By using this site, you agree to our updated Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Manage your Cookies Settings.
424,694 Members | 2,050 Online
Bytes IT Community
+ Ask a Question
Need help? Post your question and get tips & solutions from a community of 424,694 IT Pros & Developers. It's quick & easy.

Access and Oracle part II

P: n/a
Um yeah....In case you haven't figured it out, Microsoft sucks. I'm going
to be kicked back in my chair eating popcorn and watching football 10 years
from now, while all you clowns are scrambling to rewrite all your code
because Microsoft upgraded all their crap and nothing you wrote 10 years
earlier works. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that
Microsoft is unreliable. Try opening an Excel 95 spreadsheet you wrote in
college that has macros defined in it. After only 8 years it doesn't
work!! That is what a truly call a SHIT company. Just wait...people will
catch on and MS will go down in flames at the mercy of UNIX and Linux
operating systems and Oracle will continue to dominate the database sector.

All you Access gurus with your cute little prototype shit will have to
bring in the big daddy of them all (Oracle) eventually.
Nov 12 '05 #1
Share this Question
Share on Google+
13 Replies


P: n/a
um... ignore?

--
Bas Cost Budde

Nov 12 '05 #2

P: n/a
DFS
"BigDaDDY" <ih*******@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:10*************@corp.supernews.com...
Um yeah....In case you haven't figured it out, Microsoft sucks. I'm going
to be kicked back in my chair eating popcorn and watching football 10 years from now, while all you clowns are scrambling to rewrite all your code
because Microsoft upgraded all their crap and nothing you wrote 10 years
earlier works.
So in 10 years you'll be so broke you have to eat popcorn, and we'll still
be making money? Thanks Microsoft.
It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that
Microsoft is unreliable. Try opening an Excel 95 spreadsheet you wrote in
college that has macros defined in it. After only 8 years it doesn't
work!!
You're an idiot. Opening an Excel 95 spreadsheet with Excel 95 will work
indefinitely.
That is what a truly call a SHIT company. Just wait...people will
catch on and MS will go down in flames at the mercy of UNIX and Linux
operating systems and Oracle will continue to dominate the database sector.

heh... just keep telling yourself that. You'll be dead long before Linux
replaces Windows.

And Oracle is now losing market share to IBM and Microsoft.
http://www.ecommercetimes.com/perl/story/20968.html, partly because of this
http://zdnet.com.com/2100-1104-831204.html and this
http://www.dbasupport.com/oracle/news/alert59.shtml


All you Access gurus with your cute little prototype shit will have to
bring in the big daddy of them all (Oracle) eventually.


No we won't. And one thing we will NEVER do is bring in those dumbass
Oracle consultants.

Truth is, I like the Oracle db and some of their other software. Most of us
Access developers here have Oracle or SQL Server experience, and most of us
might even agree with you, in theory. In practice, however, Oracle is a
huge, expensive system that's overkill for the small to mid-size systems
Access handles with aplomb.


Nov 12 '05 #3

P: n/a
DFS wrote:
"BigDaDDY" <ih*******@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:10*************@corp.supernews.com...
Um yeah....In case you haven't figured it out, Microsoft sucks. I'm
going to be kicked back in my chair eating popcorn and watching football
10 years
from now, while all you clowns are scrambling to rewrite all your code
because Microsoft upgraded all their crap and nothing you wrote 10 years
earlier works.


So in 10 years you'll be so broke you have to eat popcorn, and we'll still
be making money? Thanks Microsoft.

No dumbass, I'll be retired because I make so much money programming real
database systems and cleaning up after dumbasses like you that use
unreliable MS databases
It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that
Microsoft is unreliable. Try opening an Excel 95 spreadsheet you wrote
in
college that has macros defined in it. After only 8 years it doesn't
work!!
You're an idiot. Opening an Excel 95 spreadsheet with Excel 95 will work
indefinitely.


Hey dumbass, yeah opening an Excel 95 spreadsheet will work with Excel 95,
but do you think Excel 95 is going to be around in 2010? Furthermore, do
you actually fucking believe that Excel 95 is going to work on Windows
2010? NOT!! You are absolutely fucking clueless!
That is what a truly call a SHIT company. Just wait...people will
catch on and MS will go down in flames at the mercy of UNIX and Linux
operating systems and Oracle will continue to dominate the database sector.

heh... just keep telling yourself that. You'll be dead long before Linux
replaces Windows.


