| From: | Greg Copeland <greg(at)CopelandConsulting(dot)Net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Dave Page <dpage(at)vale-housing(dot)co(dot)uk> |
| Cc: | Vince Vielhaber <vev(at)michvhf(dot)com>, Lamar Owen <lamar(dot)owen(at)wgcr(dot)org>, PostgresSQL Hackers Mailing List <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [mail] Re: Windows Build System |
| Date: | 2003-01-30 22:37:22 |
| Message-ID: | 1043966242.8694.16.camel@mouse.copelandconsulting.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, 2003-01-30 at 13:56, Dave Page wrote:
> When properly configured, Windows can be reliable, maybe not as much as
> Solaris or HPUX but certainly some releases of Linux (which I use as
> well). You don't see Oracle or IBM avoiding Windows 'cos it isn't stable
> enough.
I'm not jumping on one side or the other but I wanted to make clear on
something. The fact that IBM or Oracle use windows has absolutely zero
to do with reliability or stability. They are there because the market
is willing to spend money on their product. Let's face it, the share
holders of each respective company would come unglued if the largest
software audience in the world were completely ignored.
Simple fact is, your example really is pretty far off from supporting
any view. Bluntly stated, both are in that market because they want to
make money; they're even obligated to do so.
--
Greg Copeland <greg(at)copelandconsulting(dot)net>
Copeland Computer Consulting
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2003-01-30 22:39:28 | plpython fails its regression test |
| Previous Message | Lamar Owen | 2003-01-30 22:30:54 | Re: [mail] Re: Windows Build System |