| Oracle FAQ | Your Portal to the Oracle Knowledge Grid | |
 |
 | |||
| Oracle FAQ | Your Portal to the Oracle Knowledge Grid | |
|
| |||
Home -> Community -> Mailing Lists -> Oracle-L -> RE: Microsoft VS Oracle (again)
"Also,
yes they are the "fastest growing" database on the market, take a look at that
copy of Windows 2000 Advanced Server you've got."
<SPAN
class=064473320-01072003>
And, I
think all the exchange servers now have Sql*Server as a back end...
Considering they almost own that corner of the market, I bet that adds up to a
license or two...
<SPAN
class=064473320-01072003>
<SPAN
class=064473320-01072003>Tim
<FONT face=Tahoma
size=2>-----Original Message-----From: Goulet, Dick
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Tuesday, July 01, 2003 4:11
PMTo: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-LSubject: RE:
Microsoft VS Oracle (again)
<FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2> Well, I'll be a little more forgiving than Raj has
been. Basically MicroSoft is just the "pot calling the kettle
black".
<FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2>
<FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2> On the issue of price, well yes MicroSoft does have
an edge, but that's just how they've eliminated all of their other competition
over the years. The product does not cost less than Oracle or DB2, it's
just that MicroSoft can leverage the tremendous amounts of cash they have to
offset the giveaway they're into. I believe that was one of the points
of the Antitrust suit they were embroiled in.
<FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2>
<FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2> On RAC they really have a long way to
go. <FONT face=Arial
color=#0000ff size=2>If you want to do a federated database setup like
MicroSoft states, just buy standard edition Oracle licenses & toss in a
pile of database links. Works the same way & you don't have to pay
extra for it. The whole idea of RAC is that when one node dies, for
whatever reason, the data that node was hosting is not offline till you get it
repaired. And actually you really do not need to do anything to your
application to take advantage of RAC, except adjust your error handling to
understand that a transaction needed to be resubmitted.
<FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2>
<FONT face=Arial
color=#0000ff size=2>Overall I think MicroSoft's Achilles heel is
Windows. Their a one OS horse. Oracle is a multi OS horse that runs the
same whatever the platform. And BTW, Oracle runs RAC on Red Hat without
any additional software, never mind that it runs on Linux in the first
place. Similar things can also be said for DB2, Sybase, and
Informix. When, if ever, Microsoft has a version of Sql*Server that runs
as multiple independent processes on Linux then I'll give them a second
look. As long as their a single multi-threaded Windows only process they
can stay in Redmond. Also, yes they are the "fastest growing" database
on the market, take a look at that copy of Windows 2000 Advanced Server you've
got. There's a copy of Sql*Server 2000 in there, and you can't uninstall
it. Billy G is still up to his old tricks. The only solution to
MicroSoft is forced divestiture. Too bad that judge could not stand up
to King George.
Dick GouletSenior Oracle DBAOracle Certified 8i DBA
<FONT face=Tahoma
size=2>-----Original Message-----From: Jamadagni, Rajendra
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Tuesday, July 01, 2003
1:40 PMTo: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-LSubject:
RE: Microsoft VS Oracle (again)
Aargh ...
you must be very brave telling a Oracle cult to move to SQL
Server ...
How do we know you are not Billy G using an alias ...
8>)
Raj <FONT
size=2>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------Rajendra dot Jamadagni at nospamespn dot com <FONT size=2>All Views expressed in this email are strictly personal. QOTD: Any clod can have facts, having an opinion is an art !
Any comments?
Gabriel
Received on Tue Jul 01 2003 - 15:55:58 CDT
 |
 |