my guess is that they are not comparable at all.....
in the sense of cost, postgress is better:)
> >Hi
> >Is discussion exist about SQL SERVER vs ORACLE ?
> >
> >Thanks
> >Oraclion
>
> Hi,
>
> First:
> There is Sybase SQL Server and there is MS SQL Server. You are not
> clear which one you mean. Because Sybase is less often used, let's
> assume you mean the MS product (which was 'reborn' out of the Sybase
> product years ago).
>
> Second:
> If you want a confirmation of the idea that MS SQL Server sucks,
> you're in the RIGHT place as you can see if you read the crap that
> alifiemylarder1 posted here. If you want a real comparison you are
> definitely in the wrong place, just like you would ask the same
> question in comp.databases.ms-sqlserver for example.
>
> Third:
> Just search the internet with 'sql server vs oracle';
> http://www.clientsandprofits.com/sql/SQL_Oracle_v_SQLserver.html
> http://www.sqlteam.com/forums/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=6803
> http://www.image-in-usa.com/pr02.htm
> http://www.networknewz.com/2001/0709.html
> http://dbforums.com/t358048.html
>
> ... and there's a hole lot more.
>
> Fourth:
> Personally, I think Oracle is good but complex, the costs involved in
> developing and maintaining Oracle sites are gigantic, and what about
> cost of education.
> Microsoft is - like many others say - easier to manage, but in my
> opinion advanced enough to fulfill most needs and far more productive
> than Oracle.
>
> If you go for the salary, go for Oracle, if you go for ease of work
> and productivity, go for MS. But most important of all, draw your own
> conclusions.
>
> Read what others have to say, look what hard- and software there
> already is in the organisation and make a choice.
>
> Groeten,
>
> Hans van Dam.
>
Received on Thu Jan 16 2003 - 10:26:24 CST
