Re: Open Source Oracle?

From: Howard J. Rogers <hjr_at_dizwell.com>
Date: Tue, 14 Sep 2004 17:28:27 +1000
Message-ID: <41469d9a$0$29780$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au>

Thomas Kellerer wrote:

> On 14.09.2004 00:31 Howard J. Rogers wrote:

>> I don't think this discussion can be meaningful unless we qualify
>> precisely what such features are. Then we can have a parallel debate on
>> what we think "enterprise" really means.

>
> Full ACK, I did not want to start any discussion on that. That depends too
> much on the requirements of each environment.
>

>> But the problem (for me, at least) lies exactly in what you've written:
>> Postgres is closing the gap to Oracle by adding these "enterprise
>> features", whatever they might be. Re-phrase that slightly: Oracle is an
>> Enterprise-class product and others want a share of that market. Now
>> follow through on the (slightly-stretched) logical corollary: Oracle is
>> not (particularly) interested in the low and mid-end database market.

>
> My assumption (!) is that Oracle indeed doesn't care, because they see a
> bigger market potential in the "high-end" area.

Thing is, I think at one point they sort-of did care. I think I saw the move 'upwards' start with 8i, gather pace with 9i, and in 10g we're well off into the realms of the big end of town.

> IT departments maintaining
> a huge server farm are likely to spend more money on licenses and support
> then departments/companies that simple use an off-the-shelf Linux server
> to run their bussines...

True. But that is, I think anyway, a short-sighted attitude on their part. Small companies grow up to have big license budgets...

> This decision is up to Oracle,

Well, if the issue is not raised, then they probably won't get round to making it...

> if they feel they don't need to target the
> low-end/mid-range market, then I don't care. I will continue to choose the
> product that best fits my needs.

Of course, and I'm not knocking that...

Post today in the Suse group, by way of illustration, from someone who wrote 'I'm thinking of developing on MySQL because it's cheap (ie free), and then maybe one day moving to Oracle'. Someone else pipes up, 'Oracle costs $50,000 per CPU!!'.

The mindshare has already been lost, no matter how appropriate Oracle might have been for their product.

It's all the odder because Oracle is so otherwise keen on the Linux platform...

Cheers
HJR
>
> Regards
> Thomas
Received on Tue Sep 14 2004 - 02:28:27 CDT