You keep telling yourself that, because the government has already made the
switch to Linux, and Microsoft is spending considerable effort trying to
convince people that Microsoft is better than Linux. Obviously, MS thinks
that Linux is some serious competition. Probably the smartest thinking
they have thought in the last 10 years.
And Oracle is now losing market share to IBM and Microsoft.
http://www.ecommercetimes.com/perl/story/20968.html, partly because of
this http://zdnet.com.com/2100-1104-831204.html and this
http://www.dbasupport.com/oracle/news/alert59.shtml


All you Access gurus with your cute little prototype shit will have to
bring in the big daddy of them all (Oracle) eventually.
No we won't. And one thing we will NEVER do is bring in those dumbass
Oracle consultants.


You won't have to. Your ass will be canned and we Oracle consultants will
come take charge.
Truth is, I like the Oracle db and some of their other software. Most of
us Access developers here have Oracle or SQL Server experience, and most
of us
might even agree with you, in theory. In practice, however, Oracle is a
huge, expensive system that's overkill for the small to mid-size systems
Access handles with aplomb.


Nov 12 '05 #4

P: n/a
Um, lick my ass
Bas Cost Budde wrote:
um... ignore?


Nov 12 '05 #5

P: n/a
....
No dumbass, I'll be retired because I make so much money programming real
database systems and cleaning up after dumbasses like you that use
unreliable MS databases


People with habits like yours don't make money, they piss people off and get
fired. Then they sit around and troll newsgroups at home because they're not
working.
Nov 12 '05 #6

P: n/a
"MacDermott" <ma********@nospam.com> wrote:
Comments: This message did not originate from the Sender address above.
It was remailed automatically by anonymizing remailer software.


Another forgery

Tony
--
Tony Toews, Microsoft Access MVP
Please respond only in the newsgroups so that others can
read the entire thread of messages.
Microsoft Access Links, Hints, Tips & Accounting Systems at
http://www.granite.ab.ca/accsmstr.htm
Nov 12 '05 #7

P: n/a
DFS

"BigDaDDY" <ih*******@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:10*************@corp.supernews.com...
DFS wrote:
"BigDaDDY" <ih*******@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:10*************@corp.supernews.com...
Um yeah....In case you haven't figured it out, Microsoft sucks. I'm
going to be kicked back in my chair eating popcorn and watching football 10 years
from now, while all you clowns are scrambling to rewrite all your code
because Microsoft upgraded all their crap and nothing you wrote 10 years earlier works.


So in 10 years you'll be so broke you have to eat popcorn, and we'll still
be making money? Thanks Microsoft.

No dumbass, I'll be retired because I make so much money programming real
database systems and cleaning up after dumbasses like you that use
unreliable MS databases


No you won't, and no you don't. You're a liar.

There's at least as much demand for Access developers as there is for Oracle
developers - probably more.

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that
Microsoft is unreliable. Try opening an Excel 95 spreadsheet you wrote
in
college that has macros defined in it. After only 8 years it doesn't
work!!


You're an idiot. Opening an Excel 95 spreadsheet with Excel 95 will work
indefinitely.

Hey dumbass, yeah opening an Excel 95 spreadsheet will work with Excel 95,
but do you think Excel 95 is going to be around in 2010?


That's a 15-year time span. 15 years ago Oracle introduced PL/SQL and db
version 6. Are you saying all the original PL/SQL code in Oracle v6 from
1989 will run unchanged on Oracle 10g today? If you are, you're engaging in
some mighty wishful thinking.


Furthermore, do
you actually fucking believe that Excel 95 is going to work on Windows
2010?
Maybe, maybe not. I do know there's no guarantee Oracle 6 will run on Linux
or Unix in 2010, not to mention 2004.

That is what a truly call a SHIT company. Just wait...people will
catch on and MS will go down in flames at the mercy of UNIX and Linux
operating systems and Oracle will continue to dominate the database

sector.

heh... just keep telling yourself that. You'll be dead long before Linux
replaces Windows.


You keep telling yourself that, because the government has already made

the switch to Linux,
Which "the government" is that, 'cause it's certainly not the US government.
They just recently (August '03) added Linux as an approved OS. There are a
few Linux installations around - mainly in the Dept. of Defense - but
overall Linux use is miniscule.

and Microsoft is spending considerable effort trying to
convince people that Microsoft is better than Linux.
Microsoft IS better than Linux - that's why Linux copies EVERYTHING from
Windows. Load up a Linux windows manager like KDE or Gnome; by default it
looks just like Windows, down to the Start button in the lower left!
They've gone to extremes to make sure it's a user-friendly Windows clone.
Is there a single original idea anywhere in Linux? The OS and kernel is a
clone of Unix (some code apparently is even stolen directly from Unix), and
all the applications are clones or near-clones of Windows apps. What's that
all about?
Obviously, MS thinks that Linux is some serious competition.
Linux is not the competition - free is the competition. And free is always
serious competition. But even as a free platform, to have any chance at all
of widespread adoption Linux has to offer applications like OpenOffice.org
that will read and write to MS Office formats. In other words, there's not
a single compelling reason to switch to Linux, except that it's free - and
it's NOT MICROSOFT! Whoooo! Real good reason there.
Probably the smartest thinking they have thought in the last 10 years.


