SAP chooses ...

Daniel Adam

SAP chooses ...
Makes you wonder...

SAP Selects Microsoft SQL Server 7.0 as Strategic Development And Production
Platform for Windows NT and Windows 2000, Offering Customers Expanded
Platform Choices
http://www.sap.com/press/12_99/12_99_13.htm




Daniel Adam
Gratex International
http://www.gratex.sk



Leslie Pendlebury-Bowe

Re: SAP chooses ...
(in response to Daniel Adam)
Err ... I thought they choose DB2 ?????????

talk about trying to keep everyone happy.

Leslie


______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: SAP chooses ...
Author: "Adam; Daniel" <[login to unmask email]> at Internet
Date: 12/30/99 10:56 AM


Makes you wonder...

SAP Selects Microsoft SQL Server 7.0 as Strategic Development And Production
Platform for Windows NT and Windows 2000, Offering Customers Expanded
Platform Choices
http://www.sap.com/press/12_99/12_99_13.htm




Daniel Adam
Gratex International
http://www.gratex.sk








Leslie Pendlebury-Bowe

Re: SAP chooses ...
(in response to Chris Cronrath)
Chris

I have worked with both (SQL server not as much as UDB) and SQL server
is a crock of smelly dung with a shinny marketing man standing behind
it. UDB IS THE BEST! and I too wish to know why IBM have let this
slip through their fingers ..

Les


______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: Re: SAP chooses ...
Author: Chris Cronrath <[login to unmask email]> at Internet
Date: 12/30/99 8:51 AM


Someone please explain why they would choose both DB2 and Microsoft SQL Server?

How and why did IBM let this get away? Is DB2 on Windows NT/2000 not as good as
Microsoft SQL Server? I have worked with both and I know this is not the case.

My boss saw this and I am now having a very hard time convincing him DB2 UDB for
NT is the way to go. Why couldn't IBM prove DB2 UDB is the way to go on all
platforms? This would have made my job easier.



-----Original Message-----
From: Adam, Daniel [SMTP:[login to unmask email]
Sent: Thursday, December 30, 1999 4:57 AM
To: [login to unmask email]
Subject: SAP chooses ...

Makes you wonder...

SAP Selects Microsoft SQL Server 7.0 as Strategic Development And
Production
Platform for Windows NT and Windows 2000, Offering Customers Expanded
Platform Choices
http://www.sap.com/press/12_99/12_99_13.htm




Daniel Adam
Gratex International
http://www.gratex.sk



the









Chris Cronrath

Re: SAP chooses ...
(in response to Leslie Pendlebury-Bowe)
Someone please explain why they would choose both DB2 and Microsoft SQL Server?

How and why did IBM let this get away? Is DB2 on Windows NT/2000 not as good as Microsoft SQL Server? I have worked with both and I know this is not the case.

My boss saw this and I am now having a very hard time convincing him DB2 UDB for NT is the way to go. Why couldn't IBM prove DB2 UDB is the way to go on all platforms? This would have made my job easier.



-----Original Message-----
From: Adam, Daniel [SMTP:[login to unmask email]
Sent: Thursday, December 30, 1999 4:57 AM
To: [login to unmask email]
Subject: SAP chooses ...

Makes you wonder...

SAP Selects Microsoft SQL Server 7.0 as Strategic Development And Production
Platform for Windows NT and Windows 2000, Offering Customers Expanded
Platform Choices
http://www.sap.com/press/12_99/12_99_13.htm




Daniel Adam
Gratex International
http://www.gratex.sk






Leslie Pendlebury-Bowe

Re: SAP chooses ...
(in response to Mike_Levine@TEKHELP.NET)
Michael

.. remains to be seen how IBM take this .. but ...

...I am not saying that the product isn't right for certain people ..

what really annoys me is that marketing machines like microsoft are
able to just steam their way into places because they already have a
strangle hold on the infrastructure through their other products ..

