Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive


Forgot your password?
Businesses Government The Courts News

U.S. Attempts to Block Oracle Bid for PeopleSoft 275

AliasF97 writes "Thought you all might be interested in this story about the U.S. government attempting to block Oracle's bid for PeopleSoft via a civil anti-trust lawsuit. Seems to me that the courts are going to have their work cut out for them on this one. Also, the photo of Ellison is kind of comical. If you were to throw a black cape and a tall hat on him, he could be a circus magician."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

U.S. Attempts to Block Oracle Bid for PeopleSoft

Comments Filter:
  • M$ (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Aderym ( 677909 ) on Thursday February 26, 2004 @08:43PM (#8403533)
    Can't they concentrate on microsoft instead? :P
    • mod parent up (Score:5, Insightful)

      by ciroknight ( 601098 ) on Thursday February 26, 2004 @08:51PM (#8403607)
      I have to completely agree here. Microsoft is encroaching more and more on antitrust, and the US courts do nothing to stop them.

      Oracle isn't anywhere near monopoly, although they are a very strong database vendor, with probably one of the best supported database systems written, but they are competed against by everyone from Microsoft (which, btw is integrating their database engine into the OS), to us open source developers... The US Courts really need to pick their priorities better..
      • Re:mod parent up (Score:5, Insightful)

        by Unoti ( 731964 ) on Thursday February 26, 2004 @08:59PM (#8403676) Journal
        This isn't about the database market, it's about the ERP [] market. In that market, some things Oracle has done are cause for concern.
        • Re:mod parent up (Score:5, Interesting)

          by nelsonal ( 549144 ) on Thursday February 26, 2004 @09:44PM (#8403994) Journal
          In the ERP market, what exactly has Oracle done? SAP dominates that market. The whole thing is a result of PeopleSoft feeding documents to the DoJ to quash the merger. How come the DoJ didn't have a problem with #2 buying the then #3 ERP company about six months ago? It's mostly a pissing match between Larry and Craig, looks like Craig won this round. Oracle should set its sights on BEA and pick off Peoplesoft in a few years.
          • SAP, BEA (Score:5, Informative)

            by Unoti ( 731964 ) on Friday February 27, 2004 @12:05AM (#8405053) Journal
            SAP has the largest market share, but it's really not a player in every segment of the market. SAP doesn't play very much in the small to medium sized business market very much. A company like, say, might consider Oracle or Peoplesoft, but probably wouldn't go to SAP.

            I didn't realize BEA was a player in the applications market. I thought they sold tools and infrastructure, not ERP applications. (Newegg might use BEA to run their web server, but wouldn't go to BEA for, say, warehouse and order management software.)

            Regarding why the DoJ didn't have a problem with PeopleSoft buying JD Edwards, perhaps its because that merger was arguably beneficial to the customers. PeopleSoft is weakest in areas like hard core distribution and direct sales (like what newegg does), and that's where JD Edwards really shines. JD Edwards, on the other hand, is weaker in some areas where PeopleSoft is stronger, such as with their technology infrastructure (PeopleSoft is all web based) and their HR package.

            Another aspect of this is that maybe the DoJ could see this was perhaps Justice was legitimately conviced that this deal was bad for competition. More information available here [], and here (Is Oracle the New Neighborhood Bully) [].

            • Re:SAP, BEA (Score:4, Informative)

              by mahju ( 160244 ) on Friday February 27, 2004 @06:54AM (#8406606)
              I've worked with a range of these ERPs and advise companies on their choices. They aren't all the same thing.

              Historically it goes like this;

              PeopleSoft is the leader in Human Resources ERP software.

              SAP leads manufacturing / distribution software

              Oracle is best at Finance

              All of theses top tier ERP systems offer enterprise wide applications. SAP has good HR solution, PS now owns JDE which gives it a look into manufacturing and dist, and Oracle is increasing its HR.

