| From: | "Ned Lilly" <ned(at)nedscape(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Josh Berkus" <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, <jm(dot)poure(at)freesurf(dot)fr>, <pgsql-advocacy(at)postgresql(dot)org>, <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [GENERAL] MySQL gets $19.5 MM |
| Date: | 2003-06-10 12:46:54 |
| Message-ID: | 00fd01c32f4e$5f8aeac0$fd00a8c0@Ned |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-advocacy pgsql-general |
Josh Berkus wrote:
> Jean-Michel,
>
> Please cc: this to the original poster:
He did.
> > > PostgreSQL. Today, it's clearly the superior product. It will be
>
> It is really? According to which criteria? Clearly more popular, certainly.
> However, I may point out that MS Access still has more installations than
> MySQL ...and nobody is calling MS Access a "superior database product".
Er... I said PostgreSQL was the superior product. Re-read the original post.
> To be completely blunt: MySQL the database will not easily survive the demise
> of MySQL AB.
Agreed. But $19MM ought to buy them a little more time.
Regards,
Ned
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jean-Michel POURE | 2003-06-10 13:36:52 | Re: Which database? |
| Previous Message | Merlin Moncure | 2003-06-10 12:26:13 | Re: Which database? |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | alvis | 2003-06-10 12:59:57 | Re: relation model vs SQL1999 conformance vs PostgreSQL |
| Previous Message | Andrew Gould | 2003-06-10 11:10:12 | Re: Pg_dumpall |