Re: Oracle ?

Serge Rielau said: > Obnoxio The Chav wrote: >> Serge Rielau said: >> >>>Mark Townsend wrote: >>> >>>>Serge Rielau wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>>IBMs primary business is innovation, It is NOT fighting Oracle or >>>>>Microsoft. >>>> >>>>Tell me one innovative thing that IBM has done with DB2 in the last >>>> 5-10 >>>>years. Feel free to use this deinition of innovative - >>>>http://www.hyperdictionary.com/dictionary/innovative - or cite your >>>> own. >>> >>>The whole effort around DB2 II if you look at big scale issues. >>>IBM has been pushing information integration for well over 10 yes now, >>>well ahead of its time. And pedantically, II isn't part of DB2 the product, it's only part of DB2 the brand. >> Yeah, good for IBM. Without IBM's vision, none of us pond scum round the >> edge of the tide would ever have thought of information integration, >> even >> 10 years ago. > Wishful thinking is cheap OTC. You gotta throw some weight around to > make it happen. Oh, but some of pond scum did make it happen, 10 years ago while IBM was still "innovating" it. And IDS had VTI/VII for years before IBM had II. >>>On a much smaller scale (at the risk of sounding self promoting) within >>>the realm of SQL "SELECT FROM UPDATE" (see VLDB 2004 if you are >>>interested in research) is one of the most innovative pieces of SQL in >>>recent years. >> Yes, it's so frickin' innovative I still can't see what the point is. It >> might be really nice in a lab somewhere, but I really have never, in 20 >> years of doing this, thought, "wouldn't it be nice if..." > .. you could insert _more_than_one_row_ into a table with SERIAL Primary > key. Why would I want to? > and return the generated primary keys (e.g. reference #s of bill > payments). Yeah, right, like you're going to let something as critical as a bill payment happen without any kind of line-item auditability. > .. you could give everyone in your company a 5% raise and compute the > total cost of that action without wasting an expensive temp table, > double scanning or serializing logic in cursor. Yeah, like everyone in a department (let alone a company) will get the same pay rise every time. Or even once. And I mean, FFS, how expensive is that query going to be? Jesus! Chances are you would probably run it repeatedly anyway. > .. you could move (not copy!) a set of rows from one table to another > using SQL. Whoop de do: a) why would I have two identical tables and b) why wouldn't I want to be able to audit what I've done by comparing both versions before I complete the move? >>>On a big scale IBM is setting the agenda with >>>eBusiness and onDemand computing. >> Sure. Accenture and HP might disagree, but hey, what do they know? IBM >> are >> the innovators, right? > Watch the timeline, what came first: onDemand or utilityComputing (is > that the HP word?)? Watch the ability to deliver, according to the analysts. Anyway, eBusiness and On Demand are nothing more or less than: "here are all the things we sell, wrapped up in a load of marketing speak. Here are consulting services to streamline your business processes (because no-one has ever thought that was important before) and some self-healing tin and software (depending on how you define self-healing, of course) -- and no-one ever thought that reducing the body count or improving customer response was a good thing either, did they? No one has ever, ever, ever thought "Wow, wouldn't it be cool if we could make all our computer resources appear as one big pool". I mean, I wasn't looking at technology in the application space in the mid 90s that did exactly that, was I? So, as far as I can see, IBM's visionary innovation amounts to "let's take a whole bunch of blindingly obvious ideas and package it up as a strategy." >>>IBM Hardware is sold running Oracle DBMS on it. >> Well, duh! > Also duh if IBM Hardware comes with Sybase or Oracle (so Larry wants in > the future) preconfigured? Sign of closed or open? > http://www.internetnews.com/dev-news/article.php/3441591 Yes, IBM is a fully open company because they can pre-install software products from other vendors. That definitely differentiates them from other vendors. That is, in fact, very innovative as well. Can you imagine how much easier life would be if you could buy your desktop PC with an operating system from another vendor pre-installed, and maybe some applications as well? I think I'll patent that innovative idea. >>>IBM Websphere is very popular with Oracle (how else could it beat BEA?) >> Well, duh! > You repeat yourself. Closed or Open? I repeat myself because you did. Or did "software based on EJB" suddenly imply some kind of proprietary thing while I wasn't watching? >>>IBM Rational tools are open. >> Bought in, doesn't count. > Time will tell. Well, then, you can't use them as an example. >> Anyway, can you guys go have your pissing contest over in the cdo >> hierarchy or in cddb2? > Why cddb2? This is a high level IBM debate. Which has got sod-all to do with Informix, and until IBM makes IDS a central plank of the On Demand strategy nothing you have said here has any relevance to an informix newsgroup. And all your innovative examples refer to DB2 products and not Informix products. -- Bye now, Obnoxio "C'est pas parce qu'on n'a rien ' dire qu'il faut fermer sa gueule" - Coluche "I'm trying to see things your way, but I can't get my head up my ass" - JCH "Ogni uomo mi guarda come se fossi una testa di cazzo" - Marco I went to the airport to check in and they asked what I did because I looked like a terrorist. I said I was a comedian. They said, "Say something funny then." I told them I had just graduated from flying school. -- Ahmed Ahmed sending to informix-list