Hi,
You might have already seen this, however if you haven't this may interest you:
http://monty-says.blogspot.com/2009/12/help-saving-mysql.htm l
--
Richard Heyes
HTML5 canvas graphing: RGraph - www.rgraph.net (updated 12th December
- now with IE support!)
Lots of PHP and Javascript code - http://www.phpguru.org
--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
richard@rgraph.net wrote:
> Hi,
>
> You might have already seen this, however if you haven't this may interest you:
>
> http://monty-says.blogspot.com/2009/12/help-saving-mysql.htm l
>
>
Sent my appeal to comp-merger-registry@ec.europa.eu and I would suggest
everyone on this list does the same.
The European Union does not exactly have a good track record when it
comes to software and patents.
Best regards,
Stijn Verholen
--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
--001636833e7e0c3fdf047aaa3d6a
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
You might also like this:
Come on Monty - Lukas Smith http://bit.ly/5lmwwD
--001636833e7e0c3fdf047aaa3d6a--
Lenin wrote:
> You might also like this:
> Come on Monty - Lukas Smith http://bit.ly/5lmwwD
I've been watching some of this debate with interest, but I'll stay with a
database that has none of the baggage that MySQL has always had, and IS
currently replacing Oracle in many large sites :)
--
Lester Caine - G8HFL
-----------------------------
Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact
L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk
EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/
Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk//
Firebird - http://www.firebirdsql.org/index.php
--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
On Dec 14, 2009, at 12:51 AM, Lester Caine wrote:
> Lenin wrote:
>> You might also like this:
>> Come on Monty - Lukas Smith http://bit.ly/5lmwwD
>=20
> I've been watching some of this debate with interest, but I'll stay =
with a database that has none of the baggage that MySQL has always had, =
and IS currently replacing Oracle in many large sites :)
>=20
> --=20
> Lester Caine - G8HFL
Do share your db of interest... (and please don't say MSSQL).
~Philip
--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
--=-hmgIPt5BCrkQOozHZ67u
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
On Mon, 2009-12-14 at 15:59 -0600, Philip Thompson wrote:
> On Dec 14, 2009, at 12:51 AM, Lester Caine wrote:
>
> > Lenin wrote:
> >> You might also like this:
> >> Come on Monty - Lukas Smith http://bit.ly/5lmwwD
> >
> > I've been watching some of this debate with interest, but I'll stay with a database that has none of the baggage that MySQL has always had, and IS currently replacing Oracle in many large sites :)
> >
> > --
> > Lester Caine - G8HFL
>
> Do share your db of interest... (and please don't say MSSQL).
>
> ~Philip
>
>
MSSQL has nearly brought me to tears and could have easily made me bald
through hair pulling!
I have to say, I do like MySQL, it's very flexible and fast, and being
able to choose different storage engines for different tables in the
same DB is brilliant! I really don't think there's anything to overly
worry about from Oracle, as the two DB's have different audiences.
Thanks,
Ash
http://www.ashleysheridan.co.uk
--=-hmgIPt5BCrkQOozHZ67u--
On 14 Dec 2009, at 22:01, Ashley Sheridan
wrote:
> On Mon, 2009-12-14 at 15:59 -0600, Philip Thompson wrote:
>
>> On Dec 14, 2009, at 12:51 AM, Lester Caine wrote:
>>
>>> Lenin wrote:
>>>> You might also like this:
>>>> Come on Monty - Lukas Smith http://bit.ly/5lmwwD
>>>
>>> I've been watching some of this debate with interest, but I'll
>>> stay with a database that has none of the baggage that MySQL has
>>> always had, and IS currently replacing Oracle in many large sites :)
>>>
>>> --
>>> Lester Caine - G8HFL
>>
>> Do share your db of interest... (and please don't say MSSQL).
>>
>> ~Philip
>>
>>
>
>
> MSSQL has nearly brought me to tears and could have easily made me
> bald
> through hair pulling!
>
> I have to say, I do like MySQL, it's very flexible and fast, and being
> able to choose different storage engines for different tables in the
> same DB is brilliant! I really don't think there's anything to overly
> worry about from Oracle, as the two DB's have different audiences.
