Re: Tech Comparison of Oracle versus MS Sqlserver 2000

What exactly was your goal in posting this? I'm not saying you shouldn't have--but are you looking for responses, corrections, or what?

In general, your points are correct ones, but they're not made in a very convincing fashion, and in some cases sound downright unprofessional. I'm afraid you might betray your cause if you were to present this to an intelligent and experienced decision maker.

As a general rule, let SQL Server win where it wins...the _provided_ GUI tools are better, the installation is simpler, the DBAs need less training because there's less for them to DBA, etc.

Give scenarios and cases where Oracle's advantages start to really matter. For instance, in your first point...cross-platform. Very important, yes. But you don't mention why. Is it because UNIX and mainframes have much better remote administration capabilities? Because their platforms tend to be more secure and predictable? Because you can buy big iron that scales beyond four chips, and that's sometimes the best upgrade route? The list goes on.

I'm certainly not going to re-write it for you, but the one rule is: consider your audience. What do they care about? What do they want? Then tell them why Oracle gives them what they want.

A _great_ first start would be to trash the last paragraph...it's complete crap, as is the one about the _price of Oracle Magazine_! Yikes. I read that and I disregard the whole document. Really. Like my multi-million dollar database investment is going to be one iota determined by the price of the trade rag.

Jer Received on Thu Jan 16 2003 - 02:01:55 CST