DB2 and Oracle giving more job security

[usenet]

In the past few years I have seen that developers and DBAs having
knowledge of Oracle RDBMS, PL/SQL or DB2 getting job more easily. Not
only they are getting job more easily but getting job security and
good package as compared to SQL Server users.

I think the least adopted the technology, the more job security. Since
Oracle is an enterprise databases with complex architecture, only few
are able to get used to it. DB2 is slowly gaining market, but it is
new.

[usenet]

In article , Rohit wrote:
>In the past few years I have seen that developers and DBAs having
>knowledge of Oracle RDBMS, PL/SQL or DB2 getting job more easily. Not
>only they are getting job more easily but getting job security and
>good package as compared to SQL Server users.
>
>I think the least adopted the technology, the more job security. Since
>Oracle is an enterprise databases with complex architecture, only few
>are able to get used to it. DB2 is slowly gaining market, but it is
>new.

Huh? I was using DB2 in 1987.

[usenet]

On Nov 2, 11:08 am, Rohit wrote:
> In the past few years I have seen that developers and DBAs having
> knowledge of Oracle RDBMS, PL/SQL or DB2 getting job more easily. Not
> only they are getting job more easily but getting job security and
> good package as compared to SQL Server users.
>
> I think the least adopted the technology, the more job security. Since
> Oracle is an enterprise databases with complex architecture, only few
> are able to get used to it. DB2 is slowly gaining market, but it is
> new.

Oracle is like Cisco. The people that know it well are worth their
dollar, but there are only a few of them.

[usenet]

On Nov 2, 12:08*pm, Rohit wrote:
> In the past few years I have seen that developers and DBAs having
> knowledge of Oracle RDBMS, PL/SQL or DB2 getting job more easily. Not
> only they are getting job more easily but getting job security and
> good package as compared to SQL Server users.
>
> I think the least adopted the technology, the more job security. Since
> Oracle is an enterprise databases with complex architecture, only few
> are able to get used to it. DB2 is slowly gaining market, but it is
> new.

Least adopted technology? ORACLE? you are clearly misinformed. Check
this report from
http://www.ecommercetimes.com/story/...wlc=1226582016


Oracle (Nasdaq: ORCL) Latest News about Oracle continues to hold the
lion's share of the market for database software, but two hulking
rivals, IBM (NYSE: IBM) Latest News about IBM and Microsoft (Nasdaq:
MSFT) Latest News about Microsoft, have chipped away at the company's
onetime stronghold, according to a new report from IDC.

Framingham, Massachusetts-based IDC said Oracle's share of the market
for object and relational database management software slipped below
40 percent, to 39.4 percent. IBM gained the most market share,
reaching a total of 33.6 percent of the sales, while Microsoft gained
1.4 points to take 11.1 percent of the market, making it the fastest-
growing vendor by percentage.

All other vendors held only single-digit shares, IDC said, with Sybase
(NYSE: SY) Latest News about Sybase ranking fourth at 3.6 percent,
about the same as the year before.


So your comments and logic are totally flawed because your premise is
wrong. There are more ORACLE and DB2 jobs because they are the two
biggest vendors in the market. The fact that Oracle's DB technology is
superior to most of the competitors is a factor in that market lead.

Ed

[usenet]

On Nov 13, 8:22*am, Ed Prochak wrote:
> On Nov 2, 12:08*pm, Rohit wrote:
>
> > In the past few years I have seen that developers and DBAs having
> > knowledge of Oracle RDBMS, PL/SQL or DB2 getting job more easily. Not
> > only they are getting job more easily but getting job security and
> > good package as compared to SQL Server users.
>
> > I think the least adopted the technology, the more job security. Since
> > Oracle is an enterprise databases with complex architecture, only few
> > are able to get used to it. DB2 is slowly gaining market, but it is
> > new.
>
> Least adopted technology? ORACLE? you are clearly misinformed. *Check
> this report from
> * * * *http://www.ecommercetimes.com/story/...wlc=1226582016
>
>
> Oracle (Nasdaq: ORCL) Latest News about Oracle continues to hold the
> lion's share of the market for database software, but two hulking
> rivals, IBM (NYSE: IBM) Latest News about IBM and Microsoft (Nasdaq:
> MSFT) Latest News about Microsoft, have chipped away at the company's
> onetime stronghold, according to a new report from IDC.
>
> Framingham, Massachusetts-based IDC said Oracle's share of the market
> for object and relational database management software slipped below
> 40 percent, to 39.4 percent. IBM gained the most market share,
> reaching a total of 33.6 percent of the sales, while Microsoft gained
> 1.4 points to take 11.1 percent of the market, making it the fastest-
> growing vendor by percentage.
>
> All other vendors held only single-digit shares, IDC said, with Sybase
> (NYSE: SY) Latest News about Sybase ranking fourth at 3.6 percent,
> about the same as the year before.
>
>
> So your comments and logic are totally flawed because your premise is
> wrong. There are more ORACLE and DB2 jobs because they are the two
> biggest vendors in the market. The fact that Oracle's DB technology is
> superior to most of the competitors is a factor in that market lead.
>
> * Ed

Sorry. That article was a few years old, but the basic market
positions haven't changed. Here's a report from April 2008 Information
Week:
http://www.informationweek.com/news/...leID=207402230

Oracle (NSDQ: ORCL) continues to increase its share of the database
market, which continues overall to exhibit a healthy growth rate,
despite predictions in recent years ago that it was saturated,
"mature," and about to level off as a revenue generator.

The relational database market grew 12.1% from $16.6 billion in 2006
to $18.6 billion in 2007, according to figures released Friday by IDC.
Oracle's relational database revenue grew at 13% to $8.2 billion,
giving it 44.1% of the total market. In 2006, it held 43.7% of the
market.