>
> Thanks,
> Ash
> http://www.ashleysheridan.co.uk
>
>
Unfortunately, I do not share your optimism. I believe that Oracle
taking over MySQL would be a disaster of epic proportions.
The "different audiences" theory has been bought up several times but
I haven't [to date] seen a sound justification for it. Oracle wants
everyone to use ... Oracle, I can't see how this "different audiences"
theory is going to make Oracle promote MySQL, perhaps someone can tell
me?
I don't think the EU would be able to do anything about it. The
powerful companies almost always get what they want.
I don't think Monty wouldn't be doing this unless he felt that
something [put mildly] bad is coming.
What has happened, has happened. Trying to figure out who is to blame
for this mess is pointless. Ideally, It would be nice if Oracle took
its claws off MySQL and found another project to ruin.
Note: I am *not* trying to spread FUD
--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Philip Thompson wrote:
> On Dec 14, 2009, at 12:51 AM, Lester Caine wrote:
>
>> Lenin wrote:
>>> You might also like this:
>>> Come on Monty - Lukas Smith http://bit.ly/5lmwwD
>> I've been watching some of this debate with interest, but I'll stay with a database that has none of the baggage that MySQL has always had, and IS currently replacing Oracle in many large sites :)
>>
>> --
>> Lester Caine - G8HFL
>
> Do share your db of interest... (and please don't say MSSQL).
It's on my sig ....
Firebird
It was Jim Starkey who wrote the original code for it and who MySQL poached to
try and create a version of MySQL with the same power. Something which has not
been completed.
I've been running Firebird since it's closed source Interbase days last century!
--
Lester Caine - G8HFL
-----------------------------
Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact
L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk
EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/
Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk//
Firebird - http://www.firebirdsql.org/index.php
--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
--=-h9B6t2+gwV7yHpNU7Bnu
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
On Tue, 2009-12-15 at 02:53 +0000, Joseph Masoud wrote:
> On 14 Dec 2009, at 22:01, Ashley Sheridan
> wrote:
>
> > On Mon, 2009-12-14 at 15:59 -0600, Philip Thompson wrote:
> >
> >> On Dec 14, 2009, at 12:51 AM, Lester Caine wrote:
> >>
> >>> Lenin wrote:
> >>>> You might also like this:
> >>>> Come on Monty - Lukas Smith http://bit.ly/5lmwwD
> >>>
> >>> I've been watching some of this debate with interest, but I'll
> >>> stay with a database that has none of the baggage that MySQL has
> >>> always had, and IS currently replacing Oracle in many large sites :)
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> Lester Caine - G8HFL
> >>
> >> Do share your db of interest... (and please don't say MSSQL).
> >>
> >> ~Philip
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> > MSSQL has nearly brought me to tears and could have easily made me
> > bald
> > through hair pulling!
> >
> > I have to say, I do like MySQL, it's very flexible and fast, and being
> > able to choose different storage engines for different tables in the
> > same DB is brilliant! I really don't think there's anything to overly
> > worry about from Oracle, as the two DB's have different audiences.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Ash
> > http://www.ashleysheridan.co.uk
> >
> >
> Unfortunately, I do not share your optimism. I believe that Oracle
> taking over MySQL would be a disaster of epic proportions.
>
> The "different audiences" theory has been bought up several times but
> I haven't [to date] seen a sound justification for it. Oracle wants
> everyone to use ... Oracle, I can't see how this "different audiences"
> theory is going to make Oracle promote MySQL, perhaps someone can tell
> me?
>
> I don't think the EU would be able to do anything about it. The
> powerful companies almost always get what they want.
>
> I don't think Monty wouldn't be doing this unless he felt that
> something [put mildly] bad is coming.
>
> What has happened, has happened. Trying to figure out who is to blame
> for this mess is pointless. Ideally, It would be nice if Oracle took
> its claws off MySQL and found another project to ruin.
>
> Note: I am *not* trying to spread FUD
I've always been led to believe that you go with MySQL if you want
speed, Oracle if you want data integrity. I know they both handle each
one admirably, but Oracle is known more for guarding the data against
mishaps and MySQL is known more for performance. I just think it may be
a little early to be condemning Oracle yet, we should wait a little to
at least see what stance they have on the whole thing. And before you
ask, no I have no connection to Oracle, I'm an avid MySQL fan!
