Quest is a 25-year-old company that last year reported $857 million in sales and a $44 million net profit. Its speciality is creating management systems for enterprise software.

One product is called SharePlex, and it’s described as an Oracle replication product that promises to make a live copy of an Oracle database without slowing down its operation and availability. Another product for the Oracle environment is Toad, a tool that automates a lot of the maintenance tasks associated with running an Oracle database. Toad appears to be a flagship product as there are a few other versions of it for Sybase and SQL Server. Quest also builds tools to manage and maintain some Microsoft products like SharePoint and Exchange.

Quest’s market cap was just north of $2 billion as of yesterday. On today’s word of deal talks, its shares surged by 95 cents, or nearly 4 percent, to $26.13. It has been the subject of regular speculation all year that it might be taken out in an acquisition and as a result its shares have inflated by about a third during that time.

The purported offer from Dell is one of several coming in response to Quest’s agreement to be acquired by Insight Venture Partners in a deal to go private at $23 a share. The deal’s terms provide for a “go shop period” that allows the company to basically shop around for a better offer. It may get one. J.P. Morgan values Quest at $28 a share based on its sales and cash flow alone.

Also, Quest is right in the wheelhouse of the sort of things that Dell is trying to emphasize as it seeks to transform itself into an enterprise hardware, software and services concern, and de-emphasize its reliance on its traditional PC business. By at least one metric, that strategy is working — a little. Dell’s consumer PC business, for which it is best known, amounts to about one-fifth of revenue, while its enterprise-oriented businesses amount to about 50 percent. The wrinkle is that the enterprise bit includes PCs.

HP shares rose nearly 5 percent to $22.10, up $1.02 as of 11:15 am ET. Investors appear to be showing new confidence in HP and how CEO Meg Whitman is running the show. All the announcements that HP made yesterday bear repeating, because it was a busy afternoon:

 
Update: A few readers have written to point out I was wrong about HP’s old ticker symbol. It wasn’t HP but HWP. Silly me. Even so, if the Compaq name is headed for some lesser level of importance in HP’s future, then perhaps the Q in the ticker symbol, which was added as a nod to Compaq’s old symbol CPQ, to give the impression that the combination was more a merger of equals, should go. Given the choice between them, I would vote for HP. I should stress that I have zero indications that this is even under consideration, and is really just me ruminating.

Analysts had a mixed view. Chris Whitmore of Deutsche Bank Securities has been one of the more skeptical voices on HP’s turnaround prospects. “New sheriff, old game plan,” was the headline on his note to clients today. “We remain cautious on HP’s weak fundamentals, challenging macro conditions and deteriorating cash flow,” he wrote. Despite the beat on earnings, free cash flow — at $1.4 billion in the quarter — declined by half, pointing to what Whitmore calls “very poor earnings quality.” He rates HP as a “sell,” with a $20 price target.

Brent Bracelin of Pacific Crest Securities wrote that he remains unconvinced that an unexpected strength in HP’s PC unit is sustainable. “Apple and Samsung now account for 39 percent of market share across PCs, tablets and smartphones, and have a volume advantage relative to HP’s 6 percent share,” he wrote in a note to clients this morning. He rates the shares “market perform,” or neutral, and worries that HP’s biggest problem is that about half its sales are still tied to PCs and printers.

Whitman took to CNBC this morning to talk about HP’s situation. She portrayed the turnaround under way as about “10 to 15 percent” complete. That means there’s still a lot of work to do ahead. “We’ve laid a lot of pipe and done a lot of groundwork,” Whitman told the network’s anchors in a 13-minute appearance. I’ve embedded it below:

Ariba operates something called a buyer-seller network that’s aimed at helping companies manage their supply chains more efficiently. The price amounts to a 20 percent premium on Ariba shares, which closed yesterday at $37.64 a share. Ariba reported sales in the year ended September 2011 of $444 million and a profit of $33.3 million.

It’s the second big cloud deal for SAP in recent memory. In December it spent $3.4 billion to acquire SuccessFactors, a player in the cloud-based human resources software business. That deal flipped the switch on a wave of acquisitions by Oracle, which soon acquired Taleo, and Salesforce.com, which bought the start-up Rypple in response.

Here’s the announcement below.

SAP to Expand Cloud Presence with Acquisition of Ariba
Combination Creates the Business Network of the Future;
Provides Open Business Commerce Community and Procurement Solutions in the Cloud;
Network to Benefit from SAP’s Flagship In-Memory Platform, SAP HANA

WALLDORF, Germany and SUNNYVALE, Calif., May 22, 2012 /PRNewswire/ — SAP AG (SAP) and Ariba, Inc. (ARBA) today announced that SAP’s subsidiary, SAP America, Inc., has entered into an agreement to acquire Ariba, the leading cloud-based business commerce network, for $45.00 per share, representing an enterprise value of approximately $4.3 billion. The acquisition will combine Ariba’s successful buyer-seller collaboration network with SAP’s broad customer base and deep business process expertise to create new models for business-to-business collaboration in the cloud.

The Ariba board of directors has unanimously approved the transaction. The per share purchase price represents a 20% premium over the May 21 closing price and a 19% premium over the one month volume weighted average price per share. The transaction will be funded from SAP’s free cash and a €2.4 billion term loan facility. The transaction is expected to close in the third quarter of calendar year 2012, subject to Ariba stockholder approval, clearances by relevant regulatory authorities and other customary closing conditions. The transaction is expected to be accretive to SAP’s non-IFRS earnings per share in 2013.

Business Network to Drive Growth

With the addition of Ariba, SAP will acquire the leader in cloud-based collaborative business commerce. The acquisition establishes SAP as the leading business network, adding business-to-business collaboration to its existing solutions. The move positions SAP in a fast-growing segment as buyers and sellers across the globe connect in new ways through the cloud.

SAP’s entry into the inter-enterprise business network space significantly expands its growth opportunities and accelerates its momentum in the cloud. Last week, SAP announced the roadmap for its cloud applications business (Software-as-a-Service), focusing on managing customers, suppliers, employees, and financials, in addition to its cloud suite offerings SAP Business ByDesign and SAP Business One. The acquisition will also significantly boost SAP’s cloud applications portfolio with the addition of Ariba’s leading cloud-based procurement solutions.

