Re: Article about supposed "murky" future for Oracle

"Noons" <wizofoz2k_at_yahoo.com.au> wrote in message news:406aac55$1$20085$afc38c87_at_news.optusnet.com.au...
> "Daniel Morgan" <damorgan_at_x.washington.edu> wrote in message
> news:1080682452.163968_at_yasure...
> > > http://www.microsoft-sap.com/case_studies.asp
> > > and more especially
> > > http://www.microsoft-sap.com/docs/Microsoft%2012pg%20Case%20Study.pdf
> > My phone calls completed ... the best information I can glean is that
> > Microsoft is still running on Oracle.

I wonder who Daniel Morgan called? Hazy references to anonymous sources don't persuade me...

> > Take a good look at that hardware configuration. Based on your own
> > background and experience do you really think you can run the
> > financial package for a Fortune 500 on two 8 proc 550MHz Pentium IIIs?
>
> Oh PLEASE!!!!!!!! The whole freaking thing is totally BOGUS
> and nothing but another load of cheap marketing bullshit!!!!
>
> Read all the hype in page 1 of the pdf about how it is a SQL Server
> 2000 solution using Windows AS 2000, yadda yadda, crap crap.
> Then on page 2 they claim the thing was installed
> and running on SAP as early as August 1995.
>
> Since WHEN were Windows AS 2000 and SQL Server 2000
> AVAILALE in August 1995?

I noticed they first got rolling in 1995. Maybe they used SQL Server 4.2 or 6/6.5? Or, maybe it really was Oracle back then? At the time, Oracle was, probably rightly, considered much more scalable than MS SQL Server. Maybe they had a multi-million dollar implementation on Sun or something... What was the biggest WIntel box available back then? A quad-66Mhz Pentium?

However, I read the ENTIRE .pdf document and on page 8 is a discussion of the upgrade process to SQL 2000.

> I mean: Hellllooooooooooooooooooooooooo?????????????????????
> Anybody home at Microsoft bullshit central????
> --
> Cheers
> Nuno Souto
> wizofoz2k_at_yahoo.com.au.nospam
Received on Wed Mar 31 2004 - 11:26:30 CST