Re: SQL server Vs Oracle

Arvin Meyer wrote:

> Frédéric BROUARD wrote in message <3731696B.273E4D36_at_simog.com>...
>
> >1 - Oracle runs on more plateforms than Microsoft SQL Server
>
> Who cares? NT is the platform of choice for the lowest operating cost.
>
>

I must be stupid but I have heard that Linux cost was zéro !

> >2 - SQL statement in Oracle are closest to standard than SQL server
>
> Only partially true, neither conforms to the SQL-92 standard.
>
> >3 - Oracle had a greater part of the SQL C/S market than SQL Server,
> so
> >you will find more specialist on Oracle designing.
>
> I doubt that is true everywhere, only is some major markets.
>
> >4 - Larry Ellison had make a 1 million $ bet to anyone can
> demonstrate
> >that Oracle is under 100 time faster than SQL server
> >And the bet has not been paid yet !!!

> And lost that bet, he quietly withdrew it from the website when he saw
> he
> was going to lose. SQL-Server beat Oracle by 157% in one of the tests,
> and
> lost by 28% the other.
>

Sure ??? read the previous answer !!!

> >5 - the strategy of Microsoft is to make you a prisonner of thoses
> >systems, so that, when your data will be on a MS system, it will ever
>
> >coste a lot : to maintain version or to migrate... MS is a super,
> >maximized, and optimized making money machine and that's all !
> >
> >Frederic BROUARD - databases conceptor in FRANCE
> >DELPHI - Paradox - SQL C/S expert
>
> Judging by that answer, and your sig, we all can see the "winning"
> software
> packages you support.
> -----
> Arvin Meyer
> onsite_at_esinet.net

When I have choice I prefer, for many other reason 02 SGBDOO !!! (but that's french leader product in object Oriented Databases)... Received on Thu May 06 1999 - 12:50:43 CDT