> You are a speculation based development firm that is hoping that this > decision will work for your continued success. I am, on the > other hand, an > employee of a company that is creating the internal software for that > company to operate .
Different needs, different strategies. I am not saying MySQL would not be a good choice in my case. It is more that PostgreSQL is more appropriate for my needs, and the needs/demands of my market. My target market does not care what is used with regards to a database brand. They do care about the bottom line cost, regardless of how much they can increase their profits by using one of our applications. So, in a sense it is just as much a positioning issue for me (this is free, others cost $) as it is avoiding potential problems due to incorrect license fees being paid to a 3rd party company. As for me hoping the PostgreSQL decision will work out, well, if VFP did a great job for me any largely scalable and fast database will work out for me from a technical perspective. It really is about grief avoidance and cost. Re: whether $600 will break a deal or not, in larger dealership locations it may not. But to reach into the smaller stores (the "abandoned market") I need something I can come in with for the lowest possible price. With my extremely low overhead it does not take much to break a strong profit for me. Removing the license fee for MySQL makes sense. Also, with so many dealerships running on even tighter than razor-thin margins in the current market, I could see where some dealers may not be able to pay their annual license. To stay compliant "somebody" would have to pay it. What then? Do I pay to keep them compliant, or turn off the app because of a 3rd party license fee issue and starve myself and the dealer? Sounds dramatic? I have just seen a Saturn store that belongs to a dealer I have known (not a client) for over 20 years close its doors in one of the busiest locations in Southern California. I read about other stores closing this month across the US, many having been in business for over 30 - 40 years, names I recognize. Nearly all are domestic makes, some are not. In my mind I owe it to my clients to make certain they are not saddled any more than absolutely necessary when it comes to using the solutions I offer. $50/month to a dealer is not like $50 to you or me. He has to turn at least $2,500 in revenue to net that to his bottom line after all costs, expenses and taxes. And that is assuming he is running a net margin that is average across the US. When the margins get tighter, as they have been, the revenue needed to net that $50 goes up tremendously. Yeah, $600 is worth avoiding. Gil > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Stephen Russell > Sent: Monday, April 14, 2008 11:38 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Design Question > > > On Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 8:39 AM, Gil Hale <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Can you give me and pluses that come with using 100% non fee software > > over > > > counterpart that require a fee? > > > > > > > First of all, I had no idea Ed had begun to migrate more toward > PostgreSQL > > from MySQL because of the license issues (dual license). It is > one of the > > main reasons I opted to not use MySQL, just to make certain I would not > > run > > afoul of any fees owed when deploying my app to clients using > MySQL on the > > back end. I know Ed did not criticize my basis for that > decision, but to > > see he has also chosen to go in the same direction adds even more > > confidence > > in my decision than before. > > > > Now, to answer Stephen's question... In my world having the ability to > > deliver a low cost, high impact solution to a client is crucial. When I > > am > > able to tell a client or prospect that I am using a back end > database that > > requires no additional license fees up front or ever (especially fees to > > Microscoff) I get zero pushback. Of course, I tell them about > how much a > > SQL Server or Oracle license fee would be in comparison. If I were to > > tell > > them they had to pay $600 per year (or whatever it is for MySQL > now) for a > > SQL database I would have a much tougher sale than providing a database > > for > > free. Plus, by not having to pay the fees there is that much > more on the > > table I can then push toward myself if I felt compelled to do > so (I do not > > do that currently). > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------- > > You are a speculation based development firm that is hoping that this > decision will work for your continued success. I am, on the > other hand, an > employee of a company that is creating the internal software for that > company to operate . > > If you think that 600.00 a year license fee to the MySQL will > break a deal I > hope that your plan is based on having thousands of clients much like the > quick-books mindset. > > We do a lot of printing for consulting companies that train on MySQL and I > see that dolphin logo every once in a while when I walk back into > production. So I'd have to day that there are lots of companies > that don't > see the 600/year as a breaker. > > > > > > Granted, the MySQL license fee is peanuts when compared to full blown M$ > > SQL > > Server or Oracle (or any of the other "big boys". But getting the same, > > or > > substantially similar, punch on a No Fee basis from a mature, stable and > > fast solution makes it very easy for me to toss my hat into the > PostgreSQL > > ring. Stated otherwise, it would be real hard for anyone to > convince me I > > ought to do otherwise, even if the "big boys" do have some high end > > features > > PostgreSQL may (or may not <g>) be lacking. Those would likely be > > features > > I would not need for my purposes anyway. > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > I'll toss out the fact that the connection between VS200x and SQL > server is > better then going to the ODBC layer. So you may get what you pay for in > this sense, much like you buy the oracle connector or the IBM one as well. > > > > > > Finally, just because PostgreSQL works well in my application > and business > > model does not mean it is the solution for all persons or situations. I > > am > > just fortunate that I was not tied down by one of the fee based > > alternatives, facing some heavy duty recoding to migrate from SQL > > Server/Oracle/etc. to PostgreSQL - even though it would > certainly be worth > > it. > > > -------------------------------- > > Are you doing all the SQL code in your app or via SPs? > > -- > Stephen Russell > Sr. Production Systems Programmer > Mimeo.com > Memphis TN > > 901.246-0159 > > > --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- > multipart/alternative > text/plain (text body -- kept) > text/html > --- > [excessive quoting removed by server] _______________________________________________ Post Messages to: [email protected] Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/[EMAIL PROTECTED] ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