              Basically Oracle has a load of cash from its Database income base, and by absorbing PS, it would greatly increase its HR market share, and more easily dominate the market.
      • Re:mod parent up (Score:5, Interesting)

        by nazzdeq ( 654790 ) on Thursday February 26, 2004 @09:44PM (#8403995)
        For Christ's sake, stop whining about Microsoft. What freakin' Monopoly? I'm here using Mac OS X and the only MS product I use is Office, and that's because I want to. A monopoly is where you don't have another choice, like AT&T used to be. You couldn't switch phone services because there was no one else. There's nothing preventing any company in the world from switching to FreeBSD, Linux or Mac OS X. I've worked at a company that used nothing from MS. We used Linux, Informix, JBoss and Star Office. I wish the courts would stop listening to this nonsense as well. It hurts the whole industry.
        • You are WAY off (Score:5, Insightful)

          by James Lewis ( 641198 ) on Friday February 27, 2004 @05:23AM (#8406391)
          The laws aren't just to prevent total monopolies, but to prevent a company from getting there through unfair practices in the first place, or from using a total monopoly or near-monopoly in one area to take over another. MS surely crossed this line a while ago, and they continue to do so. They own 95% of the desktop OS market. By comparison, Standard Oil held 85% of the oil market at their peak. The issue here isn't if you agree with the anti-trust laws themselves, the issue is that they aren't applied consistently. MS uses their monopoly in that market to gain monopolies in the markets of browsers, word processing, media players... the list goes on. This would be the equivalent of Ford having 95% of the car market, and all the sudden buying up a tire company, and constructing cars so that it was highly advantageous, or down right impossible, to use any other tire.
      • Ummm, microsoft's anti-trust lawyer is now the working at the doj in the antitrust division. So I dont think Oracle will ever get near a monopoly
  • by pvt_medic ( 715692 ) on Thursday February 26, 2004 @08:45PM (#8403549)
    "said the combination of Oracle and PeopleSoft would hurt competition in the market for software sold to large businesses."

    So they would hurt large businesses... right and I am buying that microsoft not offering patches [] helps businesses.
  • by mike_scheck ( 512662 ) on Thursday February 26, 2004 @08:46PM (#8403561)
    His picture makes him look like "the rock". The caption under the picture should say something like "can you smell what I'm cookin".....
  • Ellison is pure evil (Score:3, Informative)

    by evil-empir3 ( 590188 ) on Thursday February 26, 2004 @08:47PM (#8403562)
    Why isn't the /. crowd upset about this madman? *boggle*
  • Ellison (Score:5, Funny)

    by El ( 94934 ) on Thursday February 26, 2004 @08:47PM (#8403569)
    If you were to throw a black cape and a tall hat on him, he could be a circus magician. Now, if you but a black cape and stovepipe hat on him, he'd look exactly like Snidely Whiplash []
  • Proof (Score:5, Insightful)

    by faldore ( 221970 ) on Thursday February 26, 2004 @08:48PM (#8403580)
    Where's the proof? I think before the feds stomp in to throw their weight around in the business arena, they better have a damn good reason they're spending my tax dollars to mess with the free market. And they'd better be prepared to prove it.
    • Re:Proof (Score:5, Informative)

      by Killswitch1968 ( 735908 ) on Thursday February 26, 2004 @08:59PM (#8403677)
      A post that was quickly modded down had similar arguments, albeit more agressive: --A_Joke.shtml
      • Re:Proof (Score:2, Insightful)

        A post that was quickly modded down had similar arguments, albeit more agressive:

        Well yeah, it's a soft-headed Objectivist rant. It starts by misrepresenting what a monopoly is, what anticompetitive behavior is, and totally ignores the requirement of misdeeds for prosecution to occur. I feel dumber for having read it.

    • Re:Proof (Score:2, Interesting)

      by nomadic ( 141991 )
      And they'd better be prepared to prove it.

      Or else you're going to do what?
    • by k_head ( 754277 ) on Friday February 27, 2004 @12:58AM (#8405367)
      It all has to do with campaign contributions. Ellison is a well known donor to democrats so he must be punished by Ashcroft. Just like Martha Stewart. Martha stewart is on trial because she prevented a 60 thousand dollar loss. Ken Lay and Bernie Ebbers were never even tried for ripping of tens of billions of dollars from people. Bernie Ebbers alone accounted for nine billion dollars of fraud by worldcom.

