It's good that managers begin to ask Linux by its name.
Next step would be to get them to recognize PostgreSQL. Today the situation is not good. Managers heard only MySQL as an open source DBMS. When they are required to cut the budget they gave a try to MySQL and found that MySQL is not reliable (ACID) and it's very limited (SQL, DBA, extensions). If not primitive. Thus they are very disappointed in MySQL and then in all open source databases. They conclude that open source databases are only good for small web applications. That is bad for all open source community.
The problem is that most of managers don't know even the name of PostgreSQL. They don't know that there is very reliable and very functional open source DBMS. They don't know that this ORDBMS is functional enough to work as a workgroup database as well as it is reliable enough to work at a corporate backend. And once you start to explain it to them then managers ask questions: "Who is behind PostgreSQL? Who will support it? Where can I train my people? Where are books about it?"
Managers already asked such questions about Linux. And they are satisfied with answers. Lucky for Linux there are a lot of commercial vendors delivered Linux to corporations. Their work includes improving the distribution (compare RedHat with Slackware), training, support and even book publishing. Unfortunately for PostgreSQL there is no such commercial effort pushing PostgreSQL to the market. There is no good distro (especially on M$win platform), there is no good training programs, there are few useless books (mostly introducing this DBMS for beginners). Most of available web-applications are connected by default to MySQL.
Conclusion: PostgreSQL needs more aggressive pushing of itself to the market. PostgreSQL is very capable to compete and beat Oracle, M$FT, IBM and Sybase. But today PostgreSQL is loosing a market competetion with MySQL.
Learn about Linux
Download Linux
Get Linux help
next would be PostgreSQL
Posted by: axxackall on June 14, 2002 08:24 PMNext step would be to get them to recognize PostgreSQL. Today the situation is not good. Managers heard only MySQL as an open source DBMS. When they are required to cut the budget they gave a try to MySQL and found that MySQL is not reliable (ACID) and it's very limited (SQL, DBA, extensions). If not primitive. Thus they are very disappointed in MySQL and then in all open source databases. They conclude that open source databases are only good for small web applications. That is bad for all open source community.
The problem is that most of managers don't know even the name of PostgreSQL. They don't know that there is very reliable and very functional open source DBMS. They don't know that this ORDBMS is functional enough to work as a workgroup database as well as it is reliable enough to work at a corporate backend. And once you start to explain it to them then managers ask questions: "Who is behind PostgreSQL? Who will support it? Where can I train my people? Where are books about it?"
Managers already asked such questions about Linux. And they are satisfied with answers. Lucky for Linux there are a lot of commercial vendors delivered Linux to corporations. Their work includes improving the distribution (compare RedHat with Slackware), training, support and even book publishing. Unfortunately for PostgreSQL there is no such commercial effort pushing PostgreSQL to the market. There is no good distro (especially on M$win platform), there is no good training programs, there are few useless books (mostly introducing this DBMS for beginners). Most of available web-applications are connected by default to MySQL.
Conclusion: PostgreSQL needs more aggressive pushing of itself to the market. PostgreSQL is very capable to compete and beat Oracle, M$FT, IBM and Sybase. But today PostgreSQL is loosing a market competetion with MySQL.
#