Re: postgre vs MySQL

> Greg Smith wrote:
>> On Fri, 14 Mar 2008, Andrej Ricnik-Bay wrote:
>>> A silly question in this context:  If we know of a company that  
>>> does use PostgreSQL but doesn't list it anywhere ... can we take  
>>> the liberty to publicise this somewhere anyway?
>
> I notice Oracle (and sleepycat before them) had a lot of fun
> pointing out when Microsoft uses BDB.
>
> http://www.oracle.com/technology/oramag/oracle/07-jan/o17opensource.html
>   You'll find Oracle Berkeley DB "under the hood" in everything
>   from Motorola cell phones, Microsoft/Groove's collaboration suite
>
> and it seems unlikely Microsoft gave them their blessings.
>
>> Bad idea.  There are companies who consider being listed as a user  
>> of a product a sort of recommendation of that technology, and  
>> accordingly
>
> Other reasons a company might get offended by this:
>
> * They might consider it a trade secret and a competitive advantage
>   over competitors; and internally enjoy giggling when they see
>   their competitors sign deals with expensive databases.
>
> * They might have a close business partnership with Microsoft
>   or Oracle that could be strained if they support other databases.
>
> I suspect my employer would not like it announced for both reasons.
>
>> they will get really annoyed...asked to be removed from the list of
>> those using PostgreSQL.  ... PostgreSQL inside, it's best not to
>> publish the results unless you like to collect cease & desist  
>> letters.
>
> While I agree companies are likely to get annoyed - just like fast
> food companies do when you say how much trans-fats their products
> contain; I'm rather curious what such a cease&desist letter would say.