Headquartered in Sunnyvale, California, Ariba has approximately 2,600 employees. The company is the leader in cloud-based collaborative commerce applications and the second-largest cloud vendor by revenue. Ariba combines industry-leading technology with a web-based trading community to help companies discover, connect and collaborate with a global network of partners – all in a cloud-based environment. With $444 million in total revenue, Ariba experienced 38.5 percent annual growth in 2011. Its business network recorded 62 percent organic growth in the same period.

“The cloud has profoundly changed the way people interact. The impact will be even greater as enterprises connect and collaborate in new ways with their global networks of customers and partners,” said SAP Co-CEOs Bill McDermott and Jim Hagemann Snabe. “Cloud-based collaboration is redefining business network innovation, and we are catching this wave in the early stage of its evolution. The addition of Ariba will create the business network of the future, deliver immediate value to our customers and provide another solid engine for driving SAP’s growth in the cloud.”

Businesses to Benefit from Combination

Industry experts estimate the cloud-based enterprise network and procurement segment at a current size of $5 billion in revenue. The Ariba network is the largest and most global trading network, connecting and automating more than $319 billion in commerce transactions, collaborations, and intelligence among more than 730,000 companies. SAP’s global customer base of more than 190,000 companies includes the largest buyers and sellers in the world, offering great potential to increase the number of participants, as well as the volume and types of transactions conducted through this network. Already today 63% of the world’s transaction revenue touches an SAP system. SAP and Ariba will facilitate collaborative commerce within and between companies of all sizes.

The combination of SAP’s innovations and core applications with the Ariba cloud-based network will create new business value for customers:

Together, SAP and Ariba can deliver a truly end-to-end solution that enables companies to achieve a closed-loop from source-to-pay, regardless of whether they deploy in the cloud, on-premise or through a combination of both.

Ariba’s open network and SAP’s integration expertise will facilitate participation and extend the benefits of business collaboration to all companies, on any system, from any provider.

The Ariba network will benefit from the performance delivered by using SAP’s flagship in-memory platform SAP HANA.

Relationship and transaction information from commerce activity in the Ariba network together with SAP’s leading analytics will provide real-time insights to enable trading partners to discover, connect and collaborate more effectively.

All SAP customers will be able to easily connect to the business network through pre-built integration points.

Through the combination of the business network procurement solutions from Ariba and SAP, organizations can gain 360-degree business intelligence and effectively demonstrate that spending activities, contracts, and supplier interactions adhere to corporate compliance guidelines.

“In our personal lives, networks are playing an increasingly important role in how we connect, share, and shop – bringing more insight and efficiency into everything we do,” said Bob Calderoni, CEO, Ariba. “Businesses are looking for the same connectedness, insight, and efficiencies in the processes and collaboration with customers, suppliers, and partners beyond the walls of their companies. By combining Ariba’s open global trading network and SAP’s solutions and analytics, we are ushering in a new era of business-to-business collaboration and driving new levels of productivity.”

Upon completion of the transaction, it is planned to consolidate all cloud-related supplier assets of SAP under Ariba. The existing management team will continue to lead Ariba, which will operate as an independent business under the name “Ariba, an SAP company.” The SAP Executive Board intends to nominate Ariba CEO Bob Calderoni to the SAP Global Managing Board after closing of the transaction and subject to the approval of the SAP Supervisory Board.

How serious? Does $2.2 billion and 15 percent EBIT profits sound serious to you? It does to me, and also to Deutsche Bank analyst Chris Whitmore.

Having slogged through Oracle’s 72-page document dump with a better eye for detail than mine, Whitmore noticed a line in a January 2010 email from Dave Donatelli, now head of HP’s Enterprise Group (specifically Exhibit 17, for those who want to scroll through and find it) saying that HP’s Business Criticial Server business combined with its Technology Services business, which includes the support and services associated with the Integrity line of servers that uses the Intel-made Itanium chip, was at that time larger on a revenue basis than HP’s personal computer business.

The same document, he says, showed that at the time, HP’s “owned operating profit” for the combined hardware, software and services tied to the business of selling and supporting Itanium servers was about $2.2 billion. All in, HP derives — or at least at that time derived — about 15 percent of its profits on an EBIT basis from Itanium and related businesses.

No wonder, then, that HP considered Oracle’s March 2011 decision to stop creating software that runs on the Itanium chip so earth-shattering that it hauled the software giant into court last June. That case is expected to head to trial any day now.

The disclosure is the clearest sign yet of how much HP stands to lose if its Business Critical Server business can’t recover. It has always been known to be a highly profitable business; exactly how profitable was a closely guarded HP secret. But sales of Business Critical hardware have been on the decline. In 2009, sales of BCS hardware were $2.6 billion. In 2011, they had fallen by 19 percent to $2.1 billion. And in the quarter ended Jan. 31, sales were $405 million, down 27 percent from the same period in 2011.

The uncertainty about Itanium’s future is one of the many reasons that Whitmore has been particularly bearish on HP’s turnaround prospects: “Given the growing uncertainty around the long-term viability of Itanium, we expect customer defections to continue, if not accelerate in future periods,” he wrote in a research note to clients, issued yesterday.

However, much as HP lawyers would like to argue that Oracle’s motivation is to help bolster long-flagging sales of its new Sun Microsystems hardware unit, Whitmore argues that the main benefactor is IBM: “While Oracle is responsible for shining a bright light on Itanium’s precarious future, it is probably doing IBM the biggest favor. … We expect IBM to be the greatest beneficiary of Itanium defections and view Power [IBM's server chip] as the market consolidator and eventual standard in the UNIX/RISC server market over the medium to longer term.”

And even if HP prevails in its suit, Whitmore isn’t seeing much benefit: “Regardless of the outcome of this particular suit, we expect HP-UX customers to continue fleeing what is increasingly looking like a dead platform — creating a major headwind for HP’s medium-term earnings.” Ouch.

