Re: So why isn't native JDBC access to ASE free?
Date: Fri, 23 Apr 1999 00:34:11 GMT
Message-ID: <7ePT2.557$3U6.868_at_news.rdc1.nj.home.com>
I've since talked with a lot of people who feel that Sybase is dying because their own management
just doesn't seem to care any more. One friend told me he tried to order some stuff from Sybase but
none of the sales reps would get back to him. His organization decided to switch to MS SQL Server.
It is a shame to find that my Sybase experience is becoming worthless (as did many past programming
languages and operating systems), but I am finding Oracle 8.1.5 to be much better than I had thought
and Oracle's java stored procedures are far more promising than Sybase's ASE 12.0 implementation.
Ray DiMarcello <rdimarcello_at_equitable-of-iowa.com> wrote in message
| Any surprise they can't get their share price to break ten bucks?
|
| Brian Jay Gould wrote:
|
| > We are converting to Oracle (because of this), so it isn't a big deal anymore. But I am curious
as
| > to why Sybase would demand $2,000 per ASE server (on Solaris) if there are any Java clients.
Don't
| > suggest the JDBC-ODBC bridge, there are lots of bugs and it doesn't provide platform
independence.
| > Native JDBC comes free with virtually every other RDBMS.
| >
| > Until this, I was a strong Sybase advocate with over 10 years of Sybase development. So what
| > bone-head at Sybase made this decision? And who at Sybase is telling their employees that no
one
| > writes real applications in Java (that is what we were told when we complained)?
| >
| > BTW: Before we made the final decision to use Oracle, I posted something about this before.
Two
| > emails from Sybase said they'd get back to me. No one ever did, just as no one from Sybase
| > returned my phone calls on the matter.
|
Received on Fri Apr 23 1999 - 02:34:11 CEST