Oracle and IBM -- Grudge Match

Didn't see that anyone posted this in the newsgroup. http://www.eweek.com/c/a/Data-Storage/IBM-Snaps-Back-with-Response-to-Ellisons-Ignorant-Remarks-about-DB2-758156/ http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9149883/Database_wars_IBM_Oracle_s_Ellison_trade_zingers Should I not be surprised? (sigh) JWC

"John Carlson" <jwcarlson1@yahoo.com.invalid> wrote in message news:hk2pkr$91q$1@news.eternal-september.org... > Didn't see that anyone posted this in the newsgroup. > > http://www.eweek.com/c/a/Data-Storage/IBM-Snaps-Back-with-Response-to-Ellisons-Ignorant-Remarks-about-DB2-758156/ > http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9149883/Database_wars_IBM_Oracle_s_Ellison_trade_zingers Nice spot, John. All quite humorous. >> Ellison: "IBM DB2 is good on mainframes, the best in the world. Oracle is >> good on everything else-x86 and all others. It's too bad DB2 can't run on >> modern machines. Can't scale either-the most [instances] you can have of >> DB2 is one." Don't get me wrong, I like DB2 and think generally it gets an unfair press on cdi. But this *is* the commonly-held opinion. If only IBM had a first-rate database system designed specifically for sub-mainframe that *did* perform excellently in this area, eh?! I don't think there is any comfort here at all for we Informix advocates. It reinforces what we have known for some years now: that our product is so irrelevant to today's db market that it's virtually never commented upon. And we all know why that is ....