Microsoft is one of the greatest companies in the history of mankind,
whether you like their products or not. They've created immense wealth for
the world, created great software, and brought low prices along with them.
When I started using PCs in the late 80s, Lotus 1-2-3 was a real scam at
$495.00. A few years later, Office Pro with the spreadsheet, word
processor, database and graphics program was the same price - for all four
programs.
And Oracle is now losing market share to IBM and Microsoft.
http://www.ecommercetimes.com/perl/story/20968.html, partly because of
this http://zdnet.com.com/2100-1104-831204.html and this
http://www.dbasupport.com/oracle/news/alert59.shtml
I notice you had nothing to say about the loss of market share and the
security holes in your "big daddy." Why?

All you Access gurus with your cute little prototype shit will have to
bring in the big daddy of them all (Oracle) eventually.


No we won't. And one thing we will NEVER do is bring in those dumbass
Oracle consultants.


You won't have to. Your ass will be canned and we Oracle consultants will
come take charge.


Take charge of what? All I've seen is Oracle consultant failure. I'm sure
there are some good Oracle consultants (and I mean employee consultants),
but they're WAY overpriced. $300 an hour for OLAP consultants? Ridiculous.
Truth is, I like the Oracle db and some of their other software. Most of us Access developers here have Oracle or SQL Server experience, and most
of us
might even agree with you, in theory. In practice, however, Oracle is a
huge, expensive system that's overkill for the small to mid-size systems
Access handles with aplomb.



Nov 12 '05 #8

P: n/a

,--------------- Forwarded message (begin)

Subject: Re: Access and Oracle part II
From: DFS <no****@nospam.com>
Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2004 15:22:14 -0800
"BigDaDDY" <ih*******@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:10*************@corp.supernews.com...
DFS wrote:
"BigDaDDY" <ih*******@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:10*************@corp.supernews.com...
Um yeah....In case you haven't figured it out, Microsoft sucks. I'm
going to be kicked back in my chair eating popcorn and watching football 10 years
from now, while all you clowns are scrambling to rewrite all your code
because Microsoft upgraded all their crap and nothing you wrote 10 years earlier works.


So in 10 years you'll be so broke you have to eat popcorn, and we'll still
be making money? Thanks Microsoft.

No dumbass, I'll be retired because I make so much money programming real
database systems and cleaning up after dumbasses like you that use
unreliable MS databases


No you won't, and no you don't. You're a liar.

There's at least as much demand for Access developers as there is for
Oracle
developers - probably more.

Yeah...You know why???....Because you personally fall into the same
category as 80% of the population. You are too damn dumb to figure out
Oracle. Instead you would rather sacrifice flexibility for less
complexity. You like that Microsoft, spoonfeed the fucking illiterates in
the world, attitude. Maybe if your IQ wasn't comparable to that of a
Frisbee you would realize this. Thank God there are brilliant people in the
world like myself that aren't going to depend on some shit dynamic company
for their software to work.
It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that
Microsoft is unreliable. Try opening an Excel 95 spreadsheet you wrote in
college that has macros defined in it. After only 8 years it doesn't
work!!


You're an idiot. Opening an Excel 95 spreadsheet with Excel 95 will work
indefinitely.

Hey dumbass, yeah opening an Excel 95 spreadsheet will work with Excel

95, but do you think Excel 95 is going to be around in 2010?
That's a 15-year time span. 15 years ago Oracle introduced PL/SQL and db
version 6. Are you saying all the original PL/SQL code in Oracle v6 from
1989 will run unchanged on Oracle 10g today? If you are, you're engaging
in
some mighty wishful thinking.

Damn straight I am!! Can you give one example that doesn't?
Furthermore, do
you actually fucking believe that Excel 95 is going to work on Windows
2010?
Maybe, maybe not. I do know there's no guarantee Oracle 6 will run on
Linux
or Unix in 2010, not to mention 2004.

That is funny as all hell!! You are absolutely clueless!! Unix/Linux are
the most stable, reliable systems around. I use code written 20 years ago
today at work. No problems at all. Any version of Oracle 6 is always
guaranteed to work on Unix/Linux, and it will remain that way for the rest
of your life.

