Re: Oracle vs. Sybase

Nuno Souto <nsouto_at_acay.com.au> wrote:

>Todd Boss wrote:
>> >You gotta be joking...
>> >
>> >Nuno Souto
>> >nsouto_at_acay.com.au
>>
>> Gee, there's an intelligent addition to this discussion! Thanks for your
>> thoughtful and well-researched response!
>>
 

>Thanx, it's a pleasure. BTW, if one intends to jibe ORACLE in favour of
>perenial jerk favourite Sybase, why not eliminate
>comp.databases.oracle.* from the posts? Most of us ORACLE users don't
>give two hoots about the opinions or otherwise of Sybase junkies, so why
>bother? Stay on comp.databases.sybase and gaze at your navel, it seems
>to be a good activity while one waits for Sybase to catch up to ORACLE.
>
>> I've never heard good things about Oracle's support; my former organization
>> absolutely hated Oracle b/c of poor tech support dating back to the early
>> 1990s. Discussions i've had with oracle users today indicate that the
>> former abhorrent service structure is much improved today, but still lacking
>> when compared to Sybase's tech support infrastructure.
 

>Hmmmmm, arguably right or wrong, I dunno. Personally I think it has
>improved markedly. And ORACLE is finally trying to keep around people
>that know how to spell the product range, instead of the previous
>revolving door policy for support people. It would help if moonlighting
>wasn't such a widespread activity in the company, too... As for Sybase,
>I can't offer my comparison: I simply refuse to use it or SQL Server for
>that matter. I'd rather use Ingres, at least it uses SQL instead of that
>aberration Transact-SQL...

Time to get back on your meds. Use as many, or as few, or none of the SQL extensions Sybase provides. Nothing prevents you from using "standard" SQL in Sybase.

Take a deep breath, relax and get on with business.

>Cheers
>Nuno Souto
>nsouto_at_acay.com.au

--
Jim Lewis
University of California, Los Angeles
pojpl_at_ais.ucla.edu