Re: ORACLE or SQL SERVER (MS) ?

Bill shrek Thater wrote:

>Daniel Morgan wrote:
>
>
>
>>Your experience is purely anecdotal. Other people's experience may
>>well differ. But one thing is definite and that is that I can put
>>either SQL Server or Oracle on a single CPU Pentium machine and both
>>will run. But while SQL Server will only run on the Windows operating
>>system with Oracle an organization has the choice to avoid paying
>>hundreds of dollars for the operating system, they can choose Linux,
>>and also avoid all of the problems with the huge number of Windows
>>only virus, worm, and trojan attacks.
>>
>>
>
>the ability exists, however at this point in time most companies do not
>have the talent available to manage other than Windows servers unless
>they are large enough to have Unix server farms. in that case they
>already would have Oracle installed on a unix platform. smaller
>companies would tend not to choose Oracle due to the lack of talent
>mentionsed as well as the adversity to adding a DBA to staff.
>
>--
>Bill "Shrek" Thater ORACLE DBA
>"I'm going to work my ticket if I can..." -- Gilwell song
> william.thater_at_carrier.utc.com
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>A man sits with a pretty girl for an hour, it seems like a minute. He
>sits on a hot stove for a minute, it's longer than any hour. That is
>relativity. - Albert Einstein
>
>

You are correct but as with all things that too is changing. The next release of Oracle, 10g, will have
all of the ease of use of SQL Server and a price that is equal or lower from what I hear.

Add to that IBM's purchase of Informix and you can expect the RDBMS marketplace to get a lot
more interesting in the next few years.

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