Subject Re: [ib-support] Re: MySQL vs Firebird - the slow decay
Author Martijn Tonies

> > Referential integrity and other constraints.
> > Subselects
> > Unions
> > Views
> > Triggers

> Getting into a feature by feature comparison is off target. It's

True - and the "crashme" application at the MySQL site isn't exactly
right either...

> the 'buzz' thing that I'm frustrated about. Yes, I can spout a list
> of reasons why Firebird beats other RDBMSs, including -- very much
> including -- MS SQL (what, you actually want to control the order of
> your trigger firing? Not with Uncle Bill's Sybase). But nobody is
> listening. When MySQL announce views or ref integrity or triggers,
> for millions of users it will be as if those guys invented
> it. "Finally we have views just like Oracle," they will crow. There
> will be news releases; there will be cheers; there will be dancing in
> the streets. Will anyone listen when you point out that Interbase
> So who's fault is it that nobody knows that stuff, that nobody knows
> about Firebird? It's nobody's fault because nobody (apart from the
> devs at conferences) has made a big effort to educate the db public.

What Firebird needs besides developers are a couple of things:

1) funding - to sponsor developers who want to devote more time
than just their sparetime. People who are working free-lance need
bread on the table.
2) a foundation to get that 1 going
3) a foundation that's publicly "there" (so to speak) and makes Fb
visible to the ignorant outside world...
4) a couple of new features to get Fb moving beyond IB/MSSQL/
MySQL ...
5) some speedups for simple selects and ordering (already done I believe
for version 1.5)

All IMHO of course...

With regards,

Martijn Tonies
InterBase Workbench - the developer tool for InterBase

Firebird Workbench - the developer tool for Firebird

Upscene Productions

"This is an object-oriented system.
If we change anything, the users object."