Jonah H. Harris wrote:
On 6/18/07, Joshua D. Drake <jd@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Depends? How many times are you going to antagonize the people that ask?
As many times as necessary. Funny how the anti-proprietary-database
arguments can continue forever and no one brings up the traditional
RTFM-like response of, "hey, this was already discussed in thread XXX,
read that before posting again."
Yeah funny how you didn't do that ;) (of course neither did I).
1. It has *nothing* to do with anti-commercial. It is anti-proprietary
which is perfectly legitimate.
As long as closed-mindedness is legitimate, sure.
It isn't closed minded to consider anti-proprietary a bad thing. It is
an opinion and a valid one. One that many have made part of their lives
in a very pro-commercial and profitable manner.
2. Oracle, Microsoft, and IBM have a "lot" to fear in the sense of a
database like PostgreSQL. We can compete in 90-95% of cases where people
would traditionally purchase a proprietary system for many, many
thousands (if not hundreds of thousands) of dollars.
They may well have a lot to fear, but that doesn't mean they do;
anything statement in that area is pure assumption.
95% of life is assumption. Some of it based on experience, some of it
based on pure conjecture, some based on all kinds of other things.
I'm in no way saying we can't compete, I'm just saying that the
continued closed-mindedness and inside-the-box thinking only serves to
perpetuate malcontent toward the proprietary vendors by turning
personal experiences into sacred-mailing-list gospel.
It is amazing how completely misguided you are in this response. I
haven't said anything closed minded. I only responded to your rather
antagonistic response to a reasonably innocuous question of: "As a
cynic, I might ask, what Oracle is fearing? "
It is a good question to ask, and a good question to discuss.
All of us have noticed the anti-MySQL bashing based on problems with
MySQL 3.23... Berkus and others (including yourself, if I am correct),
have corrected people on not making invalid comparisons against
ancient versions. I'm only doing the same where Oracle, IBM, and
Microsoft are concerned.
I haven't seen any bashing going on yet. Shall we start with the closed
mindedness and unfairness of per cpu license and support models?
Joshua D. Drake
--
=== The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. ===
Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 || 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240
Providing the most comprehensive PostgreSQL solutions since 1997
http://www.commandprompt.com/
Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
PostgreSQL Replication: http://www.commandprompt.com/products/