They’re not quite as juicy — Oracle has always had the better flair for the dramatic in this case — but in releasing them, HP clearly intends to paint Oracle, the new owner of Sun Microsystems, as out to hurt HP by kicking it straight in the teeth by damaging its Business Critical Server operation.

The first of the batch is an instant message exchange between some Oracle sales guys, who happen to use salty language in relation to HP. (Sorry about that.)

The second appears to show that Mark Hurd, while still CEO of HP, was informed about Intel being both aggressive and excited about a forthcoming version of the Itanium chip, which would seem to run contrary to the argument Oracle has made that Intel was prepping for the Itanium line’s end of life, while allowing HP to lie about it to its server customers. In the message, Martin Fink, who figured so prominently in Oracle’s document dump today, writes to Hurd: “I’m not sure what exactly this means, but I have rarely seen Intel so agressive on anything to do with Itanium EVER, and they are working very hard to get this moving forward.”

Another, from February 2011, appears to show Oracle unwilling to release a security software patch for a version of one of its applications that runs on HP-UX and therefore on an Itanium-based server. Another from the same day is an email from Oracle CEO Larry Ellison to Thomas Kurian, senior vice president of Oracle’s server technologies, asking if support documents had been updated to specify “no more one-off patches for Itanium.” The date is key because Oracle first announced that it would no longer support Itanium systems on March 23 of that year. It should surprise no one that the top echelons of Oracle management knew this announcement was coming.

The next is an email showing HP getting ready for a big strategy launch. “Kinetic” was HP’s internal name for a strategy that leveraged all of HP’s IP that enabled mission-critical products into a cohesive whole. Plans for Kinetic included extending HP-UX and Integrity, HP’s line of Itanium-based servers, indefinitely, as well as bringing up X86 chips, like Intel’s more mainstream Xeon, under the “mission critical” umbrella. As HP sees it, this was the plan all along.
 
Finally the last one is another IM exchange between Oracle sales execs. Toward the end, one of them complains about being forced to sell Sun hardware that is described as a “pig with lipstick at best.” Again as HP sees it, once Oracle owned Sun it had every motivation to do whatever it could to hurt HP, including ducking out of previously contracted commitments.

As I did with the Oracle dump this morning, I collated everything into a single PDF. I think I got everything in chronological order this time. Read for yourselves!

HP-Itanium-docs.pdf

The documents were released as part of a new offensive by Oracle to ratchet up the pressure on HP and take its case to the marketplace — that HP and Intel had already planned to bring an end to the Itanium chip’s life, and that HP lied to its customers about the chip’s long-term future.

HP has long denied Oracle’s contention, and has tried to portray this as Oracle’s failure to live up to its end of a contract.

In an open letter to affected customers, Oracle said it was releasing the documents in order to allow customers to “make your own decision” on the matter:

Dear Customer:

A little over a year ago we announced that we would no longer be developing new versions of Oracle’s database and other products on the Intel Itanium platform due to our strongly held belief of Itanium’s imminent end of life. We ensured our Itanium customers would have an easy transition to the platform of their choice by committing to 10 years of support for existing Oracle software running on Itanium.

Hewlett Packard strongly disagreed with our characterization of Itanium’s future and launched an immediate campaign designed, in their words, to foment “customer outrage.”

At this time, there are many documents that have been disclosed through litigation that describe the true state of Itanium in Hewlett-Packard’s own words. Rather than us interpreting this situation for you, we thought we would give you access to the public HP documents so you can make your own decision regarding your investments in Itanium technology.

After reading these documents we are confident that you will agree with our decision, taken with the best interest of our joint customers in mind.

Sincerely,
Jeb Dasteel, Senior Vice President and Chief Customer Officer
Oracle

Bloomberg Businessweek got its hands on some of these trial exhibits, but in its posts this morning — and presumably in the tech section of this week’s magazine — stuck to a fairly limited set of highlights. And in fact there’s not so much that’s surprising, if you read my story on the unredacted version of Oracle’s cross-complaint from January.

Basically, the new documents add more color and a lot more tension to the state of the HP-Intel relationship over the production of the Itanium chip. It also lends a lot of weight to Oracle’s narrative heading into that trial: That HP relied heavily on profits earned from multiyear sales and support contracts with customers who bought its Integrity servers that run Intel’s exotic and expensive Itanium chip. In support of that, it paid Intel nearly a half-billion dollars to keep the chip alive, despite the fact that, outside of HP, there was no other single vendor using Itanium chips.

In the emails, Intel, for its part, certainly looks like it wants out of the business of making the chip, but is willing to accept HP’s money to keep churning them out. Asked at one point what would happen if HP didn’t pay a certain amount to Intel, Intel would — in the words of Martin Fink, then-head of HP’s Business Critical Server business — shut down the teams producing certain chips that were in the process of being designed, and slap “high fives all around.”

On its face, there’s nothing inherently wrong with HP paying Intel to keep making a particular chip. HP had customers willing to buy these servers, and it made money supporting them, so paying Intel to keep them coming — remember, HP for all intents and purposes, is the only vendor buying this chip — was more or less a cost of doing business.

However, Oracle’s argument has been that HP refused to play straight with the wider marketplace, insisting that Itanium would be around for many generations to come. Even Intel itself insisted that was true last year, when Oracle first announced that it would stop making new applications that support the chip, which of course led HP to sue last June.

AllThingsD has compiled all of these documents into a single 75-page document; you can read the entire collection below. They’re ordered by exhibit number rather than chronological order. I’ll probably have more to say as I go through them.

HP just sent a statement:

“Intel has provided unequivocal and repeated statements to the marketplace that Itanium is not at an end of life. The undeniable fact is there is committed support for Itanium that extends out toward the end of this decade. Statements that Itanium was at or near an end of life are false. With the unsealing of court filings, the public can see the undisputed facts of Intel’s Itanium roadmap clearly showing a long and sustained future for Itanium.”

An Intel spokesman had no comment, saying it is not a party to the lawsuit.

