Scores by kind of claim
Each kind of claim is scored on its own, out of 100: the share that held up, with the range it likely falls in. Fewer resolved claims give a wider range.
-
Factual claims
Statements about the present or the past, checked against the record: did they hold up?
83 77 88 -
Predictions
Statements about events outside the person's control, checked once they fell due: did they come true?
Insufficient record: 4 predictions resolved, 5 needed for a score.
-
Promises
Commitments to the person's or organisation's own future action, with something to deliver: was it delivered?
77 65 88
All types combined: 82 (likely 77 to 86, high confidence), from 94 claims: 77 factual claims, 17 promises. It mixes kinds of claim in different proportions for different people, so compare people kind by kind.
Satya Nadella's claims
43 claims
“I always go back to the story of having built SQL Server with SAP.”
Satya Nadella, Microsoft CEO, interviewed 4 June 2026 An Interview with Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella About Finding Core Competencies (Stratechery)
Microsoft built SQL Server in partnership with SAP.
Mostly true True in substance, wrong in a detail.
The second judge said resolved true; the verdict shown is the first judge's.
Said for an organisation they lead or work for; it counts on both records.
What would count as true or false
Judged as of 2026-06-04. True: historical records show that Microsoft developed SQL Server (or major versions of it) in a substantive engineering partnership with SAP, for example co-engineering features of SQL Server with SAP as a design partner. Mostly true: SAP was a key design or engineering partner that shaped SQL Server's development for enterprise workloads, but was not a co-developer of the product as a whole. Mixed: the collaboration was a mix of real joint engineering and simple certification or support of SAP on SQL Server. Mostly false: the relationship was mainly about running or certifying SAP applications on SQL Server, with no meaningful joint building of SQL Server. False: no such partnership existed, or SQL Server's origins lie entirely elsewhere (e.g. with Sybase) with no SAP involvement.
Evidence
- SAP backs SQL Server 7.0 - CNET CNET · 13 January 1999
“To make sure SQL 7.0 was ready to handle SAP’s largest customers, SAP developers worked on-site for the past two years with Microsoft’s development team.”
- SQL Server 2019 is released for SAP NetWeaver | Microsoft Community Hub Microsoft Community Hub (Microsoft SAP Applications team) · 6 July 2020 Own record
“We began with co-located development and support and have enhanced our partnership with each successive release of SAP software on Microsoft products.”
- History of Microsoft SQL Server - Wikipedia Wikipedia · 3 October 2016
“SQL Server 7.0 was a major rewrite (using C++) of the older Sybase engine, which was coded in C.”
- [PDF] A Comprehensive Platform for SAP - Microsoft Download Center Microsoft · August 2014 Own record
“The partnership includes teams from each company that work together early in the development cycle of each product to ensure compatibility and performance.”
Reasoning
E1, an independent 1999 CNET report, says SAP developers spent two years working on-site with Microsoft's development team to get SQL Server 7.0 ready for SAP's largest customers. That shows SAP worked as a key engineering partner in preparing SQL Server 7.0 for SAP's largest customers [E1]. Microsoft's own sources (E2, E4) describe co-located development and joint early-cycle work, though E4 frames it mainly as compatibility and performance work. E3 shows SQL Server's engine came from Sybase, so SAP was not a co-developer of the product as a whole, which fits "mostly true" rather than "true".
Cite this claim
Satya Nadella, “Microsoft built SQL Server in partnership with SAP.” (said 4 June 2026). Verdict: mostly true. Reliability API, claim c_28afc75c2c9f, method 0.1.0+28da144b. https://epistacklabs.com/claims/c_28afc75c2c9f
Claims without a verdict
Is a verdict here wrong, or do you speak for Satya Nadella? Reply on the claim's own page, with the form at its foot (how replies work). Verdicts are made automatically; how verdicts and scores are made.