Tech Comparison of Oracle versus MS Sqlserver 2000

From: Norman Dunbar <Norman.Dunbar_at_lfs.co.uk>
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 12:15:09 -0000
Message-ID: <E2F6A70FE45242488C865C3BC1245DA7032E11B2@lnewton.leeds.lfs.co.uk>

Hi Billy,

I do enjoy your occasional rants :o)

<begin myrant>
The problem in business nowadays is that purchasing decisions are based on some bean counter deciding yes or no to any requests. Alternatively, the business chooses Microsoft because that's what everyone else is doing.

Sad but true, the benefits of one over the other are of no interest to bean counters, it's the bottom line that counts. And who tells them what the TCO is - the marketing bods, so whoever gets in with the lowest TCO, usually gets the contract. And then, when we technical bods have to sort out the mess/problems/inconsistancies/etc the TCO is never anywhere near what was quoted, and the company has to put up with it anyway because it would be too costly to change now .....
<end myrant>

Cheers,
Norm.

Norman Dunbar
Database/Unix administrator
Lynx Financial Systems Ltd.
mailto:Norman.Dunbar_at_LFS.co.uk

Tel: 0113 289 6265
Fax: 0113 289 3146
URL: http://www.Lynx-FS.com
-------------------------------------

-----Original Message-----
From: Billy Verreynne [mailto:vslabs_at_onwe.co.za] Posted At: Friday, January 17, 2003 12:44 PM Posted To: server
Conversation: Tech Comparison of Oracle versus MS Sqlserver 2000 Subject: Re: Tech Comparison of Oracle versus MS Sqlserver 2000

Karen Abgarian wrote:

> Ok, is there anything GOOD about the Sql Server?
>
> The article is maybe all truth but looks biased.

Correct.

Feature to feature comparison is WORTHLESS. Period.

If it is not, then I will put it to that person that he is in search of a
penis enlargement by wanting to have the kewlest rocking database.

<SNIP> Received on Fri Jan 17 2003 - 06:15:09 CST