Update: So let me try to curate these documents a bit. They cover a time period beginning in August 2007, and go through to April 2011. In the first, (Ex. 6) Fink writes to another HP exec and says, “Intel dropped a bomb on us last night” during a meeting that included talk of “canceling Poulsen,” a future version of the Itanium chip that was on internal road maps. Poulson, for the record, is Intel’s code name for a 32 nanometer version of Itanium that was to be released sometime this year. The response: “Call Pat G,” referring to Pat Gelsinger, the once very senior Intel executive who was at one time widely considered to be a possible successor to current CEO Paul Otellini, but is now the COO at EMC, and likely to be its next CEO. Fink’s response: “I did, spent an hour … This was a high tension call.” Intel was worried that an HP server was being built using a competitor’s chip, presumably one from Advanced Micro Devices.

From there, skip forward to Exhibit 43. The email to Fink from Scott Stallard, now a retired HP exec, details a discussion with Intel’s Tom Kilroy, then VP of its enterprise business. The message to Intel: “Don’t possibly signal to the world” the end of the Itanium road map.

The next document is notes from a meeting between Intel and HP led by Otellini and then-HP CEO Mark Hurd in September of 2007. According to those notes, Intel’s Kilroy concedes that the then-current core used to build the Itanium chip has reached its end of life, and that there are two paths forward, one expensive, the other painful — a “crash landing.” Otellini then says that Intel can’t continue to lose money on the product. Hurd goes on to say that HP had by that time sold a combined $9 billion worth of Itanium-based servers, and that it “would be hard to walk away from those customers.”

Otellini then says, according to the notes, that “we need to address the inevitable on the future of Itanium.” Both sides then agree that over the next several years they’d like to glide toward using Intel’s more plentiful and more mainstream Xeon server chips, and essentially keep Itanium alive until 2013. Intel then proposed a new business model that would turn Intel essentially into a contractor for HP. Its goal would be not so much to make money on the Itanium business, but to stop losing money on it. Hurd agrees to take a serious look at the numbers.

Next in line is Exhibit 55, in which Stallard outlines the November 2007 Intel proposal to HP. The key point: HP would pay Intel $488 million over five years to keep building Itanium chips. It includes provisions for an annual “true up,” where Intel gets paid for any difference between its costs and what HP has already paid it for that year. Stallard writes: “So you ask, why should that be that we are forced to true up Intel to break-even? lt is because Tom [Kilroy] says Paul [Otellini] has been consistent on one thing all along, that if we do any other scenario than Tukvale (e.g. shut down the business early) then “Intel can’t lose any (more) money on this thing.’”

Next is Exhibit 15, a PowerPoint deck outlining the strategic rationale for HP to consider buying Sun Microsystems. Key phrase: HP-UX, its version of Unix developed specifically for Itanium servers, “is on a death march” because of Itanium’s inevitable demise. The slide also shows HP’s worries concerning a scenario in which IBM acquires Sun. The key phrase there: Such a deal “Isolates and exposes HP-UX as 3rd tier player, accelerates our decline (product/service) as customers look to consolidate vendors.”

We all know what happened instead: Oracle acquired Sun in 2010 and, in a stroke, took over its server business, giving Oracle an obvious motivation to cut its support for Itanium and hurt its new rival HP in the process. I’ve hit a few high points here, but I think you can get the gist from a careful reading of the documents below.

Update: I’ve re-uploaded the exhibits to Scribd in more logical order, so you don’t have to skip around. Sorry if that was confusing before.

Oracle Itanium Exhibits Chronological

Other examples that have punctured my attention bubble in recent years are platform-as-a-service, infrastructure-as-a-service and storage-as-a-service, and there are probably many more. Then they get turned into ever-weirder acroynyms: Saas, PaaS, Iaas. You get the idea.

Today, Netsuite, the cloud player whose traditional approach is essentially to run your business from the cloud, today contributed its own new thing offered as a service: Commerce. (Cue the acronym: CaaS.)

One of the big things that businesses have to do is buy and sell goods and services from other businesses. The most basic example is that widget makers have to buy cardboard boxes from a supplier, because the goods don’t show up on the loading dock by magic. The same goes for every bit of physical stuff a business needs and also the services it pays for to keep its operations running smoothly.

Netsuite isn’t just managing the back-end business-to-business commerce, but also the direct-to-customer type of commerce. And the experience works pretty much anywhere a customer may be coming from: On a phone, tablet or PC, in a store or on social media.

As customers have essentially come to expect to be able to buy anything and everything online, the traditional back-end commerce engines like Microsoft Dynamics, Great Plains, Sage and even SAP were imperfectly combined with patchwork solutions for selling on the Web. And the bits of the system that faced customers have rarely if ever been unified with the ones that also face suppliers, which has a way of complicating things like inventory, the supply chain and everything else that stems from basic ebb and flow of supply and demand.

And things are getting even more complicated as machines are programmed to automatically buy things from other machines based on a pre-defined set of circumstances.

NetSuite has built what it calls a commerce engine — dubbed SuiteCommerce — that speaks directly to the core enterprise resource planning (ERP) and customer relationship management (CRM) functions that are already its bread and butter. In English that means that the new engine comes into the process already knowing what everything is, and also who everyone is. That makes it ready to wheel and deal not only with customers but also with suppliers. And when you get down to it, that’s a good way to reduce a lot of friction in any business, which is pretty much what cloud computing is supposed to be about.

The commerce service was probably the biggest news to come out of Netsuite’s SuiteWorld conference in San Francisco today, where CEO Zach Nelson (pictured) gave a keynote address. The company also announced a partnership with Square, the maker of little white credit-card reading thingies that you can insert into an iPhone or iPad for the purpose of accepting payment. Square’s Register application has been integrated with SuiteCommerce, so if you see more businesses using Squares, maybe this has something to do with it.

New documents in the case came public yesterday, essentially spelling out Judge James Kleinberg’s ruling from May 1 in turning back Oracle’s motion for summary judgement. It’s not a terribly big deal, because both sides asked for summary judgement and failed to get it, as happens nearly all of the time in cases that get this far.

One key piece of their dispute arises from the fact that when they settled another lawsuit in 2010, stemming from Oracle’s hiring of former HP CEO Mark Hurd, there was, as HP argues, a provision included requiring Oracle to continue making software that supports servers running Intel’s exotic Itanium chip. A good deal of the fighting between the companies at trial is going to revolve around this point, and whether or not that agreement is enforceable or even exists. What that provision called for, essentially, was for Oracle to continue supporting Itanium as it had previously.

