Why is Ingres better than PostgresSQL or MySQL, two well proven, widely accepted, and powerful database solutions?
With respect, your paraphrase of the question is a little clueless - unless yor're playing devils advocate.
Ten years ago, Ingres was one of the Big Four database management systems. The order was; Oracle, Ingres, Informix and Sybase. Ingres was owned by a Uk company, Ask Group, who hit financial difficulty just when Ingres was really taking off in a big way. The fire sale to CA quickly reveresed that trend, I suppose because of CAs reputation.
Ingres had , at the time , the rich feature set that Oracle, Sybase and Informix still have - stored procedures, tablespaces, rules and procedures, server clustering, multi-phase commit over several distributed server sites, out of the box failover facilities, a 4gl based forms environment etc etc.
MySQL and PostGres may be moving towards gaining these kind of enterprise grade facilities but, as far as I know, they're not there yet. They are undoubtedly widely accepted for the kinds of small to medium size developments - usually web projects, and they are both powerful enough for those types of projects. However, Ingres is far more on the Oracle kind of scale.
If I'm correct, I think PostGres may be a continuation of the original BSD licenced Ingres (hence POSTgres)
I still see absolutely no reason to support Ingres,
Depends on exactly what CA are releasing into the wild.
nor do anything to support CA's policy of embrace and devour.
Agreed. Which is why, ten years down the line, Ingres is being hung out to dry.
Big surprise there. Yahoo need to do something to remain competitive.
I'm personally waiting for gmail to come out of beta and then I'll probably move from yahoo to google locak, stock and two smoking spam filters!
Offtopic, but why does google engender a warm fuzzy feeling of trust whereas yahoo, hotmail and the rest "feel" like corporates out to make a quick buck? It's a totally false feeling, but it's happens...
to be honest the majority (don't flame me, I didn't say all) of their readers are people too dumb to form their own opinions.
I think that all of the press forms opinion - they tell people what to think, and it's not a matter of being "dumb", it's just a question of appealing to your gut (usually political) instincts and predjudices and minipulating that.
The only difference between the gutter and the broadsheets is that the standard and sophistcation of the journalism is pitched to your educational level.
Make no mistake, Guardian readers are just as minipulated as readers of the Sun - (but probably not as much as those of the Daily Racist xenophobe, nationalist Mail). I used to read the Guardian until I realised that I didn't want to think what they want me to think.
Well, good for you. I suspect that you'r'e in a minority here - esp paying for distros. I gave up that game after buying SuSE 6 (superceded 3 months after I purchased it) and RedHat 8 (superceded 4 months after I purchased it).
The obscure point i was making in my original post is that this entire discussion and all the outrage that it contains exists purely because the average Slashdot reader doesn't want to pay for software. Simple.
Exactly who are you speaking for? Many of us are quite happy to pay for Free Software.
Oh really? Then why are there so many complaints in this thread? Nobody was complaining about the MT licence before the owners actually started using the provisions of the licence to make money.
'You really could get the CD and run it without every knowing it had anything GNU/Linuxy in it or that the GPL provides you with guaranteed freedoms that Sun would like you not to know you have.'
I'm just too old for all of this misguided zealotry. Sun and Java are one of the (many) reasons Linux based systems are making such tremendous inroads into corporate-land.
And lest we all forget, winning corporates means winning mind-share. Winning mindshare means linux based systems become more of a de facto standad everywhere.
I quite understand why sun wish to leverage Java and Linux - it's a magic combination. I can't understand why the author of the article wishes to leverage this tired, old zealotry.
I'm not sure if you're joking or not, but assuming you're not, your comments are the most ignorant I've seen here.
The issue isn't the number of organisations which hold "all this information" already, it's the centralisation of "all this information" through a single biometric index that's the problem.
Once all information for a particular person is centralised, then how is the information use controlled, who is accountible and how is that accountability audited?
It's not a case of having anything to hide. It's a case of information being power. Just as a simple example - credit Reference agencies already have access to the Electoral roll data to verify a person is who they say they are and they live where they say they do. They use this information as a part of their overall credit profile for a person requesting credit. Suppose they wanted to use ID card data instead? Who's going to decide how much of your ID card linked inforation they should be allowed access to and how relevant it is to credit scoring? A credit reference agency could make a pretty poweful case that any information held about you linked through your ID card is relevant to their profiling activities - even when it patently isn't.
Finally, the most frightening aspect of all of this is that David Blunkett and technology ignoramouses seem to think that technology is infallible, that databases are un-crackable and that there's no such thing as human error.
I think that the general public have alot to fear from ID cards - they should be very afraid.
