Cris Carampa wrote:
> DA Morgan wrote:
>
>>> What's so BAD about running an earlier release (as long as it's not
>>> antedeluvian) ? I much prefer leave to the OTHERS the suffering for
>>> the bugs
>>> that oracle left in their new software release, and install it when
>>> it's a
>>> bit more stable. And God knows that software in general is unstable in
>>> these days of bloating (and offshoring)
>>
>>
>>
>> Were it true that there were more bugs in 10gR1 than in 9.2.0.6 I would
>> agree. But I see no evidence to support that contention.
>
>
> Another point: before 10g the terminal release of a major version had a
> longer life that any other releases of the next major version. I know
> that, according to Metalink, at the moment 10.1's life is 19 months
> longer that 9.2's, but who assures us that things won't change with the
> arrival of 10.2?
>
> Kind regards,
>
I don't get your math, but what about 9iR1 being de-supported
*before* 8i(R3) was desupported?
And then what: desupport just means no code changes anymore...
--
Regards,
Frank van Bortel
Received on Thu Mar 03 2005 - 03:25:12 CST