      Guess who those two contributed most money to?
  • by kbeech ( 660054 ) on Thursday February 26, 2004 @08:48PM (#8403584)
    Since the threat of takeover looms until the case is resolved, or they drop their takeover bid, Oracle gets 'vaporware' benefits from having it out there, since long-term support for Peoplesoft products is threatened by the takeover, making potential customers wary of making a decision to buy now.
    • by saitoh ( 589746 ) on Thursday February 26, 2004 @08:57PM (#8403654) Homepage
      Well, not really. (If Peoplesoft publicised this better it probably would help quell fears, but anyway, thats a different problem).

      Peoplesoft has a golden clause in their company constitution that states along the lines of:

      "If a hostile takeover is done, support must be granted for all customers within the last X years or a full refund of the receipt price will be granted"

      Got that tidbit from my advisor who worked with Peoplesoft at NAU university with a beta development team.

      -- Page
      • by nehril ( 115874 ) on Thursday February 26, 2004 @09:53PM (#8404051)
        according to the article, the terms are guaranteed support for 10 years, or 2x to 5x the purchase price of the licenses will be paid as penalty.

        Since Oracle has already stated that their only purpose in buying PeopleSoft is to kill the product (along with the JD Edwards software that PeopleSoft has just acquired), this is what's known as a "poison pill." Oracle would either have to do full support and updates (negating the whole point of the acquisition), or face massive lawsuits/fines by contract.

        this also has the effect of de-FUDing the issue for customers who may be leery of buying new PeopleSoft/JDE product if there's a death sentence on it. pretty much a brilliant move.

        Given that the ERP software market would go from around 4 players down to two (oracle vs sap) if this goes down, the deal has drawn antitrust flak.
      • by lcorc79 ( 549464 ) on Thursday February 26, 2004 @10:02PM (#8404105) Homepage
        A company laying out millions and devoting a lot of resources, training, and other effort towards a Peoplesoft roll-out isn't going to be satisfied with a refund. Knowing they will be able to get their money back if the support rug is pulled out from underneath them is NOT enough.

        Simply put - there's a lot more riding on an implementation of something like this than just the original purchase price. Any big company looking into an ERP solution right now is going to seriously think twice (or forty times) before going with PeopleSoft just because there's a possibility that all their effort could be for naught.

        That 'golden clause' is pretty much worthless - and Oracle is indeed benefiting from this dark cloud over PeopleSoft's future.
    • Parent is right. It's total FUD. If you're trying to make a buying decision between Peoplesoft and Oracle this makes Peoplesoft look much more uncertain. There may be a golden clause that enforces support for some period of time. But that doesn't mean that the PeopleSoft software will flourish in the future if Oracle buys it. It's like telling a little kid that if his parents are killed in a car crash, he won't starve, because there's always the orphanage. All sales decisions are made emotionally anyw
  • by avalys ( 221114 ) * on Thursday February 26, 2004 @08:48PM (#8403585)
    Also, the photo of Ellison is kind of comical. If you were to throw a black cape and a tall hat on him, he could be a circus magician.

    A circus magician...with a net worth of about $15 billion.
    • by Atario ( 673917 ) on Thursday February 26, 2004 @09:06PM (#8403735) Homepage
      He always looks comical to me. Like some kind of CEO-bot from the year 4000. I keep expecting his face shield to spring off to reveal metal and LEDs and servomotors. Either that or he gets a scratch on his cheek which reveals that his facial hair is actually painted on.
    • money != success (Score:5, Insightful)

      by SuperBanana ( 662181 ) on Thursday February 26, 2004 @09:06PM (#8403742)
      A circus magician...with a net worth of about $15 billion.

      ...who is also widely considered to be a complete nutcase and space-shot, with little credibility. He may be worth $15B, but who gets more press? He's widely ignored, because many concepts he's tried to champion have not just failed, they've imploded before they even left the launch pad. The whole thin-client netpc is a great example.

