Re: What else against 9.0.1

Peter van Rijn wrote:

> Dear colleagues!
>
> Last week one of our software vendors has been trying to get the middleware
> product Verastream (WRQ) working with our 9.2.0 (test) database. So far they
> haven't been very successful and they (i.e. WRQ) suddenly decided to change
> their strategy: they don't support 9.2.0 anymore!!
>
> In stead we should use 8.1.7 64-bit (we currently use 81.7. 32-bit) or
> 9.0.1. I don't like the idea at all, both 8.1.7 and 9.0.1 are desupported at
> the end of this year, but some vendors don't think just using a desupported
> Oracle version is a big deal.
>
> So far my arguments against 9.0.1 are the approaching desupport date and
> better reliability of final releases like 9.2.0.
> What I'm looking for are additional arguments against using 9.0.1. Anyone
> any idea?
>
> regards,
> Peter
>
> PS And no, choosing another software vendor is not really a possibility. I
> am not in the position to ban applications just because the Oracle support
> is poor.

Throw the vendor out if they are incapable of making their product work against 9.2.

They are the incompetent either in development, deployment, or both and will be a
huge headache for years to come.

What has to wonder what else they can't do well. And how long will it take your organization to find that out.

General advice to persons/companys buying products to use with Oracle: Include in your purchase order a clause written by your attorneys stating that the firm "must install and configure their product in your environment." If they can't ... find
a vendor that can and will. Money talks and BS walks. Let it walk.

--
Daniel Morgan
http://www.outreach.washington.edu/extinfo/certprog/oad/oad_crs.asp
damorgan_at_x.washington.edu
(replace 'x' with a 'u' to reply)