Subject Re: [IBDI] Re: Product name
Author Ann W. Harrison
At 10:49 PM 4/26/2001 +0000, markus.soell@... wrote:

>I remember a report on IBDI about a meeting you attended somewhere
>together with representants from MySql and PostgreSql, and in your
>report you showed significantly more respect for them than you do

Sorry - I was unclear. The products are fine - their names,
particularly PostgreSQL, are not.

Postgres was a pretty good name for a follow-on
to Ingres. The pronunciation is pretty obvious
"Post grress" - accent on the Post.

PostgreSQL is, first, an unfortunate bastardization
of an interesting and innovative database - almost
like hitching a mule to a VW Golf to make a high
mileage vehicle.

PostgreSQL is also impossible to pronounce. It's
a little know fact that SQL was intended to be pronounced
"sequel". It was the sequel to Alpha, Codd's first
database language. So it might be pronounced
"post gre sequel", or perhaps "post gres equal".

On the other hand, nearly everyone pronounces SQL as
ess que ell,` making the name "post gre ess que ell"

It's a golfule, and that's my opinion. No reflection
on the database, but the name bays at the moon.

> The formal advantage that it's indicative for the type of
> product remains. Guess why other databases have names like
> InterBase, SyBase, DB2, ... This has some value!

I know how InterBase got it's name ... not a pretty story.
It should have been Epic (language epilog). It was briefly
Galaxy. Then we hired some idiot to be President and his
one contribution was a stupid name.

Oracle? Delphi? Mistress? Empress? Solid? Lotus 123?

>But for sure the fact that FirebirdSQL matches the domains is a great

Errr... since we've had that domain for all of four days ...

>Please look at it again tomorrow and reconsider ;)

Have. Did. Same conclusion.


We have answers.