I like to think I am open minded about technology. I have used a variety of database engines in the last seventeen years; xBase, Access, SQL Server, Sybase, Oracle, and DB2 to name a few. I like the direction Oracle 9i is taking and hope that Microsoft's SQL Server takes some of the same direction. But I think Oracle is missing a great opportunity.
Both Microsoft and Oracle have produced equally incomplete ADO.NET Managed Providers for Oracle. I think it is time that Oracle step up to the plate and truly complete their implementation. After reviewing their Managed Provider's Documentation for Beta 2, I am perplexed that the following support is missing:
To be blunt, the Microsoft/Oracle feud is petty and adolescent. I do not quite understand what Larry Ellison has to gain by not embracing .NET and Java. He is running a database company isn't he? It is not a business mistake to try and take back some of the market share from SQL Server using Microsoft's own .NET technology? By creating and releasing (at least a Beta at this point) an inferior Managed Provider, isn't Oracle just creating another barrier for companies to purchase more Oracle licenses? It just doesn't make and sense to me.
|Implementing and Securing an API with ASP.NET Core (new)|
|Building a Web App with ASP.NET Core, MVC6, EF Core and AngularJS|
|Building a Web App with ASP.NET5, MVC6, EF7, and AngularJS (Retired)|
|Best Practices in ASP.NET: Entities, Validation, and View Models|
|Front-End Web Development Quick Start|
|Lessons from Real World .NET Code Reviews|
|Node.js for .NET Developers|
|Application Name||WilderBlog||Environment Name||Production|
|Application Ver||188.8.131.52||Runtime Framework||.NETCoreApp,Version=v1.1|
|App Path||D:\home\site\wwwroot||Runtime Version||.NET Core 4.6.24628.01|
|Operating System||Microsoft Windows 6.2.9200||Runtime Arch||X86|