a staff e-mail he sent out earlier this week:
I have made a decision to resign from Sun Microsystems. It's a personal decision that I made without anyone influencing me one way or the other (except perhaps my wife).
My personality is such that I love the challenge of an unproven value proposition, and I love being the top policymaker, building new things. I feel that together, we have accomplished the task set by the owners in 2001, and I am now stepping aside to let the strong managers of the group take over and continue the ambitious business ramp-up.
What Mickos doesn't say in the staff letter, but which I sensed in my conversation with him, is frustration at Sun's bureaucracy. As one of the most foundational personalities in open-source business, Mickos should have been given free rein to change Sun's fortunes. I don't think that he was given that freedom, based on other conversations I've had with Sun executives, and this clearly led to his desire to leave Sun.
Letting Mickos go is one of the worst decisions Sun has made. It is likely to lead to an exodus among MySQL's deep talent pool. Mickos was the backbone of MySQL's rising revenues, as an open-source pragmatist and visionary. He was the face of MySQL, but also of the rising open-source industry.
Mickos' departure comes on the heels of the resignation of MySQL co-founder Monty Widenius, but the difference here is that Widenius has been somewhat disconnected from MySQL decision making for some time; Mickos has been at the heart of it.
Sun will feel the loss of Mickos. Its open-source rebirth was just given a massive blow.
MySQL's Michael ("Monty") Widenius cann be a bit of a loose cannon, as I've written here before and as revealed in his recent excoriation of MySQL's 5.1 release, telling would-be adopters to be "very cautious" about using it.
Sun SVP of Database Products, Marten Mickos, attempts to put a happy face on Monty's indiscretion but I imagine his private feelings involve some choice Finnish profanities with Monty's name after them. At least, that's what I'd be saying (if I spoke Finnish).
Transparency, as Mickos notes, is a hallmark virtue of open-source software and its associated communities. But there is a difference between transparency and responsible self-criticism. Monty crossed that line.
Monty doesn't work for MySQL anymore. He works for a public company and has a duty not only to his conscience but also to his shareholders, shareholders that are not well-served by his now routine destructive commentary toward his own company.
Monty publicly criticized Mickos for putting consistency of release schedule over quality. Mickos, to his credit, has sought to make peace. But with rumors swirling about Monty potentially leaving Sun, I can't help but feel that he could not possibly leave soon enough for the good of Sun and its database business.
I was in Boston last week meeting customers. One of them, a senior IT executive at a large financial services company, asked me about Sun. "Matt, I know you're into open source. I'm a long-time Sun customer. Do you think Sun's open-source strategy will work? Should I be worried about my Sun investment?"
Long pause.
I then proceeded to explain open source's role in rejuvenating Novell's fortunes, but that it took several years. It also helped that Novell wasn't dealing with as big a gap as Sun has between existing (but declining) proprietary revenue and new (and increasing) open-source revenue.
In other words, I equivocated. The question for me is not whether Sun's new strategy is "Right," but whether Sun will have time to prove it out.
Sun clearly has a tough slog ahead of it, as Techcrunch points out. But I find it hard to read Sun CEO Jonathan Schwartz's review of Sun's terrible Q1 without feeling some cause for optimism:
The biggest highlights were the performance of our Solaris based, chip multi-threading (CMT) systems, which again grew a whopping 80%, year over year....Simultaneously, our Open Storage systems also delivered a great quarter, up 150+% year over year. These systems, known by many as Thumpers, are amplified by the awareness of our open source ZFS file system, a technology at the heart of Sun's storage business....
... Read more
Things have been quiet from MySQL over the past month or so, but today's Wall Street Journal has an awesome interview with Sun's Marten Mickos, perhaps the most quotable technology executive on the planet.
I really like how he talks through community (how to provide incentives, what to expect in terms of contributions), as well as competition. On the latter front, Marten talks through the value of leading through innovation:
MYSQL chief Marten Mickos isn't afraid his rivals in the database-software industry will ever overtake him. "Let them try," he says. "Our secret is in the way we operate our culture, and I'm convinced others cannot imitate that."...
Even if someone studied us in tiny detail, I don't think they could really match us. We've shown them our code, and nobody has been able to measure up against what we have....Even if I showed you my DNA, you wouldn't know how to become me.
Ah, Marten. I missed you! Head to the article for much more. What a great person to have in the open-source ecosystem.
Savio Rodrigues of InfoWorld tries to parse what makes open-source buyers tick, and how to generate more of them. In so doing, he suggests that the real battleground is over those enterprises with both money and expertise to go it alone with open-source software (so-called "Category B" customers).
Why should they bother buying support when they can self-support?
For me, this isn't the right question. Using his MySQL-derived customer classification system, the real question is, "Can proprietary software serve Category A (companies with more time than money) at all?" and "Can open source more efficiently serve Categories B and C too?"
Implicit in Rodrigues' reasoning is, I think, a belief that if the software is proprietary, A, B, and C companies will all eventually just say, "Aw, shucks. I've got time/expertise/money, but what does it matter, I just have to pay anyway!" So the vendor cleans up on all three.
In fact, my own experience suggests that B companies buy less and less proprietary software (E*Trade is an example). Ditto goes for B, and C companies are willing to pay, anyway, so where is the conflict with open-source business models?
... Read moreWith 12 million Solaris licenses now in the market, Sun's Solaris is no slouch. And while people like I talk up Red Hat's clean-up of the "certification market" [PDF] (with over 3,000 applications certified for RHEL), the chart below indicates that Solaris actually has a pretty compelling application certification story to tell.
(Credit:
Sun)
The question is, "Is it enough?"
A few days ago I suggested that Sun would be wise to partner closely with Ubuntu (Read: Acquire Canonical). It seems the easiest route to continued open-source momentum as Linux vendors continue to cut into Unix. But there's a compelling story in the Solaris numbers that suggests that it may live on for a very long time.
... Read moreGenerally, when a company wants to open a new market it needs to spend months to years dumping money into it to stoke demand.
MySQL and other open-source companies do market development a little differently. They dump software to seed a market. Lots of software.
Sun executive and former MySQL CEO Marten Mickos discusses this in a recent article with Computer Business Review:
I would say the ratio [between raw downloads and installations] is between one in one hundred and one in one thousand. If you look at averages you get useless information, because we might get 10 million downloads in China and we know almost none of them will pay anything in the near future. In the web 2.0 space, most will pay. In countries with a high GDP, many will pay, and in those with a low economy absolutely nobody will pay today.
The old model would have had MySQL spending money on sales and business development teams in these emerging markets, trying to figure out when and how to scale teams there. In open source, the customers download the software and tell you when they're ready to buy.
More efficient. More productive. More intelligent. And it's not just a matter of emerging markets. It's also a matter of emerging customers. Mickos goes on to say:
... Read more
