Re: What so special about PostgreSQL and other RDBMS?

From: Daniel Morgan <damorgan_at_x.washington.edu>
Date: Sun, 16 May 2004 19:32:09 -0700
Message-ID: <1084761131.172458@yasure>

Greg D. Moore (Strider) wrote:

> "Jim Kennedy" <kennedy-downwithspammersfamily_at_attbi.net> wrote in message
> news:AwTpc.62041$536.10434195_at_attbi_s03...
>

>>Logic problems are not the same as finding a major problem with a vendor's
>>product.  I love it that you haven't given one example where you found a

>
> new
>

>>(new to the vendor - MS)  critical (to you) flaw in their software and

>
> they
>

>>produced a patch for you.  You can't because MS won't do that.  Had

>
> problems
>

>>with them for over a decade and not once did they issue a patch to fix my
>>problem.  Yet, I have with other major software vendor's repeatedly.

>
>
> I can't because that would violate confidentiality agreements. But they
> have in fact done so.
>
> But, I can't give details. Sorry.

Sorry but what you've written is, to use Howard's word, rubbish.

When I discovered a flaw in Microsoft's ODBC 3.0 implementation Microsoft immediately wrote a custom patch for the Boeing company. And no one was asked to sign any confidentiality agreement. In fact that patch was released simultaneously by Microsoft on their web site.

So Microsoft will write custom patches ... if they are required for general distribution ... and Microsoft does not, from my experience, ever ask for a confidentiality agreement to cover that which they would then release to their user base (something I have confirmed with friends at Microsoft before writing this).

-- 
Daniel Morgan
http://www.outreach.washington.edu/ext/certificates/oad/oad_crs.asp
http://www.outreach.washington.edu/ext/certificates/aoa/aoa_crs.asp
damorgan_at_x.washington.edu
(replace 'x' with a 'u' to reply)

Received on Sun May 16 2004 - 21:32:09 CDT