Jeff Kell wrote:
>
> Mogelinski, Jerome M wrote:
> >
> > Jeff Kell brings up a good point saying:
> >
> > But honestly, you have to have been hiding in a closet to not notice
> > the recent trend toward Oracle.
> >
> > Why this trend?
> >
> > Could it be those impressive TV commercials ORACLE is using?
>
> I won't argue that it is "the trend", I'm still trying to figure out
> exactly WHY it is the trend.  I have found precisely ONE user who was
> not directly a vendor that was an Oracle advocate (on any platform).
> It appears very much to have the momentum of, as Alfredo has suggested
> in the past, "the emperor's new clothes".  In actual fact, even in it's
> most pristine state, Oracle still blows chunks.  It is horrible.  (No
> offense to the Oracle subscribers).
>
I see one major reason - Oracle was the first relational data
base that
Had the minimum requirements to get it off the ground:

1.  It worked, if not well at least somewhat.
2.  It had a sales force behind it,.
3.  It was not done by a hardware vendor (we have talked here and
    elsewhere about the problems hardware vendors have selling
software).

Drawing an analogy from another industry - I think GM makes lousy
autos
but anybody in the business who does not take them seriously is
crazy
because they are the biggest even if far, far from the best.

Another example - Apple may be better than the Intel MS
combination, but
would you bet on Apple?

Nick D.