Hmm... Isn't it because DB2 is more advanced and feature-rich than Oracle? ;)
Or maybe because REXX is far more complex (because it's a general-purpose
language after all) than PL/SQL?
Another suggestion is that IBM tends to keep things as much 'obfuscated through
too detailed description finally leading off target' as they can. ;) OS/2 was not at
all bad OS and GUI, but they lost their race against Windows - wasn't this partly
due to too detailed documentation of the API? I'm sure there also were marketing
reasons, but finally...? Maybe IBM just tried to see if the KISS principle works?
--
Vladimir Zakharychev (bob@dpsp-yes.com) http://www.dpsp-yes.com
Dynamic PSP(tm) - the first true RAD toolkit for Oracle-based internet applications.
All opinions are mine and do not necessarily go in line with those of my employer.
"Igor Laletin" <ilaletin_at_usa.net> wrote in message
news:f9226414.0112260057.4fa51e3d_at_posting.google.com...
> uchakra_at_aol.com (Uchakra) wrote in message news:<20011226000743.00807.00000883_at_mb-cs.aol.com>...
> > So finally do we all accept the
> > approximate ratio of Oracles doc size
> > and DB2 DOC size as a cart of books is
> > to a warehouse full of books.
>
> Nop. Just as to 'a couple of pallets in a warehouse' :)
Received on Wed Dec 26 2001 - 10:52:33 CST
