Karen Abgarian <abvk_at_ureach.com> wrote in message news:<3D5A0802.6CEBDE7_at_ureach.com>...
> IMO, a technically better system is not necessarily the one dominating
> on the market.
> Besides, to technically compare two systems you need to be proficient in
> both, which
> is rare. Some say DB2 is better, some say Oracle. All have their
> reasoning.
>
> db2 is used in many large applications and it will take a lot of time
> for them budget
> and justify a switch to Oracle, if they decide to do it at all.
> Conversely, Oracle customers
> will probably stick to Oracle.
We here, are replacing our Oracle db system with DB2. It is a clinical
system, not going to tell you which one. However, it is a high profile
Clinical Company. The reasoning we are(not my decision even though I'm
primary owner of the app) is because of a 3million dollar savings with
licensing. It's pretty much a go even though we haven't done any
testing or anything. So, I guess you could say they have justified it
somewhat. They are a little appauled(spelling ?) of the licensing
costs for oracle. I'm going to put my but on the line here, but I"m
going to say that it's going to cost us more in headaches and such
than what the cost difference is, but that's my oppinion. So,
sometimes you could say that some of them are getting replaced by
reason of costs not technical reasons, at least here.
Received on Thu Aug 15 2002 - 14:39:54 CDT
