Re: Oracle sucks!

henryl_at_bengaldevelopment.com (Henry Lafleur) wrote:

>rs_arwar_at_hotmail.com (Rauf Sarwar) wrote in message news:<92eeeff0.0304250754.262b24f8_at_posting.google.com>...
>> henryl_at_bengaldevelopment.com (Henry Lafleur) wrote in message news:<30f1a81b.0304241503.1e0a9294_at_posting.google.com>...
>> > Tim Ashman <tim_mapson_at_ashmans.net> wrote in message news:<vN0pa.294379$OV.337426_at_rwcrnsc54>...
>> > > Bob Loblaw wrote:
>> > >
>> > > > Why does Oracle suck so much?
>> > >
 ...
>> > >
>> > > But seriously why do you think it sucks?
>> >
>> > Man, Oracle has some serious problems with their GUI tools. ...
>> >
>
>...
>
>> > I could go on and on and on and on...
>> >
>> > So what if Oracle is fast. I don't need it. SQL Server is fast also.
>> > Our customers demand Oracle because their DBAs have them by the
>> > nads--so we are forced to use it, and without a DBA.
>> >
>> > Henry.
>>
>>
>> There is much written about Oracle vs other DB vendors... and it is
>> readily availabe on the internet... so I will not get into the nitty
>> gritty.
>>
>> From your post it seems like that you are the perfect "Poster boy" for
>> M$ products. Just give me a keyboard with one key, i.e. "Run Business"
>> -:)
>>
>> Regards
>> /Rauf Sarwar
>
>I'm the poster boy for Windows 2000/SQL 2000, but that's about it. I
>think Microsoft software is a pain in the butt. Microsoft is also
>monopolistic--they have their own set of "baggage."
>
>But lets look at SQL 2000 versus Oracle in standards compliance.
>Specifically, SQL 99 standards. Oracle does not even support the OUTER
>JOIN and INNER JOIN operators. SQL 2000 does. This means for our app,
>if we use outer join, we need two separate queries--one for Oracle and
>one for SQL Server. This is a pain. With Inner Join we can use Oracle
>syntax. I had a DBA explain, "Well, Oracle was the standard when
>Microsoft didn't even have a database system." Well, that may be true
>but I think ANSI would override Oracle for standards.
>
>Microsoft is obviously trying to crush Oracle. Once they do that, they
>will put the screws to the SQL Server users. So it's good that people
>are still using Oracle.
>
>If you have the patients to put that much time into your database
>system, I would encourage anyone to give it a whirl. Just study the
>crap out of it before you do anything in production.
>
>Personally, I prefer PostgreSQL--but I haven't seen any benchmarks
>against SQL/Oracle--since they would violate the license, I assume.
>MySQL is also good if all you care about is speed. And best of all,
>they're free--you can optimize and recompile them for the sake of
>pete!
>
>Henry.

Try to keep up..Oracle 9i is fully ANSI Sql compliant..( including INNER and OUTER joins)

----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups ---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =--- Received on Mon Apr 28 2003 - 19:10:06 CEST