Re: OT: Job Posts

From: Mladen Gogala <gogala.mladen_at_gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 8 Jan 2017 13:57:29 -0500
Message-ID: <53305bca-99e6-dc0d-f3e0-5c3d7c7093a0_at_gmail.com>


On 01/08/2017 10:27 AM, Hans Forbrich wrote:
> If that were true, then a many applications I have seen would use the
> features already paid-for when the company bought their Oracle
> licenses rather than have developers and/or purchasing duplicate those
> features at an extra cost.
>
> I'd say it's more like "the infrstructure the [developer | architect |
> decision make] finds most comfortable".
>
> /Hans
>
> On 2017-01-07 10:10 PM, Mladen Gogala wrote:
>> there is only "the most cost effective thing for my problem".
> --
> http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
>
>

Hans, financial decisions, and buying into the Oracle religion certainly is such a decision, are usually not made by the technical personnel, not even by the CIO alone. Furthermore, there is definitely a big move toward the canned applications, for everything that is not customer facing. Saleforce, NetSuite and ADP show that quite clearly. In that case, the customer is buying the app and doesn't care about the underlying database. Do you think that the customers using NetSuite time sheets are particularly concerned about the underlying database? Or the companies using ADP to cut paychecks? And yes, I know that NetSuite is a part of Oracle Corp.

Application [developers|architects] are becoming rare breeds. Companies usually outsource everything that they can, because it makes sense financially. The only applications that are usually not outsourced are the customer facing applications. Everything else like payroll, accounting, HR and electronic patient care is usually outsourced to the select few application vendors. That cuts down both the number and the influence of the technical personnel, as well as the number of jobs. Having said that, I am very happy that my son has not chosen IT as his career path.

Now back to the original topic of the Oracle jobs. The simple fact, which nobody can deny, is that Oracle is simply too expensive. The other databases have caught up and are offering similar features at significantly lower price. Why would I pay for the right to create a range partitioned table, or another database, when SAP Hana, SQL Server and DB2 are offering that for free? As a consultant, I am now devoting most of my time learning SAP Hana. It pays better than SQL Server and the demand is growing. Also, there aren't many people who know it.

-- 
Mladen Gogala
Oracle DBA
Tel: (347) 321-1217

--
http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
Received on Sun Jan 08 2017 - 19:57:29 CET

Original text of this message