Didn't Bev Hughes get the chop recently, over the immigration affair? AFAIK, she was Blunketts right hand woman. I'm beginning to think that they all need to go - Blair, Blunkett, Straw, Harmon - all of them. The level of authoritarianism and paranoia in this government is unbelievable.
The power of innovation in the open-source community is unparalleled,"
This guy couldn't have put it any better. It's the reason Linux will continue to grow and have deeper market pennetration over the next few years.
I don't see much innovation in the Linux world. BeOS was innovative - as a system written from the ground up for multimedia.
OSX is based on a version of Unix, but Apple have been innovative in the UI - rather than defaulting to using X.
Even the next version of Winblows is supposed to have many innovative new features - although what these turn out to be in practice remains to be seen.
Linux developers seem to be rather a conservative lot, and maybe I'm not being fair here, but there seem to be far too many sacred cows in the Linux world for there ever to be true innovation.
..well at least for blocking of a certain type of first post troll - using the "browse at" filter.
For instance, I think it's well over four years since I last saw a first post which referred to a Beowulf cluster of Natalie Portman pouring hot grits over her...well you get the idea!
In fact, most first post trolls I see now seem to be modded +5 Funny - just like yours in fact.
This news is depressing, but not unexpected. As usual, the beneficiaries will be, not the artists, but the record companies who are milking as much cash from the product as possible.
The problem here lies in the amount of control that the recording companies have over the distribution channel. So long as they monopolise or control distribution, then they can dictate terms and conditions and prices.
It's the same story with CDs. What's needed is a way for artists to strike deals with on-line distributors independent of the major lables. That way, the profits go to the artists, the distributors get paid and the product costs less at the point of sale to the consumer.
Unfourtanately, I can't see this ever happening, because (as is pointed out elsewhere in this discussion) the music industry is an industry and as such, they have a business model which is unquestioned by the majority of artists (product producers) out there.
Speak to any young aspiring musician and I'll bet that most of them want to be a "rock star" and are dreaming of "signing" to a "label" and have produced a "demo" which their "agent" has shipped around a few "A&R" people, but their "lawyer" didn't like the "contract"s that they've been seeing.
At the end of the day, if artists and consumers are able to exercise more control over the distribution channel, everyone who matters in the music production process (artists and consumers) should benefit.
That's the theory. I can't imagine how to make it practical, so until then it's a case of either continuing to be ripped off, or hitting the P2P networks. I think I know which option I prefer...
OK - but what about the right mouse button? How do you get context menus? I wasn't able to.
Control key and click (I think) kinda like the windows key - or rather the windows key is like the Macs control/apple key.
I don't actually have/use macs - I just drool over OS X whenever I'm in a computer hardware shop. It seems so much more powerful, intuitive and easier to use than windows or linux. The GUI is everything that KDE or Gnome ought, by now, to have become - revolutionary rather than evolutionary. Plus there's always the command line if you can dig it up!
Take an application like ical. A run of the mill calendar tool. Yet on OS X it just looks and feels great ans is super easy to use to boot. If I could afford a mac, I'd own one.
I still haven't "upgraded" to Win XP, because in order to upgrade to XP, I need to have upgraded Win95 to Win98, Win98 to WinME or Win2K and then to WinXP. Of course, I could upgrade directly from W98 to XP, but it'd cost more than upgrading from ME or 2K
That's what p****s me off about MS - why can't I go straight to this XP reloaded from Win98 (if/when it drops) FOR A REASONABLE PRICE??
After all, I'll be going straight from a PCI Nvidia Riva TNT2 to an uberAGP 32x GeForce 7.7i Touring Special when Duke Nukem 4ever drops...
Meanwhile, I'll stay with Mandrake. I love Mandy...
Ask went bust and sold Ingres to Computer Associates. It was rebranded CA-OpenIngres. Ingres used to be a great product, back in the day when the big 4 were Oracle, Ingres, Informix and Sybase. Now, we have only Sybase and Oracle. Ingres seems to have dropped off of the radar and informix was acquired by IBM last year.
Slashdot Mirror
Mod parent up!
Why is Ingres better than PostgresSQL or MySQL, two well proven, widely accepted, and powerful database solutions?
With respect, your paraphrase of the question is a little clueless - unless yor're playing devils advocate. Ten years ago, Ingres was one of the Big Four database management systems. The order was; Oracle, Ingres, Informix and Sybase. Ingres was owned by a Uk company, Ask Group, who hit financial difficulty just when Ingres was really taking off in a big way. The fire sale to CA quickly reveresed that trend, I suppose because of CAs reputation.
