Re: postgresql rising

> On Wed, Sep 20, 2006 at 10:10:56AM -0500, Tony Caduto wrote:
>> For a high level corp manager all they ever hear about is MS SQL Server,
>> Oracle and DB2, and the more it costs the more they think it is what
>> they need :-)
>
> I think that description is false. At a certain point in the
> management hierarchy, the only way anyone has the ability to evaluate
> something is on the basis of reputation.

I think that description is false. At a certain point in the management
hierarchy, the only way anyone has the ability to evaluate something is on
the basis of....

- if there is someone they can sue.
- how attractive the sales rep is.
- how much swag the sales rep brings with them.

:-/

Sadly, I once worked for a company that spent close to $500K on a
commercial product when PHP would have worked just as well... I did make
sure I wrote a very very long CYA email myself so when someone asked why
that decision was made they wouldn't look at me :)

> PostgreSQL is building its
> reputation, but it doesn't have the marketing budget of those three.
> Therefore, it's safer to pick the thing that has a better reputation,
> and that makes those reputations stronger still. So what we need is
> a spotless reputation -- which we're building.
>
> A
>
> --
> Andrew Sullivan | ajs(at)crankycanuck(dot)ca
> The whole tendency of modern prose is away from concreteness.
> --George Orwell
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives?
>
> http://archives.postgresql.org
>