On Tuesday 11 October 2005 00:49, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Richard_D_Levine@xxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> > What is Oracle after? Small DB technology? They already have rdb.
> > Firebird, back in the Groton Database Corporation days, was built to be
> > compatible with rdb. Marrying those technologies through modification of
> > existing gateways makes more technological sense than InnoDB.
> >
> > Oracle is trying for market share, as they always do, but it appears ill
> > conceived. MySQL is for people who can't or won't tune and manage a
> > DBMS. Oracle products are just not going to fit. Both on price and
> > complexity. If they kill MySQL, they are just going to increase other
> > true FOSS RDBMS projects' market share. Power to them.
>
> Oracle must know that the comodity database days are coming. By
> attacking MySQL they delay that time by another few quarters, perhaps.
I've been thinking more and more that oracle just want's leverage against
my$ql to force them to live up to thier claims that they "don't compete with
oracle". Ie. there are a few large commercial applications (think erp and
crm) that my$ql has been targeting to be able to support with 5.0 that would
compete directly with oracle (by way of giving those application vendors
leverage to use my$ql instead of oracle). Part of a future licensing
agreement might be that my$ql stay out of those markets.
--
Robert Treat
Build A Brighter Lamp :: Linux Apache {middleware} PostgreSQL
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives?
http://archives.postgresql.org
