Andrej Ricnik-Bay wrote:
> On 14/03/2008, rrahul <rahul.rathi@cognizant.com> wrote:
>
>> Thanks to all you wonderful people out their. I don't know if its your love
>> for Postgres or nepothism that makes it look far superior than mysql.
>> But why does the client list dosen't tell that?
>> I see Mysql bosting for Google,Yahoo, Alcatel......
>> What about Postgres the list is not that impressive.
>>
> What can I say? 96% of personal computers run some form of
> windows. Does that mean it's a superior product to a PC running
> Linux, or a Mac w/ MacOS?
> I'd say "no" (actually more like "NOOO!"), because windows doesn't let
> me do 80% of the things that I do (need to do) with my PC.
>
> >From the fact hat the user-base is so massive, can I deduce that
> windows is superior in terms of security or easy maintenance?
> My personal experience says "No, no way".
Whoa! Sure glad I read this thread. I was about to buy a Bentley but now
that I know that sales figures are the sole measure of quality I can see
that the Kia is clearly a superior vehicle.
But seriously, some of the most disappointing products and services I've
had the misfortune to connect with were also the most popular choices.
It's interesting to look at the past several years' Linux Journal
Readers' Choice Awards (basically a popularity contest) where MySql
consistently takes top place vs. the Editors' Choice Awards where the
writers have to lay-out their evaluation/reasoning. For the editors,
PostgreSQL is #1 year after year.
Also, a simple "used by" is pretty meaningless as it can range from
"core component of large-scale mission-critical 24x7 infrastructure" to
"used by secretary to manage holiday card list". If you are a marketroid
attempting to assemble an impressive-looking client list, guess where
the threshold will be.
Cheers,
Steve
