>
> I'd think you of all people would be a little peeved at having your
> support dismissed this way by their failure to mention that your kind
> of support was available.
Honestly, I got over that a *long* time ago. The reality is, people who
want to use postgresql, do the research themselves and then call us (if
they need us). If you recall I don't have any car salesmen, like other
companies. People that do business with us, because of our resume not
because some guy in a tie with a split tongue told them that we are the
best postgresql company out there.
Could we get more business if the press was more accurate? Sure... but
then again if the press was more accurate, they wouldn't be able to sell
any advertising.
>
>> I have already written the editor with a note about the
>> misconception of our procedural languages.
>
> That's a start :) You'll notice what I started this off with, which
> is "With friends like these..." These guys wrote a book on
> PostgreSQL. They should know better, but for some reason have decided
> to spread a bunch of FUD.
I didn't get any FUD from the article is my point. I just got ignorance
but perceptions vary. I can see your frustration from the fact that they
wrote a book on it but writing a book is easy. Writing a good book is hard.
Sincerely,
Joshua D. Drake
--
=== The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. ===
Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 || 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240
Providing the most comprehensive PostgreSQL solutions since 1997
http://www.commandprompt.com/