That is what a truly call a SHIT company. Just wait...people will
catch on and MS will go down in flames at the mercy of UNIX and Linux
operating systems and Oracle will continue to dominate the database

sector.

heh... just keep telling yourself that. You'll be dead long before Linux
replaces Windows.


You keep telling yourself that, because the government has already made

the switch to Linux,
Which "the government" is that, 'cause it's certainly not the US
government.
They just recently (August '03) added Linux as an approved OS. There are a
few Linux installations around - mainly in the Dept. of Defense - but
overall Linux use is miniscule.

Funny, very funny. You just wait. Gee...the Dept. of Defense uses it.
Now I know this may be hard for you, but just think about that for a
minute. Hmmm...we have the most dominant military technology in the whole
world, and our Defense Department is using Linux. Now why do you think
that is?....Duh! Obviously there are security issues with Windoze. One
simple trojan can wipe out an entire system in Windoze. Can't be done in
Linux. The structure of the system won't allow it.

and Microsoft is spending considerable effort trying to
convince people that Microsoft is better than Linux.
Microsoft IS better than Linux - that's why Linux copies EVERYTHING from
Windows. Load up a Linux windows manager like KDE or Gnome; by default it
looks just like Windows, down to the Start button in the lower left!
They've gone to extremes to make sure it's a user-friendly Windows clone.
Is there a single original idea anywhere in Linux? The OS and kernel is a
clone of Unix (some code apparently is even stolen directly from Unix), and
all the applications are clones or near-clones of Windows apps. What's
that
all about?

Now THAT is a laugh. Linux is at least an order of magnitude better than
Windoze. Let me explain something to you dumbass. Windoze is written in
C/C++. Therefore, Windoze was more than likely developed on some kind of
Unix system. Now you dumbasses are programming a language on top of a
language, and that language is dynamic and at the mercy of a company that
in ONE day, could just decide to change the API in any way they want. You
put your faith in that. I'll put my faith in the core languages like
C/C++, and we'll see who gets farther 10 years from now. You see, we Linux
users don't give a shit about pretty bells and whistles in an operating
system. We are about having the capability to use a core language to its
fullest potential and create what we want. Not using some subset of the
language at the expense of flexibility.

Obviously, MS thinks that Linux is some serious competition.
Linux is not the competition - free is the competition. And free is always
serious competition. But even as a free platform, to have any chance at
all
of widespread adoption Linux has to offer applications like OpenOffice.org
that will read and write to MS Office formats. In other words, there's not
a single compelling reason to switch to Linux, except that it's free - and
it's NOT MICROSOFT! Whoooo! Real good reason there.

That is hilarious. Free is not the competition. Linux is free, UNIX is
not, and UNIX is competition as well. If it wasn't, I wouldn't have a UNIX
machine on my desk at work. You want a single compelling reason to switch
to Linux...you need look no further than a few days ago. Viruses running
wild all over, but you know what? You didn't hear one person with a Linux
box complaining about it. Security!! There is one compelling reason. You
want about 100 more? Try all the auto-download spoonfed shit that gets put
on your computer that you don't necessarily want. Or how about the
inability to install Windows XP more than once. Wanna upgrade your CPU,
tough shit, buy a new copy because your license won't allow more than one
install. No problems here though. I can install Linux as much as I want.
Want to program in any language imaginable? Can't be done in Windoze, but
hey..I can program in Java, Python, Perl, C, C++, Fortran, PHP, Lisp,
Pascal just to name a few. Core languages are fairly static, Windoze is
dynamically out of control. Windoze has to continually better their product
by coming out with new versions constantly, which all have their quirks and
security loopholes, and force people to modify their original creation. If
they didn't, they would go out of business. Conversely, programs written
in C 20 years ago will still work today. If I had the Windoze source code,
I could compile it in Linux, but I could also write applications other than
Windoze. Therein lies the beauty.
Probably the smartest thinking they have thought in the last 10 years.
Microsoft is one of the greatest companies in the history of mankind,
whether you like their products or not. They've created immense wealth for
the world, created great software, and brought low prices along with them.
When I started using PCs in the late 80s, Lotus 1-2-3 was a real scam at
$495.00. A few years later, Office Pro with the spreadsheet, word
processor, database and graphics program was the same price - for all four
programs.

Microsoft is one of the worst failures in the history of mankind. They
have their nose in stuff that is out of their league. There is absolutely
no scaleability to Access. Now ask yourself, why would someone go to a
McDonald's for pizza, when Pizza Hut is up the street. Oracle is dominant
and nothing can compete with it. Every MAJOR database in this world is
done with Oracle, and for good reason. You dumbasses want to swim against
the current, go ahead, that just makes more job security for me in the
future. Bottom line is Microsoft has shitty programmers that can't test
code worth a shit, which is why the world has computer viruses. Now, Linux
on the other hand is a collaborative effort by the world, so before
anything is implemented, you can damn well bet that people all over the
world have tested the hell out of it and there are no loopholes. On one
hand we have the world...on the other...some greedy ass company with a
vested interest in getting the technology out before it is completely safe.
Obviously Microsoft sucks!