A key paragraph in the judge’s ruling:

“In the Court’s view, it is not unreasonable to interpret the Reaffirmation Provision as imposing a prospective obligation on Oracle to continue to offer products for HP’s platforms; the plain language is readily susceptible to that interpretation. If the prior, existing obligation before [Mark] Hurd’s hiring involved a clear and consistent practice in which Oracle offered its product suite on all HP platforms without written porting agreements or payments, then the Court sees no inherent contradiction in ‘reaffirming’ that this arrangement will continue going forward.”

Both sides in this case never miss an opportunity to poke each other in the eye with public statements. HP struck first last night:

“HP is pleased that the Court ruled that the language in the HP/Oracle agreement can be interpreted to require Oracle to continue porting its software products to the HP Integrity platform, as Oracle did for years before the agreement. As the ruling states, Oracle’s interpretation would make the agreement ‘illusory’ and ‘should be rejected.’ We look forward to trial, where the details of Oracle’s deliberate, anti-customer business strategy to drive hardware sales from Itanium to inferior Sun servers will be revealed.”

But it’s important to remember that HP lost its motion for summary judgement, too. Also, didn’t HP convince the judge that the Itanium provision of the Hurd settlement agreement means exactly what it thinks it does? At least that’s how Oracle attorney Dan Wall saw it, in a statement sent to AllThingsD this morning.

“HP cannot be happy with this decision. The Court did not accept HP’s interpretation of the Hurd settlement agreement; in fact, it rejected out of hand the most recent version of HP’s argument, which equated the contract with terms HP proposed, but Oracle rejected. HP’s lawsuit, like Itanium itself, is living on borrowed time and will never succeed.”

Anyway, the 29-page judge’s opinion that kicked off this latest pretrial PR salvo is below:

endorse_80790_203163_A

Jurors have reached no conclusion in the case and Judge William Alsup has sent them home for the weekend with instructions to try again on Monday.

The jury had indicated Thursday in a note to Alsup that it was stuck on some point. Alsup warned lawyers for both sides that they might have to prepare for a deadlocked jury. Obviously, the situation here is fluid. I’ll have more in this post as it comes in.

There are four questions the jurors are tasked to answer, and they’re said to be unanimously agreed on three of them, but unable to reach consensus on the fourth, though its unclear which are which.

For what its worth, below is the form with the four questions the jurors have to answer.

Jury Questions

The two companies had asked the judge essentially to throw out the other side’s complaint and rule in their favor in a pair of dueling filings last month, and made arguments to that effect in late March. Now being heard in a California State Superior Court, the case is going to trial, with no hope for a settlement, Reuters reported.

It all started up in late 2010, when in reaching a settlement of a lawsuit concerning Mark Hurd’s taking a job as co-president of Oracle, HP asked Oracle to include some language that it argues committed it to continue to build software that would support Intel’s exotic Itanium server chip. That chip, you may remember, was, for all intents and purposes, a market failure, and HP was the only vendor worth mentioning that ever made a go of selling servers using it.

In March of last year, Oracle said it would cease developing versions of its software that would work on Itanium-based systems, and argued that Intel had plans to end manufacturing of the Itanium chip. HP was outraged, and Intel said it had no such plans. Oracle was in earnest. HP got its Itanium customers to publicly lobby Oracle to reverse the decision. It didn’t work. So HP sued Oracle last June.

The pretrial arguments have been colorful. Oracle accused HP of being sneaky when it negotiated the Hurd settlement. It later compared HP’s ongoing reliance on Itanium to the movie “Weekend At Bernie’s,” the corpse in the analogy being the Itanium chip, kept alive by HP funding. For HP, the argument is a simple one: Is there an enforceable agreement between it and Oracle, or not?

Oracle argues, among other things, that there is no such agreement in place, and even if there were, HP was, at the time of the agreement, about to hire Léo Apotheker and Ray Lane as its CEO and chairman, two people who, for various reasons, Oracle thoroughly distrusts. Also, Oracle says, for HP, the Itanium business is all about the billions in support and service fees it charges its customers, fees without which HP is “strategically screwed.” And by the way, the uncertainty around Itanium servers is starting to hurt HP for real.

(Image is of this T-shirt)

Today, Birst will announce that it has taken a $26 million round of funding led by Sequoia Capital. It is Birst’s fourth round of funding, and existing investors including Hummer Winblad and DAG Ventures are also participating, but it’s not a traditional Series D. Sequoia is investing with its Growth Fund, and that creates a slightly different investment dynamic, Doug Leone, a Sequoia Capital partner, told me.

Here’s what happened: Sequoia had already invested in Birst with its Venture fund. But over the last year or so, Leone started seeing something interesting. Companies that Leone is involved with, either as an investor or as a director — specifically Aruba Networks and Rackspace — had selected Birst after a business-intelligence bake-off versus other vendors. As a director of those two companies, he was able to see the close-up evaluation they did in making their selection.

On top of that, Leone noticed that Birst kept bringing in more customers per quarter, and that those customers were putting ever more dollars on the table. “We decided to make a preemptive offer with our Growth Equity Fund,” Leone told AllThingsD yesterday. “We saw what we thought was the knee of the curve. We saw quite clearly that we were at the beginning of a phase of hypergrowth for this company.”

The main difference between the venture-capital and growth-equity investments is that growth investments are made in companies that have growing revenue and a proven business model, whereas VC investments are made in start-ups that are just getting off the ground. It’s sort of a statement of faith in where Birst appears to be going. “It’s like a later-stage investment. It’s the last money the company is going to need.”

It’s not a small statement, either. This $26 million round is bigger than its previous three rounds combined, and brings its total capital raised to $46 million.

So what’s it going to do with all that money? CEO Brad Peters said he’s seeing a significant acceleration. Customers like the flexibility of a cloud-type BI solution, even if it’s running on-premise. “We need to get Birst out there. We need to build our sales organization, we need to build our distribution channel.” He also said a big announcement around infrastructure is pending, in order to better help Birst — his words — “catch the big-data wave.”

