Is SQL Server 2000 a great datawarehousing DBMS ?

A lot of people in the organisation think that its not especially when it
comes to large datawarehouse systems. What does one do to argue the same ?
They claim Oracle or DB2 are much better.
Check this comparison:
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/evaluat.../hyperion.asp.
Dejan Sarka, SQL Server MVP
Associate Mentor
www.SolidQualityLearning.com
"Hassan" <fatima_ja@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:%23W$giQMPFHA.580@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> A lot of people in the organisation think that its not especially when it
> comes to large datawarehouse systems. What does one do to argue the same ?
> They claim Oracle or DB2 are much better.
>
|||From a purely RDBMS perspective Oracle and DB2 have more features that can
come in handy in a DW particuliarly when dealing with very large tables
(100+ million rows). However, from the perspectives of cost, total software
offering, or client accessibility my opinon is that MSSQL 2000 is a good
platform for a DW. Like most decisions in IT choosing one vendor over
another is a matter of matching the needs of the business with the
appropriate vendor offering.
Ray
PS. Since this is a microsoft group I need to also point you toward the new
features in the up coming SQL 2005. True partitioning, enhanced 64 bit
support, and new indexing capabilities will help boost MSSQL's footing as a
great DBMS for data warehousing.
"Hassan" <fatima_ja@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:%23W$giQMPFHA.580@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
>A lot of people in the organisation think that its not especially when it
> comes to large datawarehouse systems. What does one do to argue the same ?
> They claim Oracle or DB2 are much better.
>
>