Oracle FAQ Your Portal to the Oracle Knowledge Grid
HOME | ASK QUESTION | ADD INFO | SEARCH | E-MAIL US
 

Home -> Community -> Usenet -> c.d.o.server -> Re: MS SQL Server vs Oracle vs DB2 (&Sybase too)

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

From: Chad <cmcleaton_at_yahoo.com>
Date: 2000/06/01
Message-ID: <8h5kla$oip$1@gaddy.interpath.net>#1/1

Why does Oracle charge by the CPU/Mhz on the Intel platform? When are they going to
start pricing their products correctly like Microsoft does? I don't see the point. Please
explain why they do this!!

Also when you get SQL Server you get EVERYTHING. Why does Oracle charge extra
for their options?

"Niall Litchfield" <n-litchfield_at_audit-commission.gov.uk> wrote in message news:8h2su9$5bi$1_at_soap.pipex.net...
> Indeed
>
> For an NT server running twin 600Mhz processors. Hardly state of the art
>
> 600 * 2 * 15 = $18,000 for standard edition
>
> for enterprise edition
>
> 600 * 2 * 100 = $120,000.
>
> less a volume discount of 30k =$90,000
>
> don't want to be buying those quad 800's just yet.
>
> --
> Niall Litchfield
> Oracle DBA
> Audit Commission UK
> "Miguel Cruz" <mnc_at_admin.u.nu> wrote in message
> news:xe3Z4.14843$Ym2.339330_at_typhoon2.ba-dsg.net...
> > Adam Ruth <aruth_at_intercation.com> wrote:
> > > Interesting, but I bet it's still very expensive. It looks like a
 good
> > > move though.
> >
> > Not cheap, 'tis true. I seem to recall $15 per MHz per CPU for 8i
 standard
> > edition. Then everything else, from support to the actual CDs, is a
 separate
> > charge.
> >
> > miguel
>
>
Received on Thu Jun 01 2000 - 00:00:00 CDT

Original text of this message

HOME | ASK QUESTION | ADD INFO | SEARCH | E-MAIL US