Who is trying to sabotage the Oracle/Sun merger?

The European Commission claims it filed its formal objection to the proposed Oracle/Sun merger out of concern for MySQL. Let’s not kid ourselves — this development is not a victory for the MySQL community, and it’s not a victory for open source.

Free-software advocate Richard Stallman wrote a letter to the European Commission (the EU’s executive arm) claiming Oracle would “predictably limit the development of the functionality and performance of the MySQL software platform, leading to profound harm to those who use MySQL software to power applications.”

But not everyone in the open source community is opposed to the merger, nor is everyone in the MySQL community. In his own letter to the EC, former MySQL CEO Mårten Mickos said he doesn’t believe it would be “a viable, likely, or contemplated strategy” for Oracle to use the merger as a means to undermine MySQL.

Mickos is a business manager, not a geek, but he’s as canny an observer of the open source marketplace as there comes. What’s more, he resigned his post as head of MySQL earlier this year and claims to have no financial stake in the Oracle/Sun merger.

So why couldn’t he convince the EC? You can bet his and Stallman’s weren’t the only voices whispering in the commissioners’ ears. Someone stands to profit by delaying the merger; the only thing certain is that it isn’t Oracle and it isn’t Sun.

Whodunit? As with so many mysteries, it can’t hurt to follow the money.

The usual suspects The first likely culprit should be easy to guess. IBM was close to its own deal with Sun until negotiations collapsed in April, but its motive to undermine the merger with Oracle goes way beyond sour grapes.

Many saw Big Blue as a better fit for Sun, but in truth IBM would have been interested in acquiring Sun for much the same reasons as Oracle.

Like Oracle, IBM is heavily invested in Java technology. Like Oracle, IBM wants to provide end-to-end solutions for enterprise customers. And like Oracle, IBM markets a leading proprietary relational database — DB2 — that is just as threatened by open source databases as Oracle is.

And what about Microsoft? Oracle and MySQL officials have said time and again that their respective databases don’t compete, but MySQL is widely perceived as a strong alternative to proprietary low-end databases, such as Microsoft Access.

In addition, Sun Microsystems is the driving force behind OpenOffice.org, which has emerged as the leading contender to Microsoft Office in the productivity software market. Microsoft can’t be thrilled at the prospect of this promising suite falling into the hands of its bitterest rival.

Let’s not forget the developer tools market, either. Oracle already owns BEA; with Sun it gains Java itself. Bringing both under one roof could bolster the Java ecosystem considerably, slowing the momentum of Microsoft’s competing .Net platform.

There are even voices of dissent among the core MySQL community. MySQL co-founder Monty Widenius urged Oracle to sell MySQL to “a suitable third party.” But unlike Mickos, Widenius does have a financial stake in the matter; in February he launched Monty Program, a company that develops and markets a fork of MySQL called MariaDB.

The case for Oracle So is there no reason for concern? Should we just stop worrying and trust Larry? Hardly. Oracle is a fierce competitor, and its products aren’t cheap. Customers need competition in the database market — and Oracle’s other markets — if they want good value.

But a merger with Sun won’t eliminate that competition. In the database market alone, Oracle is up against the likes of IBM, Microsoft, Sybase, Teradata, and Greenplum, among others — not to mention MySQL’s own open source competition, including PostgreSQL, Firebird, and Ingres.

The actual overlap between MySQL’s customer base and Oracle’s is far smaller than the naysayers would have you believe. But while MySQL is ill suited to the kinds of mission-critical applications that form Oracle’s most profitable customer base, it makes a fine complement to Oracle’s technology on the low end.

MySQL has emerged as a leading platform for departmental databases and Web applications. In addition, many commercial MySQL licensees bundle the product in embedded systems or other turnkey solutions. A traditional Oracle license would be prohibitively expensive for many such applications; with MySQL, Oracle can offer an alternative.

More important, Oracle has deeper pockets, a broader customer base, and more market savvy than Sun ever had. It’s the largest database vendor in the world. If anyone can build the customer base for MySQL, Oracle can. Larry Ellison has already announced plans to spend more money developing MySQL [PDF] than Sun does now. I see no reason why we shouldn’t take him at his word.

If, on the other hand, you mistrust Oracle so much that you honestly believe it would kill the proverbial golden goose just out of spite, so be it. But when you root against Oracle, make sure you know just what — and who — you’re rooting for. Open source isn’t the whole story.

This story, “Who is trying to sabotage the Oracle/Sun merger?,” was originally published at InfoWorld.com. Follow the latest developments in open source and application development at InfoWorld.com.