Re: Company thought DB2 will be better than Oracle.
Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2003 23:41:26 +0100
Message-ID: <bkg06m$1cp1p$5_at_ID-64669.news.uni-berlin.de>
Larry Edelstein wrote:
> But the point
> is this: there is no way that companies of that size would bet their
> business on a database that is not solid, stable, bulletproof, and
> competitive.
How many companies bet their business on Windows NT? Does that make it solid, stable, bulletproof and competitive?
> It boils down to a fundamental difference in strategy. Companies like
> Oracle promote a strategy that moves almost EVERYTHING into the database.
> Companies like IBM believe that they would rather allow you to select the
> product/component that you use together with your database so that not
> only do you have the choice ... but you can select the best-of-breed in
> technology.
Like Tivoli, Websphere, MQ, Content Manager, Rational... Or Lotus... fnaar...
-- "C'est pas parce qu'on n'a rien à dire qu'il faut fermer sa gueule" - ColucheReceived on Sat Sep 20 2003 - 00:41:26 CEST