Thanks,
Ash
http://www.ashleysheridan.co.uk
--=-h9B6t2+gwV7yHpNU7Bnu--
On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 12:03:23PM +0000, Ashley Sheridan wrote:
>
> I've always been led to believe that you go with MySQL if you want
> speed, Oracle if you want data integrity. I know they both handle each
> one admirably, but Oracle is known more for guarding the data against
> mishaps and MySQL is known more for performance.
PostgreSQL generally matches MySQL in performance, and maintains
referential integrity (foreign keys and such) without the need for
multiple backend storage engines.
Paul
--
Paul M. Foster
--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
--Apple-Mail-1--798548953
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset=us-ascii
On Dec 15, 2009, at 6:03 AM, Ashley Sheridan wrote:
> On Tue, 2009-12-15 at 02:53 +0000, Joseph Masoud wrote:
>>=20
>> On 14 Dec 2009, at 22:01, Ashley Sheridan
>> wrote:
>>=20
>> > On Mon, 2009-12-14 at 15:59 -0600, Philip Thompson wrote:
>> >
>> >> On Dec 14, 2009, at 12:51 AM, Lester Caine wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> Lenin wrote:
>> >>>> You might also like this:
>> >>>> Come on Monty - Lukas Smith http://bit.ly/5lmwwD
>> >>>
>> >>> I've been watching some of this debate with interest, but I'll =20=
>> >>> stay with a database that has none of the baggage that MySQL has =20=
>> >>> always had, and IS currently replacing Oracle in many large sites =
:)
>> >>>
>> >>> --=20
>> >>> Lester Caine - G8HFL
>> >>
>> >> Do share your db of interest... (and please don't say MSSQL).
>> >>
>> >> ~Philip
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> > MSSQL has nearly brought me to tears and could have easily made me =20=
>> > bald
>> > through hair pulling!
>> >
>> > I have to say, I do like MySQL, it's very flexible and fast, and =
being
>> > able to choose different storage engines for different tables in =
the
>> > same DB is brilliant! I really don't think there's anything to =
overly
>> > worry about from Oracle, as the two DB's have different audiences.
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> > Ash
>> > http://www.ashleysheridan.co.uk
>> >
>> >
>> Unfortunately, I do not share your optimism. I believe that Oracle =20=
>> taking over MySQL would be a disaster of epic proportions.
>>=20
>> The "different audiences" theory has been bought up several times but =
=20
>> I haven't [to date] seen a sound justification for it. Oracle wants =20=
>> everyone to use ... Oracle, I can't see how this "different =
audiences" =20
>> theory is going to make Oracle promote MySQL, perhaps someone can =
tell =20
>> me?
>>=20
>> I don't think the EU would be able to do anything about it. The =20
>> powerful companies almost always get what they want.
>>=20
>> I don't think Monty wouldn't be doing this unless he felt that =20
>> something [put mildly] bad is coming.
>>=20
>> What has happened, has happened. Trying to figure out who is to =
blame =20
>> for this mess is pointless. Ideally, It would be nice if Oracle took =20=
>> its claws off MySQL and found another project to ruin.
>>=20
>> Note: I am *not* trying to spread FUD
>=20
> I've always been led to believe that you go with MySQL if you want =
speed, Oracle if you want data integrity. I know they both handle each =
one admirably, but Oracle is known more for guarding the data against =
mishaps and MySQL is known more for performance. I just think it may be =
a little early to be condemning Oracle yet, we should wait a little to =
at least see what stance they have on the whole thing. And before you =
ask, no I have no connection to Oracle, I'm an avid MySQL fan!
>=20
> Thanks,
> Ash
> http://www.ashleysheridan.co.uk
>=20
Let's not forget one of the biggest decisions on why people choose MySQL =
over Oracle/MSSQL.... it's way cheap. So cheap they're nearly giving it =
away. Oh wait! They ARE giving it away. You start to piss people off =
whenever you take away their working, free option. Also by being open =
source, you have plenty of people that have the opportunity to work with =
it. The biggest reason I haven't messed with Oracle (except in college =
for my db class) is that it's expensive. Don't underestimate how cheap =
people are. There's your "different audience."