And Oracle is now losing market share to IBM and Microsoft.
http://www.ecommercetimes.com/perl/story/20968.html, partly because of
this http://zdnet.com.com/2100-1104-831204.html and this
http://www.dbasupport.com/oracle/news/alert59.shtml
I notice you had nothing to say about the loss of market share and the
security holes in your "big daddy." Why?

All you Access gurus with your cute little prototype shit will have to
bring in the big daddy of them all (Oracle) eventually.


No we won't. And one thing we will NEVER do is bring in those dumbass
Oracle consultants.


You won't have to. Your ass will be canned and we Oracle consultants

will come take charge.


Take charge of what? All I've seen is Oracle consultant failure. I'm sure
there are some good Oracle consultants (and I mean employee consultants),
but they're WAY overpriced. $300 an hour for OLAP consultants?
Ridiculous.

You know why it's $300 an hour? Because rather than people doing shit right
in the first place, they use these cute litte prototype Access databases
and then they have to bring in the big dogs to clean up the MS Access shit
that idiots like yourself left behind.
Truth is, I like the Oracle db and some of their other software. Most of us Access developers here have Oracle or SQL Server experience, and most of us
might even agree with you, in theory. In practice, however, Oracle is a huge, expensive system that's overkill for the small to mid-size systems Access handles with aplomb.


`--------------- Forwarded message (end)

Nov 12 '05 #9

P: n/a
On Thu, 29 Jan 2004 23:41:55 -0800, BigDaDDY <ih*******@hotmail.com> wrote:

,--------------- Forwarded message (begin)

Subject: Re: Access and Oracle part II
From: DFS <no****@nospam.com>
Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2004 15:22:14 -0800


You all suck. I'm a genius, yadda, yadda, yadda. Standard Troll junk. If
you're so wealthy and successful, go hang out on your yacht, and stop wating
your time talking to all of us losers.
Nov 12 '05 #10

P: n/a
Steve Jorgensen wrote:
On Thu, 29 Jan 2004 23:41:55 -0800, BigDaDDY <ih*******@hotmail.com>
wrote:

,--------------- Forwarded message (begin)

Subject: Re: Access and Oracle part II
From: DFS <no****@nospam.com>
Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2004 15:22:14 -0800


You all suck. I'm a genius, yadda, yadda, yadda. Standard Troll junk.
If you're so wealthy and successful, go hang out on your yacht, and stop
wating your time talking to all of us losers.


Very good idea. I think I will do that. See ya later loser.
Nov 12 '05 #11

P: n/a
BigDaDDY <ih*******@hotmail.com> wrote:
Very good idea. I think I will do that. See ya later loser.


Don't let the door hit you on the way out.

Tony
--
Tony Toews, Microsoft Access MVP
Please respond only in the newsgroups so that others can
read the entire thread of messages.
Microsoft Access Links, Hints, Tips & Accounting Systems at
http://www.granite.ab.ca/accsmstr.htm
Nov 12 '05 #12

P: n/a
DFS
"BigDaDDY" <ih*******@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:10*************@corp.supernews.com...

,--------------- Forwarded message (begin)

Subject: Re: Access and Oracle part II
From: DFS <no****@nospam.com>
Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2004 15:22:14 -0800
"BigDaDDY" <ih*******@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:10*************@corp.supernews.com...
> DFS wrote:
>
> > "BigDaDDY" <ih*******@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > news:10*************@corp.supernews.com...
> >
> >> Um yeah....In case you haven't figured it out, Microsoft sucks. I'm
> >> going to be kicked back in my chair eating popcorn and watching football > >> 10
> > years
> >> from now, while all you clowns are scrambling to rewrite all your code > >> because Microsoft upgraded all their crap and nothing you wrote 10 years > >> earlier works.
> >
> > So in 10 years you'll be so broke you have to eat popcorn, and we'll still > > be making money? Thanks Microsoft.
> > > No dumbass, I'll be retired because I make so much money programming real
> database systems and cleaning up after dumbasses like you that use
> unreliable MS databases


No you won't, and no you don't. You're a liar.

There's at least as much demand for Access developers as there is for
Oracle
developers - probably more.

Yeah...You know why???....Because you personally fall into the same
category as 80% of the population. You are too damn dumb to figure out
Oracle.