I am happy when senior management make proper comparison's and consult
technicians about which product really is better for an organization
.. and in a lot of cases this is not so .. marketing men of these
large(Oracle etc.) companies target top senior management and get them
onside .. and let us be honest it is the DBA that picks up the pieces
after the DBAs get told they have to support the DBMS .. how many
shops have multiple DBMSs??? How many times did the technician get
listened to when the DBMS were chosen? I would like to see the results
of survey on this ... might make interesting reading ...

all the best for the New YEar to you all

Leslie


______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: Re: SAP chooses ...
Author: [login to unmask email] at Internet
Date: 12/30/99 10:58 AM


Hi,

I would not go quite this far...I think that SAP simply choose
not to put all of their eggs in one basket. I'm sure this was
not overlooked by IBM. The DB2 win over Oracle was big though!

Regards,

Michael Levine
Premier Data Services, Inc.


> Chris
>
> I have worked with both (SQL server not as much as UDB) and SQL server
> is a crock of smelly dung with a shinny marketing man standing behind
> it. UDB IS THE BEST! and I too wish to know why IBM have let this
> slip through their fingers ..
>
> Les
>
>
>______________________________ Reply Separator
_________________________________
>Subject: Re: SAP chooses ...
>Author: Chris Cronrath <[login to unmask email]> at Internet
>Date: 12/30/99 8:51 AM
>
>
>Someone please explain why they would choose both DB2 and Microsoft SQL Server?
>
>How and why did IBM let this get away? Is DB2 on Windows NT/2000 not as
good as
>Microsoft SQL Server? I have worked with both and I know this is not the case.
>
>My boss saw this and I am now having a very hard time convincing him DB2
UDB for
>NT is the way to go. Why couldn't IBM prove DB2 UDB is the way to go on all
>platforms? This would have made my job easier.
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Adam, Daniel [SMTP:[login to unmask email]
> Sent: Thursday, December 30, 1999 4:57 AM
> To: [login to unmask email]
> Subject: SAP chooses ...
>
> Makes you wonder...
>
> SAP Selects Microsoft SQL Server 7.0 as Strategic Development And
>Production
> Platform for Windows NT and Windows 2000, Offering Customers Expanded
> Platform Choices
> http://www.sap.com/press/12_99/12_99_13.htm
>
>
>
>
> Daniel Adam
> Gratex International
> http://www.gratex.sk
>
>
>
visit
>the
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>


>
>








[login to unmask email]

Re: SAP chooses ...
(in response to Leslie Pendlebury-Bowe)
Hi,

I would not go quite this far...I think that SAP simply choose
not to put all of their eggs in one basket. I'm sure this was
not overlooked by IBM. The DB2 win over Oracle was big though!

Regards,

Michael Levine
Premier Data Services, Inc.


> Chris
>
> I have worked with both (SQL server not as much as UDB) and SQL server
> is a crock of smelly dung with a shinny marketing man standing behind
> it. UDB IS THE BEST! and I too wish to know why IBM have let this
> slip through their fingers ..
>
> Les
>
>
>______________________________ Reply Separator
_________________________________
>Subject: Re: SAP chooses ...
>Author: Chris Cronrath <[login to unmask email]> at Internet
>Date: 12/30/99 8:51 AM
>
>
>Someone please explain why they would choose both DB2 and Microsoft SQL Server?
>
>How and why did IBM let this get away? Is DB2 on Windows NT/2000 not as
good as
>Microsoft SQL Server? I have worked with both and I know this is not the case.
>
>My boss saw this and I am now having a very hard time convincing him DB2
UDB for
>NT is the way to go. Why couldn't IBM prove DB2 UDB is the way to go on all
>platforms? This would have made my job easier.
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Adam, Daniel [SMTP:[login to unmask email]
> Sent: Thursday, December 30, 1999 4:57 AM
> To: [login to unmask email]
> Subject: SAP chooses ...
>
> Makes you wonder...
>
> SAP Selects Microsoft SQL Server 7.0 as Strategic Development And
>Production
> Platform for Windows NT and Windows 2000, Offering Customers Expanded
> Platform Choices
> http://www.sap.com/press/12_99/12_99_13.htm
>
>
>
>
> Daniel Adam
> Gratex International
> http://www.gratex.sk
>
>
>
visit
>the
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>


>
>



Isaac Yassin

Re: SAP chooses ...
(in response to Leslie Pendlebury-Bowe)
Hi,
If I remember correctly OS/2 was much better then windows (all versions), so
.....?????
(I know -I still use OS/2 on production system).
It looks like mgmt. all over around are going by consensus on microsoft tools on
the NT platform. They don't want to be hassled by having to combine two
products.
If microsoft will be broken to 3-4 companies then it may change.
BTW - T had to do some work on SQL SERVER both 6.5 and 7.0 and there is a big
improvement (It is still far from DB2 UDB).
SAP had to move away from ORACLE not only because of IBM's blue eyes but due to
the action ORACLE is taking against SAP with ORACLE APPLICATION. So SAP now has
to look after its markets and re-adapt.

ALL IS MY PERSONAL OPINION. ALL DISCLAIMERS APPLY.

--
Isaac Yassin

DBMS & IT Consultant

Tel: +972 9 9505172
Cel: +972 54 452793
Fax: +972 9 9560803



Chris Cronrath wrote:
>
> Someone please explain why they would choose both DB2 and Microsoft SQL Server?
>
> How and why did IBM let this get away? Is DB2 on Windows NT/2000 not as good as Microsoft SQL Server? I have worked with both and I know this is not the case.
>
> My boss saw this and I am now having a very hard time convincing him DB2 UDB for NT is the way to go. Why couldn't IBM prove DB2 UDB is the way to go on all platforms? This would have made my job easier.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Adam, Daniel [SMTP:[login to unmask email]
> Sent: Thursday, December 30, 1999 4:57 AM
> To: [login to unmask email]
> Subject: SAP chooses ...
>
> Makes you wonder...
>
> SAP Selects Microsoft SQL Server 7.0 as Strategic Development And Production
> Platform for Windows NT and Windows 2000, Offering Customers Expanded
> Platform Choices
> http://www.sap.com/press/12_99/12_99_13.htm
>
> Daniel Adam
> Gratex International
> http://www.gratex.sk
>
>
>
>
>
>



Rick Creech

Re: SAP chooses ...
(in response to Isaac Yassin)
It seems to me that you are describing the way the world works. I heard
years ago that IBM got a foothold in the hardware market mainly through
marketing tactics like you described. There were other computers out there,
such as Burroughs and Honeywell that did a good job; but the difference on
who ultimately took charge of the marketplace was the marketing
accomplishments...
OS2 already had many of the features that were seen in Windows 95; but it
was marketing that made people go crazy over Windows 95.

