Re: Why doesn't Oracle care about Linux as IBM does?

"Dino Hsu" <dino1_at_ms1.hinet.net> wrote in message news:2v3ant40th3s908so2458bg6gvb4lh2nib_at_4ax.com...
> Dear all,
>
> I am confused when I see this line everywhere:
> "We discovered that nothing runs on Linux bettern than DB2"
> Oracle doesn't seem to care too much about Linux, it's 9i only
> supports one SuSe distribution. (if it cares, Red Hat and other major
> distributions should be supported as well).

It's a daft argument, put like that. Oracle 9i for NT isn't even out yet... does that mean Oracle doesn't care about NT? No, it means that products have release plans and cycles... and just as NT is rather down on that list, so is any other Linux distribution than SuSe.

They have to start somewhere, for heaven's sake!

If 9i isn't running on most major distributions of Linux by mid 2002 at the latest, I'd be very much surprised.

HJR
>
> Furthermore, many people here (senior DBA's) don't think of Linux as a
> 'Unix'. To them, Unix means IBM AIX, Sun Solaris, HP-UX, etc.. This
> may be due to Linux's growing up from PC-based machines, although
> later ported to many different H/W platforms.
>
> On the other hand, IBM is so supportive about Linux, it even uses
> Linux in the world's biggest supercomputer:
> http://www.informationweek.com/story/IWK20010809S0018
> Linux and AIX are both Unix's, IBM may have to choose one of them as a
> result. Is it because IBM likes open source software so much that it
> cannot but take Linux back home?
>
> Can someone comment on this? Thanks in advance.
>
> Dino
>
Received on Sat Aug 11 2001 - 20:03:07 CDT