Opinion without even one cited strong argument ...
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| TxtEdMacs Feb 11, 2006 9:54 AM EDT |
While indeed this on the surface seems to be the most generous "free" (as in no charge) offering by a commercial vendor of a real RDBMS, it by no means is a killer of either PostgreSQL and MySQL. Regarding the latter, neither the fully free version or its commercial support version will suffer greatly if at all. And the former, will continue to grow too, albeit at its slower pace than seen of MySQL. This move by IBM, if the details are examined are more likely to impact Microsoft. Both Oracle and now IBM offer the less knowledgeable an easier to use administration module to set up and maintain a significant tool. The moves by both make it more difficult for MS to simply pick up the lower end (really mid-range) market on Windows without significant competition. Nonetheless, there may be a casualty form this move among the commercial vendors. Just because you are offered a free (no charge) version does not make it a total win. Could anyone tell me the SQL language version that IBM uses? I have no clue, which should indicate that it is not widely known. Moreover, just about anybody in the database area knows of Oracle's PL/SQL and Sybase's/Microsoft's Transact-SQL that are used to setup / maintain data structures and to compose stored procedures. While SQL is supposed to be a defined standard, not all work exactly the same for similar commands nor are all commands supported by every vendor. Moving from Transact-SQL to PL/SQL can be a shock even for someone that thought they preferred the Oracle syntax. In places Microsoft's implementation / extensions / emphasis in commands paralleling those of Sybase can be wildly differing. Hence, what is the investment required to become somewhat proficient in the DB2 SQL syntax? I have no informed idea, but I suspect other than mainframers or large installations that skill is not widely distributed. Therefore, IBM's goal may be more modest: gaining new developers that learn on the free version. Too many times the death or replacement of some piece of hardware / OS / application are promiscuously predicted to fade only itself into oblivion, hence, until I see some measurable indication of a trend I tend to be skeptical. Perhaps you too should take a similar stance. |
| bstadil Feb 11, 2006 7:26 PM EDT |
[quote]This move by IBM, if the details are examined are more likely to impact Microsoft[/unquote] Your are quite right here. It was MS that started this with the introduction of a free low end version of SQL Server 2005. Oracle followed 2 month ago and now IBM. MS probably did this as a strategic move against MySQL, PostgreSQL as MS is the weaker enterprise DB vs IBM and Oracle. They wanted to check the low end and position themselves to move up the stack. The move by Oracle and IBM has pretty much foiled this and now it is not clear what kind of strategy they can persue. The Windows underpinning is a real problem and Oracle is hammering away at them notably using linux, A friend of mine is the Open Source Guru at Oracle and his blog is insightful and quite entertaining if you are interested in this subject. http://otazi.blogspot.com/ |
Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [ForumMods, SITEADMINS, MEMBERS.]
Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!