RSSOracle Releases Beta of Free Database
By Nate Mook | Published October 31, 2005, 1:35 PM
The free open source database leader MySQL has some new competition from expensive enterprise database leader Oracle. The company on Monday unveiled a beta release of 10g Express Edition, otherwise known as Oracle Database XE, which is free to develop, deploy and distribute.
Oracle's new edition is aimed at students, small organizations and software developers looking to integrate a database into their applications. Although it offers the same core as Oracle's more pricey business offerings, XE is limited to systems with a single processor, 1GB of RAM and 4GB of database storage space.
The beta release comes just after the debut of MySQL 5.0, which adds a number of features previously confined to the likes of Oracle and IBM's DB2. Such additions include stored procedures, triggers and views, along with support for the ANSI SQL standard for compatibility.
MySQL has gained immense popularity among smaller companies and individuals without big pockets to cover the price of Oracle. The database is also used by a number of major Web companies including Yahoo and Google. Oracle is attempting to shore up a piece of that market by attracting PHP, Java and .NET developers with its "entry-level" XE.
"With Oracle Database XE, currently available as a Beta release, you can now develop and deploy applications with a powerful, proven, industry-leading infrastructure, and then upgrade when necessary without costly and complex migrations," the company says on its Web site.
Oracle Database XE is slated for a final release before the end of the year. Downloads are available for both Linux and Windows.
I personally prefer software that is completely free, not one that has a free, limited version and a payware version. Look at instant messaging clients, GAIM and TRILLIAN for example. If I can't get what I absolutely want in one then of course I'll sacrafice for the other.
Score: 0
|good effort, bad follow through
thats barely enough resources or hardware to run even a simple site. if they're going to price their web dbs at unreasonable levels for small business they should allow enough of a gap between their free product and their open source product as to not hinder those people attempting to addopt their software.
oracles not just hard to impliment pricewise either. its software and the code required to make quality apps require a great deal of skill and that means extra labor costs. our company attempted to switch to oracle and due to lack of support, excess costs, and longer overall queries for simple things like mysqls implimentation of LIMIT `start` `finish`, we realized it was easier to buy more servers to offset performance and stability issues than it was to purchase rumored (mother of all databases)
oh well. you live, you learn
Score: 0
|Agreed 100%. Remember it is beta, maybe they'll change it up before the final version. Give them this info when they ask how you liked the program...
Score: 0
|The DB license maybe free, but is its TCO (total cost of Ownership) up there with other databases (MS, MySql, Progress (www.progress.com) (remember reading that even if MS or Oracle gave away there DB, its still cheaper to run a Progress database (think it was in a Garnter report)).
JMTC
Molly
Score: 0
|Relative to MySQL, this news is less exciting than when Oracle bought Innobase Oy.
Score: 0
|I'm guessing that the real reason Oracle did this is because SQL Server 2005 Express Edition just RTMed and I think MS is a bigger competitor to them than MySQL.
Either way - we all win with great choices, Oracle, MS SQL and now MySQL.
Score: 0
|Microsoft will still charge for the SQL Server 2005 Express. It just will be priced lower or personal use only.
All the MS Express software will be charges the same way.
Score: 0
|That's not how I understand it. SQL Server Express replaces MSDE which was free of charge.
Score: 0
|Umm...no, it'll be FREE.
Score: 0
|Why should I use this crippleware when I can gain superior functionality from PostgreSQL ?
MySQL is still inferior to PostgreSQL feature-wise, but it's slowly getting there. (Maybe in 1-2 years?)
Score: 0
|