Re: Why doesn't Oracle care about Linux as IBM does?

Several months yes. A year: not likely. Situation should have become better with 8i introducing a Virtual Operating System for Oracle. Previously, there was officially not necessarily code sharing between the different ports. With Linux we see the same thing as with Unix: there isn't no such thing as Linux. There is Suse Linux, RedHat Linux, Caldera Linux and they are not identical.
To everyone anxious to know when 9i is released for their platform: Oracle has setup and email alert service on the download page at technet. Please use this service and stop asking *the* question over and over again in this group.

Regards,

Sybrand Bakker, Senior Oracle DBA

"Dino Hsu" <dino1_at_ms1.hinet.net> wrote in message news:jjnbnt87evrjnu6lejh18rig91l21jsquh_at_4ax.com...
> Dear Howard,
>
> Do you mean the real release date from the first platform to the last
> platform can span several months to one year? I am sorry I don't know
> that. By the way, has Oracle published a schedule of the release dates
> of individual platforms?
>
> Dino
>
> On Sun, 12 Aug 2001 11:03:07 +1000, "Howard J. Rogers"
> <howardjr_at_www.com> wrote:
>
> >
> >"Dino Hsu" <dino1_at_ms1.hinet.net> wrote in message
> >news:2v3ant40th3s908so2458bg6gvb4lh2nib_at_4ax.com...
> >> Dear all,
> >>
> >> I am confused when I see this line everywhere:
> >> "We discovered that nothing runs on Linux bettern than DB2"
> >> Oracle doesn't seem to care too much about Linux, it's 9i only
> >> supports one SuSe distribution. (if it cares, Red Hat and other major
> >> distributions should be supported as well).
> >
> >
> >It's a daft argument, put like that. Oracle 9i for NT isn't even out
 yet...
> >does that mean Oracle doesn't care about NT? No, it means that products
> >have release plans and cycles... and just as NT is rather down on that
 list,
> >so is any other Linux distribution than SuSe.
> >
> >They have to start somewhere, for heaven's sake!
> >
> >If 9i isn't running on most major distributions of Linux by mid 2002 at
 the
> >latest, I'd be very much surprised.
> >
> >HJR
> >
> >
> >
> >>
> >> Furthermore, many people here (senior DBA's) don't think of Linux as a
> >> 'Unix'. To them, Unix means IBM AIX, Sun Solaris, HP-UX, etc.. This
> >> may be due to Linux's growing up from PC-based machines, although
> >> later ported to many different H/W platforms.
> >>
> >> On the other hand, IBM is so supportive about Linux, it even uses
> >> Linux in the world's biggest supercomputer:
> >> http://www.informationweek.com/story/IWK20010809S0018
> >> Linux and AIX are both Unix's, IBM may have to choose one of them as a
> >> result. Is it because IBM likes open source software so much that it
> >> cannot but take Linux back home?
> >>
> >> Can someone comment on this? Thanks in advance.
> >>
> >> Dino
> >>
> >
>
Received on Sun Aug 12 2001 - 09:54:15 CDT