Ingres had , at the time , the rich feature set that Oracle, Sybase and Informix still have - stored procedures, tablespaces, rules and procedures, server clustering, multi-phase commit over several distributed server sites, out of the box failover facilities, a 4gl based forms environment etc etc.
MySQL and PostGres may be moving towards gaining these kind of enterprise grade facilities but, as far as I know, they're not there yet. They are undoubtedly widely accepted for the kinds of small to medium size developments - usually web projects, and they are both powerful enough for those types of projects. However, Ingres is far more on the Oracle kind of scale.
If I'm correct, I think PostGres may be a continuation of the original BSD licenced Ingres (hence POSTgres) I still see absolutely no reason to support Ingres,
Depends on exactly what CA are releasing into the wild.
nor do anything to support CA's policy of embrace and devour.
Agreed. Which is why, ten years down the line, Ingres is being hung out to dry.
your pointy haired boss will make the right decision when choosing a Unix operating
And what is the "right" descision?
Choosing BSD over Solaris or HP-UX because it's almost free at the point of acquisition?
No, I haven't RTFA and my "boss" doesn't have pointy hair either.
He does, however, make business descisions based on whatever makes the best sense for the business.
Big surprise there. Yahoo need to do something to remain competitive.
I'm personally waiting for gmail to come out of beta and then I'll probably move from yahoo to google locak, stock and two smoking spam filters!
Offtopic, but why does google engender a warm fuzzy feeling of trust whereas yahoo, hotmail and the rest "feel" like corporates out to make a quick buck? It's a totally false feeling, but it's happens...
to be honest the majority (don't flame me, I didn't say all) of their readers are people too dumb to form their own opinions.
I think that all of the press forms opinion - they tell people what to think, and it's not a matter of being "dumb", it's just a question of appealing to your gut (usually political) instincts and predjudices and minipulating that.
The only difference between the gutter and the broadsheets is that the standard and sophistcation of the journalism is pitched to your educational level.
Make no mistake, Guardian readers are just as minipulated as readers of the Sun - (but probably not as much as those of the Daily Racist xenophobe, nationalist Mail). I used to read the Guardian until I realised that I didn't want to think what they want me to think.
you're one of the stooges... :)
alwight me old cocker? I've got a gert load uv cider in my garridge...
I just wish they'd come clean and tell us that this is why the invaded iraq - instead of bleating on about "dictators" and "weapons a mass destrucion"
I wonder if it's time to switch back.
No, it isn't.
Well, good for you. I suspect that you'r'e in a minority here - esp paying for distros. I gave up that game after buying SuSE 6 (superceded 3 months after I purchased it) and RedHat 8 (superceded 4 months after I purchased it).
The obscure point i was making in my original post is that this entire discussion and all the outrage that it contains exists purely because the average Slashdot reader doesn't want to pay for software. Simple.
Exactly who are you speaking for? Many of us are quite happy to pay for Free Software.
Oh really? Then why are there so many complaints in this thread? Nobody was complaining about the MT licence before the owners actually started using the provisions of the licence to make money.
I think everyone really wants free as in speech
That just isn't true. I, like every other slashdotter, don't want to pay for my cool software tools. That's the plain truth of the matter.
But "people have to eat"
'You really could get the CD and run it without every knowing it had anything GNU/Linuxy in it or that the GPL provides you with guaranteed freedoms that Sun would like you not to know you have.'
I'm just too old for all of this misguided zealotry. Sun and Java are one of the (many) reasons Linux based systems are making such tremendous inroads into corporate-land.
And lest we all forget, winning corporates means winning mind-share. Winning mindshare means linux based systems become more of a de facto standad everywhere.
I quite understand why sun wish to leverage Java and Linux - it's a magic combination. I can't understand why the author of the article wishes to leverage this tired, old zealotry.
I'm not sure if you're joking or not, but assuming you're not, your comments are the most ignorant I've seen here.
The issue isn't the number of organisations which hold "all this information" already, it's the centralisation of "all this information" through a single biometric index that's the problem.
Once all information for a particular person is centralised, then how is the information use controlled, who is accountible and how is that accountability audited?
It's not a case of having anything to hide. It's a case of information being power. Just as a simple example - credit Reference agencies already have access to the Electoral roll data to verify a person is who they say they are and they live where they say they do. They use this information as a part of their overall credit profile for a person requesting credit. Suppose they wanted to use ID card data instead? Who's going to decide how much of your ID card linked inforation they should be allowed access to and how relevant it is to credit scoring? A credit reference agency could make a pretty poweful case that any information held about you linked through your ID card is relevant to their profiling activities - even when it patently isn't.
Finally, the most frightening aspect of all of this is that David Blunkett and technology ignoramouses seem to think that technology is infallible, that databases are un-crackable and that there's no such thing as human error.
