Quick wins for a faster PC:
Scan for outdated or missing drivers - takes under a minuteDriver Scan →Clear out junk files and repair common Windows errorsFree Scan →Some links on this page are affiliate links: if you buy through them we may earn a commission, at no extra cost to you.
At Oracle OpenWorld in San Francisco on October 1, 2017, Oracle co-founder and then-executive chairman and CTO Larry Ellison used his opening keynote to criticize Amazon Web Services—especially its Redshift data warehouse—and introduce Oracle’s forthcoming Autonomous Database Cloud. The speech was both a product announcement and a sales argument: Oracle said automation would make its database easier to operate, more available and less costly. Those comparisons were Oracle’s claims, not proof that it was universally better or cheaper than AWS.
What Ellison said about AWS
Ellison’s main target was Amazon Redshift, AWS’s cloud data-warehouse service. Contemporary coverage reported that he described Redshift as expensive, inflexible and difficult to scale or manage, and challenged the strength of AWS availability guarantees. He also criticized AWS database offerings more broadly, arguing that they were outdated or proprietary. These were a direct competitor’s characterizations, not independent technical findings. GeekWire’s account of the keynote and TechCrunch’s report describe the attack alongside the product pitch.
Ellison’s criticism of AWS service-level agreements (SLAs) focused on exclusions: he argued that headline uptime figures could be less meaningful when software bugs, patches, configuration changes or other events were excluded. That is a point to examine in any cloud contract, not evidence that AWS’s SLA was deceptive. Availability commitments depend on the specific service, architecture, region, customer configuration and contractual terms. Oracle’s own 99.995% promise also came with defined conditions; the keynote did not provide a complete, independent comparison of the two vendors’ contracts.
Oracle also promoted performance and pricing comparisons, including a claim that customers could cut database costs in half relative to AWS. Treat that as a vendor claim, not a universal price finding. A meaningful comparison would need to match the workload and account for compute, storage, Oracle licensing, support, data transfer, staffing, migration and testing. Oracle published a comparison with Amazon Redshift, but a vendor-sponsored benchmark is not independent validation.
The product behind the attack
Oracle announced the Oracle Autonomous Database Cloud, built on Oracle Database 18c. Oracle described it as a self-driving database that would use machine learning to automate routine work, including provisioning and scaling, patching, performance tuning, diagnostics, fault detection and recovery. The company’s pitch was that less manual database administration could reduce labor and human error while improving performance and security. Oracle’s announcement set out that proposition. Contemporary reporting said the initial data-warehouse service was expected in December 2017, with transaction-processing and other options discussed for later availability; that was a launch timetable, not a statement of today’s product availability.
#1 Best Overall
Oracle said the service would offer a 99.995% availability guarantee. Mathematically, that percentage corresponds to about 26 minutes of downtime in a 365-day year, often rounded to “less than 30 minutes.” It is an availability figure subject to the applicable terms, not a promise that every customer will experience no more than that much downtime in all circumstances. Nor does an uptime commitment by itself establish data durability, disaster recovery or protection against every outage.
“Autonomous” also did not mean human-free. Automating routine database operations can reduce some administrative work, but organizations still need to design their systems, govern access, test applications, plan backups and recovery, meet compliance obligations and respond to incidents. How much labor automation saves depends on the environment and which features are enabled.
What’s actually slowing this PC down?
Pick the symptom - the matching free tool is one click away.
Why Oracle made AWS the foil
AWS’s growing cloud business threatened Oracle’s position with customers deciding where to run enterprise workloads. Oracle’s historic strength was its database software and installed customer base. The keynote’s argument was that those customers could move toward cloud computing without giving up Oracle Database—and that Oracle’s automation, compatibility and enterprise features were reasons to choose Oracle’s cloud. Redshift made a useful contrast for that sales case, but it is primarily a cloud data warehouse; Oracle Database serves a broader set of relational workloads, including transaction processing. They overlap, but they are not interchangeable in every application.
Ellison’s attack was not an isolated moment: he had criticized AWS at earlier OpenWorld events, including in 2016. The 2017 appearance combined that familiar competitive rhetoric with a substantive strategic message about automating database operations. Computer Weekly’s 2016 coverage provides context for the rivalry.
Rank #3
- New
- Mint Condition
- Dispatch same day for order received before 12 noon
- Guaranteed packaging
- No quibbles returns
How to assess the claims as a buyer
The keynote did not establish that Oracle was cheaper, faster or more reliable for every customer. A buyer comparing Oracle and AWS should:
- Match the workload. A transaction-processing database and an analytics warehouse have different needs. Define data size, query mix, concurrency and latency targets before comparing platforms.
- Model the full cost. Include licensing and support, compute and storage, data transfer, backup, administration, migration and testing. Results can differ sharply between license-included, bring-your-own-license, existing enterprise agreements and new purchases.
- Read the actual availability terms. Compare the relevant service and deployment architecture, including redundancy, regions or availability zones, maintenance, exclusions and recovery arrangements. An SLA is not a substitute for designing for failure.
- Scrutinize benchmark methods. Ask what versions, configuration, workload, tuning and pricing assumptions were used—and whether labor, networking and support were counted. A headline cost ratio without those details cannot settle a purchasing decision.
- Consider portability and dependency. AWS proprietary services can create switching costs, as Ellison argued; Oracle licensing and its database ecosystem can create dependencies too. Lock-in is a trade-off to assess, not a feature only one vendor has.
The best fit depends on context. An organization already standardized on Oracle may value compatibility and continuity. A team whose applications and analytics are already on AWS may prefer keeping services close to its data and existing operations. A greenfield application or a regulated workload may have different requirements again. Redshift users should not assume that moving to Oracle Autonomous Database is a like-for-like warehouse migration.
Windows Errors? Fix Them Before They Spread
Repair common Windows errors and clear accumulated junk for a smoother, more stable PC - no reinstall needed.Free scan · no reinstallOutdated Drivers Are Slowing You Down
One free scan finds every outdated or missing driver and matches the right update for your exact hardware.Free scan · exact hardware matchThe rivalry later made room for cooperation
The 2017 rhetoric did not define the relationship forever. Oracle and AWS later introduced Oracle Database@AWS, which makes Oracle database services available on Oracle infrastructure in AWS data centers. That can give organizations with AWS-hosted applications a way to use Oracle database services without moving the application estate out of AWS. See the AWS service documentation for what the later offering is; it was not part of Ellison’s 2017 announcement.
The later arrangement illustrates a practical reality of enterprise cloud buying: providers can compete for workloads while also making products interoperable when customers want both ecosystems. Oracle’s current product terminology has changed as well. Its materials now use names such as Oracle Autonomous AI Database; the 2017 keynote concerned Oracle Autonomous Database Cloud and Database 18c, not today’s product branding or deployment choices.
Quick Recap
Best Value
Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change. Any price and availability information displayed on Amazon at the time of purchase will apply.
