Re: Oracle and Access difference

Calvin Crumrine <Calvin_Crumrine_at_dced.state.ak.us> schrieb in im Newsbeitrag: 37BC2841.340D73FE_at_dced.state.ak.us...
> Alex Hudghton wrote:
> >
> > Nicolas Bronke wrote in message <37bbac54_at_news.uk.ibm.net>...
> > >Be aware of that comparisions. Sure Oracle is the better database, but
its
> > >native tools are bad.
> > >
> >
> > In fact they are so bad that Oracle is the largest database company in
the
> > world (?)
> >
> > Alex
>
> I'm not sure Oracle's size is relevant to Bronke's comment. Bronke said it
was a
> better database. IMO that's enough to justify them being the largest
database company
> in the world even if their tools are crap (and I wouldn't know much about
their
> tools-we don't use them). Which tools is Bronke talking about, the free
ones that
> come with the database or their add-ons like Oracle Apps or
Developer/Designer? How
> much of their size is attributable to their tools and how much to their
database? How
> many people using their database are using third-party tools? Answering
those 2
> questions will tell you more about the quality of Oracle's tools than
simply looking
> at Oracle's size. (The 1st question is relevant, too. If Bronke's talking
about
> Oracle's free tools then his comment is out of line. IMO free tools aren't
really
> intended to be used seriously.)

Sorry I do not mean the free tools. I meant the designer etc. Perhaps they are improved meanwhile, but if I compare that tools with the possibilities of access or other gui-desktop-tools (Centura, Delphi) the origin tools does get the best note.
The other thing (perhaps oracle changed it meanwhile) are the high end user licensee fees.

Access is okay for small applications or prototyping. But in a network envirornment with many data and simultanous users I would never use Access. Btw.: the different in price for the database only are not so much different anymore. (I mean not the license fees for anny application).

regards
Nicolas Bronke Received on Thu Aug 19 1999 - 16:11:09 CDT