Re: MS SQL Server vs Oracle vs DB2 (&Sybase too)

The original comment regarding per seat licensing for *Intranet* connections is valid. The *Internet* Connector is valid only for e-commerce type sites and does not cover internal sites.

Were this not true, then everyone would simply cut their costs by moving to a 3-tier architecture and SQL Servers revenue would drop dramatically.

--
Michael D. Long
http://extremedna.homestead.com


"Chad" <cmcleaton_at_yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:8gmamf$6l8$1_at_gaddy.interpath.net...


> I have to disagree with the licensing comment.  If you are running

> a web server you can buy an Internet Connector license for SQL Server

> and this allows for unlimited connections to the database server.

>

> On another note, I feel like SQL, Oracle, and DB2 all have their place.

 The


> time

> it takes to develop good application and db design is more important than

> which

> DBMS you use.  SQL is definitely the best platform in the Intel arena...

> you'd be

> crazy not to seriously consider SQL Server for any application (even if

 you


> want

> your web server to run on a Unix box).  SQL 7.0 is a real database.. 6.5

> really

> wasn't that great, but SQL 7.0 (and especially the upcoming SQL 2000) will

> do

> anything you need it to do.  You get replication, OLAP services and a

 number


> of

> other freebies that cost big bucks if you buy Oracle (not sure about

 DB2 --


> I don't

> know what they include).  It is no brainer..

>

> "Davide Bianchi" <davide_bianchi_at_usa.net> wrote in message

> news:8glsk6$1imtl$1_at_fu-berlin.de...

> > Pay attention also to the client licence fee. I remember that MS want a

> > licence for each CLIENT accessing the database in an Intranet

 environment,


> > this means that if you have 1000 users, you need 1000 licences (!!!!).

>

>

>