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: Pro's & Con's on Oracle & SQL Svr?

Re: Pro's & Con's on Oracle & SQL Svr?

From: wayne <no_at_email.please.com>
Date: 01 Apr 2001 16:16:08 GMT
Message-ID: <9a7k88$ne7@freepress.concentric.net>

> > You're obviously not in upper management.
> I am a hired-gun ... a consultant for hire.

Hey, we have something in common!

> upper management. My point was not the money is not important. But rather
 that
> saving money on software and hardware (buying SQL Server and NT) at the
 expense
> of losing customers due to performance and down-time, or paying employees
 to
> come in on weekends and reboot servers, or worse yet having your database
 hacked
> and losing proprietary information is no savings at all. What counts is
 TOTAL
> cost of ownership over the life of the applications life cycle.

And good and valid arguments those are, but try convincing the marketing VP who just read a magazine article which "proves" something else is cheaper... Unfortunately those things do happen sometimes, so cost (or advertised low cost) sometimes does get in the way.

I am on the same side as you, and I believe in the right situation,. Oracle is by far the cheapest solution.

Also, the thing that gets brough up most often as something we should switch to is not SQL Server, but DB2 on the AS/400 surprisingly. The IBM people are really desperate to increase market share. I suppose they are as desperate as Oracle was when my biggets client switched to Oracle (they bought licenses at about 40% of advertised price!).

> insignificant in a major development project. Of course SQL Server costs
 less
> than Oracle. Of course NT/Win2000 costs less than Solaris. Of course
Oracle on

Did not know SQL server cost less, actually! I do not know about NT, though... Does Solaris charge by the user? I thought they did not. If they do not, there has to be a user count after which Solaris is actually cheaper.

> Solaris will be up 7x24x365. Of course NT/Win2000 won't be.

Really? How about clustered Win2K? Received on Sun Apr 01 2001 - 11:16:08 CDT

Original text of this message

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