Jonathan has a nice post with additional explanations on the MySQL deal, seeing as one or two folks have questioned it. (Note that the second link is for your amusement via Sun’s Simon Phipps blog).
Jonathan writes:
“Where are the revenue synergies?
The more interesting question is “where aren’t the synergies?” Wherever MySQL is deployed, whether the user is paying for software support or not, a server will be purchased, along with a storage device, networking infrastructure – and over time, support services on high value open platforms. Last I checked, we have products in almost all those categories.
In addition, the single biggest impediment to MySQL’s growth wasn’t the feature set of their technology – which is perfectly married to planetary scale in the on-line/web world. The biggest impediment was that some traditional enterprises wanted a Fortune 500 vendor (”someone in a Gartner magic quadrant”) to provide enterprise support. Good news, we can augment MySQL’s great service team with an extraordinary set of service professionals across the planet – and provide global mission critical support to the biggest businesses on earth.”
I can understand the part about synergies for Sun. But I’m confused that Sun, and/or MySQL believe that the major impediment to MySQL growth was that MySQL wasn’t a big enough vendor to offer enterprise support.
Huh? I guess Red Hat didn’t get that memo. Could something other than vendor size be relevant to a customer’s willingness to pay for enterprise support once an OSS product gets as ubiquitous as MySQL?
