Niall,
Good points but, remember these are management types who are not listening
to the DBA (so clearly lower IQ) so they are looking at trying to find an
excuse to go all Microsoft. I do however see this argument a lot on new
systems even when Oracle is up and running and there have been good
experience.
Jim
"Niall Litchfield" <n-litchfield_at_audit-commission.gov.uk> wrote in message
news:3cda5626$0$8508$ed9e5944_at_reading.news.pipex.net...
> Now let me see I reckon that that price will include some increased
> downtime, 6months to a years worth of reduced dba productivity, 3 months
or
> so of recoding of apps (and maybe replacing the pissed off dba who left
for
> a company that values their technical input).
>
> in the UK a 4 processor license for std edition is available online for
£46k
> including support and update subscription. Even if the purchase price of
sql
> were zero the costs of conversion would likely exceed that 46k. Now I'm
not
> saying that one should ignore purchase price but if you insist on costing
> comparative systems at least make sure that you include all the costs.
>
>
> --
> Niall Litchfield
> Oracle DBA
> Audit Commission UK
> *****************************************
> Please include version and platform
> and SQL where applicable
> It makes life easier and increases the
> likelihood of a good answer
>
> ******************************************
> "Joe Sath" <dbadba62_at_hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:b6mC8.4945$eb.3644_at_nwrddc02.gnilink.net...
> > Our company is seriously thinking about switching to sql server even
> though
> > I strongly oppose it. Very unfortunately, most of the time, DBAs do not
> > have the final say in this matter, price does.
> >
> > Oracle needs to make their price more competitive, or they will lose
more
> > market share for sure.
> >
> >
>
>
Received on Thu May 09 2002 - 09:19:01 CDT
