Oracle FAQ | Your Portal to the Oracle Knowledge Grid |
![]() |
![]() |
Home -> Community -> Usenet -> c.d.o.server -> Re: informix market share
mjbox01_at_gmail.com wrote:
> RollForward Wizard wrote:
>> mjbox01_at_gmail.com wrote: >>> RollForward Wizard wrote: >> But back to my original point, you won't convince me that "Oracle is >> as easy to use as DB2". I just won't believe it.
It's not meaningless, obviously you found something about it that had meaning. Ease of use to me means that the software is written in such a way that it has either a high level of difficulty to use or it does not. If I have to wade through a lot of documentation to find what I need then the software as a collective work is not "easy" to use. This is not unique to Oracle, SQL-Server has a lot of problems too, with some very limited ways to do things. If it takes a longer time to be productive on oneproduct vs another, then you can say one is "easier" to use than the other. I have yet to have an easy-to-use experience with Oracle, compared with other products. As a business person I know what works in providing solutions, and Oracle is last on the list never first for a variety of reasons, and it will never get on my list for ease-of-use, whether for the front-end or the back-end. I just wouldn't want to work that hard, and pay for software that I know most people wouldn't use if they didn't have to. Oracle persists because of applications not because it's a great technology. Larry never sold technology, he sells dreams of great technology that people with more money than brains buy into, and then push it down on to people with brains and tell them to make it work. The Oracle engine has not improved a lot and remains the same as it was 10 years ago. Take away the big apps, and Oracle has no value.
> The fact that you continue with it nevertheless says something.
>
The fact that you responded says something too.
Have a nice day. Received on Tue Nov 29 2005 - 10:22:39 CST
![]() |
![]() |