Re: IBM DB2 serious alternative to Oracle/Informix?

In <5qnui7$k1n@camel1.mindspring.com>, Michael Ruminer wrote: }jbrock@panix.com (John Brock) wrote: } }>In article <33BBEC44.692F2A8A@mindspring.com>, }>Tim Schaefer <tschaefe@mindspring.com> wrote: } }>If IBM -- which controls the mainframe DB market but doesn't have much }>of a foothold in the client/server world -- were really interested in }>swaying non-DB2 people to DB2, their best bet might be to try to buy }>market share, by selling what is generally acknowledged as a world }>class database engine at fire sale prices. Hey! According to the }>original poster, that's exactly what they're doing! If DB2 on Unix and }>NT really does have a 10 to 1 price advantage over Oracle and Informix }>(can that possibly be right???) it strikes me as a *much* stronger }>incentive than a well coordinated color scheme. <snip> }The above is exactly why I had my company buy DB2. You can get a }world class Database for UNIX at a fraction of the cost that I would }have ever expected. } } Data isn't pretty. If an interface is needed - I'll build it. I }just want an engine to store and query and retrive the data. I'll }control it's interface. } }I'm looking forward to using the product. An excellent product at an }unbelievable price. That is truly incentive. } If your company is really interested in cheapest the RDBMS, and are willing to take chances then DB2 may a wrong choice. Go get so called "POSTGRES", which claims latest features like Informix Universal Server, SQL-92 Standard and is absolutely FREE !!!. But remember whenever something is very cheap or free it will normally lead you into trouble, at least that is what the corporate world do. My best wiches to POSTGRES & DB2 Felix K. Mathews mailto:fmathews@systems.dhl.com