Bryan Oakley wrote: > On Feb 20, 2008 7:41 AM, Toby Roworth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Oracle has deployment contracts in the govornments of X countries >> worldwide, each having Y department, which have Z number of databases >> each... >> > > I would think the number of MacOSX installations would outnumber the > Oracle installations of the world, wouldn't it? I'm just guessing > here, but with the cost of Oracle being so high, and there being > millions of Macintoshes out in the wild... > > It wouldn't surpise me to learn sqlite was on the ipod or iphone too, > though I haven't heard definitely one way or the other. > > And of course there is Solaris. And symbian cell phones. > > And if you count a large percentage of windows systems in the wild > that use McAfee virus protection which reportedly uses sqlite and add > it all up, you're approaching a *very* large number of deployments. > > Do you really think Oracle can match all that? > _______________________________________________ > sqlite-users mailing list > sqlite-users@sqlite.org > http://sqlite.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users > > I'm not disputing whether it is the mist widely used SQL database - I was merely disputing the fact that there are only 100 million other databases in use worldwide. I completely agree with you that there is a very large number of deployments, and that oracle probably has nowhere near as many.
I just wanted to point out this flaw in the logic, so that it could possibly be rectified before someone in a better poition to criticise the statement does so. Hope this makes sense Toby _______________________________________________ sqlite-users mailing list sqlite-users@sqlite.org http://sqlite.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
