Oracle Calls HP Itanium Lawsuit a 'Publicity Stunt'
title=Fierce Competition for the Unix Market}
Oracle
also denied the existence of any contract obligating it to continue developing
its enterprise software for Itanium. Such a contract would have been negotiated
and documented, but none exists. Instead, HP is implying such a promise based
on two sentences Oracle wrote in a press release announcing the end of the
legal dispute around Hurd's hiring by Oracle.
The
sentence read: "HP and Oracle Corp. today reaffirmed their long-term strategic
partnership and the resolution of litigation regarding Mark V. Hurd's
employment at Oracle. The agreement also reaffirms HP and Oracle's
commitment to delivering the best products and solutions to their more than
140,000 shared customers."
"No
sophisticated corporation would ever secure a supposedly life-or-death software
support commitment with two fuzzy sentences in an agreement that primarily
deals with an employment dispute-to do so would be not only utterly
irresponsible, but a violation of every imaginable duty of care owed to
shareholders," Oracle wrote in the document. "In fact, to make this all the
more bizarre, in the context of the Hurd dispute HP actually asked for a
commitment from Oracle to -support all ongoing versions of HP-UX with Oracle's
relevant database, middleware and application products'-and Oracle
unequivocally rejected the request because, among other things, it was so out
of line in that context."
In
the court document, Oracle noted that Intel continues to improve the
performance of its Xeon server chips, and that the performance difference
between those and the Itaniums is negligible. It was the high performance of
Oracle's Exadata Database Machine running on Xeon chips that convinced Oracle
CEO Larry Ellison earlier this year that the Xeons were as good as the
Itaniums, and he told a "senior Intel executive" that Oracle was considering
shifting its focus away from Itanium and entirely onto Xeon.
"The
response was that Oracle's proposed change in plans was exactly the right thing
to do and consistent with Intel's own plans," Oracle wrote. "Ellison
concluded-correctly-that even though Intel had not announced a formal
end-of-life for Itanium, probably because HP did not want Intel to do so,
Itanium's end-of-life had to be no more than a few years away. Otherwise
the Intel executives would have made at least some argument for continued
Oracle support."
Intel
executives-including CEO Paul Otellini-have said several times since Oracle's
announcement that they have no plans to end Itanium develop, but instead are
working from a roadmap that extends years out.
Many
analysts and joint
HP-Oracle customers also are siding with HP in the dispute, saying that
Oracle's decision amounted to a power play designed to harm HP and prop up its
own SPARC hardware. The competition for the lucrative Unix market continues to
be fierce. IDC analysts in May said that Unix server revenues in the first
quarter grew 12.5 percent-to $2.6 billion-over the same period last year, and
that the top three Unix server vendors-HP, IBM
and Oracle-all saw revenue increases. In a survey, Gabriel
Consulting Group also said that most enterprise IT managers saw their Unix
systems as crucial to their businesses, and almost half said they were planning
to increase their use of Unix.
Analysts
have argued that the real winner of HP-Oracle dispute will
be IBM, which already is the top Unix systems vendor and can leverage the
instability created by the conflict between rivals to siphon off HP and Oracle
customers.