And will it join the parade of companies going public after Facebook? Not right away, Peters said. “We’re on that trajectory, but it won’t happen this year, or probably next. Maybe just after that,” he told me. “We’re building this to be a standalone, independent company.”

The textbook case for BI is comparing data on marketing spend to deals. If you find you’re spending a lot of money on one type of marketing campaign that seems not to be generating leads and deals, and not enough on one that seems to be working better, you can see the pattern and make needed changes. It’s all about synthesizing raw data and turning it into information you can make a decision on, Peters told me last year.

There’s a lot of venture-capital money flowing into young BI companies. Both Good Data and Domo have raised a lot on their own, and there are probably other companies I haven’t thought of, not to mention the large software players like Oracle and SAP, who do business intelligence, and IBM, which tends to favor the word “analytics” over “business intelligence.” Hewlett-Packard’s Autonomy business unit could also arguably be considered a business-intelligence outfit. Given all that activity, it just might be intelligent to to keep watching this business.

HP sued Oracle over what it says is an agreement to continue to create software that will run on HP systems running Intel’s Itanium chip, an agreement that HP argues was struck as part of the settlement that ended a suit stemming from former HP CEO Mark Hurd’s joining Oracle in 2010. Oracle, for its part, has argued that Intel plans to phase out the Itanium chip, a specialized server chip that never saw any real success in the marketplace, in order to focus more on its mainstream Xeon line of server chips and has only been producing them because HP has been paying it to do so.

The pair lobbed dueling filings at each other yesterday. In Oracle’s filing, which is the first of the pair embedded below, its lawyers accuse HP of trying to have the court write the contract it says it never agreed to in the first place: “HP has now been forced to admit that the fuzzy, feel-good language in the Reaffirmation Provision would fail as a porting contract on its own — unless the Court supplies numerous detailed terms inferred from the parties’ course of dealing.”

In the second of the two filings embedded below, HP makes the point that Hurd, once HP’s CEO and now Oracle’s co-president, had previously worked with Intel on Itanium-related matters. The key quote from the introduction:

“When asked point blank at his deposition whether it was misleading for HP not to publicly disclose the ICA [Itanium Collaboration Agreement], Oracle’s Co-President stated definitively: “No.” Thus, to prevail on its false advertising claims, Oracle must establish that its own Co-President was responsible for a fraudulent scheme while he was the CEO at HP, and that Mr. Hurd perjured himself at deposition. Although, and somewhat incredibly, Oracle recently stated on the record in response to this Court’s question that Mr. Hurd was part and parcel of this alleged scheme and pattern of lying, Oracle has no evidence to support this claim against Mr. Hurd. In any case, the fact that Oracle is even going down this path against its current Co-President reveals the absurdity of its entire claim.

Here, you can read them in the original, Oracle’s first:

Oracle Reply Msa 1599529

And now HP’s filing:

HP Reply in Support of Cross Claim MSJ

One of the things the company signaled it was going to do with that money was make acquisitions. Today it announced its first: OneDrum, a British start-up that specializes in making Microsoft Office a lot more collaborative.

Financial terms aren’t being disclosed, and OneDrum is a pretty early-stage company with 10 employees and combined $2 million in capital raised, mainly from angels and Amadeus Capital Partners, a British VC firm. But, the deal is invariably going to be compared to a similar one announced last year by Yammer rival Jive for OfficSync.

I talked to Yammer CEO David Sacks about the deal earlier today and I asked him about the comparison. He said that one thing OneDrum does that OfficSync does not is a level of desktop synchronization that’s comparable in some ways with what you find with something like DropBox. And, it does so without the need for a plugin that might, he argues, mess up how Office runs and which can be difficult to deploy across an enterprise.

Basically, Yammer customers will be able to share and see the contents of the folders they share with other people via Yammer. Also, people can collaborate on Office documents live. Changes are tracked within the Yammer news feed and revisions are stored. Once you drag a document into your Yammer folders, the contents are instantly text searchable from within Yammer.

What OneDrum lacked, Sacks told me, was “a good front end to express the OneDrum technology,” which Yammer will readily provide.

Obviously, that’s not the part that surprises me. But here is the bit that did: When you add up all those expenses over a server’s lifetime, labor costs amount to about 70 percent of the total, according to IBM. If you had asked me, I would have guessed the cost of power would outweigh the cost of ongoing labor. Silly me.

I talked with IBM’s Steve Mills about this earlier this week. He’s Big Blue’s senior vice president and group executive for Software and Systems. It’s not uncommon, he says, for a company to take weeks or even a month between a server’s arrival and its deployment.

IBM today announced a hardware system it calls PureSystems that can cut that deployment time to hours and reduce the lifetime labor cost associated with the server by about one-third.

Basically what IBM is doing here is bringing to bear its expertise in services. Having done so well running IT services for a few thousand different companies, it has learned a thing or two about efficiency.

And it makes perfect sense when you consider that much of IBM’s $107 billion in revenue is derived from its services business. Now it’s taking some of that learning and applying it to its hardware and software business, which accounts for about 40 percent of sales.

The key feature, Mills told me, is something called the Flex Systems Manager, which is some IBM-made software that automates a lot of the set-up and maintenance work that traditionally has to be done more or less manually by one or a team of IT managers. “The purpose of the code is to do discovery. … Can I locate every piece of hardware in the frame? What are the rules for configuring it? Can I locate all the software I need and what are the rules for configuring that?” Mills told me.

All that data has been gathered into a single screen that makes the relevant information available at a glance. Mills says the system can be up and running within four hours of arriving at a company’s loading dock. That’s a bold claim.

It’s all based around patterns that IBM has seen over and over again for different types of deployments and configuration options. See them often enough and you can develop software scripts that take a great deal of the manual labor out of the process.

Sometimes companies have their own unique or wonky business processes that even someone as experienced as IBM hasn’t seen before. If that’s the case, a company can craft its own pattern and translate that into software that can automate a process that’s unique to its business or internal rules.

IBM has also teamed up with 125 independent software vendors or ISVs to develop their own patterns that clients can quickly download in order to get up and running. (IBM put out a video on that, which I’ve taken the liberty of embedding below.)