~Philip=
--Apple-Mail-1--798548953--
--0016e6da2e7e27ba74047addcb3f
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 3:14 PM, Philip Thompson
> On Dec 15, 2009, at 6:03 AM, Ashley Sheridan wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 2009-12-15 at 02:53 +0000, Joseph Masoud wrote:
> >>
> >> On 14 Dec 2009, at 22:01, Ashley Sheridan
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> > On Mon, 2009-12-14 at 15:59 -0600, Philip Thompson wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> On Dec 14, 2009, at 12:51 AM, Lester Caine wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >>> Lenin wrote:
> >> >>>> You might also like this:
> >> >>>> Come on Monty - Lukas Smith http://bit.ly/5lmwwD
> >> >>>
> >> >>> I've been watching some of this debate with interest, but I'll
> >> >>> stay with a database that has none of the baggage that MySQL has
> >> >>> always had, and IS currently replacing Oracle in many large sites :)
> >> >>>
> >> >>> --
> >> >>> Lester Caine - G8HFL
> >> >>
> >> >> Do share your db of interest... (and please don't say MSSQL).
> >> >>
> >> >> ~Philip
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > MSSQL has nearly brought me to tears and could have easily made me
> >> > bald
> >> > through hair pulling!
> >> >
> >> > I have to say, I do like MySQL, it's very flexible and fast, and being
> >> > able to choose different storage engines for different tables in the
> >> > same DB is brilliant! I really don't think there's anything to overly
> >> > worry about from Oracle, as the two DB's have different audiences.
> >> >
> >> > Thanks,
> >> > Ash
> >> > http://www.ashleysheridan.co.uk
> >> >
> >> >
> >> Unfortunately, I do not share your optimism. I believe that Oracle
> >> taking over MySQL would be a disaster of epic proportions.
> >>
> >> The "different audiences" theory has been bought up several times but
> >> I haven't [to date] seen a sound justification for it. Oracle wants
> >> everyone to use ... Oracle, I can't see how this "different audiences"
> >> theory is going to make Oracle promote MySQL, perhaps someone can tell
> >> me?
> >>
> >> I don't think the EU would be able to do anything about it. The
> >> powerful companies almost always get what they want.
> >>
> >> I don't think Monty wouldn't be doing this unless he felt that
> >> something [put mildly] bad is coming.
> >>
> >> What has happened, has happened. Trying to figure out who is to blame
> >> for this mess is pointless. Ideally, It would be nice if Oracle took
> >> its claws off MySQL and found another project to ruin.
> >>
> >> Note: I am *not* trying to spread FUD
> >
> > I've always been led to believe that you go with MySQL if you want speed,
> Oracle if you want data integrity. I know they both handle each one
> admirably, but Oracle is known more for guarding the data against mishaps
> and MySQL is known more for performance. I just think it may be a little
> early to be condemning Oracle yet, we should wait a little to at least see
> what stance they have on the whole thing. And before you ask, no I have no
> connection to Oracle, I'm an avid MySQL fan!
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Ash
> > http://www.ashleysheridan.co.uk
> >
>
> Let's not forget one of the biggest decisions on why people choose MySQL
> over Oracle/MSSQL.... it's way cheap. So cheap they're nearly giving it
> away. Oh wait! They ARE giving it away. You start to piss people off
> whenever you take away their working, free option. Also by being open
> source, you have plenty of people that have the opportunity to work with it.
> The biggest reason I haven't messed with Oracle (except in college for my db
> class) is that it's expensive. Don't underestimate how cheap people are.
> There's your "different audience."
>
> ~Philip
Your rant has been repeated so many times that it is becoming like a
corporate mantra. Some of the biggest software companies in the world use
open source software (which is free as in free beer). Are companies that
use Linux or FreeBSD as their server software "cheap"? For the remainder of
my argument, I will assume that your assertions only apply to database
servers (I'm not sure why you've chosen to single them out).
It is disheartening that developers who decide to use open source software
are castigated as "cheap". Well in my case, I like to know what's under the
bonnet. That's just me, not a generalization and I emphasize that I am not
speaking on behalf of anyone.
