Oracle FAQ Your Portal to the Oracle Knowledge Grid

Home -> Community -> Usenet -> c.d.o.server -> Re: 10G

Re: 10G

From: Daniel Morgan <>
Date: Sun, 18 Jan 2004 10:56:00 -0800
Message-ID: <>

Jim Kennedy wrote:

> Alas, the whole behind the curve problem. The vendor application takes
> forever to use the current version of Oracle and then the business takes
> even longer to upgrade to the current or latest vendor application so there
> is this huge time lag behind when a release from Oracle comes out and when a
> company finally uses it. I've worked places where table and index reorgs
> still occur because the vendor recommends it. (Primus, SAP, Siebel) You
> would think that these companies would hire top DBA's for their application
> development and stay current with the technology.
> It is very frustrating to have this highly capable database and because the
> vendor is incompetent (in terms of the database) you can't take advantage of
> features that would improve the quality of life for your users.
> This is not Oracle's fault; I would rather they have the features available
> before I can use them than the other way round.
> Jim

The fault, if a finger is to be pointed, is to the customers that don't demand more from the vendors. It is certainly easy to see why SAP, PeopleSoft, Siebel, Baan, etc. don't invest cash in upgrading their technology if they can still make billions selling the same old code.

For those interested ... when I go on consulting gigs and advise clients on purchases here are some of the things I insist are written into the purchase contract.

  1. Vendor agrees to make available and support a version of their product that is compatible with one or more FULLY supported versions of the database.

Which means that, on this date, they would have to support at a minimum. And that by December of this year ...

2. Vendor agrees to, at vendor's expense, to prove that all statements of compatiblity between vendor's product, and other products existing within the organization, are true.

Meaning those products that will directly interface with the vendor's product.

3. Vendor agrees to make available to customer a list of 100 customers both of similar size and in the same industry that are using vendor's product: Including company name and name of contact.

Then contact is made with at least five of them, randomly chosen, and we don't contact the named contact but rather avoid that person like the plague except to get the name of a production DBA actually supporting the system.

When faced with the loss of a multi-million dollar contract it is amazing what some vendors will step up to the plate and agree to that they won't do if not pushed.

Daniel Morgan
(replace 'x' with a 'u' to reply)
Received on Sun Jan 18 2004 - 12:56:00 CST

Original text of this message