      He's just too goddamned impressed with himself, and the picture is a perfect example of that attitude, and I'm sure it was selected(or provided) for that reason. The comparison to The Rock was perfect. Like Trump, Gates, Jobs, Fiorina- any time the focus shifts from someone's talents and qualifications to their personality, you've got yourselves a genuine cult figure and some serious problems. Things are all happy-shiny while the money's pouring in...but when the -water- starts leaking in, everyone's too busy looking at how great Master is to bail, and often even when the water's up to their necks they don't realize it's really time to mutiny, or jump ship altogether. One man or woman does not make an organization, and many a corporation has discovered the dangers of simply rubber-stamping and worshipping a central figure. Boards, VP's, etc all exist exactly to prevent this sort of thing.

      Frankly, what amazes me the most is that there isn't a massive explosion when he and Steve Jobs are in the same room at Apple board meetings- Steve's Reality Distortion Field meets the Ellison Ego Field.

      Lastly, never confuse wealth with success. Some of the world's richest people are miserable failures as human beings. I could name a dozen people I respect far more than Ellison, or any executive officer of any corporation.

      • Re:money != success (Score:5, Interesting)

        by Nexum ( 516661 ) on Thursday February 26, 2004 @09:13PM (#8403789)
        Ellison is no longer on the board of directors [] at Apple.

        Don't bash him though, in my opinion the guys a great lot of fun - apparently he has been known to fly his Russian built fighter over Gate's house to piss him off.

        So he has a big ego too.

        As for his credentials and people slagging Ellison for the thinPC/thinClient/netPC idea, it really wasn't a bad idea, but was put out of the water by the dramatically falling price of normal PC's. On other matters he's been right on the ball - convergence in enterprise apps for example in the 11i suite - it's going to make increasing inroads into systems integrators territory such as IBM if it continues along its current path of success.

        Plus he's best mates with Steve, between them you can bet this dynamic duo get up to a lot of fun (Google for the trick they played on a technician at Pixar - offering him the CEO job at Apple).
        • Don't bash him though, in my opinion the guys a great lot of fun - apparently he has been known to fly his Russian built fighter over Gate's house to piss him off.

          Er, no. He said something about that once, but as far as I know he isn't even legaly allowed to fly it in US Airspace. Even if he is, I'm very certan that he's never buzzed Gate's house.

          He does seem like a fun guy to party, with though.
  • Odd. (Score:5, Interesting)

    by ackthpt ( 218170 ) * on Thursday February 26, 2004 @08:50PM (#8403601) Homepage Journal
    Considering the outcome of the Microsoft antitrust trial I thought the DoJ and present administration were friendly towards mega corporations.

    Maybe Larry doesn't contribute enough towards ... uh .. certain funding. Then again, maybe PeopleSoft has connections.

    After the spying on the UN scandals in the news this morning my head is swimming.

    • Re:Odd. (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward
      Just goes to show how selective law enforcement is when it comes to these issues. Oracle buying Peoplesoft is bad, but Fox buying Directv is OK?

      Clearly, Ellison is considered too much of a loose canon to get his deal approved by the DOJ, or he aint greasin' the right wheels.
    • Re:Odd. (Score:5, Insightful)

      by EvilTwinSkippy ( 112490 ) <[yoda] [at] []> on Thursday February 26, 2004 @09:03PM (#8403721) Homepage Journal
      I think Ellison is a democrat.

      But also think of the sweetheart pricing on Oracle the feds can "negotiate" as part of the "settlement."

      Other than that, I really have a hard time figuring out why they wouldn't so much as whimper through the entire HP/Compaq merger, and decide to speak up now. There is either more to the story, or someone in the department finally has a pair.

      Oh, right, this is an election year...

      • Re:Odd. (Score:3, Interesting)

        by angle_slam ( 623817 )
        HP and Compaq are merely 2 of a plethora of other computer manufacturers. Peoplesoft has always said that there are only 3 companies in their line of business. Merging with Oracle would leave only 2. Same reason they nixed the Office Depot/Staples merger, there are only 3 companies: merging two would eliminate one of them (notwithstanding the fact that you can get a lot of the stuff they sell from Wal-Mart or Best Buy).

