Subject Re: Why don't you use MSSQL?
Author Svein Erling Tysvær
--- In, "russellbelding" wrote:
> Yes this really is a Firebird support question, in a wider sense of
> support, for those of us using Firebird in applications and trying to
> sell to them.

Sure, it is a Firebird support question, but is it a firebird-support question?
I'd say that it is a firebird-general question.

> A scenario I have faced in selling an application using Firebird is
> this. A potential user's IT team sits in on a demonstration and
> observes "We are aleady using MSSQL on our DB server, why don't you
> convert your application to use MSSQL, then we won't have to put
> Firebird on our server?"
> I wonder if other app builders have faced this question and if so
> would you find it helpful to share insights here?
> My replies have been:
> 1. Yes I can do that and it would take me some time to convert the
> application. ("I'll do it if you pay the cost" is what I refrained
> from saying.)
> 2. Firebird is easy to install and will not bother you with any admin
> tasks. It is efficient in memory use and fast. It installs as a
> service and has an auto start companion fbguard. You can forget about
> it after installation.
> 3. Firebird has a proven track record and you can see commendations
> for Firebird at <forgot the site>

Thanks for good explanations as to why use Firebird. Though they are rather
defensive, basically saying that Firebird is good enough even though it is not
MSSQL. "Sure, I could consider evaluating whether downgrading is feasible or
not, though I'd rather help you get rid of MSSQL" is a more aggressive approach,
that will either start a fight or make whomever asked you a bit curious whether
you have any reason to be that confident about Firebird (or maybe people will
just laugh).