 |
|
| Computers Forum Index » Computer - Databases - Oracle (Server) » The end is near: Coca Cola switches to UDB... |
|
Page 3 of 3 Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3 |
|
| Author |
Message |
| John Hurley... |
 Posted: Sat Oct 10, 2009 9:56 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Oct 9, 4:47 pm, joel garry <joel-ga... at (no spam) home.com> wrote:
snip
Quote: I don't think DEC was ever a major player in the computer field the
way that you appear to think they were.
Whaaaaaa? "At its peak in the late 1980s, Digital was the second-
largest computer company in the world, with over 100,000 employees." -http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Equipment_Corporation
Then what happened to them? At all of the shops I was at thru mid
90's there was little if any DEC equipment and a whole bunch of IBM.
By the late 90's oracle workloads seemed to be running mostly on sun
and hp systems. If they were that big then they must have imploded
pretty quickly. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| joel garry... |
| Posted: Sun Oct 11, 2009 12:12 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Oct 10, 2:56 pm, John Hurley <johnbhur... at (no spam) sbcglobal.net> wrote:
Quote: On Oct 9, 4:47 pm, joel garry <joel-ga... at (no spam) home.com> wrote:
snip
I don't think DEC was ever a major player in the computer field the
way that you appear to think they were.
Whaaaaaa? "At its peak in the late 1980s, Digital was the second-
largest computer company in the world, with over 100,000 employees." -http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Equipment_Corporation
Then what happened to them? At all of the shops I was at thru mid
90's there was little if any DEC equipment and a whole bunch of IBM.
By the late 90's oracle workloads seemed to be running mostly on sun
and hp systems. If they were that big then they must have imploded
pretty quickly.
Mladen's point exactly. In 1989 it seemed pretty plain to me that
oracle/unix was a good bet. I wish I had bet more than my career on
it, it turned out to be more successful than I saw - having barely
broken even getting out of my DEC stock before it crashed and burned,
I was thinking the investment advice of "invest in what you know" was
pretty lame. At the time it wasn't at all clear that Oracle would do
better than Ingres or Sybase. MS betting on Sybase was perhaps the
only reason it survived at all. Of course, anyone who bought (or was
granted options on) Oracle or MS stock at that time and then held onto
it is now thought to be genius.
What happened to DEC? It's called "the bigger they are, the harder
they fall." Also, a big part of both Oracle and DEC's success was
military/gov contracts, so when the big lump of VAXen had gone through
the snake, it hit DEC hard, but Oracle not so much, since Oracle ran
on the hp/sun replacements, and there were still requirements for
things to run on Oracle. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ken_Olsen
"Later Career History".
Oddly enough, by the mid-90's having expertise in both DEC tech and
Oracle/unix made me valuable as people dumped one for the other but
still needed their apps to work. Nowadays I look at the stuff that is
supposed to replace Oracle and just kinda feel like staying a dinosaur
until the asteroid comes. And still work on the descendants of the
system I worked on in 1980, having then found this amazing Relational
thingee, even if database-independence is like, so 90's.
Oracle won't fall like DEC because it explicitly recognizes greater
future value in apps than databases. Some publications seem to think
it might fall due to over-reliance on Larry, but such a statement is
certainly undervaluing Henley, Phillips and Catz. I mean, they can't
be too wimpy if they are keeping Larry happy, eh?
jg
--
at (no spam) home.com is bogus.
http://www.macobserver.com/appledeathknell/index.shtml
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=%22I+predict+that+the+last+mainframe+will+be+unplugged+on+March+15%2C+1996.%22 |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Matthias Hoys... |
| Posted: Sun Oct 11, 2009 2:26 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
"Mladen Gogala" <mladen at (no spam) bogus.email.invalid> wrote in message
news:haq95r$rrn$2 at (no spam) solani.org...
Quote: On Sat, 10 Oct 2009 00:09:08 +0100, Palooka wrote:
I am no particular fan of any specifc RDBMS, nor of any particular
application technology.
I am. I prefer Oracle RDBMS above all other. What I dislike are Oracle's
prices and licensing policies. I welcome any competition to Oracle, in
order for them to stop behaving like a monopoly.
I agree. It sucks that you have to pay extra for "options" like Advanced
Compression and Partitioning for the Enterprise Edition, which is already
expensive enough. On the other hand, some of the free products like SQL
Developer and Application Express are becoming very good.
Matthias |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Noons... |
| Posted: Sun Oct 11, 2009 5:15 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
joel garry wrote,on my timestamp of 11/10/2009 10:12 AM:
Quote: only reason it survived at all. Of course, anyone who bought (or was
granted options on) Oracle or MS stock at that time and then held onto
it is now thought to be genius.
Errr.....
Thanks!
(and I should have done a LOT more!)
;)
Quote: they fall." Also, a big part of both Oracle and DEC's success was
military/gov contracts, so when the big lump of VAXen had gone through
the snake, it hit DEC hard, but Oracle not so much, since Oracle ran
on the hp/sun replacements, and there were still requirements for
things to run on Oracle. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ken_Olsen
This is IMHO the problem with Oracle now. Extreme portability was always its
saving grace when all else was buggy.
Portability is certainly not as important these days of one size fits all.
And when was the last time we saw Oracle push anything other than Linux?
Quote: Nowadays I look at the stuff that is
supposed to replace Oracle and just kinda feel like staying a dinosaur
until the asteroid comes.
Amen!
Quote: Oracle won't fall like DEC because it explicitly recognizes greater
future value in apps than databases. Some publications seem to think
it might fall due to over-reliance on Larry, but such a statement is
certainly undervaluing Henley, Phillips and Catz. I mean, they can't
be too wimpy if they are keeping Larry happy, eh?
Good point. M$ certainly hasn't fared better by replacing Gates with the
drug-addict.
But the question remains: who is going to replace Larry's ferocity? Because
that will still be needed with their business model and he is certainly not
eternal... |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
All times are GMT
The time now is Sat Dec 12, 2009 9:32 am
|
|