IBM Donates Java Database App. to Apache Foundation

the_pooh_experience writes "IBM has announced that it will open up Cloudscape by giving it to the Apache Software Foundation. Cloudscape, a small footprint Java database, is primarily used for small scale websites and point-of-sale systems. Its new, opensource name will be 'Derby.' Cloudscape (originally created by Informix, and purchased by IBM in 2001) has been valued by IBM at $85M."

Tax Reduction?

[Lust]

A win-win scenario for IBM: donate a software application at an inflated price for a big tax break while also looking good to the open-source community. At least that's how I assume it works in the US.

Compared to the alternative of supporting or shelving a dead application, can you blame them? Perhaps at least this will serve as a good model for other companies that still consider dead software as a corporate asset.

Foot in the door?

[frostman]

I had a look at the IBM product page and found this:

Supports complex SQL, transactions and JDBC so that your applications can be migrated to DB2 UDB when they need to grow.

...which makes me wonder whether this is part of a strategy to get the foundation and community to do the work maintaining something that may not have been profitable but was something their service division could get people using as a baby step towards DB2.

In any case it's cool they donated it. Being a database developer myself, I'm extremely wary of the "you don't need a DBA" claim, but regardless of the hype it looks like an interesting product that will fit in well with the Apache lineup.

NYT

[13Echo]

Leave it to NYT to misinform people. The article says that IBM put the code "in the public domain". The license by which the Apache foundation will distribute this is certainly NOT public domain. It later says "Apache will hold the licensing and intellectual property rights to the Cloudscape code."

I wish people would stop mixing these things with public domain. Apache's license, GPL, etc., are forms of copyright, and are NOT public domain.

Re:Database written in Java?

[the quick brown fox]

I'm pretty sure databases spend a lot more time I/O and network bound than CPU bound. Besides, Java is pretty fast these days.

On the other hand, it's still a (relative) memory hog.

Re:Value

[NETHED]

Not true. I'm sure this can be written off as a tax deduction. Something akin to a donation.

CloudScape is primarily used in websphere

[castlec]

Maybe it's just me, but I believe cloudscape is primarily used inside Websphere to ease development of ejbs by making the database local. I can't see it being incredibly useful outside of that... only as development, not as anything deployed. i could be wrong....

Re:MySql Competition?

[jusdisgi]

You could have also said Google. But I concur...MySQL is definitely ready for heavy loads.

Kinda similar to Berkeley DB for Java...

[CitizenDan]

Of anything out there I think Cloudscape is most similar to Berkeley DB for Java (an in-process DB). The comment about it being a stepping-stone to DB2 could be made about any JDBC-compliant DBMS...IBM just happens to favor theirs ;-)

Re:Value

[Anonymous Coward]

the word is priceless.

Re:Comparisons?

[Anonymous Coward]

Hmm.. Are you trolling? That is BETA software.

Now if IBM wants to get really nasty with Sun.....

[ShatteredDream]

They should donate their JVM to the Mozilla Foundation. Having a high quality, open source JVM would further undermine Sun's position in the Java market AND it would create a buffer against Microsoft's .NET. However, I don't think it would do much good against those that want to build on Mono.

Re:Value

[Tassach]

It may well be worth $85M, but how much would it cost IBM to maintain it? Besides, it would only be worth that much if they could find a buyer, and it's pretty unlikely that they'd find someone to buy it at that price.

An $85M "asset" isn't worth much if you have to spend $16M a year maintaining and supporting it. Also, remember that IBM has several other database products this would be competing against. The fact that they released it as Open Source is a very good thing for everyone, considering that they could have just abandoned the code and kept it locked away. This way they get good publicity, reduce their maintenance costs, and get a nice tax break.

Another point that IBM really isn't in the business of selling either software or hardware anymore -- they sell SOLUTIONS. Nowadays, most of Big Blue's revenue comes from sending consultants out to tell customers what hardware and software they need to run their business, and then putting all the pieces together for them so the whole thing works. While they'd prefer to sell you IBM hardware and IBM software, they're pretty agnostic in that regard. Having their own pet OSS database allows them to offer an IBM-backed solution for lower-end projects which don't have the money for a DB2 license.

Re:Performance

[johnnliu]

I don't think that's a very good test.

In real life, you either add an index, or you don't query a non-index unique field on a 50+ million table.

I'd think some sort of inner query is a better test for this.

An opensource alternative to Pointbase

[Anonymous Coward]

This product does not compete against MySQL. It competes with HSQL, Pointbase, JDataStore, and any other pure Java database solution. It can be used with Java Webstart, to distribute a configuration free local database with your Java applications. I think this can also be used with Java Enabled Phones, and PDA's.

Re:Yawn.

[Anonymous Coward]

Use sqlite: http://www.sqlite.org/. Maybe java beeing slow is a myth, but sqlite beeing fast is definitly not a myth.

eT

Re:Performance

[Anonymous Coward]

raw i/o : in other words, you're testing how fast your computer is. Only if somebody coded something braindead slow will there be any interesting results..

