On Tue, Aug 09, 2005 at 09:49:28AM -0400, Rick Morris wrote:
> - But, like you said, there are quite a few companies taking a more
> serious interest in PostgreSQL. This is different from winning the
> single developer. Think about the strategic difference. We all know that
> many large companies use PostgreSQL for internal projects. Verio comes
> to mind, here in Florida. I liken it to the number of companies that use
> FreeBSD instead of Linux (also something you will find at Verio).
> FreeBSD will never be as popular as Linux, but there are many companies
> who use it extensively because they have found it suits their needs
> perfectly; they just don't waste a lot of breath *advertising* that
> fact. Companies that use Linux tend to shout it from the rooftops
> because it makes good press. (Please... not trying to start a
> FreeBSD-vs-Linux war, just noting a strategic similarity). Note that
> there is much *less* feature distinction between it and Linux than
> between My/Pg, but still, FreeBSD will always be around, because it has
> achieved a sort of balance in the market. Individual users tend to use
> Linux, but corporate deployments might have 1000 FreeBSD boxes that no
> one ever hears about. I think that again is very similar to the
> PostgreSQL use cases.
But ISTM that these companies that don't mention the fact that they use
PostgreSQL (or FreeBSD for that matter) are doing a dis-service to the
community. Many, many people default to MySQL (or Linux) because their
perception is that's what everyone uses. If it were well known that
there are alternatives, people would be much more likely to investigate
them and make a more informed decision. While I don't understand most
people that choose MySQL knowing the facts, I feel sorry for people that
choose MySQL out of ignorance, because they're likely to get bit.
--
Jim C. Nasby, Sr. Engineer 512-569-9461 jnasby@pervasive.com