Обсуждение:
Were do we finde accurate values, more updated ones?
Guess we should measure current values and compare them later, in a few months after oracle dbms war gets quiet.
http://www.internetnews.com/dev-news/article.php/3462241
Regards,
Guido
--
/"\ ASCII Ribbon Campaign .
\ / - NO HTML/RTF in e-mail .
X - NO Word docs in e-mail .
/ \ -----------------------------------------------------------------
Guess we should measure current values and compare them later, in a few months after oracle dbms war gets quiet.
http://www.internetnews.com/dev-news/article.php/3462241
Regards,
Guido
--
/"\ ASCII Ribbon Campaign .
\ / - NO HTML/RTF in e-mail .
X - NO Word docs in e-mail .
/ \ -----------------------------------------------------------------
On Mon, Feb 27, 2006 at 01:57:27PM +0000, Guido Barosio wrote: > Were do we finde accurate values, more updated ones? > Guess we should measure current values and compare them later, in a few > months after oracle dbms war gets quiet. > > http://www.internetnews.com/dev-news/article.php/3462241 "In our survey, 90 percent of our developers work with or deployed to Windows platforms," McKendrick explained. "Windows dominates this space, and a database that doesn't run on Windows or doesn't run effectively in Windows would have a fairly limited reach." Does that strike anyone else as being *highly* skewed? -- Jim C. Nasby, Sr. Engineering Consultant jnasby@pervasive.com Pervasive Software http://pervasive.com work: 512-231-6117 vcard: http://jim.nasby.net/pervasive.vcf cell: 512-569-9461
On Mon, 27 Feb 2006, Jim C. Nasby wrote: > On Mon, Feb 27, 2006 at 01:57:27PM +0000, Guido Barosio wrote: >> Were do we finde accurate values, more updated ones? >> Guess we should measure current values and compare them later, in a few >> months after oracle dbms war gets quiet. >> >> http://www.internetnews.com/dev-news/article.php/3462241 > > "In our survey, 90 percent of our developers work with or deployed to > Windows platforms," McKendrick explained. "Windows dominates this space, > and a database that doesn't run on Windows or doesn't run effectively in > Windows would have a fairly limited reach." > > Does that strike anyone else as being *highly* skewed? Aren't most surveys, stats and benchmarks? :( there is no such thing as an "unbiased result" in statistics, it will always be skewed in some way based on the person generating the stats ... ---- Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org) Email: scrappy@hub.org Yahoo!: yscrappy ICQ: 7615664
On Mon, Feb 27, 2006 at 08:39:16PM -0400, Marc G. Fournier wrote: > On Mon, 27 Feb 2006, Jim C. Nasby wrote: > > >On Mon, Feb 27, 2006 at 01:57:27PM +0000, Guido Barosio wrote: > >>Were do we finde accurate values, more updated ones? > >>Guess we should measure current values and compare them later, in a few > >>months after oracle dbms war gets quiet. > >> > >>http://www.internetnews.com/dev-news/article.php/3462241 > > > >"In our survey, 90 percent of our developers work with or deployed to > >Windows platforms," McKendrick explained. "Windows dominates this space, > >and a database that doesn't run on Windows or doesn't run effectively in > >Windows would have a fairly limited reach." > > > >Does that strike anyone else as being *highly* skewed? > > Aren't most surveys, stats and benchmarks? :( there is no such thing as > an "unbiased result" in statistics, it will always be skewed in some way > based on the person generating the stats ... Oh, sure, but 90% windows seems pretty blatent to me. -- Jim C. Nasby, Sr. Engineering Consultant jnasby@pervasive.com Pervasive Software http://pervasive.com work: 512-231-6117 vcard: http://jim.nasby.net/pervasive.vcf cell: 512-569-9461
Jim C. Nasby wrote: > On Mon, Feb 27, 2006 at 01:57:27PM +0000, Guido Barosio wrote: > >> Were do we finde accurate values, more updated ones? >> Guess we should measure current values and compare them later, in a few >> months after oracle dbms war gets quiet. >> >> http://www.internetnews.com/dev-news/article.php/3462241 >> > > "In our survey, 90 percent of our developers work with or deployed to > Windows platforms," McKendrick explained. "Windows dominates this space, > and a database that doesn't run on Windows or doesn't run effectively in > Windows would have a fairly limited reach." > > Does that strike anyone else as being *highly* skewed? > But true? --- Joshua D. Drake
On 2/27/06, Joshua D. Drake <jd@commandprompt.com> wrote: > Jim C. Nasby wrote: > > "In our survey, 90 percent of our developers work with or deployed to > > Windows platforms," McKendrick explained. "Windows dominates this space, > > and a database that doesn't run on Windows or doesn't run effectively in > > Windows would have a fairly limited reach." > > > > Does that strike anyone else as being *highly* skewed? > > > But true? --- If you happen to survey a bunch of 100-500 person companies with local, distributed IT support staff, then you will see that more than 90% of the servers in use are locally administered, and almost always running some version of Windows. It is trivial to also point the exact same survey to only the corporate administration groups in larger businesses ('corporate' meaning all the servers are in datacenters somewhere), who almost always have UNIX, OS400 and/or some other non-windows *nix variant as the dominant server platform. It all depends on who you ask. If I want windows-skewed results, then I just ask the local IT folks. If I want *nix, then I ask the corporate applications developers and consolidated system admins. Is this consistent with everyone else's experience? Just wanting a reality check here... -- Mitch Pirtle Joomla! Core Developer Open Source Matters
> On Mon, Feb 27, 2006 at 01:57:27PM +0000, Guido Barosio wrote: > > Were do we finde accurate values, more updated ones? > > Guess we should measure current values and compare them later, in a > > few months after oracle dbms war gets quiet. > > > > http://www.internetnews.com/dev-news/article.php/3462241 > > "In our survey, 90 percent of our developers work with or > deployed to Windows platforms," McKendrick explained. > "Windows dominates this space, and a database that doesn't > run on Windows or doesn't run effectively in Windows would > have a fairly limited reach." > > Does that strike anyone else as being *highly* skewed? Not really. Rather realistic, I'd say. It's a changing landscape, but 90% doesn't seem off at all to me. With the possible exception that you don't really need to run *efficiently*. Depending on what you mean, of course. Running as efficient as MS Access does it certainly bad. Running as efficiently as PostgreSQL does is definitly Ok in this case. PostgreSQL on cygwin (pre 8.0) is not OK. //Magnus