        The Justice Dept is too literal in their readings sometimes. They nixed the DirecTV/Dish

  • by Unoti ( 731964 ) on Thursday February 26, 2004 @08:51PM (#8403603) Journal
    I'm glad to see this! The Justice Department decision may have come after a big campaign from PeopleSoft, but that doesn't mean that blocking it is a bad thing for consumers. Working on Oracle Applications is like working in a gold mine: you've got to sift through 20 tons of mud to get 6 ounces of gold. Oracle needs healthy competition, and it could become a monopoly. I'd hate to see it become the the Microsoft of the ERP market.
  • Stock Price (Score:5, Insightful)

    by nija ( 667087 ) on Thursday February 26, 2004 @08:51PM (#8403605)
    Orcl - 13.27 down .01
    PSFt - 21.78 down .35

    I'm going to make a prediction that because of this the news, Psft's prices are going to go up and Orcl will go down.

    PeopleSoft has been fighting this tooth and nail. They actually seem like they want the keep the company. As opposed to just wanting to cash out and saying screw the people.

    From this prespective, it seems like a Corporation is stucking UP to the Big Guy, instead of sticking it TO the little guy.
  • by saitoh ( 589746 ) on Thursday February 26, 2004 @08:53PM (#8403620) Homepage
    This shouldnt happen, but for different reasons (other then I'm working with PSoft at my uni, but anyway).

    Ellison and his company bungled this one big time. They badmouthed the company, and on Larry King Live, Oracle openly stated that they would kill off the PS product line after the take over (besides the kill clause in their constitution which they didnt research, it was just a bad PR move). With Sparky being the job runner in earlier PeopleSoft releases, Conway made an interesting analogy that they were going to shoot his dog, and I can remember at the 2003 Peoplesoft Conference in the fall that Conway walked out on stage with his dog (both wearing a bullet proof vest), and proclaimed that he would not let his dog be shot and the crowd went wild.

    This deal was just destined not to happen after Oracle's management bungled it. Read over at itmanagersjournal for an interesting history lesson at why they bungled it.

    -- Page
    • by Unoti ( 731964 ) on Thursday February 26, 2004 @09:15PM (#8403805) Journal
      Perhaps this deal was meant to be bungled?

      If Oracle intended this whole deal as FUD to encourage people not to buy PeopleSoft, they couldn't have done a better job.

      One of the main things people look for when they buy ERP software is longevity in the software package, and knowledge that the software will flourish in the future. This deal casts a tremendous doubt on PeopleSoft in that regard. So just the talk of this alone helps Oracle tremendously in their competition with PeopleSoft.

      • Good point--and one that probably won't be lost on Conway. Expect a nice lawsuit against Oracle when this is over. Oracle can't appear that they were merely trying to stop the PSFT purchase of J.D. Edwards, so Ellison is playing this up to make it look like they still want to buy.

        I hadn't considered that they still might have something to gain by scaring ERP customers way until your post, though.

    • by Anonymous Coward
      Oracle is not only battling Peoplesoft's tenacious shareholders, but the big Tech Ed userbase that does not want to spend millions to convert their systems to Oracle.

      This impacts taxpayers too as some govermental districs and departments are also Peoplesoft clients.

      If Oracle wants to do this, they need to consider the cost of conversion or they will continue to meet with resistance from the users as well as the shareholders.

  • ...and I'll say it again. Ellison looks exactly like what you'd expect Satan to look like. All he needs is to add some horns.
    • Ellison looks exactly like what you'd expect Satan to look like. I never saw any resemblance between Larry Ellison & Bill Gates... Except, of course, that they're both insanely wealthy...
  • by joshmoh ( 708871 ) on Thursday February 26, 2004 @09:00PM (#8403681)
    So how many of you read the article just to see Ellison's photo?

    I'll be honest. I did.
  • by JDRipper ( 610930 ) on Thursday February 26, 2004 @09:00PM (#8403687)
    I work for a major university in California. We're currently implenting Peoplesoft's Student Administration product. (Which is a giant piece of crap BTW, but it's better than other products out there. I wish we had developed our own solution.) If Oracle buys out Peoplesoft, we would have to spend millions to get a new product. (We don't believe Larry when he says that Oracle will continue to support Peoplesoft's products.) If you consider that this software is used by a large number of schools in the US, you can figure out that this will be a HUGE expense (Hundreds of millions of dollars) for all these schools to switch to some new product in a few years. Who will pay this cost? You will. Either in school bonds or higher student fees. Larry ain't gonna pay for it. He's got to pay for his jet fuel.
  • If you were to throw a black cape and a tall hat on him, he could be a circus magician.

