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: database market share 2003

Re: database market share 2003

From: Noons <wizofoz2k_at_yahoo.com.au.nospam>
Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2004 20:57:32 +1000
Message-ID: <40c83e97$0$8985$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au>


Serge Rielau allegedly said,on my timestamp of 10/06/2004 1:02 AM:

> I disagree. Everyone equates Oracle (no qualifier) with the Relational
> database, yet the same name is used for Apps, and of course the mobile
> database offering.

and quite wrongly, IMHO. Been one of my old grudges with Oracle, as a matter of fact. It's as stupid as it gets and only confuses people. Let's not go into what it does to the heads of competition's marketeers. (the expression "major meltdown" springs to mind...)

The names were originally Oracle Financials for the apps and Oracle RDBMS for the database. Which would equate to IBM "this" or IBM "that", given that Oracle is the name of the company. NOT the name of the product. Somewhere in the last 12 years it all became mixed up, with dire consequences for intelligible conversation.

> The lastest crime is "for Muliplatforms" which sounds like Milla
> Jovovich in the "5. Element" and is largely ignored.

Et tu, Brutus? ;)

> We had similar problems with "SQL Procedural Langage" (SQL PL) which
> isn't a language at all, really.. It's just SQL.

Yeah, that sounded always like a major twist of PL/SQL... :) I never understood why not just call it what it is: ANSI SQL. After all, IBM always called Cobol as ANSI Cobol...

> Things need short memorisable names, the market demands it, and if there
> is none chaos prevails.
> It's an IBM blindspot.

Not just IBM...

-- 
Cheers
Nuno Souto
wizofoz2k_at_yahoo.com.au.nospam
Received on Thu Jun 10 2004 - 05:57:32 CDT

Original text of this message

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