Hans Forbrich <news.hans_at_telus.net> wrote in message news:<h3Scd.18205$cr4.15935_at_edtnps84>...
> Mark Townsend wrote:
>
> > Rhino wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> This is *not* a troll and we don't want to start a flame war! Scott just
> >> want some honest facts to help him decide which product is best at which
> >> jobs.
> >>
> >
> > Two things
> >
> > 1) This WILL end in a flame war.
>
> I agree Mark. This discussion, in a public forum such as these lists, will
> attract the strong supporters and will invariably devolve to a religious
> discussion.
>
> First step should be to develop a set of business requirements. Then ask
> experts to explain how each product under consideration will satisfy the
> requirements.
>
> Then decide based on who you trust! Ultimately both products, as well as
> some open source (or soon to be open source - sic), will satisfy many
> business requirements.
>
>
> <Now my religious rant ...>
>
> Don't let anyone tell you that Oracle is the most expensive - that myth
> comes from people who buy before they think (or have someone else think for
> them) and then avoid or are ignorant of what they have bought. And is
> encouraged by each and every competitor.
>
> If used properly, and if you don't re-invent the wheel by using built-in
> features and capabilities, the difference in long term cost (between
> Oracle, DB2, Ingres, MySQL, PostgreSQL, SQL Server, etc.) is very, very
> small.
>
> I happen to prefer Oracle because it provides a lot of functionality in the
> database at no additional price - functionality that I see required in many
> apps such as: workflow, message queueing, replication, subqueries, direct
> http request/response capability, security, backup/recovery, admin &
> management tools, job scheduler (akin to cron, but inside the DB), DB
> initiated callouts to OS shared libraries, DB initiated mail & page, DB
> initiated TCP calls, and so on.
>
> These capabilities may exist in other database managers, but if not (or if
> the developer doesn't know/understand how to use them in Oracle) these
> capabilities will be duplicated. That moves the money from "product price"
> to "development cost" in creating the application and the cost of
> supporting the application into the hands of the developer instead of the
> 'vendor'. (You pay for it somehow <g>)
>
> Aside from that, there _are_ a few technical differences ... I'll leave
> those to others.
>
> <end rant>
>
> > 2) You have posted this message to a defunct Oracle group. If you insist
> > on starting this at least use the right targets -
> > comp.databases.oracle.server
>
> Copied to comp.databases.oracle.server. Requesting all other threads and
> potential replies to this one PLEASE remove cdo and only use cdo.server
>
> Thanks
> /Hans
Huh? This guy is told NOT to get religous and there somebody gets
religious on him...not fair.
Received on Tue Oct 19 2004 - 08:09:51 CDT
