Your glib response isn't going to cut it with me. You don't know what you're talking about any more than that other clown. Without having a rigorous knowledge about these DBs and the new arena, it is laughable to make such claims. Specifically,
Conversely, Excelon can support the integration of those large RDBMS repositories as they exist today.
There is an element of truth here, but the fact is EXLN takes such DBs and rewrites them over time in object form so that another call eventually obviates any RDBMS access. Every call eats the static storage byte by byte. So why should EXLN support them? Why should corporations preserve an inefficient dinosaur whose operating overhead is bleeding them buckets in maintenance cost while the nature of their utilization has completely changed? The Net has changed the game.
You and the others including this parade of amateur analysts simply don't get it. You think you get it, but you're still hanging on to the past. Corporations don't have that luxury. They don't work for anyone. They have to get it right. They're proprietors and if they don't get with it, someone else will and someone else will eat their lunch. In contrast you and the other clown get to eat whether you fail or not. In fact, you're rewarded for failure because you make your co-workers look good.
They can also assist any large corporation in implementing "Business to Business" just as they are, and they also have an "Object Database" that is available for future system implementations when desired
This misses the mark completely. A provision for object orientation is no longer incidental. It is necessary because the Net operates in diverse data types. Attempting to create a static translation layer between different data model servers is complicated, latency prone, vulnerable to frequent crash, and can't scale well, to mention only the obvious. To go with a full object model is substantially faster and cheaper. There are many other advantages too.
You should read this thread and all its links. It isn't too long. You people think you can waltz in and throw around some buzzwords and somehow comprehension will arrive. You can't make it that way. Maybe you can make it in guaranteed existence, but if you have to manage a company, you have to actually get it right. |
