Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!ucsd!sdd.hp.com!wuarchive!decwrl!pa.dec.com!shlump.nac.dec.com!banzai.enet.dec.com!r_anderson
From: r_anderson@banzai.enet.dec.com (Rick Anderson)
Newsgroups: comp.databases
Subject: Re: how bad is oracle?
Message-ID: <19922@shlump.nac.dec.com>
Date: 7 Feb 91 12:49:00 GMT
References: <1991Feb6.181906.17145@cimage.com> <10737@pasteur.Berkeley.EDU> <1991Feb3.182558.14411@oracle.com>
Sender: newsdaemon@shlump.nac.dec.com
Reply-To: r_anderson@banzai.enet.dec.com (DEC)
Distribution: usa
Organization: Digital Equipment Corp.
Lines: 19

In article <1991Feb6.181906.17145@cimage.com>, dbc@cimage.com (David
Caswell) writes:
> How bad is Oracle -- Not nearly as bad as Unify.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but could you please elaborate on this
statement - what makes Oracle not nearly as bad as Unify?  On what
facts, features
or frustrations do you base this statement?
Rick

**********************************************************
* Rick Anderson          * Digital Equipment Corporation *
* 603-884-4284           * Database Systems Division     *
* Mailstop: NUO 1-1/F12  * 55 Northeastern Boulevard     *
* "My timing is Digital" * Nashua, NH  03062             *
**********************************************************
* UUNET: ...{decwrl|decvax}!nova.enet.dec.com!r_anderson *
* Internet: r_anderson%nova.enet.dec@decwrl.dec.com      *
**********************************************************