Re: Experiences with extensibility
| От | Ow Mun Heng |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: Experiences with extensibility |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 1199863282.12814.28.camel@neuromancer.home.net обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: Experiences with extensibility ("Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com>) |
| Ответы |
Re: Experiences with extensibility
|
| Список | pgsql-general |
On Tue, 2008-01-08 at 23:05 -0800, Joshua D. Drake wrote: > Sim Zacks wrote: > > > > > The reason companies go with the closed source, expensive solutions is > > because they are better products. > > Sometimes, sometimes not. It depends on your needs. This is total FUD. Everything has a place. And besides, as what I read, nobody ever gets fired for recommending an expensive solution that comes with expensive support contracts and what not. (wish I could google and insert the link to where I read that) > > > > > When evaluating a database for your company, it is better to look at > > what the > > closed source products offer that cause companies to shell out tons of > > money and > > decide if it is worth locking yourself into an expensive and/or > > exclusive agreement. > > The only thing this post could possibly be is a Troll. Please go back > under the bridge. No, it's better to evaluate if the features which are being provided will fit your needs. This is akin to buying a lamborghini only to drive it down to the local 7-11, down the (same) road to buy some bread. Take a walk instead, save my ears, save some petrol, save some money. Otherwise, you end up paying X amount more for features you don't need. (Me remembers vividly an episode of Simpsons where Homer was given free rein to design the ultimate American Dream Car.)
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: