Sim Zacks wrote:
>
> > That isn't really an extensibility argument. At least not in my mind.
> > Further I don't know of anyone that can "easily" do it. You either
> > suffer the possibility of catastrophic data loss (dolphins) or you
> > suffer guaranteed bank account drainage (Oracle), or you suffer the
> > willingness of Monopolies (MSSQL).
> >
> > None of those equate to "easy".
>
> That's a load of FUD. When looking at feature-sets that are available or
> not
> available in an open source product, you can't throw out all the things
> that a
> commercial, closed source project has because it isn't open source and
> it costs
> money.
You obviously didn't read my post.
>
> The reason companies go with the closed source, expensive solutions is
> because
> they are better products.
Sometimes, sometimes not. It depends on your needs.
>
> When evaluating a database for your company, it is better to look at
> what the
> closed source products offer that cause companies to shell out tons of
> money and
> decide if it is worth locking yourself into an expensive and/or
> exclusive agreement.
The only thing this post could possibly be is a Troll. Please go back
under the bridge.
Sincerely,
Joshua D. rake