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.
> >
> > 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?

I had that thought too, but decided it is not too out of line given that all the subsidiaries have their own processing. As a distillation of that for a few hundred users, I don't think it is unlikely at all. If you think about all the CEO's you know who are reasonably techno-efficient, don't you see them want to put everything on their laptop? (There was a big to-do not long ago when Irwin Jacobs [Qualcomm] had his laptop ripped off).

What they don't say is whether an Oracle style distributive db might be better, rather than waiting for the data to bubble up.

> >
>
> 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 mean: Hellllooooooooooooooooooooooooo?????????????????????
>
> Anybody home at Microsoft bullshit central????

I don't think this is a legitimate criticism, as they list the upgrade steps to get to the current configuration. But I do think it is cheap bullshit that they fluff it to give the impression you got. The paper is certainly out of context by not comparing to a similar Oracle solution.

From what I recall hearing about R/3 implementations in the given time-frame, they must be happy anybody got the thing implemented at all. http://www.cio.com/archive/061596_sap_1.html

jg

--
@home.com is bogus.  http://www.usanetwork.com/movies/heidifleiss/