I hate to say this again but its apples to oranges comparison. Anyway, you can try some points like cost effectiveness, TCO, cross-platform needs, maintenance requirements, disk and memory footprint, speed, hardware requirements etc.
> "If SQLite is as good as you say, then why is it > free?" This kind of mindset is very difficult to overcome. Not everything paid is good and not everything free is bad. If your company is hell bent on paid solution then I am sure Dr. Hipp won't mind taking donations and can also provide paid support ;-) > "If anyone can see the source code, then won't we be > venerable to hackers?" Security is more than just being able to see the code. Closed source products have been proven to be equally vulnerable. Security of any product also depends upon the practices of the product's users. For instance, if someone has their entire system (files, databases etc.) encrypted but if their server is open and keys accessible then whether the code for OS or database is available or not is a moot point; hackers will still be able to get the sensitive data. HTH, Jalil Vaidya --- "Downey, Shawn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Thank you for your replies (both yours and Jalil's). > I understand that > SQLite is not universally applicable. Let me give > you some background > to better explain my request. > > We currently have a product (which we inherited the > responsibility from > another company). This product was originally > written to use SQLite. > We have expanded the this product (continuing to use > SQLite). > > Now our organization is partnered with another > company which has a > related product which uses SQL Server 7. This new > partner is pushing my > management to convert our product over to use SQL > Server 7 instead of > SQLite. The intent is that we can use a single > database format at some > point in the future. > > I can see no earthy reason to move in that > direction. If a single > database is needed, I would like to see it be > SQLite. I am convinced > that SQLite could fill both companies our needs. > > I am sorry I can not disclose more about the > products in question. What > I am looking for are some talking points which can > convince my own > management to push back against converting all our > good work into SQL > Server 7. I am trying to overcome the attitude of: > > "If SQLite is as good as you say, then why is it > free?" > > and > > "If anyone can see the source code, then won't we be > venerable to > hackers?" > > etc. > > Thanks again. > > Shawn M. Downey > MPR Associates > 632 Plank Road, Suite 110 > Clifton Park, NY 12065 > 518-371-3983 x3 (work) > 860-508-5015 (cell) > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Fred Williams [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Monday, January 31, 2005 10:32 AM > To: sqlite-users@sqlite.org > Subject: RE: [sqlite] SQLite Advocacy > > I think if your organization is truly looking at > SQLite vs SQL Server, > you need to reconsider your project specifications. > You are basically > comparing a Corvette to a Greyhound Bus. > > Fred > > -----Original Message----- > From: Downey, Shawn [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Monday, January 31, 2005 8:28 AM > To: sqlite-users@sqlite.org > Subject: [sqlite] SQLite Advocacy > > > In our organization, my management is debating the > use of SQLite vs. MS > SQL Server 7 for an upcoming MS Windows project. > Does anyone have any > SQLite advocacy info I can use? Perhaps a link to > an article? I am > hoping someone had written something eloquent about > SQLite's advantages > such as its size, speed, zero-installation, etc. > > ... > > > ===== 01001010 01100001 01101100 01101001 01101100