??? What's to figure out? So it's a big db platform? So what? I've used
Oracle off and on for years, and spent 6 months full-time as the DBA/data
analyst on a large 8i database I designed and created. I know a good bit
about
Oracle - enough to step into a development or "junior" DBA role right away.

Again, I like Oracle and SQL Server, but for the majority of the work I do -
small-department Access systems - it's overkill, and usually requires the
clients' IT group involvement, which adds exponentially to the cost and
development time but gains the users very little.


Instead you would rather sacrifice flexibility for less
complexity. You like that Microsoft, spoonfeed the fucking illiterates in
the world, attitude. Maybe if your IQ wasn't comparable to that of a
Frisbee you would realize this. Thank God there are brilliant people in the world like myself that aren't going to depend on some shit dynamic company
for their software to work.

You brilliant???? BWAHAHAHAHA!!! You're an idiot. You come in here
making stupid, uninformed assumptions about Access developers and users.
That alone shows me how ignorant you are.

And as for your technical competence - I would guess you can't even tell me
a few specifics about your own "big daddy" Oracle system, such as:

* what do NOCYCLE and CACHE 150 mean to a sequence object?
* what does the PL/SQL statement DBMS_SQL.PARSE do?

(I can see you now, searching through the docs).

> >> It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that
> >> Microsoft is unreliable. Try opening an Excel 95 spreadsheet you wrote > >> in
> >> college that has macros defined in it. After only 8 years it doesn't > >> work!!
> >
> > You're an idiot. Opening an Excel 95 spreadsheet with Excel 95 will work > > indefinitely.
> >

> Hey dumbass, yeah opening an Excel 95 spreadsheet will work with Excel

95,
> but do you think Excel 95 is going to be around in 2010?


That's a 15-year time span. 15 years ago Oracle introduced PL/SQL and db
version 6. Are you saying all the original PL/SQL code in Oracle v6 from
1989 will run unchanged on Oracle 10g today? If you are, you're engaging
in
some mighty wishful thinking.

Damn straight I am!! Can you give one example that doesn't?


Not right now. I just don't believe 15-year old Oracle 6 PL/SQL code runs
unchanged on 10g. I'll try to find some that doesn't, and when I do so I
expect you to suck it up.

> Furthermore, do
> you actually fucking believe that Excel 95 is going to work on Windows
> 2010?


Maybe, maybe not. I do know there's no guarantee Oracle 6 will run on
Linux
or Unix in 2010, not to mention 2004.

That is funny as all hell!! You are absolutely clueless!! Unix/Linux are
the most stable, reliable systems around.


And ugly and difficult to learn (oh wait - they're trying to make it look
good and be easy to use - just like Windows), and doesn't have many good
desktop apps, and doesn't support much hardware...
I use code written 20 years ago today at work.
Cripes. I feel sorry for you. It's 2004 man, not 1984.

No problems at all. Any version of Oracle 6 is always
guaranteed to work on Unix/Linux, and it will remain that way for the rest
of your life.
Guaranteed? By who? In writing? I don't think so.

> >> That is what a truly call a SHIT company. Just wait...people will
> >> catch on and MS will go down in flames at the mercy of UNIX and Linux > >> operating systems and Oracle will continue to dominate the database
> > sector.
> >
> > heh... just keep telling yourself that. You'll be dead long before Linux > > replaces Windows.

>
> You keep telling yourself that, because the government has already made

the
> switch to Linux,


Which "the government" is that, 'cause it's certainly not the US
government.
They just recently (August '03) added Linux as an approved OS. There are

a few Linux installations around - mainly in the Dept. of Defense - but
overall Linux use is miniscule.

Funny, very funny. You just wait. Gee...the Dept. of Defense uses it.
Now I know this may be hard for you, but just think about that for a
minute. Hmmm...we have the most dominant military technology in the whole
world, and our Defense Department is using Linux.
You'd best do some research before making blanket statements like this.
Linux is not very widely used anywhere in the US govt.

Now why do you think
that is?....Duh! Obviously there are security issues with Windoze. One
simple trojan can wipe out an entire system in Windoze. Can't be done in
Linux. The structure of the system won't allow it.
You don't seem to know what you're talking about, Big DuMMy. Make sure you
take the time to read all the links, so you can learn about just a few Linux
viruses and trojans:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/56/21538.html
http://securityresponse.symantec.com...n.linux.jbellz.
html
http://math-www.uni-paderborn.de/~axel/bliss/
http://www.infosatellite.com/news/20...ux_trojan.html
http://antivirus.about.com/library/weekly/aa032301a.htm
http://tinyurl.com/394os
http://tinyurl.com/25m52
http://antivirus.about.com/library/v...fo/blramen.htm


> and Microsoft is spending considerable effort trying to
> convince people that Microsoft is better than Linux.


