Re: SQL server Vs Oracle

Nuno Souto wrote in message <7hegdg$a2g$1_at_m2.c2.telstra-mm.net.au>...
>Abbot Cooper <cooper_NoSpam_ab_at_mediaone.net> wrote in message
news:7hcf9b$ck6>
>Yup - you have completely hit the nail on the head. How many days would
>> programmers in the past spend to scrunch 3K of code down into 2K because
RAM
>> was more costly than gold? Now this becomes entirely irrelevant
(generally
>> irrelevant -- I am sure someone will have some exception to my
statement...)
>> because RAM is now about as costly as dirt. Does it make sense to spend 3
>> weeks tuning your code to get the last few bytes out of it when RAM is
>> plentiful? Of course it does not make sense, unless you have an overly
>> developed sense of aesthetics. From a strictly business standpoint it is
not
>> economically efficient, period.
>
>
>Here we go again with the typical MS and "expert magazine" marketing
DRIVEL!!!!! What exactly does MS marketing have to do with his summary on how the industry has changed. This has nothing to do with marketing. Are you so mindless that you have to parrot your broken record phrase of "MS Marketing is behind it!" over and over and over without really responding to the point?

He is absolutely correct when he says that times have changed in regards to development due to cheaper RAM. I remember when coding for the PDP (only 16-64k depending on how much money you had) you had to take the uttmost care in writing for efficiency due to the memory limitations.

>Wrong! We are talking about picking an application that has maybe 500K
>lines of code and turning it into a 200Mb monster that does essentially the
>SAME!
Nuno, you really need a lesson in manners. Here in the US it isn't necessary that you agree with the other person, but what is required is courtesy and politeness, not upper-case screaming and rudeness. What kinds of manners do they teach you in Australia? Maybe it was because Australia was originally populated with English felons... I don't know.

As to your comment on the size of the application, do you have any clue as to the size and complexity of the application? Or are you just pulling these numbers out of your bung-hole?

>What is the VALUE to the user in that? Absolutely NONE!
>
>WHATEVER the cost of memory may be. Don't use semantics or common place
>argumentation to try and confuse the issue, you can't do that with me, been
>around
>for too long. NOBODY is questioning that memory is cheaper and therefore
it is
>easier to code larger programs.
>
>What is being questioned is WHAT IS THE VALUE TO USERS of that additional
code
>if it achieves NOTHING but sell new versions of hardware and software?

Actually I find that the latest versions of Word do offer quite a bit more. I am now able to link URLS and edit HTML directly in Word. You might not need all the features (like I said before, I think you need to look into using Notepad for all your simple needs) but at least they are available and you can always choose not to install them. As far as the size of Word, it hasnt really gotten any bigger in size in proportion to the average hard drive size. Hard drives being shipped with new machines have gone from 1 Gig a few years ago to 18 Gigs today. If Word is still only around 100 megs to install, that isnt too bad.

>Name ONE feature of Word97 that makes it absolutely IMPERATIVE and
NECESSARY
>and VALUABLE for the majority of users to upgrade to it? What did you get
for
>the
>extra hardware requirement?

You could really say the same about most applications. I am sure you could get by with an Atari ST and the Word Processor that shipped with it, but people like improvement whether they are large or small.

>And you think that makes a lot of sense and is "economically efficient,
period"?
>
>No wonder it is MS making the money, not you...

Actually I am making a ton with MS as I have had their stocks for many years now and watched thier stock double almost on a yearly basis. Rather than bash MS, why don't we have a conversation about what kinds of wonderful software products Australian software companies have produced? Now that is something we all can whole heartidly laugh about.

LOL David

>
>--
>Cheers
>Nuno Souto
>nsouto_at_nsw.bigpond.net.au
>http://www.acay.com.au/~nsouto/welcome.htm
>
>
Received on Mon May 17 1999 - 17:14:31 CDT