[Fwd: Article about supposed "murky" future for Oracle]

FYI. Ron <fdf@dmb.no> wrote in comp.databases.informix: > I found an interesting article by Karen Southwick about Oracle's > supposed "murky" (in her own words) future. Can someone counter her > arguments. > > http://news.com.com/2010-1071-5072299.html > > Should I select Oracle or should I go with > > PostgreSQL.com (free and in my opinion, extremely reliable), MYSQL, > MS SQL Server or DB2? > > Thanks! Hmmm; IDS springs to mind... -- Jonathan Leffler #include <disclaimer.h> Email: jleffler@earthlink.net, jleffler@us.ibm.com Guardian of DBD::Informix v2003.04 -- http://dbi.perl.org/

"Jonathan Leffler" <jleffler@earthlink.net> wrote in message news:5Gv8c.55910$aT1.9333@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net... > FYI. > > Ron <fdf@dmb.no> wrote in comp.databases.informix: > > I found an interesting article by Karen Southwick about Oracle's > > supposed "murky" (in her own words) future. Can someone counter her > > arguments. > > > > http://news.com.com/2010-1071-5072299.html > > > > Should I select Oracle or should I go with > > > > PostgreSQL.com (free and in my opinion, extremely reliable), MYSQL, > > MS SQL Server or DB2? > > > > Thanks! > > Hmmm; IDS springs to mind... I never saw the original post alluded to. >> In its database stronghold, Oracle is seriously challenged by IBM and Microsoft. Is Oracle seriously challenged by IBM? It comes back to the argument occasionally aired here about how penetrative IBM is in the mid-market. In my own experience I encounter very, very few DB2 installations not in use either on mainframes or on AS/400s. >> After three generations of computing (mainframes, client-server and Internet), "there will be no new architecture for computing for the next 1,000 years," he proclaimed. "The computing industry is about to become boring." Well, that's quite interesting, isn't it? Grid computing is not a architecture I suppose. But what about the changes that advances in solid-state electronics will bring to processing and memory? I'm not saying he's wrong - he's the billionaire, not me, but this seems a bold claim. >> "There's no way they can grow like they did in the 1990s. More likely, they go into a decline. If they lose their core (database) business, the rest of it will crumble." But, obviously, no database company would ever precipitate such a decline by neglecting its core customers and tying itself up in knots in other products that customers didn't really want in sufficient numbers, would it? >> It's unlikely that Ellison would ever be forced out of Oracle, since he owns one-fourth of its stock and has a relatively weak board of directors. But, given his propensity for fast jets, fast cars and sleek yachts, some kind of accident is possible. You know, I really do think Ellison sometimes gets a bad press. He has been successful beyond the dreams of most of us and, although I have no chance so to indulge on a captain's salary, I hardly think he's hardly doing things that the rest of us wouldn't do given the opportunity.

Captain Pedantic wrote: > "Jonathan Leffler" <jleffler@earthlink.net> wrote: >>FYI. >> >>Ron <fdf@dmb.no> wrote in comp.databases.informix: That should be comp.databases.oracle.server, etc... >> > I found an interesting article by Karen Southwick about Oracle's >> > supposed "murky" (in her own words) future. [...] > I never saw the original post alluded to. Yeah, yeah, yeah - my mitsake. I normally type 'informix' afer comp.databases. and was running in autopilot mode - sorry. And I didn't intend to send two copies with the attachment, let alone MIME. It was late; I was tired; I boobed. Apologies. -- Jonathan Leffler #include <disclaimer.h> Email: jleffler@earthlink.net, jleffler@us.ibm.com Guardian of DBD::Informix v2003.04 -- http://dbi.perl.org/