The tenets of a successful argument include a viable theory substantiated by
reliable and independently verifiable facts (none of which exist in your
rant). I will, nevertheless, try to make sense of your logic [in my own
mind[.
I think you are making 2 assertions and then clumsily using them to prove
your claim.
Assertion 1: It is inconvenient when a successful, widely adopted and very
convenient open source solution is taken away from the community (I am aware
that there are no explicit plans to kill the project, but this is my
perception based on how Oracle treated InnoDB).
True. This is not only inconvenient, it is rude, immoral and very selfish.
Now, you tell me who's being "cheap"? Developers who implement MySQL (for
whatever reason) or Oracle by viciously going after businesses that are
happily using MySQL?
Assertion 2: People who implement Open Source Software are tawdry.
This is absurd. Period. Cost is one of the more important factors when
choosing a software solution to implement, irrespective of company or
project size. Suggesting that developers who use Open Source Software are
inferior to their counterparts using propriety software is stunning. To
convince me of this you will need to conduct a thorough survey comparing the
skill of developers from both camps. It would be exceptionally difficult to
produce the criteria that will differentiate between the two and give
reliable results that prove your claim beyond reasonable doubt.
You are claiming that the assertions above are enough to differentiate
between a typical MySQL and Oracle user. I am not convinced. Lack of
funding is a problem faced by every company in the world, it is therefore
logically flawed to use that as a differentiating factor between the
audiences.
You have failed to demonstrate how your assertions would enable Oracle to
promote and nurture MySQL so that it becomes the better database solution.
If you can't see the conflict of interest then you are knowingly choosing to
ignore reality.
With a heavy heart, I have to say that Oracle will undoubtedly get its way.
I am in no position to predict the consequences, however I do wish Monty
Widenius the best of luck in his bout with the proverbial "Big Fish".
--0016e6da2e7e27ba74047addcb3f--
--Apple-Mail-1--778805577
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset=us-ascii
On Dec 16, 2009, at 1:48 PM, Yousif Masoud wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 3:14 PM, Philip Thompson =
> On Dec 15, 2009, at 6:03 AM, Ashley Sheridan wrote:
>=20
> > On Tue, 2009-12-15 at 02:53 +0000, Joseph Masoud wrote:
> >>
> >> On 14 Dec 2009, at 22:01, Ashley Sheridan =
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> > On Mon, 2009-12-14 at 15:59 -0600, Philip Thompson wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> On Dec 14, 2009, at 12:51 AM, Lester Caine wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >>> Lenin wrote:
> >> >>>> You might also like this:
> >> >>>> Come on Monty - Lukas Smith http://bit.ly/5lmwwD
> >> >>>
> >> >>> I've been watching some of this debate with interest, but I'll
> >> >>> stay with a database that has none of the baggage that MySQL =
has
> >> >>> always had, and IS currently replacing Oracle in many large =
sites :)
> >> >>>
> >> >>> --
> >> >>> Lester Caine - G8HFL
> >> >>
> >> >> Do share your db of interest... (and please don't say MSSQL).
> >> >>
> >> >> ~Philip
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > MSSQL has nearly brought me to tears and could have easily made =
me
> >> > bald
> >> > through hair pulling!
> >> >
> >> > I have to say, I do like MySQL, it's very flexible and fast, and =
being
> >> > able to choose different storage engines for different tables in =
the
> >> > same DB is brilliant! I really don't think there's anything to =
overly
> >> > worry about from Oracle, as the two DB's have different =
audiences.
> >> >
> >> > Thanks,
> >> > Ash
> >> > http://www.ashleysheridan.co.uk
> >> >
> >> >
> >> Unfortunately, I do not share your optimism. I believe that Oracle
> >> taking over MySQL would be a disaster of epic proportions.
> >>
> >> The "different audiences" theory has been bought up several times =
but
> >> I haven't [to date] seen a sound justification for it. Oracle wants
> >> everyone to use ... Oracle, I can't see how this "different =
audiences"
> >> theory is going to make Oracle promote MySQL, perhaps someone can =
tell
> >> me?
