More on the demise of solidDB

Solid was a poor acquisition for IBM. It just couldn't make the grade.

No, solidDB hasn't died. In fact, the fact that it's now free from IBM may actually turn it into an interesting open-source project.

But there are few, if any, near-term winners in the mess. Certainly not Solid's investors, who pumped nearly 100 million euros into the company only to sell it for (rumor has it) 20 million euros. Or so. In fact, the result was bad enough that one of Solid's venture investors went on the record to declare, "Sijoitus Solidiin ei vastannut sille asetettuja tavoitteita" ("The investment in Solid did not meet the objectives set for it."

IBM wanted something that can be seen as a competitor to Timesten (Oracle's acquired database). It didn't care about solidDB as an open-source phenomenon. Ultimately, it didn't care about solidDB, period, apparently discovering that it has scalability and performance problems.

IBM is probably working on creating the Timesten competitor through internal development now. It's too bad that solidDB couldn't work out for it, but hopefully someone else will make a good home for it.

Tech Culture
About the author

    Matt Asay is chief operating officer at Canonical, the company behind the Ubuntu Linux operating system. Prior to Canonical, Matt was general manager of the Americas division and vice president of business development at Alfresco, an open-source applications company. Matt brings a decade of in-the-trenches open-source business and legal experience to The Open Road, with an emphasis on emerging open-source business strategies and opportunities. He is a member of the CNET Blog Network and is not an employee of CNET. You can follow Matt on Twitter @mjasay.


    Discuss More on the demise of solidDB

    Conversation powered by Livefyre

    Show Comments Hide Comments