Re: backhanded compliment from Larry Ellison - Mailing list pgsql-advocacy

I agree, though I think the motivation for his quote was more to elevate
Oracle above the rest. By implying that PostgreSQL will give MS a run for
its money, he implies that both MS and PostgreSQL are in the same class-yet
inferior to Oracle. It's a wonderfully crafted statement. I'm taking it as
praise, with promotion of Oracle on the side, which is to be expected.

I also agree that when PostgreSQL goes native win32, all heck will break
loose in terms of competition and deployments. I'm pretty tech savvy, but I
found it not an easy thing to get it running under windows. Mostly, it was
not-up-to-date or lacking documentation on the web (mostly regarding the IPC
service), but enough searching got me what I needed to know.

This however is insufficient when courting the window's market. I'm afraid
you'll need a gui installer and gui administration tool for the click-n-fix
MCS[E|A]s that would be in charge of it. Gaining their acceptance is key for
PostgreSQL to succeed in the enterprise.

-J

-----Original Message-----
From: pgsql-advocacy-owner@postgresql.org
[mailto:pgsql-advocacy-owner@postgresql.org]On Behalf Of Shane McChesney
Sent: Wednesday, November 20, 2002 1:44 PM
To: josh@agliodbs.com; pgsql-advocacy@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [pgsql-advocacy] backhanded compliment from Larry Ellison


On Wed, 20 Nov 2002 09:16:29 -0800, Josh Berkus wrote:
>Robert,
>
>>He was then quoted as saying "They are a bigger threat to
>>[Microsoft]
>>SQL Server than Oracle."
>
>I've always felt the same.  In fact, I tried to persuade the
>president of Great Bridge to target SQL Server before taking on
>Oracle, without success.

I've got to disagree with LarryE on this one, although I agree with
many of Josh's points in that last email.

As I've written lately and Josh pointed out here:

> ... over the last 5 years,
>Oracle's license revenue has shrunk while their service revenue has
>climbed steadily.

..while we cannot say the same about Microsoft's license revenues.

Oracle and PostgreSQL run on the same platforms, but PostgreSQL does
not yet run natively on Windows. We'll get there, but until we do
PostgreSQL cannot nearly be the competitive consideration in MS shops
that it is in Oracle shops.

I know that Oracle and PostgreSQL use more similar procedural
languages than PostgreSQL and MS SQL Server do, making conversion (at
least theoretically) slightly easier from Oracle than from MS.

Speaking as a PostgreSQL newbie and a Linux newbie, but as the
president of a small and therefore supposedly nimble company: getting
out of Windows 2000 and MS SQL Server and into Linux and PostgreSQL
is not an easy task, and that's more the OS than the DBMS.

Maybe Larry defines the word "threat" as something in the future, a
bad thing that hasn't happened yet. As in the big kid who beat you up
and took your lunch money earlier today is no longer a threat, he's a
painful reality.

Since we'll have a big effect on MS eventually, and PostgreSQL has
been having a big effect on Oracle for some time now, well, in that
sense, I guess Larry is right, it may be more of a "threat" to MS.

PostgreSQL is already *more* than a threat to Oracle, it's a promise.

Anyway, Josh is right: alliances are as important as marketing and
support and having a top-notch product to the success of PostgreSQL
going forward.

I have no doubt we'll see more and more firms building their software
on PostgreSQL over time.

- Shane McChesney


---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to majordomo@postgresql.org