Buy Zyprexa Without Prescription http://freedb2.com/2009/09/22/ellison-oracle-does-not-compete-with-mysql-mysql-disagrees/ Big Data, Hadoop, free databases and a whole lot of Cloud Computing Fri, 23 Dec 2011 04:54:52 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 Buy Zyprexa Without Prescription http://freedb2.com/2009/09/22/ellison-oracle-does-not-compete-with-mysql-mysql-disagrees/comment-page-1/#comment-7819 Leon Mon, 19 Apr 2010 15:35:14 +0000 http://freedb2.com/?p=865#comment-7819 Nate, I think there is a difference between MySQL being competitive and MySQL competing. In my view, there is a market category i.e. DBMS and MySQL definitely competes in that category. There is no denying that MySQL is the most used RDBMS when it comes to websites and web applications. Oracle, DB2, SQL Server, PostgreSQL all all competitors in that category. I think the question you raise is around "competitiveness" of MySQL in terms of it being deliver the right set of features, reliability, security and scalability to compete with he likes of Oracle and DB2. I would very much agree that MySQL does not have many of the features that commercial DBMS deliver. As I said in my <a href="http://freedb2.com/2010/04/18/mysql-conference-the-state-of-the-mysql-community/" rel="nofollow">blog post on the MySQL Conference</a>, in my opinion, MySQL community is not as deep as say DB2 or Oracle communities. However, I would not dismiss MySQL as a player. Exactly the same arguments were made about Windows for quite some time. Despite that, Windows is the number one server operating system and enjoys a virtual monopoly on the desktop. Features and functions are not the only thing that make a product competitive. Simplicity and ubiquity are very important and while many find MYSQL lacking on the technology side, few will deny that it has ubiquity to be a major player in the DBMS market. Nate, I think there is a difference between MySQL being competitive and MySQL competing. In my view, there is a market category i.e. DBMS and MySQL definitely competes in that category. There is no denying that MySQL is the most used RDBMS when it comes to websites and web applications. Oracle, DB2, SQL Server, PostgreSQL all all competitors in that category.
I think the question you raise is around “competitiveness” of MySQL in terms of it being deliver the right set of features, reliability, security and scalability to compete with he likes of Oracle and DB2. I would very much agree that MySQL does not have many of the features that commercial DBMS deliver. As I said in my blog post on the MySQL Conference, in my opinion, MySQL community is not as deep as say DB2 or Oracle communities. However, I would not dismiss MySQL as a player. Exactly the same arguments were made about Windows for quite some time. Despite that, Windows is the number one server operating system and enjoys a virtual monopoly on the desktop. Features and functions are not the only thing that make a product competitive. Simplicity and ubiquity are very important and while many find MYSQL lacking on the technology side, few will deny that it has ubiquity to be a major player in the DBMS market.

]]> Buy Zyprexa Without Prescription http://freedb2.com/2009/09/22/ellison-oracle-does-not-compete-with-mysql-mysql-disagrees/comment-page-1/#comment-7769 Nate Sat, 17 Apr 2010 00:05:20 +0000 http://freedb2.com/?p=865#comment-7769 MySQL doesn't compete with Oracle. MySQL can't compete with Oracle. MySQL isn't even really competitive with Microsoft SQL Server, and certainly not with IBM DB2. I'm not saying MySQL isn't good, but it competes mostly with OpenSource and niche/low marketshare databases like PostgreSQL, Firebird, Interbase, etc. It's nice to think "it's a database too, so therefore it's a competitor," but that's not the way these things work. Sorry. Around here, MySQL is more of a buzzword than anything. The tooling for MySQL is terrible, it's STILL catching up to other databases in features, and much of what's said about it is a contradiction. MySQL doesn’t compete with Oracle. MySQL can’t compete with Oracle. MySQL isn’t even really competitive with Microsoft SQL Server, and certainly not with IBM DB2.

I’m not saying MySQL isn’t good, but it competes mostly with OpenSource and niche/low marketshare databases like PostgreSQL, Firebird, Interbase, etc.

It’s nice to think “it’s a database too, so therefore it’s a competitor,” but that’s not the way these things work. Sorry.

Around here, MySQL is more of a buzzword than anything. The tooling for MySQL is terrible, it’s STILL catching up to other databases in features, and much of what’s said about it is a contradiction.

]]> Buy Zyprexa Without Prescription http://freedb2.com/2009/09/22/ellison-oracle-does-not-compete-with-mysql-mysql-disagrees/comment-page-1/#comment-4927 Leon Sun, 25 Oct 2009 00:56:04 +0000 http://freedb2.com/?p=865#comment-4927 What I am saying is that Larry will say whatever is needed to close the deal. Every day the deal is not closed SUN hemorrhages millions of $s and if this drags on much longer there will not be much left for Larry to inherit for his money. Saying that MySQL does not compete with oracle is complete bull. It may not compete in some segments and both go after the same $ in many accounts. That is called competition. MySQL may not win as much as Oracle but it does not mean they don't compete. Providing what oracle provides for less money has been their strategy from day one and that is spelled out in plain English on their website. As for my opinion on whether EU should or should not approve the deal I expressed it in one of my earlier posts on the topic http://freedb2.com/2009/05/15/mysql-escapes-oracles-grasp/. I think EU should approve because it does not matter. MySQL has already left Oracle's grasp and I don't think it makes any difference how the deal is concluded. What I am saying is that Larry will say whatever is needed to close the deal. Every day the deal is not closed SUN hemorrhages millions of $s and if this drags on much longer there will not be much left for Larry to inherit for his money. Saying that MySQL does not compete with oracle is complete bull. It may not compete in some segments and both go after the same $ in many accounts. That is called competition. MySQL may not win as much as Oracle but it does not mean they don’t compete. Providing what oracle provides for less money has been their strategy from day one and that is spelled out in plain English on their website.
As for my opinion on whether EU should or should not approve the deal I expressed it in one of my earlier posts on the topic http://freedb2.com/2009/05/15/mysql-escapes-oracles-grasp/. I think EU should approve because it does not matter. MySQL has already left Oracle’s grasp and I don’t think it makes any difference how the deal is concluded.

]]> Buy Zyprexa Without Prescription http://freedb2.com/2009/09/22/ellison-oracle-does-not-compete-with-mysql-mysql-disagrees/comment-page-1/#comment-4913 Jeff Fri, 23 Oct 2009 15:53:24 +0000 http://freedb2.com/?p=865#comment-4913 So what you're saying is that the EC should base their decision on what a company posts on their website? MySQL has a fraction of the the database market share. That's like saying someone on the boxing featherweight class competes with a boxer in the heavyweight class. Lary's right...and you are grasping at straws just like the EC is. Their "real" agenda is to hurt Oracle, which helps SAP. So what you’re saying is that the EC should base their decision on what a company posts on their website? MySQL has a fraction of the the database market share. That’s like saying someone on the boxing featherweight class competes with a boxer in the heavyweight class. Lary’s right…and you are grasping at straws just like the EC is. Their “real” agenda is to hurt Oracle, which helps SAP.

]]>