Re: Does anyone have serious databases on NT?

In article <37a18698.4811097_at_news.supernews.com>,   mkx_at_excite.com wrote:
> After reading many, many articles, press releases, and marketing
> propaganda about the fight for the dominant position on NT, I seem to
> see something missing: Any direct evidence that anyone is using the
> major databases on NT (other than Microsoft's SQL Server). Most
> serious (non-mainframe) projects always seem to go on Unix, AS/400,
> etc. I understand why this is - many organizations are hesitant to go
> "Enterprise on NT".
>
> All of the statistics I have seen wrap the UNIX/NT market segments
> together. Thus the "leader in license revenue" may have gotten there
> on UNIX, without selling that much on NT.
>
> I simply am interested in seeing where the major work is being done on
> NT specifically, and if it is done elsewhere than MS SQL.
>
>

 Fascinating thread.

Actually, I asked a question about Oracle VLDB on NT several weeks ago, but only got two replies. I'm glad this came up, because I gained much valuable information.

  I would say the _best_ of both worlds:

  Oracle database on UNIX, applications on Citrix WinFrame (we were   able to make PeopleSoft Version 6 run logical 3-tier, even though   PeopleSoft says version 6 can't).

  It's not NT _or_ UNIX; it's NT _and_ UNIX; NT over time will only   become more UNIX-like (oh, Microsoft will never admit it), but the   only way NT will be able to play with the big boys is to incorporate   many of the features of more scalable, reliable OS's like UNIX,   Linux, MVS and OS/2.

Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Share what you know. Learn what you don't. Received on Fri Aug 06 1999 - 00:22:08 CDT