    No no no. If he was a circus magician, then Oracle's products would be affordable.

    He's clearly a Vegas Magician. Same act, but the ticket costs $120 instead of $6.
  • Peoplesoft? (Score:4, Funny)

    by grasshoppa ( 657393 ) * <skennedy@AAAtpno ... inus threevowels> on Thursday February 26, 2004 @09:06PM (#8403736) Homepage
    This has been bugging me for a while now, and all the articles and things I've read seem to think it's a given.

    WTF does peoplesoft do? Software vendor? What software?
    • Re:Peoplesoft? (Score:5, Informative)

      by jours ( 663228 ) on Thursday February 26, 2004 @09:10PM (#8403774)
      This has been bugging me for a while now...

      ...but not long enough to RTFA.

      "PeopleSoft and one other firm--SAP--are the only companies that compete with each other to develop and sell enterprise human resource management and financial services software for large businesses and government and nonprofit organizations"
  • by Sanksa Wott ( 680705 ) on Thursday February 26, 2004 @09:16PM (#8403818) Homepage Journal
    "Also, the photo of Ellison is kind of comical. If you were to throw a black cape and a tall hat on him, he could be a circus magician."

    Can you SMELL what Larry Ellison is COOKIN*' ?!!
    *single eyebrow shoots up
  • Thank God (Score:5, Funny)

    by CptChipJew ( 301983 ) * <> on Thursday February 26, 2004 @09:20PM (#8403842) Homepage Journal
    I'm a PeopleSoft employee, and am glad I can stop practicing my burger flipping skills.
  • by mbrother ( 739193 ) <mbrother@uwy[ ]du ['o.e' in gap]> on Thursday February 26, 2004 @09:23PM (#8403866) Homepage
    Oracle has made it clear their plan is to take Peoplesoft apart and get access to their customer base for Oracle software, phasing out Peoplesoft entirely. They basically want to buy Peoplesoft to eliminate a competitor, leaving the market to Oracle and SAS (the European gorilla in the field). This is not good for Peoplesoft or Peoplesoft customers (and there are a *lot* of them out there) or the market in general. This is only good for Oracle (duh). Many hear complain about Microsoft -- well, do you want another Microsoft in the tech field? Larry Ellison does. The US Government does not. By the way, the Peoplesoft stock price going down instead of jumping to 26 (the Oracle bid) says what the market thinks about the takeover happening.
    • ...the Peoplesoft stock price going down instead of jumping to 26 (the Oracle bid) says what the market thinks about the takeover

      Not really. Yahoo Finance [] shows that PSFT jumped almost 20% last June when Oracle's takeover bid was announced.

      There's no reason to expect the stock to jump on an announcement that the takeover won't happen. And investors won't have much patience for a long legal battle if Oracle fights it [].
    • "leaving the market to Oracle and SAS (the European gorilla in the field)." I think you meant SAP, which is based in Walldorf, Germany. SAS (the software company) makes business intelligence tools and is based in Raleigh, NC, USA. SAP is supposedly "running" the majority of the Fortune 500's, with PeopleSoft and SSA lagging far behind. The Oracle takeover (if it happens) may actually shake SAP's hold on the ERP world by consolidating Oracle ERP / PeopleSoft customers and widening the Oracle base.
  • by alexborges ( 313924 ) on Thursday February 26, 2004 @09:47PM (#8404013)
    Oh! yeah, you mean that postgres clone... shure!... who cares anyhow?
  • The way I see it, at least one good thing could come out of this. If Oracle and Peoplesoft merge, you can save money on certifications. Just think, they could all merge together into Micro-People-Orcl-soft and then maybe there'd be just ONE BIG TEST. And we could all run Linux instead.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 26, 2004 @09:57PM (#8404076)
    I work for a company that is in the throws of implementing PeopleSoft. When I first heard of the takeover bid from Oracle I was unhappy. (We would finish the implementation of PeopleSoft only to have to do it again with Oracle.) Now that I know PeopleSoft a little better, I no longer care. As far as I am concerned, PeopleSoft will milk the market for all its worth and provide as little in return as possible. In terms of business practices, predatary pricing is the rule at both Oracle and PeopleSoft. Both companies are basically thieves. Once you're locked in with one of these vendors you will pay ... and pay... and pay.
  • by xot ( 663131 )
    I fail to understand why the government has to butt into a private acquisition.If it was a govt firm being overshadowed or intimidated into selling out , it would have made sense.
    If a company can afford to buy out another company there seems to be no logical reasoning for the govt to step into the matter.This means that with anti trust laws the govt can curb the growth of any company be it MS or Oracle or any power hungry firm which beats the whole idea of freedom of uhmm..whatever.
    Besides Oracle does hav
  • Actually, Larry Ellison reminded me of a dark demon after some little monk kid [].

