[Info-vax] Should Oracle buy OpenVMS?

[Richard B. Gilbert]

Bill Gunshannon wrote:
> In article <iIuHl.16569$8_3.14630 at flpi147.ffdc.sbc.com>,
> 	Michael Austin <maustin at firstdbasource.com> writes:
>> Arne Vajhøj wrote:
>>> JF Mezei wrote:
>>>> Richard B. Gilbert wrote:
>>>>> The last time I looked, there were several levels of support 
>>>>> available; the cheapest $0.00 being web access to security patches 
>>>>> only. For some money you get access to a database with patches and 
>>>>> solutions to common problems.  For more money you get questions and 
>>>>> answers via e-mail.  For lots more money, you get telephone support 
>>>>> and, for REALLY big bucks, you get priority telephone support; e.g. 
>>>>> someone will talk to you right away.
>>>> But the question is whether outfits like RedHat, IBM etc can provide
>>>> comparale Linux support for much less than what Sun charges for Solaris
>>>> suport or whether they are all more or less the same.
>>> Good IT people cost what good IT people cost rather independent
>>> of the OS.
>>>
>>> The advantages for Linux are just:
>>> - competitive market meaning that the vendor can not
>>>   make an over normal profit
>>> - some of the providers has support as their core business
>>>   meaning that it gets priority
>>>
>>> The move to Linux are not driven by low support cost but by:
>>> - cheap HW (x86-64)
>>> - cheap SW
>>> - lots of software available
>>> - lots of people with Linux skills available
>>>
>>> Arne
>>>
>>>
>> lots of software available != lots of good software available
> 
> Maybe so, but the more there is the more likely some of it will be good.
> The inverse is really bad.  Or have you already forgotten: "It's the
> applications, not the OS that sells boxes."
> 
>> lots of people with Linux skills available != lots of good people with 
>> Linux skills available
> 
> This I definitely agree with.
> 
> bill
>  
> 

I haven't heard it lately but it used to be good advice to: find the 
application(s) you need/want and buy the box and O/S it runs on.