Image has been ported to UX and DOS by a number of different people over
the years, but there are varying reasons why you don't see them around.






"Fontaine, Charles" <[log in to unmask]> on 01/25/99 12:44:43 PM

Please respond to "Fontaine, Charles" <[log in to unmask]>

To:   [log in to unmask]
cc:    (bcc: Shawn Gordon/IS/FHM/FHS)
Subject:  IMAGE on (fill in the blank): was: Oracle on HP3000




Crazy question, but I'll ask it anyway.  Would it make sense (economic) to
port IMAGE SQL to other OS'es and thus enable It to run on several
different
CPU's or is IMAGE so incredibly efficient because of it's tight integation
with the MPE/iX OS?

I have noticed several third party software packages that were developed on
HP3000 "branching" out onto other platforms (Cognos, Suprtool, Omnidex,
etc.).

> ----------
> From:         Nick Demos[SMTP:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent:         Monday, January 25, 1999 3:12PM
> To:   [log in to unmask]
> Subject:      Re: Oracle on HP3000
>
> 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?
>
> Sure, bu there is more to it than that:
>
> 1.  A dedicated sales force.
> 2.  It runs (and is a hog 0n) several different CPU's
> 3.  It is natively relational, which some think is an advantage
>     over the Image SQL add on.
>
> Image is still the best, but for the above reasons Oracle
> comes on strong.
>
> Nick D.
>