XPost: comp.databases.ibm-db2   
   From: datagoob@hotmail.com   
      
   Mark Townsend wrote:   
      
   > Data Goob wrote:   
   >   In   
   >   
   >>>> Larry's   
   >>>> own words they indicate the direction of the company has less to do   
   >>>> with   
   >>>> being a database company and more to do with applications.   
   >>>   
   >>>   
   >>>   
   >>>   
   >>> Complete and utter bullshit. You have absolutely NO basis for your   
   >>> characterization, yet you make it. Why ?   
   >>>   
   >>   
   >> It was based on experience?   
   >   
   >   
   > Who's ?   
   >   
      
   Actually to get you back on track, read through Larry's book, the words are   
   in the book, not quoting, but close enough, Oracle is more about applications   
   than databases.  ( the book is "SOFTWAR" )   
      
   As far as my experiences with Oracle, it is the most expensive database   
   product on the market, not to mention one of the most complicated.   
      
   Now let's move along to your acid trip...   
      
   Assuming you are 100% correct about the grid, commodity/utility computing,   
   SETI, and all that, why on earth would Oracle be relevant in the equation?   
   As if they are the only ones who figured it out?  As if they are the right   
   choice for that?  As if the grid is even relevant...   
      
   Smoke some more Mark... break out the bong...   
      
   >   
   >>>   
   >>> You obviously have no idea how the grid applies to business. Note   
   >>> that one of the foremost proponents of the grid architecture is   
   >>> indeed Ford.   
   >>>   
   >>   
   >> Enlighten me on the grid.  I'm getting my SETI screen-saver fired up, and   
   >> turning on the Lava Lamp.  LOL.   
   >>   
   > Presuming that this was not a rhetorical question, the argument goes   
   > something like this.   
   >   
   > Silo's of computing are bad. Seperately configured systems for   
   > individual workloads are bad - high cost, each over worked individually   
   > but under utilized in terms of resources across the company. Labour   
   > intensive. Difficult to integrate, make secure, make highly available.   
   >   
   > So as an alternative, consider a grid. As follows   
   >   
   >   
      
   >   
      
   Later that same day...   
      
   > The grid is a little more than lava lamps and SETI screen savers. SETI   
   > was all about an organization without money finding ways to borrow   
   > machine cycles from other people. Good for SETI, but not going to happen   
   > for Ford, Boeing etc - Ford is not going to go to GM and say "run this   
   > workload for me, I can't afford to". Instead, commercial grids are   
   > built, not borrowed, and the future of the grid is all about the   
   > practical application of well known consolidation, commodization,   
   > standardization and automation techniques to the problem of deploying IT   
   > solutions more efficiently. The Grid is to IT what the Ford Model T   
   > assembly line was to Manufacturing. And most importantly, you can start   
   > anywhere with this. Each of the advantages is achievable in it's own   
   > right, with it's own individual value prop and ROI calculation. And as   
   > you complete more and more of the jigsaw, over time, the ROI increases,   
   > and increases, and increases.   
   >   
   > It's going to be a fun few years.   
   >   
   With the drugs you're gettin?  whooooo hoooooooo!   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)