Freshmeat Made a Mistake Publishing This
This guy has obviously no knowledge of the database software industry, the database consulting industry, or the vertical markets involved in the aforementioned (like, say, the financial or insurance industries which partially fuel the market). In addition, this person is obviously not a very experienced writer.
First of all, the article, overall, lacks any kind of focus. There's a thing writers call 'revisions'. We write our first drafts like the above article: 'stream of consciousness'. It makes sense while we're writing it, and then we walk away from it for 20 minutes, come back to it, and it makes, of course, no more sense than a Slashdot comment. We go back through, cut out the extraneous crap, tweak here and there, add some order to the content.... rinse, repeat....
Second, there are glaring issues with the subject matter. Do you want to talk about databases in any particular context? If so, it's rare that you'll find Oracle and Access in the same article. If you want to talk about MySQL and the OSS community, there's a reason it was embraced in spite of the features Postgres came to the table with. Namely, a lot of people didn't need those features, and therefore didn't want the overhead or added administrative hassle/learning curve associated with them. MySQL is very compact, has a small footprint, is very fast, and if you don't need triggers/stored procedures, is fine for just about anything. If you don't believe me, send email to Yahoo and ask them how their financial site is doing. It runs on MySQL.
If you do need enterprise features, there are many other options you miss, and many insinuations you make that make it obvious that you're highly influenced by industry rags, slashdot and other things unrelated to actual experience in the field. Have you ever heard of Sybase? Did you know that MS SQL was sold to MS? Do you know that it was sold to them by Sybase, and that it's essentially version 4 of Sybase's version 12.5 product?
Do you know how the market breaks down in terms of Oracle vs. Sybase? The long and short of it is that Oracle grew to Sybase's size by feeding on the dot com boom. They never took any significant market share from Sybase in their core sectors, because Sybase has more history in enterprise scenarios, has more history running on the Sun, IBM and HP platforms, and has never been shown to be slower than Oracle in any test that I'm aware of. In addition, Sybase ASE 12.5 is available for Linux. So is DB2 (that's an IBM product). DB2 is an insane product. I would go into their query optimizer, but I don't suppose you know what that is.
Here's the deal. Screwdrivers are tools, but you don't use a flathead to do a phillipshead's job. Just the same, You don't grab Oracle or Postgres when MySQL does the job. If you grow out of MySQL (the fewest features, but one of the smallest footprints and by far the easiest to get up and running 'today'), there are plenty of other alternatives out there to turn to without going to MS SQL (one of the least scalable and feature filled - and one of the slowest databases out there).
That's all I have to say about this. If I could nail down the intended audience or the intended direction of the article, I might say more.