I have to fight against HTML-DB as a development tool in comparison to WFS. Can anyone help me out with arguments ?
I'm a WFS user since 20years, but now I'm in a position, were my new Company is "adicted" to Oracle tools. I highly appriciate any help.
March 30, 2005, 07:49 PM
An interesting article was posted a while back comparing different BI tools: Previous postThis message has been edited. Last edited by: Kerry,
March 30, 2005, 08:49 PM
Oracle makes a great database, but a great database-maker does not necessarily make a great BI-maker. That Forrester study that Nicola refered to evaluated Oracle and Information Builders, as well several other BI vendors and Oracle did not fare that well but Information Builders was in the leader quadrant of just about every category. It could definitely come in handy in making a case for Information Builders over Oracle for enterprise BI development and deployment.
I read another new study on the IBI site from Meta Group that ranked the different BI vendors for enterprise reporting and dashboard functionality. IBI won that one hands-down (probably why they bought the reprint rights to it, huh?). That one is here:
Well I certainly can't give you 10 reasons, but if several of us each gave you 1 or 2, it would add up.
How about database "lock-in". I don't know anything about the Oracle tool, but I could imagine that it is very strongly tied to their database. So an argument could possibly be made that with WebFOCUS you are not tied to any particular data source. You can pull data from multiple sources/databases/database engines, and transparently join all these disparate resources together. I can't imagine any medium to large corporation relying solely on a single database vendor, and WebFOCUS provides database transparency, whether it be Oracle, Informix, DB2, Teradata, Sybase, etc., etc.
April 01, 2005, 08:07 AM
thanks for your help !!! I was sure, that I can count on IB and their user community !