Lester Caine wrote:

> What probably helped us was that the MySQL people could not understand
>
>the questions ;)
>
>

What I *really* think that helped us is that almost everyone that is
using Firebird is using it for some serious business application. That's
quite diferent than a database such as MySQL, that is widely used
wordwide, but a (big?) percentage of this number are just curious that
need a place to store data.

The results from Evans Data are important, since are mainly professional
developers that answer the questions. I've been folowing them for a long
time, and it's clearly noticed that sometimes the research is ordered by
a big player, such as IBM, M$, Sun (the questions are too much oriented
into something).

Notice that "Sixty percent of database developers plan to expose or
invoke database operations through Web services
<http://www.evansdata.com/cgi/relocate.php?key=db2005_1_3>. The most
likely database operations to be invoked are: Stored procedures, 22%,
SQL Query Web services, 18%, and XML Query Web services, 15%."
This is clearly a professional use of a Database Engine.

And this "Companies say data security is improving. The vast majority,
89%, reported no security breaches against their databases at all but,
for those that did suffer a security breach, the most likely type of
breach was via physical access."
This is clearly a Firebird-related thing. :-)

What pleases me more on the results of the research is that Firebird is
positioned the way it should be - as a database engine for Enterprise use.
That's where we are always looking to be, and this is clearly
demonstrate in the way that Evans Data puts it.
One more step.

Artur