> > Hmmm, MySQL 5 is promising though. And quite the nice stab at
> > Firebird - with _still_ no released v2 ( I know why, but the outside
> > world doesn't) and is slowly creeping towards v3 with hardly any
> > new features? While MySQL 5 and 5.1 (which is underway) are
> > packed with new stuff.
>
> True. However, with the Oracle-cloud hanging over it, it may turn out
> to be a hard sell to non-GPL users. The VC's are likely to be very
> focused on their exit (last round was in 2003, exit after 3) and
> hence on financial performance.
>
> On the feature side I agree that we need to move faster. I think that
> 2006 will packed with new Firebird and Firebird-based releases. We
> have done the coding homework - now we need to package and sell it.
>
> Remember, success is ultimately not decided by features, but by
> offering practical solutions to users who aren't necessarily
> interested in the database underneath. MySQL was succesful because
> for a while it was the best choice for building dynamic websites.

And because it was free.

And because the security system was easy to use for ISPs.

And because fixes were available continuesly. Ever looked at the
number of minor updates?

> This MySQL 3/4 franchise is eroding and whatever MySQL 5 franchise
> will have fierce competition from the incumbants: us and
> SQLServer/MSDE.

Sure, this will become interesting. But Firebird will missed the boat
when it comes to "we have procedure, triggers, views and check constraints"
with MySQL on a number of -other- features that the MySQL crowd
was used to.

Now, get SQL 2005 in your VMWare session. Woah, that's a change.
I predict that it will be hard to change from SQL 2000 to 2005 ( I'm
changing - a lot - of code in a certain GUI tool ;) ... But on the other
hand, SQL 2005 offers a lot of new features compared to 2000. Yes,
Firebird has some of them and lacks many of them. Add to that,
.NET is coming to SQL 2005. And the dreaded XQuery crap.

> Thinking creatively, the best thing for Marten to do would be to plan
> for a gradual phase-out of the MSQL5/Inno code base, adopt the
> Firebird code base and shift from selling licences to selling

Way too different beasts.

> support, Red Hat style. Marten's problem: one does not have that
> shift in place by 2006.

Don't get me wrong, I still like Firebird and use it for quite some things,
both internally here and externally. Works as a treat.

Then again, so does MySQL for other things and nice free and open
source PHP applications :-)

With regards,

Martijn Tonies
Database Workbench - tool for InterBase, Firebird, MySQL, Oracle & MS SQL
Server
Upscene Productions
http://www.upscene.com
Database development questions? Check the forum!
http://www.databasedevelopmentforum.com