Microsoft IS better than Linux - that's why Linux copies EVERYTHING from
Windows. Load up a Linux windows manager like KDE or Gnome; by default

it looks just like Windows, down to the Start button in the lower left!
They've gone to extremes to make sure it's a user-friendly Windows clone.
Is there a single original idea anywhere in Linux? The OS and kernel is a clone of Unix (some code apparently is even stolen directly from Unix), and all the applications are clones or near-clones of Windows apps. What's
that
all about?

Now THAT is a laugh. Linux is at least an order of magnitude better than
Windoze. Let me explain something to you dumbass.
I'll listen as soon as you tell me why the most important thing for Linux
distros is that it installs easily, and looks and feels and behaves like
Windows. Is there anything original in Linux? Anything at all?

Windoze is written in
C/C++. Therefore, Windoze was more than likely developed on some kind of
Unix system. Now you dumbasses are programming a language on top of a
language,
Windows is NOT a language.

and that language is dynamic and at the mercy of a company that
in ONE day, could just decide to change the API in any way they want. You
put your faith in that. I'll put my faith in the core languages like
C/C++, and we'll see who gets farther 10 years from now.
It's not a matter of who gets farther. I develop small-scale Access db
applications (some linked to Oracle or SQL Server). I like working with
interfaces. I infrequently use the Win32 API.

You see, we Linux
users don't give a shit about pretty bells and whistles in an operating
system.
The hell you don't. Every new Linux release looks and behaves more and more
like Windows everyday. The Linux desktops are crammed with more icons than
ever, and contain more little Windows wannabe utilities and apps than ever.

I haven't used Linux in a few years, but it would surprise me if there
wasn't a "My Computer" icon on the Linux desktop nowadays, seeing as how
they "borrow" as many Windows features and functions as they can.

We are about having the capability to use a core language to its
fullest potential and create what we want. Not using some subset of the
language at the expense of flexibility.
What does this blabber about "core language" and "subset" mean? Seriously.

> Obviously, MS thinks that Linux is some serious competition.


Linux is not the competition - free is the competition. And free is

always serious competition. But even as a free platform, to have any chance at
all
of widespread adoption Linux has to offer applications like OpenOffice.org that will read and write to MS Office formats. In other words, there's not a single compelling reason to switch to Linux, except that it's free - and it's NOT MICROSOFT! Whoooo! Real good reason there.

That is hilarious. Free is not the competition. Linux is free, UNIX is
not, and UNIX is competition as well.
UNIX has been losing market share for 10 years. Only free Linux can be
considered a competitor nowadays, and then only for servers.
http://www.dwheeler.com/oss_fs_why.html#market_share

If it wasn't, I wouldn't have a UNIX
machine on my desk at work. You want a single compelling reason to switch
to Linux...you need look no further than a few days ago. Viruses running
wild all over, but you know what? You didn't hear one person with a Linux
box complaining about it.
True. Not one, but hundreds. When MyDoom hit recently, every Linux user
out there, including you, went and checked their security configuration
again.
Security!! There is one compelling reason.
Like I showed you before, you don't know what you're talking about. And you
tell me to "just wait"? Well, you "just wait" until virus writers decide to
really focus on Linux and Unix - you'll be eating large helpings of crow.
Actually, that probably will never happen, 'cause Linux won't ever have a
large enough installed base to attract kiddies like you to write viruses.
You want about 100 more?
Try all the auto-download spoonfed shit that gets put
on your computer that you don't necessarily want.
I get ZERO auto-downloaded stuff from MS.

Or how about the inability to install Windows XP more than once.
What about it? Those are the terms of the license agreement. Nobody is
forcing me to use Windows.

Bet you steal music, too.
Wanna upgrade your CPU, tough shit, buy a new copy because your license won't allow more than one install.

Wrong. Another ignorant statement.
No problems here though. I can install Linux as much as I want.
I can install Win2000 and below as much as I want.

Want to program in any language imaginable? Can't be done in Windoze, but
hey..I can program in Java, Python, Perl, C, C++, Fortran, PHP, Lisp,
Pascal just to name a few.
You are clueless, aren't you? There's a Windows-based IDE or compiler
available for _every single one_ of those languages, and all the resultant
executables, bytecode and binaries will execute on Windows systems. But
Linux users can't program in C# or VB (the most widely used language in the
world).

Why don't you know all this, considering how "brilliant" you are? LOL!