Regards,
Rick Creech


>From: Leslie Pendlebury-Bowe
><[login to unmask email]>
>Reply-To: DB2 Data Base Discussion List <[login to unmask email]>
>To: [login to unmask email]
>Subject: Re: SAP chooses ...
>Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 15:52:46 +0000
>
> Michael
>
> .. remains to be seen how IBM take this .. but ...
>
> ...I am not saying that the product isn't right for certain people ..
>
> what really annoys me is that marketing machines like microsoft are
> able to just steam their way into places because they already have a
> strangle hold on the infrastructure through their other products ..
>
> I am happy when senior management make proper comparison's and
>consult
> technicians about which product really is better for an organization
> .. and in a lot of cases this is not so .. marketing men of these
> large(Oracle etc.) companies target top senior management and get
>them
> onside .. and let us be honest it is the DBA that picks up the pieces
> after the DBAs get told they have to support the DBMS .. how many
> shops have multiple DBMSs??? How many times did the technician get
> listened to when the DBMS were chosen? I would like to see the
>results
> of survey on this ... might make interesting reading ...
>
> all the best for the New YEar to you all
>
> Leslie
>
>
>______________________________ Reply Separator
>_________________________________
>Subject: Re: SAP chooses ...
>Author: [login to unmask email] at Internet
>Date: 12/30/99 10:58 AM
>
>
>Hi,
>
>I would not go quite this far...I think that SAP simply choose
>not to put all of their eggs in one basket. I'm sure this was
>not overlooked by IBM. The DB2 win over Oracle was big though!
>
>Regards,
>
>Michael Levine
>Premier Data Services, Inc.
>
>
> > Chris
> >
> > I have worked with both (SQL server not as much as UDB) and SQL
>server
> > is a crock of smelly dung with a shinny marketing man standing
>behind
> > it. UDB IS THE BEST! and I too wish to know why IBM have let this
> > slip through their fingers ..
> >
> > Les
> >
> >
> >______________________________ Reply Separator
>_________________________________
> >Subject: Re: SAP chooses ...
> >Author: Chris Cronrath <[login to unmask email]> at Internet
> >Date: 12/30/99 8:51 AM
> >
> >
> >Someone please explain why they would choose both DB2 and Microsoft SQL
>Server?
> >
> >How and why did IBM let this get away? Is DB2 on Windows NT/2000 not as
>good as
> >Microsoft SQL Server? I have worked with both and I know this is not the
>case.
> >
> >My boss saw this and I am now having a very hard time convincing him DB2
>UDB for
> >NT is the way to go. Why couldn't IBM prove DB2 UDB is the way to go on
>all
> >platforms? This would have made my job easier.
> >
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Adam, Daniel [SMTP:[login to unmask email]
> > Sent: Thursday, December 30, 1999 4:57 AM
> > To: [login to unmask email]
> > Subject: SAP chooses ...
> >
> > Makes you wonder...
> >
> > SAP Selects Microsoft SQL Server 7.0 as Strategic Development And
> >Production
> > Platform for Windows NT and Windows 2000, Offering Customers
>Expanded
> > Platform Choices
> > http://www.sap.com/press/12_99/12_99_13.htm
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Daniel Adam
> > Gratex International
> > http://www.gratex.sk
> >
> >
> > To change your subscription options or to cancel your
>subscription
>visit
> >the DB2-L webpage at http://www.ryci.com/db2-l. The owners of the list
>can be
> >
> >
> >
> >
>the
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> >
> >
>
>
>
>the
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com



Robert A. (Cameron of Pittsburgh at Alcoa) Knight

Re: SAP chooses ...
(in response to Rick Creech)
You are absolutely right.

I watched this go on in a previous shop where :::

Model 204
Supra
Ultra
DB2
IMS
Oracle
??
were in use over the past 10 years.