    That, or some James Bond villain, named "Zodiac" or something (credit to Jack at As the Apple Turns [] for that one).
  • by Ma$$acre ( 537893 ) on Thursday February 26, 2004 @10:48PM (#8404519)
    I have to say this is great news. I'm a long time employee, and I have skills that could take me to many companies, but I choose this one for many reasons.

    Oracle started this bid and has continued it as a way of disrupting business, creating FUD, and trying to change PeopleSoft's market perception. I've worked with both products and I can tell you that there are very few who would claim Oracle's product, support or business tactics are better than PeopleSoft's. That's not saying that any ERP product doesn't have it's pitfalls, but our customers are some of the most loyal and it's not without good reason.

    I'm all for the free market, but the proposed takeover would undoubtedly crush innovation and increase prices. It faces many regulatory hurdles, from a DOJ lawsuit, to a potential EU lawsuit on the same grounds and a States Attorneys General lawsuit should it go forward. These people are the same ones /. praises when they hammer away at Microsoft for monopolizing the market... why would anyone here not support them on the same grounds for moving against Oracle?

    I'm of the belief that anyone who wants this to go through is either paid by Oracle, has strong ties to Oracle, or is a short term investor. Larry has a magical way of using the "system" to his advantage and he has only done this to cause market confusion, disrupt PeopleSoft's business and drive up his sagging market share.

    I'm of the belief he NEVER wanted to buy PeopleSoft. If Oracle truly wanted us, why not do it 2+ years prior when we were against the ropes? He would have gotten us on the cheap and had a nice chunk of customers. No, if he really wanted to buy PSoft, he would have never badmouthed the product, claim he was dropping support or any of the other shenanigans he's pulled. He's scared of the combined force of JDEdwards and PeopleSoft and the customer's he's been losing to us for years.

    By the way, many PeopleSoft employees are ex-Oracle ones and every single one of them I know has said they will never work for Oracle again. Even current Oracle employees apologize for their boss... what does that tell you?

    In the end, I have a feeling this will bite him on the ass.

  • by the_truk_stop ( 448393 ) on Thursday February 26, 2004 @11:29PM (#8404822)
    My university [] uses Peoplesoft as a vendor; we use them for class scheduling and managing class documents and communication. But they output some of the shoddiest HTML I've seen in a long time. It's a strange mix of HTML and CSS, and obviously hasn't been tested except on one browser. It's been published [] in our school's most-distributed newspaper: Use IE to avoid problems.

    Our school's course management system is one of the more infuriating sites around. For instance, hitting enter in a form doesn't submit the form. Rather, it reloads the page. And blanks all of your entries. And you can't stop the reload.

    I have a serious problem with Peoplesoft's products.

    I don't know or understand all of the stakes involved in the acquisition or lawsuit, but I have this to say: I can only hope that Peoplesoft cleans up its act (read: HTML output). I don't like having to use other people's computers when Firefox doesn't know how to deal the poor output.

    • Hate to burst your anti-Peoplesoft rant, but you should shift the blame to your school's Peoplesoft admins. Peoplesoft's interface is incredibly customizable. They can control and change the "shotty html output" all they want. They can change it work fine in Mozilla, Opera, and IE. It's just bad implimentation on your schools part. They should get a competent web designer and a peoplesoft admin together and craft a better interface. Peoplesoft can look and function well when set up properly.

Recent investments will yield a slight profit.