Re: Oracle Certification

From: Daniel Morgan <damorgan_at_x.washington.edu>
Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2004 11:24:43 -0800
Message-ID: <1080156259.576242@yasure>

Hans Forbrich wrote:

> So I conclude your issue is not certification, but OCP.

Absolutely. Exactly. On the money. I am totally in favor of certification. But certification that has meaning and value. Not certification for the purpose of being a source of revenue.

>>Or at least as much. Amazingly Oracle has actually sent its license dogs
>>into major universities to argue licenses when the issue was not what
>>the school was using for its own administration but rather for teaching
>>students. Talk about an act of short-sightedness. One schools response
>>... they stopped teaching the subject. <sarcasm> Well that certainly
>>helped Oracle's bottom-line </sarcasm>.

>
> I know. <SIGH!!!!!> I walk into the bookstore at the local, and reasonably
> reputable, tech college (NAIT) and see nothing but SQL Server stuff, and
> one excessivly obsolete early-Oracle7 reference. Reason is simple - they'd
> have to pay big-time for Oracle software. <ARGHHHH!>
>

>>>Isn't there an "Oracle myths" site somewhere?  Or is that a myth?
>>
>>I know Tom Kyte has put together a presentation, I may have had a copy
>>at one time, on the subject of Oracle myths. It would be a good place to
>>start.

>
> Excellent idea.
>

>>>In Alberta's case, the problem is simply that the competition (MS) is
>>>perceived as much more attractive than Oracle strictly on a pricing
>>>basis.
>>
>>Which is amazing as the prices are effectively identical.

>
> Not really. MS uses the 'our EE is $x, their EE is a much bigger $y'
> argument. And customer management buys it. I've seen it in action!

In that respect you are correct. But in an honest comparison which is MS Enterprise against Oracle SE or SE1 the prices are effectively identical.

Were I Oracle I would have named what is SE1 to SE, renamed SE to EE, and come up with a new name for EE so that Microsoft comparisons of their EE to Oracle's EE would make sense.

>>>And - are there any possible problems, such as legal implications to
>>>referencing specific books, etc.
>>
>>Last time I checked ... free speech was free speech. If anyone wants
>>to sue me for pointing out that you can use ORDER BY in a view ...
>>let them and their attack dogs try it.
>>

> My objective is to help people find these things quickly and understand why
> they are a problem. Let's try this on for size:
>
> ------------
> a) Subject contains "MYTH:"
>
> b) Contents contain the following if possible:
>
> Synopsis or brief description:
> Submitted by (optional):
> Effective or first noticed in Oracle version:
> Wrong in OCP exams? (Y/N):
> Incorrect in the following documents:
> Proof (pref. SQL example):
> ------------
>
> (By keeping these as separate threads but using an easily identifiable
> subject, we can encourage followup discussions.)
>
> Comments?
> /Hans

Send them to me and I'll put together a Myths page at psoug.org. I've already posted something about it on the psoug.org web site.

-- 
Daniel Morgan
http://www.outreach.washington.edu/ext/certificates/oad/oad_crs.asp
http://www.outreach.washington.edu/ext/certificates/aoa/aoa_crs.asp
damorgan_at_x.washington.edu
(replace 'x' with a 'u' to reply)

Received on Wed Mar 24 2004 - 13:24:43 CST