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: Hmmm, it's starting....

Re: Hmmm, it's starting....

From: Noons <wizofoz2k_at_yahoo.com.au.nospam>
Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2004 21:08:31 +1100
Message-ID: <400cff47$0$14482$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au>


"Daniel Morgan" <damorgan_at_x.washington.edu> wrote in message news:1074583088.663424_at_yasure...

> If what he said was true I'd agree with him but it isn't. The fact is
> that there was word about 10i long ago. It was all over the trade press.

So was 11i, 12i and a lot of others. We even had the "what is the letter for the next version of Oracle" competition! So what? Since when does ANY of that mean the price of fish?

Oracle officially announced 10g beta program when it was almost over. I don't give two hoots what the trade press says, I go for what Oracle says. That simple. And there is nothing to add to that.

> bitter as it may be to Mladen, is that plenty of people joined the Beta
> after it began because they made testing proposals that demonstrated to
> Oracle that they had something to contribute.

Did they? Prove it.

> Betas are not intended to be early release promotional programs.
> Microsoft tried using them that way once and has never tried it again
> for what should be obvious reasons. To Beta test you need to have the
> hardware, operating systems, and resources the software company needs
> and believes it can benefit from using.

Don't give me the definition of a beta program, I was doing them 25 years ago when the current crop of Oracle marketing still smelled of their mother's milk!

> That some of you apparently don't read the trade press, don't read
> Oracle's marketing White Papers, and didn't proactively contact Oracle's
> Beta test office when they learned about it is not a fault on Oracle's
> part. The earliest information on 10i was out there early in 2003.

That's rubbish. We do NOT have to read the trade press nor is there such a requirement anywhere. In fact, most of us probably do NOT read any IT press with few exceptions. It's just a waste of time.

As for White Papers, since when are they indicative of a beta program about to happen?
Last: Software makers usually do not sit and wait for customers to knock on the door asking for beta programs. Name one case other than the Oracle current one where that was so. What they do is announce it through their marketing channels and sites, then ask for submissions from beta testers. That did NOT happen here.

> Here, for example is a Press release from pro-dba.com dated April 2003
> talking about the 10i database.
> http://www.pro-dba.com/oracle_newsletter_apr03.html

I don't give a hoot what pro-dba.com says or publishes! Got it?

> Or perhaps you'd like this:
> http://www.dbasupport.com/oracle/news/oracle10i.shtml which refers to
> the fact that 10i has been in testing since November 2002.

I don't give a hoot what dbasupport.com says or publishes! Got it?

> Go to google.com and you will find literally hundreds of items talking
> about 10i that are dated July 2003 or before.

Yup. Same as talking about 11i, 12i, 13i, etcetc. And since when are postings in google an "official statement" from Oracle?

> So lets be clear about this ... Oracle didn't make this a secret anywhere.

YES it did. Prove by Oracle's own doco where did they ask for submissions, when and how. There was NOT a single shred of that anywhere other than to the people that were directly contacted.

> And if Mladen thinks I am taking him to task for any reason other than
> the fact that he has been loose with his facts he is incorrect. Had he
> stuck to the truth I'd be standing behind him 100%. He is in a hole of
> his own digging.

Nope. Quite frankly, until someone from Oracle demonstrated with facts, NOT "trade publications", that indeed they asked for submissions, I'm afraid it's you who is in a hole...

> > So, why didn't Oracle propose a beta test to ALL the licensees.
> > Like it has always done? Heck, it's not like they don't have the
> > e-mails to send a URL to...
>
> Because it doesn't want Microsoft to be a Beta tester?

Oh, puh-leaze!!!!

> Because it has an
> internal knowledge of what is new code and what is old and is
> specifically looking for people with the resources to test the new code?

So if that knowledge is "internal", how does it expect external people to make submissions to test that code if IT HAS NOT PUBLISHED somewhere that knowledge? Helloooo?????

> To put it through its paces. The last thing they want is people that
> like to live on the bleeding edge implementing solutions with Beta
> software and we both know that would happen.

That has never happened. If anything, those "people" use OLD versions of Oracle, not new ones. As complained SO MANY TIMES in public here and everywhere else. Well known fact and NEVER was it a concern.

> a fiasco. Do you seriously think that less than 90% of licensed sites if
> offered the Beta wouldn't say yes?

So what?

> mother'd like a copy too. And then how would they manage it? How would
> legal handle the contracts? How would tech support handle the install
> issues? How would they ever staff the office tracking bugs?

Oh dear: the same way every other IT company does?

-- 
Cheers
Nuno Souto
wizofoz2k_at_yahoo.com.au.nospam
Received on Tue Jan 20 2004 - 04:08:31 CST

Original text of this message

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