Oracle FAQ Your Portal to the Oracle Knowledge Grid
HOME | ASK QUESTION | ADD INFO | SEARCH | E-MAIL US
 

Home -> Community -> Usenet -> c.d.o.misc -> Re: Microsoft destroys TPC-C records!

Re: Microsoft destroys TPC-C records!

From: Norris <jcheong_at_cooper.com.hk>
Date: 14 Mar 2000 03:34:28 GMT
Message-ID: <8akc04$2rd8$1@adenine.netfront.net>


Every database vendor claims its new version product can lower the total cost of ownership. Which one should I believe?

In comp.databases.sybase DNP <High.Flight_at_btinternet.com> wrote: > As a famous author in the U.K. said :-

> "There's lies, damned lies and statistics."

> TPC is all well and good, but does it take into account systematic
> shortcomings of the producst which happen periodically (but certainly
> probably not during an intensive test).

> Another thing TPC calcs don't take into account is
> vendor-technology-churn risk. I.e. is Microsoft still going to be
> actually selling and supporting the products and OS versions used here
> in 3 yrs time?  If there's any doubt, then the cost to upgrade has to be
> taken as a total cost of ownership hence total cost of transaction > performance.

> I don't need statistics to guide me towards good products, I prefer > first hand recommendations.

> David P.

> --------------------------------------------------------


> Norris wrote:

>>
>> To see MS innovations and how SQL Server 2000 achieved world record TPC-C performance and price/performance results:
>>
>> http://msdn.microsoft.com/isapi/msdnlib.idc?theURL=/library/backgrnd/html/megasrvs.htm
>>
>> In comp.databases.sybase Nuno Souto <nsouto_at_nsw.bigpond.net.au.nospam> wrote:
>> > On 9 Mar 2000 02:00:23 GMT, Norris <jcheong_at_cooper.com.hk> wrote:
>>
>> >>>> > Everything any culture on the planet has today is
>> >>>> > ALL built on somebody else's work.
>>
>> > Don't have the slightest problem with this. That's what makes progress
>> > work.
>>
>> > PROVIDED we are talking about "building on".
>>
>> > Badge-engineering and term re-invention like MS does all the time
>> > is what I'm against. This is not the same as "building on somebody
>> > else's work". This is crap, desguised as marketing.
>>
>> > Many years ago, it was the norm to use tar and feathers for what MS
>> > marketing does. Nowadays, the stock market hikes up the share price
>> > when MS re-names something instead of "building on something"...
>>
>> > Cheers
>> > Nuno Souto
>> > nsouto_at_nsw.bigpond.net.au.nospam
>> > http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/the_Den/index.html
>>
>> --
>> http://www.cooper.com.hk
>> http://sybooks.sybase.com/onlinebooks

--
http://www.cooper.com.hk
http://sybooks.sybase.com/onlinebooks Received on Mon Mar 13 2000 - 21:34:28 CST

Original text of this message

HOME | ASK QUESTION | ADD INFO | SEARCH | E-MAIL US