At 10:59 PM 14-04-2001 -0400, Lamar Owen wrote:
>http://www.crn.com/Sections/Fast_Forward/fast_forward.asp?ArticleID=25670
>
>Marc will be pleased to note that the PostgreSQL project came out of the
>FreeBSD project, and is Great Bridge's database. Gotta love
>journalistic license.
Reporter must have missed the April 1st deadline.
;)
Still I must point out that the article isn't negative. And if it's read by
PHB's it doesn't make a difference anyway <grin>- the general gist is: it's
decent, cheap, and virtually as good as proprietary databases.
So what if there are factual errors. This is mass-media we're talking
about. Just point it out if it's really negative AND it's strategically
appropriate to do so.
By saying there's "nothing factual" does that apply to the following as well?
"Great Bridge is on the forefront of the open-source movement in providing
tools that are enterprisewide and capable, and what's compelling is they
provide the 24x7 support"
I think some of you guys are overreacting. It's almost like those FreeBSD
advocates slamming Tucows or something.
Maybe you guys should get some Great Bridge marketing/PR person to handle
stuff like this.
Cheerio,
Link.
