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

From: Norris <jcheong_at_cooper.com.hk>
Date: 2000/06/01
Message-ID: <8h5qim$13kh$1@adenine.netfront.net>#1/1

If you don't like the pricing policy, you can stop using Oracle.

In comp.databases.sybase Chad <cmcleaton_at_yahoo.com> wrote:

> 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
>>
>>

-- 
http://www.cooper.com.hk

Received on Thu Jun 01 2000 - 00:00:00 CDT