In article <36ED13D8.9C512F14_at_Feist.Com>,
KeyStrk_at_Feist.Com wrote:
>
>
> Tuomas Hosia wrote:
> >
> > "KeyStroke (Jack L. Swayze Sr.)" <KeyStrk_at_Feist.Com> wrote :
> >
> > Hmm ... I'd say you have Microsoft-only view. PC's are not going to be
> > tha main platform for databases and there are no MS-products to real
> > computers. PC:s have lot of CPU-power but IO is horrifying, by desing.
>
> Guess what? the same thing was said about Unix machines by the Mainframe
> bigots. and guess what, it was true, and guess what, it didn't matter because
> the Unix machines were cheaper. "those who live by the sword...."
>
> > Yes. And where do you find a company who can afford to sue Microsoft?
> > Everybody who thinks otherwise can't calculate.
>
> Suing, and coming out better for it, for breech of contract is a lot different
> than suing for antitrust laws. Chances are that MS would come to an agreement
> on a breech of contract a lot sooner than coming to agreement on something as
> far-reaching as an antitrust case.
>
> > Which are the advantages then?
> >
> > Easier to learn, maybe. If there are others, I'd like to hear them.
>
> Integration, integration, integration. What most of us, who use computer
> software, mostly find valuable they provide. MS is the best at making
> disparate software working together
>
> > I already know that SQL-Server corrupts data (has 'dirty' reads and
> > it's on by default) and has same quality standards as other Microsoft
> > products, which are almost useless.
>
> Oh? Provide documentation. I would like to see your direct evidence of your
> _own_ experiments.
>
Now we've seen it all. Mr . Keystroke told us that just wanted to warn us
against the incoming RDBMS climate change and advised us to start buying
SQL Server7 books (which aren't of the quality I was used to in the unix &
oracle world) and now he's openly advertising MS with the sentences like
"MS is the best at making disparate software working together". After the
first "chain letter" I'm not inclined to take this individual seriously
and his stubborn insisting on advertising MS on this group is just proving
me right. Microsoft has *** NEVER *** been known for good quality software,
just for aggressive and obnoxious marketing campaigns, just like one
you are conducting right now. More then once, they've forced better quality
products out of the market by using predatory pricing and bundling. They
did it with QuatroPro, WordPerfect, Netscape and many smaller ones. Success
against Oracle Corp. is highly unlikely, because RDBMS is an enterprise beast
where portability and performance count and not a desktop piece of software
where it doesn't matter whether it runs on Unix or not.
I'm deeply aggravated by your manner (coming to Oracle newsgroup and
insisting on switching to SQL Server7) and that is why my reply will be
in the same tone of voice:
There is an illustration of probability theory saying that a chimp, if
given a typewriter and enough time (several trillion years) would, eventually,
write "Hamlet". It would take a bit longer for a Microsoft propagandist to
make a compelling argument for switching form Oracle to SQL7.
Mladen Gogala
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
Received on Mon Mar 15 1999 - 11:23:56 CST
