Subject Re: [Firebird-general] MySQL to Fight Oracle With Fire(bird)?
Author Dariusz Zelichowski
Good point in your recent posts. I have been bothered with the same doubts. A lot of what happened and has been subsequently written by some of the FB Foundation brass just doesn;t stick together. The main premise of the unofficial (?) statemets may be true and understandable by those who fowllow the uos and sdowns of the FB project, but those statements are still all over the place and are somewhat (for the lack of a better word) incoherent.
So far the unofficial (?) statements from FB have been to the tune of:
1a. Jim Starkey was hired by MySQL because of his vast experience with RDBMS
2a. Jim was valuable to FB, and will be to MySQL
3a. The fact that he now works for MySQL is not a biggie because FB does not compete with MySQL
4a. The fact that he now works for MySQL is not a loss to FB because FB <> Jim Starkey. There are others.

and then, the respective counter statements/facts:

1b. Jim Starkey was hired by MySQL MySQL doesn't have what FB has had for years, and MySQL can't implement it inspite of gobs of money they have.
2b. FB will do just fine without Jm.
3b. See this listserv discussions on MySQL, comments from FB foundation members, see voting for the last 3 years, and any number of web sites when the two RDBMS are compared. It sure sounds like competition to me.
4b. And yet, inspite of the "free" developer's base, FB Foundation thought it was becessary to spend substantial amount of money to hire Jim to do importatnt work. So do we have the talent, or not?
1a leads me to believe MySQL is unable to develop their own talent, inhouse, and with all the money they have. So what do they do? They hire a guy who worked for the competition.

3a is plainly not true, no matter how you dress it up. The two database compete, no question about it.

1b clearly indicates that when it comes to market presence it's quantity first, and quality second. FB has had quality for years. It needs to maintain it and build some more, but it should now focus even more on quantity. I already wrote where those masses to intercept are lurking. Think of it the same way the car salesmen think about their job. Sure, they have a better commission on a Cadillac, but a lowly Chevy cavalier is what really puts food on their table.

4b leads me to believe that I'm not sure what to believe anymore.

The whole "before Jim","during Jim" and "after Jim" is pretty messy, and one statement contradicts another. At the present time it's hard to say if we have what we like, or just trying to feel satisfied with what we have.

Even the fact that Jim's hiring by MySQL first hit the FB pages pretty much in a manner similar to the Cheyeney's shooting incident ;-)

I used to check news religiously following this order:


I learned about the Jim-Gate from (which had a link to

Now I changed the sequence of the news check to :

another $0.02 of mine. (I'll go bankrupt soon, more than likely to the joy of many on this mailing list.)

Alexandre Benson Smith <iblist@...> wrote: Hi Paul,

Paul Beach wrote:
> Spin, spin, spin etc the to the tune of Spam, Spam etc
> Paul

That was my point, the key aspects of the articles I have read are
wrong, how it is understood by the people outside FB community ?

Alexandre Benson Smith
THOR Software e Comercial Ltda
Santo Andre - Sao Paulo - Brazil

Community email addresses:
Post message:
List owner:

Shortcut URL to this page:
Yahoo! Groups Links

Relax. Yahoo! Mail virus scanning helps detect nasty viruses!

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]