If you were to log in, you'd be able to get more information on your fellow community member.
I would have to agree with the Informix vs. Oracle comments. As far as 99% of the user-base is concerned, both products supply about the same level of service, cost about the same amount of money, and run about as fast.
I should mention at this point that I'm an Informix DBA by profession who was forced to become an Oracle DBA about a year ago due to interesting management decisions. This probably gives me a skewed perspective on things, so keep that in mind.
Anyway, the one place that the two systems really diverge in my opinion is in basic entry-level administration. While both systems provide a complete set of 'system tables' that an advanced DBA can write queries on, Informix is light-years ahead as far as friendly common tasks go. A good example of this would be the amount of effort to do common administrative procedures. Some examples follow.
I was assured in official Oracle training that I wanted to rebuild my b-tree indexes periodically to recla...
There are lots of comments here pointing out that the NSX doesn't have a soul. I'd like to introduce a slightly different perspective. When driving some cars, they feel as if they have a life of their own. You have to get to know them, and they have to get to know you. Once you're communicating on a low level, they will perform miracles for you. Driving one can be a real experience. Just as some loudspeakers can breathe life into unimaginative performances, making something plain into something quite extraordinary, these cars can turn your morning drive into an adventure. The NSX is not one of those cars. Rather, when driving the NSX, you will get out of the relationship exactly what you put into it. You may not feel the soul of the car, but you will feel the soul of the road. I would say that the NSX is transparent in much the same way that a really good audio system is transparent. Uninspired stretches of highway will be delivered without spark or sizzle, allowing you...
That's a very valid point. My home system is currently well below audiophile standards, but my truck stereo is, IMnsHO, quite good (and currently being redesigned for the '00 competition year). Its set up for total sound quality, not pure bass. There are several pieces of music that I enjoy listening to at home that I just can't stand in the truck. Since much modern music seems to be recorded more... how shall I put this... casually than it should be, the recording quality certainly suffers. Its no great thrill to listen to static and poor imaging being faithfully reproduced and exposed for what it is. As far as the Quads go, my main experience with them was conditionally favorable. A friend of mine had an older set, and they sounded absolutely wonderful -- from his recliner. Off axis imaging was close to non-existant. I have rarely seen a speaker more susecptible to room conditions as they were either -- the addition of a healthy plant was enough to inspire 2-3 hours of ca...
> Dave Clark did not by any means design TCP/IP by himself
Does anyone really design anything by themselves? This is quibbling IMO.
> Now we're running out of host addresses again
Actually, CIDR really pushed this issue off a fair distance into the future. All it took was a little self discipline. Of course, if things got really tight some institutions (ie: MIT) that have sizable allocations (ie: an entire Class A) could always renumber and share the wealth, but that's a pain and probably unnecessary.
> the best solutions they've come up with so far result in every router on the backbone having to know which direction tens of thousands of networks are in
This is mainly because doing the kind of baling-wire fix you describe turned out to be rediculously easy with the advent of better block allocation and almost-free memory. If what you have works, you don't fix it.
> The current TCP/IP protocols don...
Geoffrey's question is an interesting one -- so interesting that I think that it bears examining rather than answering. Personally, I think that the entire concept of dividing your life into alternating stretches of 'learning' and 'doing' is both unnatural and unproductive. One of the more well-balanced people I work with just finished a master's degree after 5 years of study -- by taking classes that were interesting and relevant while working, then putting them all together when the time was right. Admittedly, I'm fortunate in that I work in the computer industry, where degrees are fairly optional. Still, I think that most people would be well served by working and learning at the same time. Advanced study used to be an end instead of a way -- what happened to change that?