Re: market share numbers

Robbie wrote:
>
> > > Who in their right mind would post a message without thinking?
> > > When you are planning a long term investment the stability of the
 product
> > > and the manifaturer can (must) be an aspect on wich you base your
> > > dissision.
> >
> > Not if you end up hosing your company by making the wrong
> > choice by assuming that the market leader is the product
> > appropriate to you. Anyone with an ounce of common sense
> > evaluates first. All the RDBMS mentioned in the list are
> > adequate for most purposes and have been around long enough
> > to be consider tong term.
> >
> > The lesson is to choose objectively and not make subjective
> > value judgements.
> >
> > -am
> >
> First of all i am talking about one off many aspects on wich you can base
> your conclusion so i'am mont impressed by you absolute assertions.
> Second, there is no reason to use the word "wanker".
>
> Greetings Rob

The only Market Share stuff that I've seen for the RDBMS market is from the following sources - these are as of 1996 ... you may want to contact these companies for the full articles and/or udpates:

1. IDC Article: ESTIMATE: UNIX & SOE RDBMS MARKET 1996 D.Kusnetsky 12/96
2. Dataquest - this one is pretty good. Lists the WW mkt share by licence revenue for the UNIX and NT platforms ...
3. Gartner Group Article: Strategic Data Management (SDM) M-500-213 Research Note, 03/11/97,
4. Burton of Gartner Group provides 1996 DBMS revenue numbers.