> ----------
> From: Leslie
> Pendlebury-Bowe[SMTP:[login to unmask email]
> Reply To: DB2 Data Base Discussion List
> Sent: Thursday, December 30, 1999 10:52 AM
> To: [login to unmask email]
> Subject: Re: SAP chooses ...
>
> Michael
>
> .. remains to be seen how IBM take this .. but ...
>
> ...I am not saying that the product isn't right for certain people ..
>
> what really annoys me is that marketing machines like microsoft are
> able to just steam their way into places because they already have a
> strangle hold on the infrastructure through their other products ..
>
> I am happy when senior management make proper comparison's and
> consult
> technicians about which product really is better for an organization
> .. and in a lot of cases this is not so .. marketing men of these
> large(Oracle etc.) companies target top senior management and get
> them
> onside .. and let us be honest it is the DBA that picks up the pieces
> after the DBAs get told they have to support the DBMS .. how many
> shops have multiple DBMSs??? How many times did the technician get
> listened to when the DBMS were chosen? I would like to see the
> results
> of survey on this ... might make interesting reading ...
>
> all the best for the New YEar to you all
>
> Leslie
>
>
> ______________________________ Reply Separator
> _________________________________
> Subject: Re: SAP chooses ...
> Author: [login to unmask email] at Internet
> Date: 12/30/99 10:58 AM
>
>
> Hi,
>
> I would not go quite this far...I think that SAP simply choose
> not to put all of their eggs in one basket. I'm sure this was
> not overlooked by IBM. The DB2 win over Oracle was big though!
>
> Regards,
>
> Michael Levine
> Premier Data Services, Inc.
>
>
> > Chris
> >
> > I have worked with both (SQL server not as much as UDB) and SQL
> server
> > is a crock of smelly dung with a shinny marketing man standing
> behind
> > it. UDB IS THE BEST! and I too wish to know why IBM have let this
> > slip through their fingers ..
> >
> > Les
> >
> >
> >______________________________ Reply Separator
> _________________________________
> >Subject: Re: SAP chooses ...
> >Author: Chris Cronrath <[login to unmask email]> at Internet
> >Date: 12/30/99 8:51 AM
> >
> >
> >Someone please explain why they would choose both DB2 and Microsoft SQL
> Server?
> >
> >How and why did IBM let this get away? Is DB2 on Windows NT/2000 not as
> good as
> >Microsoft SQL Server? I have worked with both and I know this is not the
> case.
> >
> >My boss saw this and I am now having a very hard time convincing him DB2
> UDB for
> >NT is the way to go. Why couldn't IBM prove DB2 UDB is the way to go on
> all
> >platforms? This would have made my job easier.
> >
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Adam, Daniel [SMTP:[login to unmask email]
> > Sent: Thursday, December 30, 1999 4:57 AM
> > To: [login to unmask email]
> > Subject: SAP chooses ...
> >
> > Makes you wonder...
> >
> > SAP Selects Microsoft SQL Server 7.0 as Strategic Development And
> >Production
> > Platform for Windows NT and Windows 2000, Offering Customers
> Expanded
> > Platform Choices
> > http://www.sap.com/press/12_99/12_99_13.htm
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Daniel Adam
> > Gratex International
> > http://www.gratex.sk
> >
> >
> > To change your subscription options or to cancel your
> subscription
> visit
> >the DB2-L webpage at http://www.ryci.com/db2-l. The owners of the list
> can be
> >
> >
> >
> >
> the
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> >
> >
>
>
>
> the
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>



Roger Miller

Re: SAP chooses ...
(in response to Robert A. (Cameron of Pittsburgh at Alcoa) Knight)
SAP chooses DB2

SAP and IBM announced that the award-winning IBM DB2 Universal Database
will replace Oracle as the primary database on IBM, Sun and Linux
platforms for internal development and production systems within SAP.

The platforms include Windows 2000,in addition to the already available
solutions for Sun Microsystems, Linux, Windows NT and IBM's RS/6000, AS/400
and S/390 ...
For the complete story go to
http://www2.software.ibm.com/news/news.nsf/n/smum4edn6t

For more information on this announcement and the reactions to it, please
see http://www.ibm.com/software/data/partners/ae1partners/sap/sapprs.html

Roger Miller



Richard A Yevich

Re: SAP chooses ...
(in response to Roger Miller)
MISLEADING INITIAL POSTING...

Only has to do with mySAP.com Solutions on NT. IBM DB2 is the strategic and
production platform for SAP development according to both SAP and IBM.

This is th full title of the anouncement:

SAP Selects Microsoft SQL Server 7.0 as Strategic Development And Production
Platform for mySAP.com™ Solutions On Windows NT and Windows 2000, Offering
Customers Expanded Platform Choices



Leslie Pendlebury-Bowe

Re: SAP chooses ...
(in response to Richard A Yevich)
Richard
that sounds a lot clearer now ..
Les


______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: Re: SAP chooses ...
Author: Richard A Yevich <[login to unmask email]> at Internet
Date: 12/30/99 3:09 PM


MISLEADING INITIAL POSTING...

Only has to do with mySAP.com Solutions on NT. IBM DB2 is the strategic and
production platform for SAP development according to both SAP and IBM.

This is th full title of the anouncement:

SAP Selects Microsoft SQL Server 7.0 as Strategic Development And Production
Platform for mySAP.com? Solutions On Windows NT and Windows 2000, Offering
Customers Expanded Platform Choices