> >>
> >> I don't think the EU would be able to do anything about it. The
> >> powerful companies almost always get what they want.
> >>
> >> I don't think Monty wouldn't be doing this unless he felt that
> >> something [put mildly] bad is coming.
> >>
> >> What has happened, has happened. Trying to figure out who is to =
blame
> >> for this mess is pointless. Ideally, It would be nice if Oracle =
took
> >> its claws off MySQL and found another project to ruin.
> >>
> >> Note: I am *not* trying to spread FUD
> >
> > I've always been led to believe that you go with MySQL if you want =
speed, Oracle if you want data integrity. I know they both handle each =
one admirably, but Oracle is known more for guarding the data against =
mishaps and MySQL is known more for performance. I just think it may be =
a little early to be condemning Oracle yet, we should wait a little to =
at least see what stance they have on the whole thing. And before you =
ask, no I have no connection to Oracle, I'm an avid MySQL fan!
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Ash
> > http://www.ashleysheridan.co.uk
> >
>=20
> Let's not forget one of the biggest decisions on why people choose =
MySQL over Oracle/MSSQL.... it's way cheap. So cheap they're nearly =
giving it away. Oh wait! They ARE giving it away. You start to piss =
people off whenever you take away their working, free option. Also by =
being open source, you have plenty of people that have the opportunity =
to work with it. The biggest reason I haven't messed with Oracle (except =
in college for my db class) is that it's expensive. Don't underestimate =
how cheap people are. There's your "different audience."
>=20
> ~Philip
> Your rant has been repeated so many times that it is becoming like a =
corporate mantra. Some of the biggest software companies in the world =
use open source software (which is free as in free beer). Are companies =
that use Linux or FreeBSD as their server software "cheap"? For the =
remainder of my argument, I will assume that your assertions only apply =
to database servers (I'm not sure why you've chosen to single them out).
>=20
> It is disheartening that developers who decide to use open source =
software are castigated as "cheap". Well in my case, I like to know =
what's under the bonnet. That's just me, not a generalization and I =
emphasize that I am not speaking on behalf of anyone.
>=20
> The tenets of a successful argument include a viable theory =
substantiated by reliable and independently verifiable facts (none of =
which exist in your rant). I will, nevertheless, try to make sense of =
your logic [in my own mind[.
>=20
> I think you are making 2 assertions and then clumsily using them to =
prove your claim.
>=20
> Assertion 1: It is inconvenient when a successful, widely adopted and =
very convenient open source solution is taken away from the community (I =
am aware that there are no explicit plans to kill the project, but this =
is my perception based on how Oracle treated InnoDB).
>=20
> True. This is not only inconvenient, it is rude, immoral and very =
selfish. Now, you tell me who's being "cheap"? Developers who =
implement MySQL (for whatever reason) or Oracle by viciously going after =
businesses that are happily using MySQL?
>=20
> Assertion 2: People who implement Open Source Software are tawdry.
> This is absurd. Period. Cost is one of the more important factors =
when choosing a software solution to implement, irrespective of company =
or project size. Suggesting that developers who use Open Source =
Software are inferior to their counterparts using propriety software is =
stunning. To convince me of this you will need to conduct a thorough =
survey comparing the skill of developers from both camps. It would be =
exceptionally difficult to produce the criteria that will differentiate =
between the two and give reliable results that prove your claim beyond =
reasonable doubt.
>=20
> You are claiming that the assertions above are enough to differentiate =
between a typical MySQL and Oracle user. I am not convinced. Lack of =
funding is a problem faced by every company in the world, it is =
therefore logically flawed to use that as a differentiating factor =
between the audiences.
>=20
> You have failed to demonstrate how your assertions would enable Oracle =
to promote and nurture MySQL so that it becomes the better database =
solution. If you can't see the conflict of interest then you are =
knowingly choosing to ignore reality.
>=20
> With a heavy heart, I have to say that Oracle will undoubtedly get its =
way. I am in no position to predict the consequences, however I do wish =
Monty Widenius the best of luck in his bout with the proverbial "Big =
Fish". =20
Ooops! I forgot to conclude my last email with... "Tongue in cheek."
~Philip=
--Apple-Mail-1--778805577--