Linked by David Adams on Tue 26th Oct 2004 16:30 UTC
Permalink for comment
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 23:22 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 22:04 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 22:01 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 17:52 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 22:23 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 13:38 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 13:30 UTC, submitted by JRepin
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 22:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 21:45 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 15:53 UTC
More News »
Sponsored Links



Okay, but a Microsoft solution would be SQL Server (Access being, well, hopeless) which still costs a couple of thousand? I'm not totally up on the pricing of it but that's still that couple of thousand more than mySQL.
I understand what you are saying but as far as pricing with support we are talking apples and apples. Its a much used misguided argument that running an OSS solution is costless. It is just not the case hence the reason I branded the authors statement FUD.