Re: Oracle: Naked King in database land?

<ctcgag_at_hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:20030404195801.391$P0_at_newsreader.com...
> Mark.Powell_at_eds.com (Mark D Powell) wrote:
> > Numo, I have added a couple of comments for any interested parties on
> > your observations. I cut the post down to save unnecessary text.

<snip>

> > The problem is that in the short-term it is cheaper to connect the new
> > with the old than to convert the old technology to modern technology.
> > Unfortunately this usually results in high maintenance costs due in
> > part to very difficult modification efforts. But management only
> > looks at the short-term numbers.
>
> Are even the long term numbers favorable for switching to new technology?
> Afterall, the long term is just the union of a bunch of short terms, and
> it's not like "new technology" will still be new by the time you get
> ported to it.

The long term is usually, but not always, the union (as you put it) of a bunch of short terms. Sometimes you get, figuratively, 'ERROR at line 1:
ORA-01790: expression must have same datatype as corresponding expression'

in other words something fundamental has changed, now this doesn't happen as often as people think, and certainly not as often as the phrase 'paradigm shift', but it does happen and when it does the business in the old model has a problem. A big problem. My gut feeling is that this is why business managers (who lets face study business failure not systems failure) keep trying to jump on the next buzzword, in case they miss it and it kills their business.

--
Niall Litchfield
Oracle DBA
Audit Commission UK
*****************************************
Please include version and platform
and SQL where applicable
It makes life easier and increases the
likelihood of a good answer
******************************************