"The point of the SUV analogy was that many purchases such as Oracle and other software and hardware are made according to the "Law of the Sheep": everyone else is doing it so it must be the right way to go."
Before I proceed, let me state that I am not chiming in one way or the other regarding Oracle/RDBMS or U2/PICK. Now, on to my point. There is much truth to most of the quoted statement above. I have spoken to executives at large companies that have made changes to their database systems / applications even though they knew BEFOREHAND that they were not going to gain much of anything (competitive edge/lower costs/other benefits) by using the new database/application. They didn't do it because 'it must be the right way to go' though, they did it to not stand out as being totally different. They did it because if they didn't, they might be questioned on it and might be dismissed as not conforming to the majority. Of course, you could try to overcome a buyers/partners/... scrutiny, but it doesn't necessarily mean you win. It may cost you more if certification is required, increase the qualification period, etc.. On the other hand, if you match your competitors in this regard, you automatically get to skip the issue (and that IS a win - you get to move on to something else). To me, this means that if you are going to use your database/application as your primary competitive edge, it is certainly worth the effort to go all out (you win, all others lose). If it is not and you will focus on other differentiators, then it does make sense to not be different and go with what everyone else is doing (can't lose - move on). Regards, Jim ------- u2-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.u2ug.org/listinfo/u2-users
