Re: Company thought DB2 will be better than Oracle.

Posted in 2003

Obnoxio The Clown — Fri, 19 Sep 2003 23:41:26 +0100 — source: Usenet: comp.databases.informix

Larry Edelstein wrote: > But the point > is this: there is no way that companies of that size would bet their > business on a database that is not solid, stable, bulletproof, and > competitive. How many companies bet their business on Windows NT? Does that make it solid, stable, bulletproof and competitive? > It boils down to a fundamental difference in strategy. Companies like > Oracle promote a strategy that moves almost EVERYTHING into the database. > Companies like IBM believe that they would rather allow you to select the > product/component that you use together with your database so that not > only do you have the choice ... but you can select the best-of-breed in > technology. Like Tivoli, Websphere, MQ, Content Manager, Rational... Or Lotus... fnaar... -- "C'est pas parce qu'on n'a rien ''' dire qu'il faut fermer sa gueule" - Coluche