The Director of New Technologies here took a look at Oracle vs. DB2 vs.
SQL*Server around the first of the year to see if it made any sense to remain
with Oracle (remember my licensing problems of some months ago). Anyway, dollar
for dollar he found that their all about the same in
Humm, If you've got Oracle DBA's who are swearing at their databases you might
question the way they do their work. I've 25 instances I don't have to swear
at any of them. Now the users, that's another story.
Dick Goulet
Reply Separator
Author: Steven
Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, August 13, 2002 9:44 AM
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
Subject: Re[2]: Oracle vs. DB2
Oracle people are expensive
--
Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com
--
Author: Jesse, Rich
Tim,
Thanks for the copy of the marketing speil, I had not heard that one before.
But, I'll take great exception to the claim that:
It would make sense to select a database product based on price alone if
database products were the predominant part of the overall information
technology
I too would love to see somebody give Oracle a reality check in regards to
the prices of their software, but as much as I hate to say it, I just don't
see it happening. Why? Because the ONLY reality check that Oracle is going
to actually LISTEN to and do something about would be for people to
I guess they can make their money by targeting the high end and having a few
high paying customers, or be more reasonable and have a broader base. I get
the feeling that Larry's ego (psychoanalysis from a distance, ain't it
wonderful) would drive him to both the $ and the broad base. If you are
At 01:35 PM 4/24/01 -0400, you wrote:
Dennis,
OK, but your sales critter is DEAD wrong. We bought a Standard
edition from
Yep. Based on your statement, I checked with the critter. He says yes, you
can do it with Standard version. Which costs (ballpark) $33K Cdn for the
unlimited user
