Linux.com

Feature

Database deathmatch?

By on January 19, 2004 (8:00:00 AM)

Share    Print    Comments   

An article on Techweb reports on a just-published Evans study survey of 550 database developers that shows Microsoft Access and SQL Server use increased by 6% last year. At the same time, MySQL use increased by 30% among the same group -- impressive, even counting that MySQL started from a smaller base. Is MySQL poised to beat Microsoft in the database arena?
"Concerns over stability, expense and how well a database plays with others are leading a quickly growing number of developers' companies to seriously consider and implement an open source database solution. We expect this trend to continue as the open source offerings are continually improved upon," said Joe McKendrick, Evans Data's database analyst.

I can tell you from observation and experience that usage of MySQL has doubled or tripled in the last year among the blog set, which doesn't show up in a survey like this. Apache + PHP + MySQL has become the unbeatable trinity for simple Web services. Where a year ago people were running simple blogs, they are now running calendering, forums, groupware, accounting, mail, and lots of other applications through Web browsers via these three programs. My guess is that the majority of MySQL growth in the last 18 months has been through growth in the database market as a whole. The trinity has stimulated a lot of people to utilize databases for the first time.

That's why the TechWeb article surprised me. I had never seen MySQL as direct competition to any of the big database vendors. Although Microsoft is no Oracle, I had thought it positioned SQL Server as an alternative on the enterprise level. Yet Microsoft's own Web site clearly puts SQL Server in the small/mid-size business market. That puts Microsoft and MySQL on an apparent collision course.

When was the last time a new entrant came into a market and directly challenged Microsoft? This is doubly interesting because I believe MySQL has hit on the magic formula for dual licensing infrastructure applications. The software is released under the GPL, but if you want to use it for closed-source work, or just don't like the GPL, you can buy a closed-source license. The company also aggressively sells support and services.

Because MySQL is not specifically a Linux product, this contest will represent the first time Microsoft has had to compete directly with a for-profit open source company on the Windows platform. As such, this may be an important test case and instructive for all.

A few factors that stand out as potentially significant. First, MySQL is a Swedish company. Sweden is in the EU. You can bet that if EU bureaucrats were interested in Microsoft's alleged anti-competitive practices against Sun and Real Networks, they will be more interested in any complaints coming from a European company. More important, they will likely take quicker action if they do receive a complaint. Either MS will be aware of this and temper its tactics, or it won't and potentially create some real problems for itself.

Second, MySQL is multi-platform and SQL Server is not. That's a huge benefit for anyone who wants to future-proof their databases. Linux will have a larger market share in future, especially in the server market. Using SQL Server will limit one's future OS choices; given Microsoft's traditional business style, a multi-platform version of SQL Server is unlikely.

Third, for many usages, MySQL is free-as-in-beer. The company makes its money from proprietary licenses and service contracts. TCO, by definition, may not be lower with MySQL, but the up-front cost ($0) is pretty damn compelling. Any Microsoft counter-pricing will be constrained by anti-trust issues.

Then there is the issue of free-as-in-speech. Will readily available access to the source code be a decision factor for customers? Microsoft's shared source program (which does not allow source code changes and is not available to everyone) doesn't make source code available as easily.

Since MySQL is part of a de-facto standard package for Web services, Microsoft must overcome not only MySQL but also Apache and PHP if it is to dent MySQL's growth. In the short term at least, that is a practical impossibility. Microsoft hasn't made much headway against Apache, and PHP is almost beyond its ability to influence. Embrace and extend are the only tactics I can see for subverting PHP, but the furor over Microsoft's attempted assimilation of Kerberos in 2000, when the company tried to add proprietary extentions, suggests it wouldn't work anyway.

Lastly, we have to admit that if Microsoft does perceive MySQL as a threat, it will protect its turf by whatever means necessary. That's how they do things. There are a lot of very smart people at Microsoft, and just because they have used illegal or underhanded tactics as standard procedure in the past is no reason to assume they can't compete in a more transparent manner if they have to.

I have argued here and elsewhere that Microsoft's pathological competitiveness has created exactly the kind of competition it can't deal with, in the same way casual antibiotic use creates super-bugs in the hospital. That would give MySQL an edge, but it doesn't mean they will win.

However things unfold, MySQL's experience will provide something of a road map for all. Stay tuned, this will get very interesting.

Share    Print    Comments   

Comments

on Database deathmatch?

Note: Comments are owned by the poster. We are not responsible for their content.

MS has seen it as a threat

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on January 19, 2004 06:10 PM
Microsoft has been following open source movement on many levels, nut just Linux/Windows or Office/OpenOffice. I do not think they are so much concerned with MySQL as they are concerned by an increasing number of web sites using PHP. For example, one of the "wins or losses" they are tracking is the ASP vs. PHP battle. Of course, PHP is closely linked to MySQL, so this definitely has some impact. I think they are more worried about PHP because they want ASP to become a monopoly, since it utilizes calls to the Internet Explorer and helps their desktop strategy, because of undocumented links between ASP and the Windows operating system. PHP is a thorn in their side, because it's widely used and it's growth is very steady. I don't think MySQL has gained enough traction in the enterprise market yet, although I know many big companies are already using it in production environments. But I am positive they are worried about PHP + MySQL + Apache. This is a killer application development environment that really bugs them, because it is of high quality and easy to get and learn. That is exactly why they have made available the ASP WebMatrix development tool and the Microsoft Desktop SQL Engine freely available. So far they have been relatively succesful in this area, although, I believe, not as much as the open source movement. So I think the real issue is not so much MySQL vs. MS SQL but more of LAMP vs Microsoft's web development platform.

