Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : IFMX - Investment Discussion -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Marq Spencer who wrote (10115)	3/31/1998 1:39:00 PM
From: Mark Finger	Respond to of 14631

>> >>Oracle's approach is too S-L-O-W to survive. << >>This was said of Oracle 3.x, 4.x, 5.x, 6.x, ... In the past, most of the worst difference was on the order of 2:1 or 3:1 in the markets. Since Oracle had mind share and customer base, the promise to close the gap sustained Oracle (besides, they could lie about their benchmarks), and they generally got "close enough" after a period of time. However, as you may have noticed, in the past, ORCL did not compete well in the data warehouse area (Teradata owned it) until about 2-3 years ago. Before then, the difference was much greater than the above ratios and Oracle did not have a customer base to sustain it, so Teradata continued to pick up much of the data warehouse market. In this case, we are looking at performance ratios probably greater than 10:1 on simple objects (like spatial coordinates) if implemented in the published Data Cartridge architecture. If that ratio is not fixed, the installed base of Oracle in OLTP will not be able to help Oracle move into the "extensible" market.