Re: Oracle for Linux

Kenneth_Lee_at_ml.com (Kenneth Lee) writes:

>But if you were running a business why wouldn't you go with a more tried
>and tested Sun or HP? Of course, this may be different if the scale of the
>business is small, but for most corporate business needs, an Intel-based
>server just doesn't pack the necessary punch.

Throwing alot of money at a problem is not always a good solution. What is tried and tested to you is inefficient, slow, buggy, inferior and unacceptable to me. You, it seems, like Windows users have learned to live with the limitations and problems with solutions offered by HP and Sun. I on the other hand have tried them all, HP and Sun and Linux. Linux is a superior product from my point of view.

You see if I ask a Windows 95 user, who has not, used any of the Unices, he would tell me that he considers Windows 95 a tried and tested product. The problem is that he hasn't seen anything better. And that is the problem that most of the users in this newsgroup seem to suffering from.

Give me a regular user account on your HPUX or Solaris machine and I will bring down your tried and tested system in about 60 minutes from right here in my bedroom. You cant do that to my Linux machine. I have tried it.

Atif Khan
aak2_at_ra.msstate.edu Received on Tue Mar 18 1997 - 00:00:00 CST