#

Re:MS has seen it as a threat

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on January 19, 2004 06:33 PM
I agree with the above except that Data Bases have extra importance because most companies will try to migrate data to one platform. A MySQL win, with no pressure to move, converts a whole shop. Once you have some of your data in MySQL the 0$ expansion cost will eventually suck up all your DB needs.

If there was a free open source Access they would really be in trouble. As it is with two databases to choose from -- one free, one relicensed every two years what would you take?

#

Access replacement

Posted by: gerardm on January 20, 2004 12:17 AM
They are working on a graphical frontend environment that has MySQL PostgreSQL.. It will be something K if my memory serves me well.

Last time I looked they were busy with ERD diagrams and the building of tables. The idea was that eventually it should be a complete Access replacement. I want it..

#

Re:MS has seen it as a threat

Posted by: Joe Klemmer on January 20, 2004 01:26 PM
There is a good Access alternative but, unfortunately it's not free. theKompany has a product called Rekall, which is a front-end for a number of SQL databases. It costs $69.95 but comes with out-of-the-box support for -

  • MySQL
  • PostgreSQL
  • XBase with XBSQL (an SQL wrapper library for the XBase access library)
  • IBM DB2
  • ODBC

It would be nice to have a free-as-in-beer (at least) option like Rekall, though.

#

Re:MS has seen it as a threat

Posted by: robharper on January 20, 2004 08:36 PM
<A HREF="http://javadbclient.sourceforge.net/nuke/" TITLE="sourceforge.net">JDBC</a sourceforge.net> is basic, but it's a start...

#

MySQL / Postgresql for low end, too

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on January 19, 2004 08:57 PM
You can use MYSQL / Postgresql for low end uses, too, not just medium or high end. They're not big threats, yet, to Oracle, but <A HREF="http://www.cs.berkeley.edu/~nweaver/sapphire/" TITLE="berkeley.edu">MS-SQLServer</a berkeley.edu> is outta there -- high licensing fees, high maintenance cost, and insecure.

Note, you can do much the same with <A HREF="http://www.unixodbc.org/doc/OOoMySQL.pdf" TITLE="unixodbc.org">MySQL / Postgresql + ODBC + OpenOffice</a unixodbc.org> (PDF, sorry) that you could with <A HREF="http://www.foxprohistory.org/home.htm" TITLE="foxprohistory.org">FoxPro</a foxprohistory.org>, <A HREF="http://www.filemaker.com/" TITLE="filemaker.com">FileMaker</a filemaker.com> or even crapply lil' MS-Access.

#

A minor point: Sweden is not in the EU

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on January 20, 2004 05:26 AM
The referendum in Septemeber, preceded by the assassination of foreign minister Anna Lindh, decided against joining the union.

#

Re: A minor point: Sweden is not in the EU

Posted by: cleanshaver on January 20, 2004 07:30 AM
Sweden most assuredly are in the EU. They only decided not to adopt the Euro as their standard currency just yet.

#

This is a battle over before it started.

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on January 20, 2004 12:16 PM
The battle won't be between microsoft's SQL and MySQL. The battle is already over. GNU/Linux, including MySQL/Postgres and GNU/Linux in general taking on SQL is already over. Microsoft is seeing anemic growth in market share as SCO and Sun tumble. GNU/Linux and MySQL are seeing incredible growth in market share, from a much smaller installed base.



Going forward, microsoft growth is going to stall starting with profits, then revenue, costs will rise, margins will fall. It is starting to show up in their quarterly reports already. They'll still be able to shuffle money around to fix the numbers for a while, but it won't last. In the meantime,they gave a little taste to the market, then will cover up with increased sales with a stronger market, so that the next time they need to show a little weakness, they can dismiss it like this past and current quarters.



MySQL, and Postgres aren't competing with SQL. The company that is going to feel real pain, ala SCO/Sun is Oracle. MySQL/Postgres are already taking market share from Oracle. Going forward, watch and compare growth rates between Oracle and MySQL/Postgres. That's where the real fireworks are going to be. And watch how fast and how far Oracle pricing falls.

#

You guys make me laugh

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on January 20, 2004 03:47 PM
Why does it have to be MySQL vs SQL Server? Why not Oracle or DB2? I hear the same crap with regards to desktop windows, why not the Mac which is eating your lunch day in day out as a user friendly UNIX based OS. Explain that.

#

The last time...

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on January 21, 2004 01:15 AM
When was the last time a new entrant came into a market and directly challenged Microsoft?


Well, let's see:

Linux challenged Windows
Apache challenged IIS
PHP challenged ASP
etc., etc.

Open source stuff has been challenging EVERYONE (not just Microsoft) for the past decade and it's really starting to hit home....

#

This story has been archived. Comments can no longer be posted.



 
Tableless layout Validate XHTML 1.0 Strict Validate CSS Powered by Xaraya