Re: Does Oracle have a tool like T.O.A.D.?

jmw42969 wrote:
>
> czetie_at_nospamus.oracle.com wrote in article
> <35512F30.64EF_at_nospamus.oracle.com>...
> > jmw42969 wrote:
> > >
> > > And where did you get that information? I'll gauge market share by
> what I
> > > see in the market place for developers. And in that arena, Sql Server
> > > hasn't been slipping.
> >
> > You can gauge market share by whatever you please, but if you
> > gauge it by revenue and licences sold, installed, and in use
> > then Oracle is gaining share from SQL Server. Watch your
> > favorite magazines for this week's announcement, for example.
> > Of course, if you choose to define market share by some other
> > definition than what everybody else means by market share, you
> > can come to a different conclusion. You just won't be speaking
> > a language anybody else understands. Same planet, different
> > worlds.
>
> No, now you're talking in marketing nonsense. Market share is NOT the
> number of seats sold, it is the number of seats in USE. And that, my
> friend, can only be ascertained from the trenches; not from your Excel
> spreadsheet. Or are you fogetting that a significant number of Sql Server
> licenses were free or bundled? Different world? Yeah, the REAL world.
>

[Quoted] Go and ask Dataquest who has the larger market share. They will tell you Oracle is gaining market share from SQL Server. Whether you define it as licences sold or seats in use, Oracle is gaining. If you want to define this as "marketing nonsense", and what you can see the people immediately
around you using as "market share", then sure, you are right. On the other
hand, if you want to define "market share" in any way that anybody else understands it, you are wrong. Now if you want to go on believing that Dataquest are wrong and that the people that you happen to come into contact with in your daily work are a representative sample of database users, you are free to do so. Just don't confuse that with the real world.

[Quoted] I have explained this to you as clearly as I can; I think it is clear to anybody else still reading this thread what each of us is using for sources and for definitions, and I trust they will draw their own conclusions... Received on Fri May 08 1998 - 00:42:00 CEST