Competition, not Tax

[SparklesMalone]

Both IBM and the analyst mentioned in the article say this is about competition; undermine MS SQL Server while boosting Websphere. If some small-scale apps are developed in Cloudscape/Java instead of .NET then when/if those apps grow up the natural evolution would be to migrate to DB/2 & Websphere. And maybe it isn't even about making more profit on Websphere but just slowing the penetration of MS into the back office.

Nowadays, people know

[Anonymous Coward]

the price of everything and the value of nothing.

"Picture of Dorian Gray" - Oscar Wilde.

Re:CloudScape is primarily used in websphere

[Luminari]

Maybe it's just me, but I believe cloudscape is primarily used inside Websphere to ease development of ejbs by making the database local. I can't see it being incredibly useful outside of that... only as development, not as anything deployed. i could be wrong....

Embedded databases are very useful for applications that are intended for a small number of users or a small database (just look at Microsoft's Jet Engine as an example, that is used all over the place). There are many instances where you want the use of a database for a stand-alone application, but don't want to have to install a stand alone database. Imaging creating a CD-Catalog program and telling the user they have to download mysql just to use it. With cloudscape (or any of the other embedded databases) you don't have to do that.

Re:NYT

[poot_rootbeer]

Leave it to NYT to misinform people. The article says that IBM put the code "in the public domain".

While many at Slashdot have caught this mistake, relatively few at the New York Times are likely to.

Instead of/in addition to posting about the error here, why not send off a note to the Times to let them know about the important flaw in their coverage of this story?

If there is one observation that can be made about the surging popularity of blogs in the past few years, it's that Media is able to function better when it gets feedback from its readers.

Access Killer?

[Snap E Tom]

The main thing I've felt that has been holding Star/Open office back is a need of a database as easy as MS Access.

I know it's a different language, but work with me for a second.

Yes, Access sucks as a DB, but it's good for three things. First, it's a quick and dirty way to store data. Secretaries and analysts use it, dump their data in a little file, put it on a floppy, bring it home, work on stuff at home, and bring it back on a floppy the next day. That is the ultimate selling point of file based databases. Even with Open Office's database tools, I have to know something about being a DBA - starting mysqld, db security, etc. Second, our DBAs love it because it's a graphical frontend to ODBC datbases. It gives semi-cluefull non-techs a way to see data. Finally, you can actually drop it onto a webserver and drive databases with it. Biases aside, it did gather them a following in the late 90's when everybody was a "developer" doing websites.

Any sort of MSOffice competitors have taken a while to solve these three needs elegantly. Looking at the IBM site, it looks like Cloudscape, with the embeded and network connectivity features, can be a foundation for something that can fill all three needs.

IBM vs. Sun

[_randy_64]

Notice how IBM is responding to competition by offering something to the community, while Sun's response to competition is to take something away (Novell/SUSE). I know, I know, it's GPL, they can't really take it away, but I think the point is still valid. Sun's response to competition should be to GPL Solaris and/or Java, not try to lock things up. Rather than try to improve themselves, stupid Sun's trying to compete by trying to hurt the competition instead - which will backfire.

Re:Value

[jrumney]

I know from when I used to work for the R&D arm of a large multinational, that patents donated into the public domain can definitely be written off against tax in the US, so I wouldn't be surprised if copyrights could too, and if donating them to a non-profit that kept them for the public good was treated the same as public domain for tax purposes. I don't see any other reason for IBM to put a value on Cloudscape right before they give it away.

Re:IBM vs. Sun

[Anonymous Coward]

a)Sun taking over Novell is a load of uncritical press hysteria that less reputable news sourcces, and mere news relayers such as slashdot, use to whip up 5 million 17yo children into a foaming rage. It's not happening.

b)Sun are GPLing Solaris. They have also GPLed OpenOffice, NFS code, a whole lot of java stuff such as netbeans. A recent study showed that 17% of the code in any given linux distribution was originally freed by Sun.

c)Stop being an uncritical IBM fanboy like those twats at groklaw. They are just as evil as any other corporation.The reason they want Java open sourced comes down to a desire to do evil: they want to fork java into their own incompatible version. Ask IBM if they would do this and all you will hear is an ominous silence.

d)Sun shoudl doubtless get its act together in a lot of ways, but half the criticisms on this site are absurdly wide of the mark.

Re:$16M to maintain?

[Big Sean O]

Benefits aren't everything. You cost a lot more to the business.

There's the cost of rent, utilities for your office, your desk, your phone, your work cell phone, your work blackberry, the fax line, the copier, the copier paper, property taxes, the cost of keeping your parking space free of snow. Some communities charge an employment head tax. Oh, and don't forget hiring a janitor to keep your toilets clean. And some places you need to hire 'overhead' (ie: management) just to keep the yahoos in line.

When I was in consulting we charged the client roughly 2.7x what we were making per hour. (Of course, that was in the rough-and-tumble heady days of consulting (the early 90s).

Your standard IBM programmer probably makes $70K, add in another $40K for benefits, and double it for all the costs associated with hiring the person and you're at $220,000, almost the $250,000 the grandparent claimed.