Re: Oracle and PICK

Depends on what the CLIENT thinks is TCO, Total Cost Of Ownership, right? Not the Database company....If as a Vendor I only need 10 developers to maintain and enhance an application that licenses for 250K while my Oracle competitor needs 100 to maintain enhance his/hers, and sells his/hers for 1 Mill, then TCO to the CLIENT is definitely lower with mine. That is the difference between Pick and Oracle, real world solutions to verticals are the ONLY real measurement

Many, too many, years ago, I added a paragraph to my stand up sales routine just for the 'xpurt' IT weenies,

"How can you describe a three dimensional 'any' thing in a two dimensional database?"

Just a thought...

Oracle, by the way, is great for your consulting bank account. If that's what turns you on.

Most 'pickies' do not consider that, we only think of our verticals and the satisfaction we get from being the "best available application of computer technology
to a problem".

I do not put Oracle in IBM's class, so the fact that IBM has an outstanding RDBMS competitor to Oracle in DB2 and STILL went after the MV Market by purchasing the U2 companies just might indicate something to a client.

Best,

Nick and Dawn :-)

"Laconic2" <laconic2_at_comcast.net> wrote in message news:MoqdneJv5oxEfOLd4p2dnA_at_comcast.com...
> It's been claimed in this forum that there's no empirical data to compare
> TCO between Oracle and PICK.
>
> Oracle has a larger market share than PICK. That's empirical evidence.
>
> I would never claim that it's conclusive evidence. But it is evidence.
And
> I can't believe it's unrelated to TCO.
>
>
Received on Fri Apr 16 2004 - 19:27:39 CEST