Re: Dr. Brown asserts databases are dead, dead as a dodo

Centuries ago, Nostradamus foresaw when "D Guntermann" <guntermann_at_hotmail.com> would write:
> I interpret this metric (of 6%) to mean just the opposite. DBMS's
> work so well and are so stable, they have become commodities. Would
> you consider the personal computer a commodity? If you do, has it
> stymied innovation, competition, and new features?

Hmm. There are things to agree on, but not quite that DBMS's have become "commodities."

The fact that there's pressure to drop prices does support that thought.

The growth of usefulness of "open source" databases that, while perhaps not sufficient for Really Big problems, can probably replace "Brand O", "Brand D", and "Brand M" for what we might call 'departmental' applications should certainly be giving those brands pause.

But on the other hand, the various brands (including the "other Brand M" that's trying to push their open source database) have worked pretty hard to make sure that their respective products are nearly unusable without resorting to a lot of brand-specific trickery to try to tie you into buying licenses. They don't _want_ them to be commodities; that would let you buy something else, or perhaps not buy anything at all.

The trickery has pretty clearly stifled competition; as for innovation and features, that's a tougher call.

-- 
output = ("cbbrowne" "_at_" "ntlug.org")
http://www3.sympatico.ca/cbbrowne/linuxdistributions.html
Have you ever considered beating yourself with a cluestick?