Re: Tech Comparison of Oracle versus MS Sqlserver 2000

I was at one of those"We must use MS products; they will solve all our problems" companies. I left. After burning through 40 million dollars they went from being number 1 in their niche market to not having a product that anyone would buy. The company basically closed. They focused on the BSO (bright shiny object) and not the business needs. They sold going to MS products to make development time and expenses less. I had been deep in the technical side and I went repeatedly to all levels of management and told them that the problem was not knowing what to build, not using the same people over again so that we could learn from our mistakes. (These were customized pension admin systems for defined benefit plans.) Each on started with a brand new team of developers; sure there was a learning curve for the toolset, but there was a huge learning curve to the problem. Since the new developer wasn't familiar with what had been done before, and how to get specs from the customer; it was an expensive process.

But hey, replacing the toolset (with any vendor's tool set) had to be the right answer, cause upper management said so. Gosh they has an MS consultant come it to give an unbiased view of what they should do. Surprise, Surprise, they recommended buying MS tools, signing up for a very expensive "exclusive" support contract. (wasn't worth much, but it cost a lot)

Anyway I agree with Billy.

Jim

--
Replace part of the email address: kennedy-down_with_spammers_at_attbi.com
with family.  Remove the negative part, keep the minus sign.  You can figure
it out.
"Billy Verreynne" <vslabs_at_onwe.co.za> wrote in message
news:b08vja$r54$1_at_ctb-nnrp2.saix.net...


> Norman Dunbar wrote:

>

> > I do enjoy your occasional rants :o)

>

> I was born to rant. ;-)

>

> > The problem in business nowadays is that purchasing decisions are based

> > on some bean counter deciding yes or no to any requests.

>

> Very true. I've witnessed how bean counters turned our support & services

> division from the _best_ in the country (not we that claimed it, but that

> we was voted by the business comunity as the best), to one that did not

> even appear among the top 20 support companies year following. I resigned

> and walked out.

>

> A year later, the _entire_ support division walked (with one or two guys

in


> sales) and created their own company.

>

> > Alternatively, the business chooses Microsoft because that's what

> > everyone else is doing.

>

> Again, very true. As Branson said, you sell the brand and not the product.

>

> > Sad but true, the benefits of one over the other are of no interest to

> > bean counters, it's the bottom line that counts.

>

> Norman, that would not be a problem if they knew how to determine the

bottom


> line.

>

> There's a book called 'In Search of Exellence' that should be made

> compulsory reading for bean counters. It shows how 'beanie logic' does not

> make sense. And putting a single box of supplies in a big truck and

driving


> that 50 miles to a customer in the dead of night to resupply him, paying

> the driver overtime, makes bottom line sense.

>

> > 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 .....

>

> There must be a balance between technical requirements and business

> requirements. Which is why I ranted about infrastructure and IT/IS skills.

>

> Some years ago I did this Oracle warehouse contract. There were about 10

> developers. Some of them around for many years. All excellent people with

> good and solid skills - it was a joy working with them.

>

> Then decisions were made about new technology. Architecture changes. The

IT


> director did not even bother to listen to his staff. WTF do they know

> anyway. He listened to the reps and sales people. And decided.

>

> 2 years later (after 3 contract extensions) I was the longest serving

> developer in the company, with the exception of one lady. The rest of the

> developers all walked.

>

> Permanent staff turn over was incredible. One Oracle DBA lasted not even 2

> months before she walked. The newly employed IT manager walked after a

> year.

>

> Some developers put a sign in the passage. It read 'Whippings will

continue


> until morale improves'.

>

> Management never accepted that there was anything wrong. And attempted to

> fix the problem with outsourcing - which just furthered the divides there

> were in IT.

>

> So yeah, I'm not saying that management only, or bean counters only, must

> make the decision when it comes to technology and architecture. Your

> techies must be part of the decision.

>

> However, I have yet to see that happen personally. And I have been around.

> :-)

>

> It is either an idiotic management decision, or a

kewl-big-penis-technology


> decision by a few senior techies.

>

> ... and then suckers like us have to make it work.

>

> --

> Billy