Re: Article about supposed "murky" future for Oracle

"Daniel Morgan" <damorgan_at_x.washington.edu> wrote

> And as now know Oracle wasn't at fault at all. Orbitz lost a control
> file and their DBAs started applying Oracle and Solaris patches and
> didn't contact Oracle, or for that matter Sun, support for hours. By
> then Orbitz's employees had done irreparable damage.

Have Orbitz turned back RAC on? If not, why?

> I work only 1.5 miles from Microsoft and many of my students are from
> Microsoft. I doubt they'd make up stories about it. And doubt even
> more that Ballmer would give Oracle even dollar one if he could avoid
> doing so.

keep doubting :-)

Your repeated attempts to prove that SQLServer is a piss-ant RDBMS has reached a point of joke. Do u think sites like Barnes and Noble, tesco (one of the biggest online grocers) are fools to use SQL Server. Even Larry and Oracle realizes that their biggest competitor is SQLServer and not DB2.

They already are a formidable competitor to Oracle and in another few years will start hammering O. They have the muscle and cash to do it. In the last few years, with O showing a precipitous decline in new database license sales (only last quarter they showed a growth), MS has shown a very impressive growth. IMO they are the fastest growing database in the market, linux threat notwithstanding. There was a nice article about it in week.com.

rk- Received on Mon Mar 29 2004 - 10:56:23 CST