Re: Does anyone have serious databases on NT?

Most of the replies have, I believe correctly. focused on the RDBMS platform...with Oracle and its SqlNet ( Net80 now)[ or the Web enabled parts] the RDBMS platform can be selected based on the 'best practices' for your data needs and need not be (and probably should not be ) based on the user's client PC...especially for very large or many-simultaneous-user systems...

Just an additional 2c

John Greco

saustin_deja_at_my-deja.com wrote:

><SNIP>
>> I *will* say that I make a significant part of my income assisting
>them
>> during difficult crash recoveries, or recovery of unfortunate actions
>> that some employee has performed because "NT is easier to use" than
>Unix.
>>
>> The employment is good, but I would rather build new things than
>constantly
>> clean up messes caused by shoddy, bug-laden software from Redmond.
>>
>
>So far I haven't seen anyone suggest that they use a mixed-platform,
>client/server solution. Is ODBC a pipe dream?
>
>My take might be to host the big database on a dedicated Unix platform,
>then give the users (clients or distributed, smaller databases) their
>choice of a Unix or NT front end, whichever they're more productive
>with (and less likely to perform "unfortunate actions"!).
>
>A most hideous management sin is to shove the wrong platform down the
>user's throats. Making Windows-literate users have to learn Unix is
>asking for trouble. (On the other hand, the back office types ought to
>be used to having stuff forced down their throats, and have learned to
>make do...)
>
>
>Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
>Share what you know. Learn what you don't.

  -----------== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ==----------    http://www.newsfeeds.com The Largest Usenet Servers in the World! ------== Over 73,000 Newsgroups - Including Dedicated Binaries Servers ==----- Received on Tue Aug 03 1999 - 12:54:08 CDT