It’s also pretty diverse from a computing standpoint. IBM being IBM, the system has different hardware options, including processors from Intel or its own Power line of chips. There are also three OS options: Windows, Linux and AIX, IBM’s proprietary flavor of Unix. There’s also a wide choice of virtual machine managers: VMWare, KVM, Microsoft’s HyperV and IBM’s own PowerVM.

In the end, the point is to allow a company’s employees to spend more time working on their key lines of business and less time making the computers run properly, which is at its most basic level the IT shop’s highest mission.

It’s not so much about any shifts in sentiment or intention for spending among large companies, it’s just that the dollar is currently strong against other currencies, so U.S.-domiciled companies are in a weaker position when selling to customers in other countries. When accounting for that discrepancy, Gartner says it expects overall growth in spending of 2.5 percent, but on a constant currency basis, the digits would be transposed for a healthier 5.2 percent.

Spending by governments will likely contract, thanks in no small part to the austerity measures being put in place in the euro zone.

The highest rate of growth will be in the telecommunications equipment sector, which will grow by nearly 7 percent, Gartner says. A lot of that is thanks to mobile going to mobile, but also to speeding up networks. See the rest of the segments and their expected rates of growth in the table I screengrabbed from the press release, below:

Earlier this week, Gartner singled out IT spending in emerging economies, which it said will amount to an impressive trillion and change by itself. And last week we got a glance at the sentiment from 100 CIOs at large enterprises, courtesy of J.P. Morgan, indicating that growth is likely to tick upward this year. Up is good.

But there’s another alternative, called SugarCRM, that has been gaining traction, and which positions itself as an alternative to Salesforce. It’s open source, runs both in the cloud and on-premise, and it has a million end users at 7,000 companies in 192 countries.

Today, SugarCRM announced that it had raised $33 million in equity and debt financing. New Enterprise Associates led the round, and Brooke Seawell, an NEA partner, joined Sugar’s board. Silicon Valley Bank and Gold Hill Capital joined as new investors, while prior investors Draper Fisher Jurvetson and Walden International also participated.

The company saw sales increase by 67 percent last year and added 2,700 new customer companies, making SugarCRM, by its count, the third-most popular CRM product in the world.

Now you understand why executives at large tech companies like Intel, IBM, Hewlett-Packard and Cisco Systems get so excited when they talk about places like Brazil, India and elsewhere.

Brazil in particular is just a big part of a surging Latin American region, Gartner says, where spending will total $326 billion; nearly half of that in the professional sector, the other half in consumer.

By adding Mexico, Gartner also adds a fifth member to the four-country BRIC club comprised of Brazil, Russia, India and China. The five countries that make up the BRIMC club will account for 17 percent, or $658 billion, of IT spending this year, the firm says.

The Asia Pacific Region will account for the most among the emerging economies: $496 billion. The Middle East and Africa will account for $244 billion in spending, more than a third of that coming from Saudi Arabia, Turkey and South Africa. Central and Eastern Europe, led by Russia and followed by Poland and the Czech Republic, will account for $158 billion.

Luis Anavitarte, the Gartner analyst who led the study, says that while that seems like an awful lot of healthy spending, buyers are still cautious. He said in a statement that he expects to see aggressive efforts made to go after new consumer buyers in all of these countries, which brings to mind Apple’s aggressive retail push in China. Also, expect to see a lot of spending on cloud computing and mobile technologies at the office.

(Image taken from what someone thinks a trillion-dollar bill might look like. Of course, no such bill exists.)

It comes in the form of a survey of 100 CIOs by the investment bank J.P. Morgan. The firm finds that, on average, CIOs say they’re going to boost their IT spending by 2.7 percent this year, up from 2.4 percent in 2011. That may not seem like a big change, but here’s why its important: It’s the first time in a few years that the same survey has detected a directional change in sentiment. CIOs are at long last saying they intend to boost their spending on IT, rather than trimming it back and back and back as they have for the last several years. “In our prior CIO survey in September 2011, the directional movement indicated a reduction in planned spending growth, as at that time CIOs were starting to pare back on spending during more uncertain macroeconomic conditions,” the firm says in its report, which was shared exclusively with AllThingsD.

The optimism is a bit more pronounced when you see it expressed in the graphic below, which I grabbed from raw survey results. More than two-thirds of the CIOs surveyed said they planned to boost their overall IT spend this year, most of them by a modest 1-5 percent, but some by more than 10 percent. Last year, the figure was 58 percent, but it usually swings up by only 3 or 4 percentage points, analyst Mark Moskowitz told me.

“The overall tone we got in our conversations with these CIOs was more optimistic than it has been in a while,” Moskowitz said. “They have the green light to start projects that are going to take several quarters to get done. Most aren’t willing to do that when they’re worried their overall business is going to roll over.” A lot of that has to do with more confidence in the overall macroeconomic environment.

And where will that growth be? And, perhaps more importantly, where won’t it be? Software, storage and security are looking like big spending priorities among the CIOs surveyed. Business intelligence tools and getting mobile devices integrated are also high on the list — there’s that ongoing trend toward “bring your own device” (BYOD), rearing its persistent head once again.

Employee-purchased iPhones, iPads and Android devices are supplanting company-assigned BlackBerrys. “BYOD is real,” Moskowitz says. “And you have to assume that Apple is going to be the one that benefits the most from it.”

Other winners include EMC and NetApp, as they play strongly in networked storage. Server virtualization — making one physical server act like dozens of servers, using software to subdivide its resources — also has a lot of room to grow, the survey finds. That’s good news for VMware.

Losers? There are few. Intel’s new Romley chip isn’t going to be as big a deal in spurring spending on new servers: In fact,91 percent of CIOs surveyed said they don’t expect Intel’s new chip to drive new spending in the data center. Intel’s last big upgrade, Nehalem, did change the game, Moskowitz says. The trouble is, most of the companies using Nehalem-generation chips in their servers are happy with them, and are unlikely to bother with the expense of an upgrade, for now.

