RE: Standards Compliance (Was: Anyone with experience with MMOG and databases?)

oracle-l-bounce_at_freelists.org gravou em 2005-08-15 09:40:20:

> > Yep. Actually changes wouldn't be so big, and Oracle
> > even downplays the differences, but has yet to come with a
> > conformance plan.
> >
> And How many compilers have you written, that you can make such a
> statement?

        I am just taking Oracle at their own word. I think it self-contradictory. Either differences are minor, and then they could produce at least a conformance plan; or they aren't minor, and they are duping people.

        I gather differences aren't actually that minor, but I haven't analysed them myself in detail. Anyway, shifting the load for non-conformance to the user by saying 'minor differences' or something the like is not fair -- nor good for the user.

> You keep harping on that. Can you provide some links (at least), from
> truly independent sources to validate your claims?

        I wish I had.

> Everything I've seen
> and read has Oracle more standards compliant than either SQL Server or
any
> variation of DB2.

        My experience says otherwise. Oracle does have lotsa bullets in charts, but its nonconformant items are quite fundamental.

> Again, which version/platform of DB2, since they are mainly different
> programs that IBM bought for different platforms and then slapped a new
> name on all of them?

        Now you got it wrong. DB2 was all developed by IBM. It does descend from three different products -- SQL/DS, DB2 for the mainframe, DB2/UDB -- but these came for quite different platforms that couldn't possibly be well supported by the same codebase, and some of which Oracle either never supported or ceased supporting.

        It is true that IBM bought other DBMSs and related products, like Informix, but Oracle did the same with RDB and this has nothing to do with DB2 anyway.

> Actually MSDE is a runtime engine. While I do wish at times that Oracle
> had a runtime engine, a runtime engine by itself is rather limiting by
> it's very nature. How can something inherrently self-limiting supposed
to
> apply market pressure?

        MS has the practice of inserting in the market bottom-up. One ends up with lotsa MS DBs around, and next thing one knows is that he can't get rid of MS without going free software, and either way Oracle is in jeopardy.

> And I won't even get into the cost of "free"
> software. That's already been beat to death on this list and others many
> times over.

        That's irrelevant.

--
Leandro Guimarães Faria Corcete DUTRA
Administrador de Bases de Dados      +55 (11) 4390 5383
Toyota do Brasil Ltda              ldutra_at_toyota.com.br
São Bernardo do Campo, SP                        BRASIL



This message (including any attachments) is confidential and may be privileged and intended solely for the use of the person/entity to whom it is addressed. If you have received it by mistake please notify the sender by returning via e-mail as well as delete this message from your system. Any unauthorized use or dissemination of this message in whole or in part is prohibited. Please note that e-mails are susceptible to change. TOYOTA DO BRASIL LTDA (including its group companies) shall not be liable for the improper or incomplete transmission of the information contained in this communication, neither for personal, nonbusiness related information nor opinion sent through this email or even for any delay in its receipt or damage to your system. TOYOTA DO BRASIL LTDA (or its group companies) does not guarantee that the integrity of this communication has been kept nor that this communication is free of viruses, interceptions or interference.
--
http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l