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: Oracle vs SQl Server

Re: Oracle vs SQl Server

From: Sybrand Bakker <postbus_at_sybrandb.demon.nl>
Date: Tue, 26 Dec 2000 22:43:33 +0100
Message-ID: <92b3as$6f61v$2@ID-62141.news.dfncis.de>

That will definitely not be MS. They are now for many years trying to defeat Oracle and they still didn't succeed.
Also they uprooted several other products not because of the quality of their own products, they simply forced the customer to use it (as you probably are aware in the DOS era OEM were forced by MS to give away Windows with any new PC, at the expense of the OEM. As you are also probably aware they uprooted Wordperfect in the Netherlands by almost giving away Word) So one of the reasons MS will not defeat Oracle, is Oracle is simply too rich: they will survive such an attack.
The only option also for MS to defeat Oracle in the database field, is to provide a port of Sqlserver running under Unix: anyone who knows anything about the capabilities of NT and Win2K knows their scalability is too limited.

Regards,

Sybrand Bakker, Oracle DBA

"Robin R Handler" <rrhandle_at_my-deja.com> wrote in message news:92b1s2$vcv$1_at_nnrp1.deja.com...
> I think you are all missing something. I have no doubt MS's aim is to
> product a database as good as for better than Oracle. They uprooted
> WordPerfect, Lotus, Netscape, . . . Who do you think will have the
> database market in five years?
>
>
> In article <922712$24s$1_at_nnrp1.deja.com>,
> sybrandb_at_my-deja.com wrote:
> > In article <t494l2nsrgp32c_at_corp.supernews.com>,
> > "Michael A." <banana_boat_x_at_x_1stconnect.com> wrote:
> > > > Can anyone provide me some insight into the relative merits of
 Oracle
> > > > vs SQL 2000?
> > >
> > > I haven't used SQLServer all that much myself, but I know it's
 usually not
> > > mentioned in polite company in the firms for which I've done work in
 recent
> > > years. Mostly things having to do with table corruption and
 scalability.
> > >
> > > Personally, it's a Big Red Flag when I see a so-called enterprise-
 level DBMS
> > > including, and even relying upon, a utility for recovering corrupted
> > > database tables. Why is it even needed?
> > >
> > > Mike
> > >
> > >
> > If you mean Oracle by a 'so-called enterprise level DBMS' and you
 would
> > know anything about the transaction concept in relational databases,
> > you could have answered this question yourself. How do you expect to
> > recover from failure in Sqlserver if your last backup was several days
> > or more ago? You probably know the answer: you can't!
> > If that's ok with you stick to sqlserver or other Microsoft provided
> > toys like Access which should never been used for enterprise level
> > information systems.
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > --
> > Sybrand Bakker, Oracle DBA
> >
> > All standard disclaimers apply
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
 --
> >
> > Sent via Deja.com
> > http://www.deja.com/
> >
>
>
> Sent via Deja.com
> http://www.deja.com/
Received on Tue Dec 26 2000 - 15:43:33 CST

Original text of this message

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