Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sun 1st Apr 2007 15:02 UTC, submitted by WillM
OSNews, Generic OSes "The server operating system wars never seem to slow down. Last week it was Red Hat's turn with the announcement of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 5, which incorporates the Xen open source hypervisor. Naturally there's also the endless market speculation about the final feature set and likely arrival date of Windows Server 2007. And then there's Solaris, which with its nice value-add features like DTrace and its new status as open source software is making something of a comeback, it seems."
Thread beginning with comment 226500
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: Really Meaningless
by Laurence on Mon 2nd Apr 2007 11:45 UTC in reply to "RE: Really Meaningless "
Laurence
Member since:
2007-03-26

....But all has to do with, what I keep saying, the Oracle mystic; the same mystic that makes people buy Microsoft's products; there is nothing exactly great about the product, they don't actually *need* it as there are cheaper alternatives, but it makes them feel good that they're using a tool from what they deem 'the winning team'....


I'm not so sure that's the main reason people turn to MS or Oracle products. I think the main reason companies turn to these products is simply because they base their marketing on:
a) compatibility, and
b) support.

While Iím not denying that other solutions are just as valid as MS / Oracle - when you have trained consultants, dedicated forums and hundreds of publications dedicated to the set up, maintenance and debugging of these systems, it does ease corporate minds that their product wont (shouldn't) fail, regardless of how good they are in a market comparison.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[3]: Really Meaningless
by kaiwai on Mon 2nd Apr 2007 13:44 in reply to "RE[2]: Really Meaningless "
kaiwai Member since:
2005-07-06

I'm not so sure that's the main reason people turn to MS or Oracle products. I think the main reason companies turn to these products is simply because they base their marketing on:
a) compatibility, and
b) support.

While Iím not denying that other solutions are just as valid as MS / Oracle - when you have trained consultants, dedicated forums and hundreds of publications dedicated to the set up, maintenance and debugging of these systems, it does ease corporate minds that their product wont (shouldn't) fail, regardless of how good they are in a market comparison.


True, but at the same time, alot of it is cluelessness; for example, I deployed a fleet of computers for a highschool; FreeBSD + GNOME + OpenOffice.org running ontop.

Skeptical at first, but once I set a mock up desktop, they moved around, loaded up OpenOffice.org, they realised they could do everything they needed, and it wouldn't require them shelling out large amounts of cash for licences.

I think the issue is that management should be less quick to judge alternatives out there; and if there is an alternative, for christ sake, don't use a consultancy firm, get your IS/IT staff to investigate, get the company to send out a free trial version, setup a stand alone server, and test it to see how successful it is.

Having seen some of the stupid things I've see management spend money on in the past - first class plane trips, expensive food and so forth, all on the company card, its a small price to pay to be a little more open minded on managements part.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[4]: Really Meaningless
by Laurence on Mon 2nd Apr 2007 14:22 in reply to "RE[3]: Really Meaningless "
Laurence Member since:
2007-03-26

True, but at the same time, alot of it is cluelessness


Maybe, but if you know you have a massive resource base (expensive or not) to rely upon during setup or in case the worst happens - then it makes sense to go with that company. After all, a payroll server (for example) crashing could prove very very damaging to a company if no-one is there with specialise knowlage to suport the system.

for example, I deployed a fleet of computers for a highschool; FreeBSD + GNOME + OpenOffice.org running ontop.


I appretiate your example, but my comments were more directed at companies that offer top-end solutions for business critical systems. While I agree in princible with what you've achieved, it wouldn't (in my opinion) be as practical to set up a payroll server (to use a previous example) "just to see what happens".
We use Oracle for our HR and payroll systems and while I don't particularly like the application itself, the support level for their systems is superb.

Reply Parent Score: 1