On Thu, Sep 21, 2006 at 10:48:47AM -0500, Scott Marlowe wrote:
> On Thu, 2006-09-21 at 08:47, Brad Nicholson wrote:
> > On Wed, 2006-09-20 at 16:38 -0500, Philip Hallstrom wrote:
> > > > On Wed, Sep 20, 2006 at 10:10:56AM -0500, Tony Caduto wrote:
> > > >> For a high level corp manager all they ever hear about is MS SQL Server,
> > > >> Oracle and DB2, and the more it costs the more they think it is what
> > > >> they need :-)
> > > >
> > > > I think that description is false. At a certain point in the
> > > > management hierarchy, the only way anyone has the ability to evaluate
> > > > something is on the basis of reputation.
> > >
> > > I think that description is false. At a certain point in the management
> > > hierarchy, the only way anyone has the ability to evaluate something is on
> > > the basis of....
> > >
> > > - if there is someone they can sue.
> >
> > Good luck attempting to sue Microsoft, Oracle or IBM for deficiencies in
> > their database products.
>
> I had a boss once who panned PostgreSQL because he wanted a company to
> be able to blame if things went wrong. I asked him if it wasn't more
> important to worry about preventing things from going wrong in the first
> place. I got a rather blank stare for a while. No answer.
And now-a-days, there's at least 2 US companies you can pay for the
right to blame when something goes wrong.
--
Jim Nasby jim@nasby.net
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com 512.569.9461 (cell)
