Re: Rebranding PostgreSQL

> On Wed, Nov 16, 2005 at 02:19:28PM -0500, Vivek Khera wrote:
>> On Nov 16, 2005, at 1:09 PM, <john(dot)bender(at)hushmail(dot)com>
>> <john(dot)bender(at)hushmail(dot)com> wrote:
>>
>> >There are a few obstinate anti-open source customers though, that
>> >prevent my plan from moving forward. They've bought into whatever
>> >hype they've read and just simply say no. Now, that said, they're
>> >fairly non-technical and probably had never heard of PostgreSQL
>> >before we presented our plan.
>>
>> how would postgres be exposed to them anyhow? wouldn't it just sit
>> behind the scenes of your front-end?
>
> Backups. You really need to explain pg_dump to the end user.

Unless you include a tool that internally performs a pg_dump, in
binary form, so they don't need to know about what it's doing, and so
that it doesn't show off being a raw text form that will clue them in
;-).

Think about any of the apps that used embedded DBs like Faircom,
Raima, and such; you'd need to run some extra module to do a "backup."

If the intent is to pretend PostgreSQL is being embedded, it's natural
for the results to have a shape like that...
--
output = reverse("moc.liamg" "@" "enworbbc")
http://linuxdatabases.info/info/spreadsheets.html
"I've seen a look in dogs' eyes, a quickly vanishing look of amazed
contempt, and I am convinced that basically dogs think humans are
nuts." -- John Steinbeck