David Fetter wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 21, 2009 at 08:44:20AM -0700, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>> Dealing with Forester or any of the other shills is a
>> waste of energy. Let EDB deal with that.
> With all due respect, I don't think it's a complete waste of energy.
> Hackers frequently need to deal with decision-makers who get their
> information from sources much less truthful than pgsql-advocacy.
> Sometimes, these decision-makers' hair is pretty pointy, and it's for
> this case when having some PHB-friendly material can really, really
The most PHP-friendly material I've seen are the actual customers - that
Skype can and *does* scale with Postgres carries a lot more weight
than Forrester saying it can't.
> help. This means getting our story out to the Foresters of the world,
> repugnant as that may seem to you.
By the methodologies of Gartner, Forrester, Enderle, etc, I bet
you'd see Cigarettes and Cigars are both far more important
products in the "breathable gasses" category than Fresh Air is -
as proven by their revenue figures. 
Unless we intend to become a big-money customer of Forrester, I fear
their reports will sound much the same no matter how hard we try
to get the story out.
If they wanted to publish an objective report, no doubt they could
have done adequate background research in the report which started
this thread -- if only by googling the customers using postgres to
disprove their doubts of scalability avaialbility and performance.
Naively one would think that's their job, right?
 I think I saw that analogy first on these lists; but can't
recall who it was to adequately credit them.
In response to
pgsql-advocacy by date
|Next:||From: damien clochard||Date: 2009-08-22 17:11:46|
|Subject: Re: Brochure final layout / Scribus Version|
|Previous:||From: David Fetter||Date: 2009-08-21 23:48:59|
|Subject: Re: Forrester: Ingres and MySQL Lead Open SourceDatabases|