RE: Why is Oracle unaffordable?

From: RP Khare <>
Date: Tue, 9 Nov 2010 18:02:37 +0530
Message-ID: <COL122-W649471310F8A6F1F94D06E97300_at_phx.gbl>

It is neither the question of cheap developers or expensive DBAs, the question was about the cost and user-friendliness of the product. With almost same features, one is costing much more than the other. In my original post I wrote how BerkelyDB's licensing is fr more expensive than similar products (don't include M$ if you are irritated with it).

Until and unless Oracle comes out with a GUI to manage administration easily, people will praise the black screen because there is no option.

> Date: Tue, 9 Nov 2010 19:59:57 +1100
> From:
> To:
> Subject: Re: Why is Oracle unaffordable?
> Kellyn Pedersen wrote,on my timestamp of 9/11/2010 6:55 AM:
> > performing poorly. When someone comes to me with the blanket statement, "SQL
> > Server and MySQL just can't stand up to 24X7 database requirements" I laugh.
> > It's not the database platform that failed the requirements, it's the person
> > that installed it and the database design.
> Invariably, one of the "cheap developers" that seem to be the alternative to
> "expensive dbas" nowadays... Same problem here.
> First two years where I am now, we saved >$2M in M$ fees by simply combining and
> consolidating the myriad "databases" - one server for each!!! - installed all
> around the place, into three major production servers.
> Now we spend <$200K in M$ fees.
> Same was done for Oracle, down to three major production servers from >10.
> Regardless of what M$ and Oracle might think of that loss of revenue, I think
> that was not a bad return for investing in an "expensive dba". Particularly
> since the salary for said dba is much, much less than the licence fees...
> > when I say this- I have created SQL Server environments with web properties that
> > can out perform Oracle for the same purpose and function. Before I was brought
> > in to tune them, they ran like dogs though. They weren't properly designed,
> > properly configured, tuned or installed. This takes time and expertise and
> > Microsoft has made it way to easy for just anyone to create a SQL Server db.
> Bingo.
> > I truly believe this is because it was built by someone who is a DBA, who knows
> > his/her craft. Databases shouldn't be easy to install and configure for anyone.
> Yeah, and I'll bet no one properly costed that "expensive" dba against the prior
> waste in licensing. In another year or so when all is forgotten about the
> previous bad performance, they'll be after said "expensive dba" like a ton of
> bricks. Aided of course by every marketing department and sales group out there
> willing to "prove" they can place a "much cheaper" dba.
> And the madness goes on...
> --
> Cheers
> Nuno Souto
> in hazy Sydney, Australia
> --

Received on Tue Nov 09 2010 - 06:32:37 CST

Original text of this message