<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Oracle&#8217;s ECM Vertical Acquisitions</title>
	<atom:link href="http://bigmenoncontent.com/2008/07/01/oracles-ecm-vertical-acquisitions/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://bigmenoncontent.com/2008/07/01/oracles-ecm-vertical-acquisitions/</link>
	<description>Opinions and discussions on content management by two of the biggest guys in the business.(measured by weight not volume)</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 23 May 2012 04:05:52 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Lee Dallas</title>
		<link>http://bigmenoncontent.com/2008/07/01/oracles-ecm-vertical-acquisitions/#comment-124</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Lee Dallas]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 03 Jul 2008 01:31:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://bmoc.wordpress.com/?p=109#comment-124</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Interesting idea - that the reason for the complexity is to discourage defections to other products. Kind of like holding their customers for ransom. More than one commentator though has referred to Oracle&#039;s pricing model as highway robbery.So maybe this is a case of choosing which crime you want to be a victim of, kidnapping or robbery.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Interesting idea &#8211; that the reason for the complexity is to discourage defections to other products. Kind of like holding their customers for ransom. More than one commentator though has referred to Oracle&#8217;s pricing model as highway robbery.So maybe this is a case of choosing which crime you want to be a victim of, kidnapping or robbery.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: msillanp</title>
		<link>http://bigmenoncontent.com/2008/07/01/oracles-ecm-vertical-acquisitions/#comment-123</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[msillanp]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 02 Jul 2008 14:01:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://bmoc.wordpress.com/?p=109#comment-123</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I’m not sure I would call Skywire a CEVA acquisition.  It seems more to be a Siebel play that happens to have content management.  That means that Oracle will still need to figure out how to integrate Skywire’s content management components in theirs.  

But the real point I like is why Oracle can do this, I’d say why no one else can.  If you look at how Oracle dominated the market it was by creating an open standard ODMA.  They pushed the standard and made every other vendor look like a fool if they didn’t get on board. Oracle knew their product was the best and made sure that it was easy for anyone to develop solutions on their platform or anyone else’s by making relational database development a standardized approach.  Basically leveling the playing field.

So as a VAR spent time trying to work with competing vendor, Oracle would push to make sure they were following standards.  Then once the VAR realized that Oracle was better it was an easy transition to the platform as a standard had been followed.

No one in the ECM space is willing to do this because they don’t believe in their own products.  They’re too afraid that customers and VARs will want to change over that they make their platforms incredibly complex to make sure that migration costs are extremely high.  “I know we have problems but are you sure you want to spend x millions to go to Vendor B?”

Standards in the ECM field seem to last only a few years.  That’s not something you build your product’s future on.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I’m not sure I would call Skywire a CEVA acquisition.  It seems more to be a Siebel play that happens to have content management.  That means that Oracle will still need to figure out how to integrate Skywire’s content management components in theirs.  </p>
<p>But the real point I like is why Oracle can do this, I’d say why no one else can.  If you look at how Oracle dominated the market it was by creating an open standard ODMA.  They pushed the standard and made every other vendor look like a fool if they didn’t get on board. Oracle knew their product was the best and made sure that it was easy for anyone to develop solutions on their platform or anyone else’s by making relational database development a standardized approach.  Basically leveling the playing field.</p>
<p>So as a VAR spent time trying to work with competing vendor, Oracle would push to make sure they were following standards.  Then once the VAR realized that Oracle was better it was an easy transition to the platform as a standard had been followed.</p>
<p>No one in the ECM space is willing to do this because they don’t believe in their own products.  They’re too afraid that customers and VARs will want to change over that they make their platforms incredibly complex to make sure that migration costs are extremely high.  “I know we have problems but are you sure you want to spend x millions to go to Vendor B?”</p>
<p>Standards in the ECM field seem to last only a few years.  That’s not something you build your product’s future on.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

