Ron Mayer wrote:
> Justin Clift wrote:
> > Nick Fankhauser wrote:[...]
> > > "An Enterprise-Level Database, Free."
> >
> > How about:[...]
> > "An Enterprise-Level Database, Saving You Money"
>
> Curious about the term "Enterprise-Level" vs. "Enterprise"?
>
> Sybase calls theirs an "Enterprise Database for Linux"
> http://www.sybase.com/detail/1,6904,1024137,00.html
> http://www.sybase.com/detail?id=1019336
> and MSFT & Borland use that phrase as well...
> http://www.borland.com/news/press_releases/2003/06_02_03_borland_and_microsoft_team_to_deliver_solution.html
>
> For my own enlightenment, do the terms mean something different?
>
> Ron
They represent much the same buzzwords, however they are worded.
>> - Is now optmized for the AMD Opteron, increasing the family of
>> 64-bit platforms supported which already includes HP/Compaq, Alpha,
>> Sun UltraSPARC, MIPS, PA-RISC, and RS6000*. 64-bit platforms are
>> designed to be a new class of high-performance computing, with
>> greater levels of computing power and scaleability needed for
>> enterprise level systems.
>
>Oh, that's the money shot! Very nice. -sc
It may be "very nice" if the goal is to produce something that sounds
good whilst being totally content-free. But I thought that was the
sort of thing that people would only stoop to if they didn't have any
_real_ functionality to talk about.
Can we have at least _some_ content in that, suggesting something
about why you might actually care about 64 bits, aside from being
maximally buzzword-compliant?
The two major demonstrable merits of 64 bit systems are that:
a) They can access a pile of memory. An appropriate phrase might be:
"allow applications to use very large amounts of memory, breaking the
32 bit barrier of 4GB"
b) They can manipulate larger objects directly, manipulate higher
precision values more efficiently, and [probably other stuff
that isn't occurring to me].
--
output = reverse("ofni.smrytrebil" "@" "enworbbc")
<http://cbbrowne.com/info/alpha.html>
Christopher Browne
(416) 646 3304 x124 (land)