Nor is Windows 8 going to cause a new round of PC buying, as both Hewlett-Packard and Dell are hoping. “A new version of Windows hasn’t caused a PC upgrade cycle since 1995,” Moskowitz told me. Asked directly if Windows 8 was expected to drive a major PC upgrade cycle, 78 percent of the CIOs in the survey said no. In fact, at least 30 of the CIOs in the survey said they were still working on deploying Windows 7. Ouch. Perhaps it’s too much to ask for things to be looking up for everyone all at once.

(Image is a movie poster for the 1935 British film starring Cicely Courtneidge, but the title song in this case is, well, awful. What I really wanted was an image of Fred Astaire dancing with Joan Fontaine to the underappreciated George and Ira Gershwin tune of the same name, from the 1937 film “A Damsel in Distress,” but I could find nothing suitable. So — loving Gershwin tunes as I do — just for fun, I’ve embedded both Astaire and Billie Holiday singing the tune, below, courtesy of Grooveshark. Yes, I’ll admit, sometimes I have a little too much fun in this job.)

Lawyers for both HP and Oracle filed arguments seeking summary judgement in their fight over whether or not Oracle has the right to stop making software that has been ported to run on computers using Intel’s obscure Itanium chip. Oracle said last March that it would no longer support the chip, which is, for all intents and purposes, only used in certain exotic high-end systems sold by HP. For its part, HP has argued that Oracle is bound by a contract to continue to support the chip for several more years. I’ve embedded the competing filing documents below.

The legal moves naturally touched off a renewed salvo of public statements between them that added some interesting details to the proceedings, and which provide some fair insight into how the two players are going to argue at trial. Basically, it’s going to come down to whether or not the two companies have an enforceable agreement that was struck as part of a wider settlement they reached when they settled another lawsuit that followed former HP CEO Mark Hurd’s hiring by Oracle.

Meanwhile, Oracle insists that HP and Intel are lying to the marketplace about the future prospects of the Itanium chip, and has characterized their efforts to keep the chip alive in the marketplace as “a remake of ‘Weekend at Bernie’s.’”

HP scored first:

“The information brought to light during the discovery period further underscores the key facts of this case. In fact, it has led HP to seek a pretrial ruling that Oracle is contractually obligated to offer future versions of Oracle’s software on Itanium. It is time for Oracle to quit pursuing baseless accusations and honor its commitments to HP and to our shared customers.”

HP’s statement then went on to use several historic statements by Oracle, emphasizing the partnership and commitment to Itanium. It even quoted Oracle CEO Larry Ellison:

“Ellison testified that in making his decision to issue Oracle’s March 22 announcement that Itanium was “nearing the end of its life,” he relied on a conversation with Intel’s chief executive officer, Paul Otellini. But Ellison admitted under oath that Otellini did not say that Itanium was nearing the end of its life. And the Intel executive responsible for the Itanium business has now testified unequivocally that Oracle’s claim was not true.”

Oracle attorney Dan Wall issued a pair of statements, and one was more or less the standard summary of that company’s position: So important an agreement as the one that would obligate Oracle to extend a strategic partnership wouldn’t be contained in a settlement over what was essentially a dispute over a noncompete agreement.

“We don’t believe, nor do we think HP really believes, that a settlement agreement relating to Mark Hurd’s employment could possibly obligate Oracle to write new software for a platform that is clearly end of life. We are pleased the Court now has the evidence needed to see HP’s purported contract claims for what they are.”

Then, apparently after seeing HP’s extensive statement , Wall shot back with more extensive — and interesting comments. He cites testimony fromformer HP chief communications officer Bill Wohl as admitting that the lawsuit was more or less a public relations stunt that was part of a wider campaign intended to raise outrage among their shared customers and force Oracle to reconsider.

“Rather than filing a legal motion, HP has yet again filed a press release that continues its campaign of lies about the Itanium roadmap. HP’s PR Director admitted the lawsuit was conceived as part of a campaign designed to ’foment customer outrage.’  HP’s documents and executive deposition testimony make indisputable the fact that Itanium is nearing the end of life as Oracle said. Intel documents confirm that as well–which is why despite repeated efforts by HP to get Intel to refute Oracle’s March 22 press release, Intel has refused to say more than that it intends to deliver the two announced versions of Itanium.

“The status of Itanium, meaning its impending end of life, has been maintained as one of HP’s most ’closely guarded secrets’ from customers, partners and HP employees alike in order to avoid giving its sales organization ’another reason not to sell’ Itanium and to continue to ’milk’ maintenance profits from its customers. HP documents reference HP-UX on Itanium as on a ’death march’ and confess that Intel would be doing ’high fives’ to no longer have to develop the chip given its poor performance and market traction and the huge opportunity cost associated with it. HP’s documents also contemplate various options to deal with the inevitability of Itanium’s end of life, including paying Intel to ’elongate’ its life. HP’s documents make clear that HP was intent on ’creating a market perception of long term viability’ and introducing versions of the chip that are ’more of an illusion than of technical significance.’ In other words, HP’s strategy was to mislead the market and its customers as to the real status of Itanium. Oracle will not participate in this fraud.”

The history and context of this lawsuit is long and complicated, and fraught with the fact that for a time, HP was run by former SAP co-CEO Léo Apotheker at a time when Oracle and SAP were locked in their own nearly-nuclear multiyear legal battle. The fact that former Oracle president and Ellison enemy Ray Lane is HP’s executive chairman only adds to the enmity.

However, there’s evidence to show that HP is the one being hurt the most by the ongoing fight. Without the support and maintenance fees that HP collects from companies who buy its Itanium-based servers, the company is, in the words of one of its own executives, “strategically screwed.” Amid the doubts brought on by the fight with Oracle, sales of HP’s highly profitable business-critical servers have suffered. And with the printer business suffering and PC sales flattening, that is the last thing HP needs.

Oracle, by all appearances, can afford to let its Itanium business die, and has argued that Intel would like nothing better than to get out of the business of making Itanium chips that are only profitable with subsidies from HP; and that it has quietly planned to let the chip reach the end of its life and transition customers over to its more mainstream Xeon chip, which it now says is “suitable for any workload.”

Anyway, the dueling filings are below, HP’s first:

HP Summary Motion

Oracle Summary Motion