Re: SQL server Vs Oracle

Nuno Souto wrote in message <7hs7em$d02$1_at_m2.c2.telstra-mm.net.au>...
>David <desertfox_at_thegrid.net> wrote in message
>news:Iu003.2242$i4.123736_at_alfalfa.thegrid.net...

>If you had read the ENTIRE message instead of concentrating in one single
>point, you would understand. Let me clarify.
>
>The discussion is NOT about code that should be 3K when it is now 5K!
>Nor is it about 100Mb of product.
>The discussion is about what VALUE are we DERIVING from such sizes!
>
>So quoting the usual crappy arguments from the press about the lack of
>develoment efficiency in reducing code memory sizes to 3K is totally
>USELESS as an argument IN THE CONTEXT of this discussion!
>
>Easy to understand now?
>>
>> 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.
>
>Sure he is correct. If I now reply that some days are sunny and some days
are
>rainy, am I incorrect? NO! But what the heck has that got to do with the
>price of fish?

I guess I have been having this conversation with another impolite Australian by the name of Nuno. But just in case you are him, let me remind you that a large part of our discussion has centered around your claim that "adding hardware" is a solution that won't work so here we are arguing that times have changed and that hardware is getting so cheap that it really does change things in the way we develop our applications.

>> 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.
>>
>
>Sure. I understand courtesy and politeness. But I don't consider
courteous
>or polite the reading of my messages so lightly and with such lack
>of attention that the replies come out of context, distorting and plainly
>invoking argument lines that I have not made. Better not reply. I can
>relate to that.

Funny, I think that actually fits your description. I have already received several emails from usenet posters that actually say the exact same thing about you. You have quite a habit of trimming people's original post to twist their words around.

>>Maybe it was because
>> Australia was originally populated with English felons... I don't know.
>
>Me neither. Probably because these religious arguments and fanatical
>defences come out from the US who was originally colonised by religious
>fanatics.

I guess this goes hand in hand with Freedom of choice, something Microsoft has given us.

>> 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.
>
>Oh, let me see. You use Word to make web pages? One would think
>that a word processor would be the LAST tool anybody doing web code
>would use... Word processors are useful for the printed page or
>documents. You want to do web pages, I suggest the use of things like
>Frontpage, since you like MS stuff so much. Quite useful for that,
>does that job and does it darn well and that's it.

Actually I do use FP98, Visual Interdev and Drumbeat for my ASP development. But I was just pointing out these added features, among many, that you seem to have a problem with.

>Much simpler, no need for a PIII-450 and 256Mb of memory to run
>a word processor BLOATED with stuff that has NOTHING to do
>with word processing.

But a PIII-450 would be nice if I am running 6 applications at the same time, including Word. Or are 6 applications too much for you to handle?

>Value, David. Value. There ain't ANY. Just marketing hype.

Simple solution. Don't BUY their products. It's a wonderful concept here in the U.S.

>Once again, David. The total size of O97 is miles bigger than O95
>or previous versions. Totally out of context with any gains in
productivity
>in using it. But needing an upgrade from the 1Gb drive to one of these
>18Gb things you talk about (why not 9Gb?).

The total size of O97 is bigger than O95? Is that a profound idea? I don't know of too many 'newer' versions of software that are actually SMALLER in size. Even new cars are bigger, heavier and more costly than older models.

You really should look into taking a Computer Science 101 class.

>See the big picture. You are being conned into this spiral of
>upgrades like everybody else.

And your point is? Most people's lives are in a spiral of continual upgrades.. better car, bigger house, better looking girlfriends. It's called progress, deal with it.

>Some have said no already. Many more will in future. Or do you
>really think Joe6pack is gonna keep upgrading (read: replacing!)
>his PC just so that he can put URL's into his kid's birthday invitations?
>Joe 6pack may be many things, but don't make the mistake of
>thinking he's stupid...

Do you think web has fully realized its full potential? Streaming media and high bandwidth are starting to put the pressure on client computers to perform. Joe 6-pack will still need to upgrade, for a little while more anyway.

>Sooner or later, this rate of change will have to slow down. When it
>does, be prepared. It won't be nice on your MS shares...

No problems here... I'm loving it.

David Received on Tue May 18 1999 - 15:57:01 CDT