I think that the general public have alot to fear from ID cards - they should be very afraid.
Didn't Bev Hughes get the chop recently, over the immigration affair? AFAIK, she was Blunketts right hand woman. I'm beginning to think that they all need to go - Blair, Blunkett, Straw, Harmon - all of them. The level of authoritarianism and paranoia in this government is unbelievable.
, surf for pron. Do anything you can to stimulate your muscles in a way that doesn't involve clicking a mouse
But, to surf for pr0n requires a mouse..wait..oh you mean exercise the left hand...
The power of innovation in the open-source community is unparalleled,"
This guy couldn't have put it any better. It's the reason Linux will continue to grow and have deeper market pennetration over the next few years.
I don't see much innovation in the Linux world. BeOS was innovative - as a system written from the ground up for multimedia.
OSX is based on a version of Unix, but Apple have been innovative in the UI - rather than defaulting to using X.
Even the next version of Winblows is supposed to have many innovative new features - although what these turn out to be in practice remains to be seen.
Linux developers seem to be rather a conservative lot, and maybe I'm not being fair here, but there seem to be far too many sacred cows in the Linux world for there ever to be true innovation.
A professional who is on call should be responsible enough to avoid places where he is not allowed to use his phone.
I'm an amateur, you insensitive clod.
..well at least for blocking of a certain type of first post troll - using the "browse at" filter.
For instance, I think it's well over four years since I last saw a first post which referred to a Beowulf cluster of Natalie Portman pouring hot grits over her...well you get the idea!
In fact, most first post trolls I see now seem to be modded +5 Funny - just like yours in fact.
This news is depressing, but not unexpected. As usual, the beneficiaries will be, not the artists, but the record companies who are milking as much cash from the product as possible.
The problem here lies in the amount of control that the recording companies have over the distribution channel. So long as they monopolise or control distribution, then they can dictate terms and conditions and prices.
It's the same story with CDs. What's needed is a way for artists to strike deals with on-line distributors independent of the major lables. That way, the profits go to the artists, the distributors get paid and the product costs less at the point of sale to the consumer.
Unfourtanately, I can't see this ever happening, because (as is pointed out elsewhere in this discussion) the music industry is an industry and as such, they have a business model which is unquestioned by the majority of artists (product producers) out there.
Speak to any young aspiring musician and I'll bet that most of them want to be a "rock star" and are dreaming of "signing" to a "label" and have produced a "demo" which their "agent" has shipped around a few "A&R" people, but their "lawyer" didn't like the "contract"s that they've been seeing.
At the end of the day, if artists and consumers are able to exercise more control over the distribution channel, everyone who matters in the music production process (artists and consumers) should benefit.
That's the theory. I can't imagine how to make it practical, so until then it's a case of either continuing to be ripped off, or hitting the P2P networks. I think I know which option I prefer...
You must be asking in the wrong tone of voice....
OK - but what about the right mouse button? How do you get context menus? I wasn't able to.
Control key and click (I think) kinda like the windows key - or rather the windows key is like the Macs control/apple key.
I don't actually have/use macs - I just drool over OS X whenever I'm in a computer hardware shop. It seems so much more powerful, intuitive and easier to use than windows or linux. The GUI is everything that KDE or Gnome ought, by now, to have become - revolutionary rather than evolutionary. Plus there's always the command line if you can dig it up!
Take an application like ical. A run of the mill calendar tool. Yet on OS X it just looks and feels great ans is super easy to use to boot. If I could afford a mac, I'd own one.
Don't mod me Flamebait, I am dead serious. What is it with Mac OS/X?
It's, well....better than anything else...
I still haven't "upgraded" to Win XP, because in order to upgrade to XP, I need to have upgraded Win95 to Win98, Win98 to WinME or Win2K and then to WinXP. Of course, I could upgrade directly from W98 to XP, but it'd cost more than upgrading from ME or 2K
That's what p****s me off about MS - why can't I go straight to this XP reloaded from Win98 (if/when it drops) FOR A REASONABLE PRICE??
After all, I'll be going straight from a PCI Nvidia Riva TNT2 to an uberAGP 32x GeForce 7.7i Touring Special when Duke Nukem 4ever drops...
Meanwhile, I'll stay with Mandrake. I love Mandy...
What ever became of that?
Ask went bust and sold Ingres to Computer Associates. It was rebranded CA-OpenIngres. Ingres used to be a great product, back in the day when the big 4 were Oracle, Ingres, Informix and Sybase. Now, we have only Sybase and Oracle. Ingres seems to have dropped off of the radar and informix was acquired by IBM last year.