> -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of Mogens N�rgaard > Sent: 27 October 2003 05:34 > To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L > Subject: Re: Oracle pricing ain't going down > > > You had everybody convinced by your speach down there in > South Africa!
Not me. Quite. My arguments will be up at www.niall.litchfield.dial.pipex.com/sadebate.html shortly. Too much FUD for me. > I > think actually SQL Server SE is 1/3, not 2/3, of Oracle SE > and 1/2 of EE > as you state. DB2 is about the same as SQL Server. No idea > about Sybase. That is probably list price rather than actual price. > > I have this radical idea that Oracle should include RAC in SE at no > extra price (I think that would spread the product fast :) ), and > include all the other options at no extra price in EE. I > always wondered > how much extra revenue these options really generated compared to all > the extra work required to convince people and manage > separate options, etc. Nice idea but I'm not sure. We generate instances when there is a new 'project' that needs a db server. Now technically we should probably add schemas to an instance but as A) no-one knows if 3 people or 3000 will use this app and B) what load will it place on the server Sticking it on a new pizza-box compaq server which is SAN attached seems fine. If it turns out we had a good idea we will buy it proper hardware. Next time you see Julian ask him about Rob and buying servers. We write these boxes off aver 3 years. We generate at least 3 new db driven projects per year. So now consider RAC then.In any one year we are likely to have to consider moving 4 projects onto a rac box. These currently have at least 4*2 processors. Thus we move from 4 SE licenses * 2 procs to at least 1 EE license * 8 procs + RAC etc. Then there is fail over, suddenly its data guard etc. Ummm attractive not. Std one? Well anyone here running a production database on a single CPU box is welcome to step forward. > The OLAP thing, for instance, is included in SQL Server EE, > but not in > Oracle EE. But Oracle has other unique options (the security stuff, > etc.) that would make it a good bargain then. > > I think you're right: Oracle is too expensive at the moment for most > uses and users. You were kind enough not to mention what happens when the MSDE engine gets into the OS in (say) 2005. I fear that move will kill Oracle corp. Niall -- Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.net -- Author: Niall Litchfield INET: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fat City Network Services -- 858-538-5051 http://www.fatcity.com San Diego, California -- Mailing list and web hosting services --------------------------------------------------------------------- To REMOVE yourself from this mailing list, send an E-Mail message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (note EXACT spelling of 'ListGuru') and in the message BODY, include a line containing: UNSUB ORACLE-L (or the name of mailing list you want to be removed from). You may also send the HELP command for other information (like subscribing).
