On Wed, 2005-02-23 at 04:30, Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:
> > My question is, how can I refine my arguments, do you have others
> > arguments I can use? What could we say about responsabilities issue
> > regarding to PG? How can I better advocate on PG -more generally- ?
>
> The Oracle and Microsoft and IBM database licenses will all disclaim any
> responsibility for your data loss. You cannot get money off them or sue
> them for loss either.
>
This should probably be point number one because it points out that
these people have been operating under these conditions for years and so
there isn't likely to be a change legally for them. They actually
probably been living under even worse than that. Take the Micro$oft
Windows Refund issue, where in the EULA they specifically state that if
you don't use the OS you can return it for a full refund, and yet
countless numbers of people have tried and been unsuccessful in getting
those refunds due to the hoops their corporate lawyers make you jump
through... and remember this is when they have an agreement up front to
give you money back.
I think the situation actually improves when you choose software like
postgresql because you have a choice of vendors to get support from, so
you can look for vendors to take on as much responsibility as you need.
If you pick $ql $server and have a problem with Micro$oft support, where
else are you going to turn? This actually isn't just a problem for
commercial software; even software like my$ql or ingres have the issue
of very tight vendor control, so your options are limited. With
postgresql you have the ability to hit people where they really feel it,
and that is by taking away future business, and it is not an empty
threat because you can switch to another postgresql service provider and
not have to change a single line of code.
Robert Treat
--
Build A Brighter Lamp :: Linux Apache {middleware} PostgreSQL
