Re: Oracle comparison

On 18 Jun 2002, nospam_at_nospam.com wrote:

> Yes, I do have a bias against them but I have justified it on the
> basis it seems that there is never a case when MS is the best solution
> out there. There is always some other solution, just as good or
> better. So there is just no need to recommend MS, and we don't feel
> bad recommending against them.

Man, this is just plain sillyness. There are reasons MS has the chokehold it has. One is because its default installations are usually good enough to solve most people's problems. You can have a braindead office worked using spreadsheets in an hour and you can have a braindead DBA installing an enterprise database within a half-hour. Add to this mix that there are boatloads of MS techies who are far from braindead and you have solutions that work and are quick to implement.

My problem with MS is that, if the mouse clicks can't get you to your needed answer, there are extremely hidden and user unfriendly/unintuitive ways to find out whats going on. With an Oracle/UNIX/Linux solution, after a few hours, one is already passed the initial curve of not having that perfect gui/crux to lead you to your answer and then the power of being able to customize the environment becomes clear and soon it becomes intuitive. It just isn't initially intuitive.

-- 
Galen deForest Boyer
Sweet dreams and flying machines in pieces on the ground.