Oracle FAQ Your Portal to the Oracle Knowledge Grid
HOME | ASK QUESTION | ADD INFO | SEARCH | E-MAIL US
 

Home -> Community -> Usenet -> c.d.o.server -> Re: IBM Debunks Oracle's MultiVersion Read Consistency ?

Re: IBM Debunks Oracle's MultiVersion Read Consistency ?

From: Nuno Souto <wizofoz2k_at_yahoo.com.au>
Date: 6 May 2003 21:59:18 -0700
Message-ID: <73e20c6c.0305062059.d0f18dd@posting.google.com>


jrickard_at_unisystems.biz (Jeremy Rickard) wrote in message news:<d36116ef.0305061627.131a74f3_at_posting.google.com>...

>
> Well, more like a half-truth. There are 4 remaining code bases: (1)

You should perheaps explain that to the IBM people who here vehemently defended that there was ONLY ONE codebase for DB2. In a violent altercation about 2 years ago. Where I maintained against them all that there was indeed more than one codebase. Only to be insulted by them, including the idiots who unconditionally supported the IBMers.

> anyone running Oracle on a mainframe); (4) DB2 UDB for Multiplatforms,
> which runs with a shared code base on Windows, Linux, multiple UNIX
> flavours and even Linux for OS/390.

IOW, the same code for the same OS is portable to that OS. Brilliant piece of semantics...

> into Oracle market share. The problem for Oracle is that IBM has a
> genuinely comparable product, selling at a fraction of the price,
> using a common code base across all the platforms that Oracle runs on.

I think the "inroads" are in IBM marketing imaginations... Buying off Informix accounts and adding them to total accounts as if they were DB2 is not exactly precise statistics, no?

> Wall Street. Better it seems to keep the high prices and attempt to
> slow loss of market share by smearing the opposition.

Oh, is that ANY different from what IBM does?

>
> Regards database security, yes all versions of DB2 use the operating
> system to authenticate users, and I see nothing really wrong with that

Except that EVERY OS it runs on has a different security mechanism, which basically ensures non-portability of anything relying on that "database security".

> - other than the fact that it then lets Oracle tout the obvious
> consequent absence of any "security awards" as though there is some
> sort of problem.

The problem is indeed the bullshit artistry of IBM marketing.

PS: don't bother commenting on my "future career", OK? Cheers
Nuno Souto
wizofoz2k_at_yahoo.com.au.nospam Received on Tue May 06 2003 - 23:59:18 CDT

Original text of this message

HOME | ASK QUESTION | ADD INFO | SEARCH | E-MAIL US