Re: yipeee!

bucknuggets_at_yahoo.com (Buck Nuggets) wrote in message news:<66a61715.0402041122.27cdc560_at_posting.google.com>...
>
> However - one more thing: I find that my database choices usually
> hinge more on the strategic direction of the company - rather than on
> the specific needs of the application. If you go
> application-by-application you'll end up with a half-dozen different
> databases, and the skillset problem that results is typically more
> challenging than the minor technical differences between commercial
> databases.

[Quoted] I don't see this. Even if a company has a strategic initiative to go to a particular database, mergers, aquisitions, and specific [Quoted] application requirements still mean heterogeneity. There may be some pure MS companies around, but I wouldn't know about them (and I don't think MS is one of them, and of course IBM may well be its own world).

The skillset problem is challenging, but a red herring since it is probably not a good idea as a strategic plan, except maybe in certain small companies. Even governments that specified Oracle figured that out. Enterprise software salespeople sell gateways, if they have to.

jg

--
_at_home.com is bogus.
"I don't practice Santeria." - some pop song.
http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/uniontrib/thu/currents/news_1c5cuba.html