So why is Oracle favored over SAP? It is because they have a better vision? You are kidding me, right? Let's see, Microsoft has a vision. IBM has a vision. Sun has a vision. Vision counts for little in the IT game. The key and deciding factor must be the ability to execute. I am still waiting for Dynamic to match Microsoft’s vision from 10 years ago. The same goes for Oracle and IBM. The only company that continues to deliver on their “vision” is SAP. SAP wins hands down on execution.

Mr CIO would you really risk your career on Oracle ?

This CIO will stake his career on Oracle but not on a successful SAP program. I've attempted both. Score: Oracle 2 SAP 0. Vision is meaningless without execution. Look closely at Oracle's emerging portfolio and you'll see that they are delivering on the vision year-on-year.

Do I really want another reason to get tied into the Oracle DB? I'd rather have an app that performs today than rely on more vaporware.

Oracle's application strategy has delivered. The eBusiness suite is a powerful platform and will continue to grow.

I would disagree with the "wait and see" comments regarding fusion. Fusion is here now! Components of the new technology are already available and users are seeing great success. Fusion Applications 1.0 will be a great platform, however, there is no need to wait for this technology. eBusiness Suite r12 with Fusion Middleware and Oracle Database 11g provides a powerful platform for any small, medium, or large business.

AIA is also here now. Oracle is capable of connecting complex apps with PIP's via AIA and customers are demonstrating a strong ROI on this now.

I put my career on the line every day with Oracle and continue to be very successful with Oracle as my partner.

Steve Romeo
VP of IT
Breg/Orthofix

Oracle ACE Director

An insiders view. I was an executive at Oracle and then an Executive at SAP. At SAP I handled the "Platform" or SOA piece of the business. I can tell you for sure that Oracle's strategy is the best and from an execution standpoint far superior. SAP hired an entire team to handle the "platform" play and the let them go. The new EVP handling the Americas for SAP, Greg Tomb pushed the button on the SOA strategy piece and decided his strategy was net new accounts and core ERP. Oracle is making a consistent effort and is funding it's plan. If SAP had kept it's former EVP, John Nugent, who also invented Value Engineering at SAP and changed the industry, the game would be over, but he is gone.

The game is for Oracle to loose at this point.

Oracle has both the vision and ability to execute. Oracle's apps strategy is providing real value to it's customers and a path to the future. SAP has a strong install base and is "milking" their customers for higher support costs, upgrades, add on licensing for products that are just minor improvements or reconfiguring/repackaging of existing products. SAP is a great sales/marketing company but they have lost their way on product developement and innovation. Oracle's not perfect either with their confused sales model, but they do build great products and know how to integrate acquired products.

I have always felt that Oracle was the better way to go because it can be implemented module by module (mostly). Thus,it is not such a drain on an Enterprise's resources, nor nearly as costly. It's funny that Forrester also doesn't take in to account the cost to implement! Implementing SAP is more like pouring concrete, it has to be done in sections and in long stretches. Must be all that experience the Germans have building Autobahns!

Are you kidding me? What rock has this author been hiding under?

I believe most SAP instances are on an ORACLE database right?

Wake up CIOs!! You don't see where Oracle is heading in the next 10 years? When is SAP going to buy a large scale RDBMS company to support their architecture? I seem to see SAP people at all the Oracle User group conferences. I wonder why that is? SAP is successful in my personal opinion because they have a very regimented business process that their user base must follow. While I agree sometimes at heart with this kind of strategy, it is only because of the typical cast on an implementation team. Oracle has been too flexible and given too many good choices to their users over the years. Shame on Oracle!

I would choose SAP because a CIO should justify overpriced software solely for it's install base and functionality limitations. It is easier for CIOs to manage software that restricts choices. IT and SAP got together in an alliance to stop the business people from making choices.

I guess I should also choose Microsoft Vista as my corporate platform for PCs if I base my research on the author's justifications.

Regarding execution (as well as vision which establishes the execution opportunity and therefore is vital to this discussion) Oracle wins hands down over the past three years. One has only to review the financial performance of both companies to realize Oracle has grown faster, is now considerably larger than SAP, has more customers, is significantly more profitable, has more cash on hand, and is far better positioned for growth into the future. For these reasons, Oracle's stock over the past 3 years has well outperformed SAP. Anyone claiming that SAP has executed better than Oracle over this same time period is either drinking the coolaid or grossly misinformed.