Boy, there's lots of hype concerning the discharge of Google's Fusion Tables.

The collaborative editing is one thing that appears fantastic, and can interface well with Google Wave. The visualization appears to shine mostly in it's simplicity of use. Aggregation over multiple disparate data sources can also be just an excellent and timely idea.

Still, what amount of the hype is warranted? I question if anybody has any ideas around the implications of the newest Labs edition, particularly, exist implications for other database/data aggregation systems (I have heard that Oracle "is trembling," is the fact that even likely?). Yes, I realize the main difference within the database structure and also the benefits, but does it essentially change anything we're presently doing (especially in the enterprise level)?

How come everybody appear to think that technology really are a dying knell for old, proven technologies?

It’s great that you will find new solutions for tasks which are difficult with RDBMS. However I wonder if these new solutions be more effective at tasks that RDBMS are very well-suited.

The myth here's that there is a zero-sum game. We do not need to abandon technology that actually works, simply because new things is invented. Let’s use technology for exotic tasks, but let’s use RDBMS when that's the best solution.

Bear in mind that excel spreadsheets will also be still around, and they're quite helpful — indispensable, actually, for several types of work.

PS: this is actually the comment I published to some blog article "Google Fusion Tables…Threatening Databases?"