Re: Why is Oracle unaffordable?

From: Guillermo Alan Bort <cicciuxdba_at_gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 9 Nov 2010 10:57:10 -0300
Message-ID: <AANLkTinM5+axsFVYYX=+Ffq+=UsGFjftae7jvXj9mQBK_at_mail.gmail.com>



OP,

  I think you are not expressing yourself clearly. What is "USER FRIENDLY"? something that someone with no experience (or very little at that) can use? like say Windows? a point-and-shoot camera? I guess that's one way of looking at it. But if you are a professional photographer you will want a camera that allows you to change the lenses, set the focus manually, regulate the delay in the flash, have multiple flashes, remote triggering, shutter and sensitivity settings, etc. Right now automated cameras are way cheaper than professional cameras. It's the same with the database. If you just want a place to dump data, then perhaps a well written SQLite code is your answer, however if you want the flexibility that comes with Oracle, then I guess you should pay for it.

  Oracle's Licenses cost a lot of money, but I don't think they are 'expensive'. You are getting a very good product for what you pay and developing a similar product in-house or overhauling an already existing product (and I'm thinking only of Postgre here, the rest are far more expensive) would certainly cost more than the Oracle License.

  As to ease of administration, you have amazing tools out there (TOAD, for instance) and Oracle provides an administration interface (that used to be somewhat unstable but got better over the years) called Enterprise Manager Database Control (or a centralized version for multiple databases called Grid Control). The latest versions of EM are VERY complete and you can do almost everything from there. Why would you need a GUI? Oracle 9i has a java console... not exactly a GUI but close enough. That eventually evolved into DBControl.

  Now, DBAs... most managers and several developers don't really understand the need for a DBA. I can tell you from experience, developers can make good DBAs (i've met a couple over the yeras), but they usually don't. That's why DB Consultants make so much money. When all goes to hell, managers call a very expensive consultant to fix the problems that could have been averted by having an in-house DBA or a remote DBA service.

  All that being said, Oracle isn't and doesn't want to be targeted for small companies. So, small companies should not even look at Oracle. There are alternatives that can store data efficiently and are fully functional RDBMS, some with no or very low licensing costs.

  Anyway, you sound very frustrated when you wrote that e-mail and like you were looking for people to tell you "you're right, Oracle sucks" but most of us can put food in our tables (which we bought thanks to our high DBA pay) thanks to Oracle being what it is... so we won't say that.

  Oh, and this is where I get to rant... DBA Pays are NOT HIGH. Granted, we live in a capitalist world so the people that make money are the sellers (and owners), DBAs may have a slightly better pay than say developers, but that's because for one thing there aren't as many DBAs as there are developers (let's not get into Good vs Bad dba/developer) and a new application being delayed for a few weeks because of a lazy or bad programmer (except for software factories, but they have other ways to deal with that) is not as expensive as having a production line stopped for two days because the DB went down unexpectedly and the backups are done through exports because the developer that configured the DB had absolutely no idea that RMAN even existed (and this is a true story, yes)... By the way... do you think that a DBA gets a bonus for the DB no crashing (which is to say, for doing a good job) anywhere near what a salesman gets for making a sale? Or a SAP basis for just... I don't know what they do.

  Just as a side note, if you are developing a product for selling to other companies, I think there is a developer license or something like that. You should read the license agreement thoroughly or contact an Oracle rep.

cheers.
Alan.-

On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 9:59 AM, Michael McMullen <ganstadba_at_hotmail.com>wrote:

> #2 is true, I took over the management of two dbs that unskilled users
> installed and managed themselves to the point the db was inoperable.
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> *From:* oracle-l-bounce_at_freelists.org [mailto:
> oracle-l-bounce_at_freelists.org] *On Behalf Of *Stefan Knecht
> *Sent:* Tuesday, November 09, 2010 7:42 AM
>
> *To:* passionate_programmer_at_hotmail.com
> *Cc:* oracle-l-freelists
>
> *Subject:* Re: Why is Oracle unaffordable?
>
>
>
> There's 2 possible answers to that, from my personal opinion:
>
>
> 1) I think Oracle is *extremely* user friendly even if you're not using the
> GUI (see #2) , because if you know how to query the database the right way,
> it shows you soooooooo much information and detail about what's going on
> under the hood. It's not "click .. hmm nothing happens.. now what ?!" -
> that just doesn't happen (well.... :-) but you get the idea )
>
> 2) Oracle has had for many years, and still has, a GUI. It's called
> Database Control, or Grid Control.
>
>
>
>
>

--
http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
Received on Tue Nov 09 2010 - 07:57:10 CST

Original text of this message