Core languages are fairly static, Windoze is
dynamically out of control.
Do you really think Windows is a programming language? You sound like you
do.
Windoze has to continually better their product
by coming out with new versions constantly,
Another clueless statement. Many more versions of Linux and UNIX are
released than new Windows versions. Every few months a new Linux kernel is
released, and if you read the linux newsgroups you'll see each new kernel
addresses many security issues found since the previous kernel.
which all have their quirks
and security loopholes, and force people to modify their original creation. If they didn't, they would go out of business. Conversely, programs written
in C 20 years ago will still work today.
So? Who runs 20 year old C programs? 95% of the world uses Windows.

If I had the Windoze source code, I could compile it in Linux,
No you couldn't.

but I could also write applications other than Windoze. Therein lies the beauty.

And from Windows I can write apps that run on Linux and UNIX. So?

> Probably the smartest thinking they have thought in the last 10 years.


Microsoft is one of the greatest companies in the history of mankind,
whether you like their products or not. They've created immense wealth

for the world, created great software, and brought low prices along with them. When I started using PCs in the late 80s, Lotus 1-2-3 was a real scam at
$495.00. A few years later, Office Pro with the spreadsheet, word
processor, database and graphics program was the same price - for all four programs.

Microsoft is one of the worst failures in the history of mankind.
LOL! What an uninformed, narrow-minded dumbass you are, Big DuMMy. That's
one of the most idiotic statements I've ever heard.
They have their nose in stuff that is out of their league.
You obviously have been snorting stuff up your nose.
There is absolutely no scaleability to Access.
That's probably the first true statement you've made in this thread. Nobody
ever claimed differently.
Oracle is dominant and nothing can compete with it.
Another clueless statement. You should stop making stupid, uninformed
statements like this. Go to http://www.tpc.org/ and see where Oracle gets
its ass handed to it by Microsoft SQL Server and IBM DB2.
Every MAJOR database in this world is
done with Oracle, and for good reason.
Wrong.
You dumbasses want to swim against
the current, go ahead, that just makes more job security for me in the
future.
You don't sound secure; you sound desperate.
Bottom line is Microsoft has shitty programmers that can't test
code worth a shit, which is why the world has computer viruses.
The world has computer viruses because of childish morons like you who like
to prove they can bypass Microsoft security.
Now, Linux on the other hand is a collaborative effort by the world, so before anything is implemented, you can damn well bet that people all over the
world have tested the hell out of it and there are no loopholes.
I already showed you many loopholes. Now where are you gonna go?
On one hand we have the world...on the other...some greedy ass company with a vested interest in getting the technology out before it is completely
safe. Obviously Microsoft sucks!
Obviously Microsoft has contributed enormously to the world: in wealth, job
creation, software and hardware standards, corporate productivity,
philanthropically, etc.
> > And Oracle is now losing market share to IBM and Microsoft.
> > http://www.ecommercetimes.com/perl/story/20968.html, partly because of > > this http://zdnet.com.com/2100-1104-831204.html and this
> > http://www.dbasupport.com/oracle/news/alert59.shtml
I notice you had nothing to say about the loss of market share and the
security holes in your "big daddy." Why?


C'mon Big DuMMy - address the issues of dropping market share and security
considerations in Oracle and Linux. You keep evading - but the problems
aren't going away. In fact, they'll only get worse.

> >> All you Access gurus with your cute little prototype shit will have to > >> bring in the big daddy of them all (Oracle) eventually.
> >
> > No we won't. And one thing we will NEVER do is bring in those dumbass > > Oracle consultants.

>
> You won't have to. Your ass will be canned and we Oracle consultants

will
> come take charge.


Take charge of what? All I've seen is Oracle consultant failure. I'm

sure there are some good Oracle consultants (and I mean employee consultants),
but they're WAY overpriced. $300 an hour for OLAP consultants?
Ridiculous.

You know why it's $300 an hour? Because rather than people doing shit right in the first place, they use these cute litte prototype Access databases
and then they have to bring in the big dogs to clean up the MS Access shit
that idiots like yourself left behind.


Like I said, the Oracle "big dogs" I saw weren't competent at all. I
seriously doubt you are, either.



Nov 12 '05 #13

P: n/a
"Colleyville Alan" <ae***********@nospam.comcast.net> wrote:
Comments: This message did not originate from the Sender address above.
It was remailed automatically by anonymizing remailer software.


Yet another forgery.

Tony
--
Tony Toews, Microsoft Access MVP
Please respond only in the newsgroups so that others can
read the entire thread of messages.
Microsoft Access Links, Hints, Tips & Accounting Systems at
http://www.granite.ab.ca/accsmstr.htm
Nov 12 '05 #14

This discussion thread is closed

Replies have been disabled for this discussion.