Re: SQL server Vs Oracle - Technical/prices issues please

Chris Weiss wrote:

You raised some very good points Chris and I agree with you all the way right up to the part about Linux and OpenSource... :-)

>Open source is highly overrated.

Disgaree. Your next point do not back this statement up (as you yourself actually point out in saying that new releases are usually probhlematic).

> Look at the problems with the various
>distributions of Linux. See if you can make Red Hat 6.0 work as well as
>5.2. New releases of Linux are usually disasterous. Open or Closed
>source - new releases of an operating system are usually problematic.

Open Source or not has -nothing- to do with the Linux distributions. And the Prophets of Tux will be the first to tell the market NOT to uupgrade to a new version of Linux UNLESS it solves a serious bug for that Linux customer, or has a new feature that is critical for that Linux customer.

In the coprorate and business world, the Linux kernel used should (I would even venture to say MUST!) lag at least a version or two behind the latest Linux kernel. New kernels are pushing the envelope and is -not- intended (or marketed) as the latest and greatest robust version of Linux.

>with most software, quality is usually job 1.1. Open source does not
>overcome this quality issue.

Not true!!!!! OpenSource actually DOES address this issue the BEST! The source code is publicly available - this means that the code is subjected to strict coding standards. The code is read and used by 100's of diffirent programmers across the globe - each with a unique non-company-enforced perspective. This ensures clean code that gets to be bug free pretty quickly. Peer review - nothing like top quality programmer peer pressure on a global scale to ensure that the Linux developers produce exceptional code.

The latest code is used by power end-users (Linux "hackers") everyday globally on a wide range of platforms. What better Q&A team is there! Bugs are found and fixed in Linux at a phenomenal rate, compared to -any- other commercial operating system on the market.

Anyone looking to run the latest Linux release in a production evironment is, to put it bluntly, stupid.

>Most people in the business world want a complete solution that does not
have
>to be modified at the source code level.

Bull. The two is not related. A complete solution ito what? And what needs to be modified at source code level?

Compiling new kernels is nothing new in the UNIX world. We have done that on huge production machines running commercial UNIX. Problems with Oracle? - on more than one occassion we had to install patches (from fixes made at source code level) and relink Oracle executables.

New features - well, if you are not going to change the source code, where and how are they suppose to be implemented?

Linux has more features than most other commercial UNIX systems - and the majority of these (Apache, SAMBA, etc.) are free, high quality, OpenSource products. This is why IMO Linux is the ideal solution for the business world. Free off the shelve software that can be customised to meet the exact and unique requirements of the customer.

The majority of ISPs in my country run Linux as their dial-up servers, routers, mail servers, web servers etc. And my part of the glose is considered 3rd world. :-)

>When you can give open source software to a secretary without impacting her
>productivity, Open source will be worth looking at. Right now, Open source
>is a curiosity with very limited application outside of small servers or
>machines used by highly technical users.

This has nothing to do with OpenSource, but the user interface and the installation procedures. Granted, Linux is not easy to install. No UNIX system is. This aspect is being addressed by the Linux distributors. Wait for the Lizards which will make it easy to get the Pengiun up and running. :-)

User interface? Both GNOME and KDE are by far superior GUIs than Windows'95/98. And any secretary that is able to use the Win95 GIU will be able to use either GNOME or KDE.

OpenSource as a curiosity... what an odd statement... Look at what strategy Netscape selected to counter Microsoft's attack on the browser market - OpenSource. Please read The Cathedral and The Bazaar (http://www.tuxedo.org/~esr/writings/cathedral-bazaar/index.html) - this explains the concepts of OpenSource and why it works. This document also influenced and reaffirmed Netscape's decision to pursue the OpenSource strategy. Read the Halloween Memos from Microsoft in which they see OpenSource as the next biggest threat to their dominance in the software market.

regards,
Billy Received on Thu May 27 1999 - 05:00:19 CDT