On Thu, 2005-05-19 at 11:35, Philip Hallstrom wrote:
> >>> ...We are proposing that Postgres be used for the application database.
> >>> Not too surprisingly we are being asked for additional information because
> >>> Postgres is open source.
> >>>
> > So is the implication that they think open source is a bad thing? I would
> > think they would question a recommendation for using proprietory products!
>
> It's all about covering their butts... If they buy SQLServer and it goes
> bad, they can sue Microsoft. Or at least they like to think they can.
Ummm. No, they can't. But they can BLAME microsoft to their bosses.
Microsoft's EULA, like most for commercial software, makes it clear that
all you'll ever get out of them is your money back. And even that is a
stretch.
Read up on their "indemnity". It's basically a money back guarantee,
and nothing more.
> If PostgreSQL goes bad, who are they going to sue?
The same people they would sue if MSSQL went south...
> No one...
Correct.
> which means
> the guy who approved it is the scape goat
Sadly, lots of people in positions of power still want scape goats,
rather than proven results.
> -- which is why he wants proof
> that others have found it worthy...
When what he should want is proof that it will work for HIS situation,
since other's use may or may not reflect his.
> Silly, but that's probably what's happening.
Most surely. It's common when people with business degrees but poor
understanding of the scientific method get involved.
