Re: IDS License Revenue

Tool said: > Guy you're a liar and a gossip unless you can show some PROOF, get it? > It's all lies! I think you need to get some decaf or go for a(nother) wank. -- Bye now, Obnoxio "I don't read newspapers anymore except the local rag which I do weekly to cheer myself trying to see if anyone I hate has been stabbed." -- Horribilis XVI -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by OpenProtect(http://www.openprotect.com), and is believed to be clean.

may be a fist in the face of 'tool' will help. goto the obstacle news group if you do not like what is said here or do not read it to begin with. Superboer. On 24 jan, 09:11, "Obnoxio The Clown" <obno...@serendipita.com> wrote: > Tool said: > > > Guy you're a liar and a gossip unless you can show some PROOF, get it? > > It's all lies!I think you need to get some decaf or go for a(nother) wank. > > -- > Bye now, > Obnoxio > > "I don't read newspapers anymore except the local rag which I do weekly to > cheer myself trying to see if anyone I hate has been stabbed." > -- Horribilis XVI > > -- > This message has been scanned for viruses and > dangerous content by OpenProtect(http://www.openprotect.com), and is > believed to be clean.

Superboer wrote: > may be a fist in the face of 'tool' will help. > goto the obstacle news group if you do not like what is said here or do > not read it > to begin with. > > Superboer. All this fire and brimstone around what? Whether the shareholders at IBM get a few more pence in their dividend check if it is real? What does any of this have to do with anyone not in marketing and sales? Here are the only numbers that matter: Informix: www.dice.com 345 jobs worldwide www.monster.com 318 jobs worldwide www.hotjobs.com 247 jobs worldwide and just from dice.com alone DB2 3,171 jobs Oracle 16,638 jobs SQL Server 12,584 jobs Sybase 2,086 jobs If anyone can't figure out the implication of Sybase providing 600% more jobs than Informix (dice.com) they need to take a tuning class. -- Daniel A. Morgan University of Washington damorgan@x.washington.edu (replace x with u to respond)

Gosh Informix is 600% easier & productive than all the others! > -----Original Message----- > From: informix-list-bounces@iiug.org [mailto:informix-list- > bounces@iiug.org] On Behalf Of DA Morgan > Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2007 18:14 > To: informix-list@iiug.org > Subject: Re: IDS License Revenue > > Superboer wrote: > > may be a fist in the face of 'tool' will help. > > goto the obstacle news group if you do not like what is said here or do > > not read it > > to begin with. > > > > Superboer. > > All this fire and brimstone around what? Whether the shareholders at > IBM get a few more pence in their dividend check if it is real? What > does any of this have to do with anyone not in marketing and sales? > > Here are the only numbers that matter: > > Informix: > www.dice.com 345 jobs worldwide > www.monster.com 318 jobs worldwide > www.hotjobs.com 247 jobs worldwide > > and just from dice.com alone > DB2 3,171 jobs > Oracle 16,638 jobs > SQL Server 12,584 jobs > Sybase 2,086 jobs > > If anyone can't figure out the implication of Sybase providing 600% more > jobs than Informix (dice.com) they need to take a tuning class. > -- > Daniel A. Morgan > University of Washington > damorgan@x.washington.edu > (replace x with u to respond) > _______________________________________________ > Informix-list mailing list > Informix-list@iiug.org > http://www.iiug.org/mailman/listinfo/informix-list

>From: DA Morgan <damorgan@psoug.org> >Superboer wrote: [SNIP] > >All this fire and brimstone around what? Whether the shareholders at >IBM get a few more pence in their dividend check if it is real? What >does any of this have to do with anyone not in marketing and sales? > Actually no. Since you want to talk about this from a financial perspective... The fact that Guy posted some "numbers" that were internal to IBM and not officially released, this could be considered a violation of FD (Full Disclosure). The fact that IBM is so huge, and already reports the numbers at a brand/pillar level, the numbers and information is noise. Thus it would be difficult to prove that even with this "inside" information, it would have minimal impact on IBM as a whole and thus is not a violation of FD. >Here are the only numbers that matter: > >Informix: >www.dice.com 345 jobs worldwide >www.monster.com 318 jobs worldwide >www.hotjobs.com 247 jobs worldwide > >and just from dice.com alone >DB2 3,171 jobs >Oracle 16,638 jobs >SQL Server 12,584 jobs >Sybase 2,086 jobs > >If anyone can't figure out the implication of Sybase providing 600% more >jobs than Informix (dice.com) they need to take a tuning class. LOL... Silly boy, you just don't know how to read these numbers. 1) Everybody knows that Informix is so easy to maintain, that there is A) Low job turnover. B) Training from within C) Lower number of support staff required 2) Higher numbers in other products means A) Higher turnover. B) Product support is more difficult requiring more man hours C) Lower staff satisfaction at their mundane jobs doing patchwork repairs. You want to look at "hot jobs" look to those that know Java and App Servers like websphere, jboss, and of course ajax... Oh and to be honest, it also means that IBM has done a pitiful job at marketing its products. But hey! What do I know? I'm suffering through Oracle's spatial carp. -G >-- >Daniel A. Morgan >University of Washington >damorgan@x.washington.edu >(replace x with u to respond) >_______________________________________________ >Informix-list mailing list >Informix-list@iiug.org >http://www.iiug.org/mailman/listinfo/informix-list _________________________________________________________________ Get in the mood for Valentine's Day. View photos, recipes and more on your Live.com page. http://www.live.com/?addTemplate=ValentinesDay&ocid=T001MSN30A0701

"DA Morgan" <damorgan@psoug.org> wrote in message news:1169658859.608159@bubbleator.drizzle.com... > Superboer wrote: >> may be a fist in the face of 'tool' will help. >> goto the obstacle news group if you do not like what is said here or do >> not read it >> to begin with. >> >> Superboer. > > All this fire and brimstone around what? Whether the shareholders at > IBM get a few more pence in their dividend check if it is real? What > does any of this have to do with anyone not in marketing and sales? > > Here are the only numbers that matter: > > Informix: > www.dice.com 345 jobs worldwide > www.monster.com 318 jobs worldwide > www.hotjobs.com 247 jobs worldwide > > and just from dice.com alone > DB2 3,171 jobs > Oracle 16,638 jobs > SQL Server 12,584 jobs > Sybase 2,086 jobs > > If anyone can't figure out the implication of Sybase providing 600% more > jobs than Informix (dice.com) they need to take a tuning class. If we take Sybase as providing 2,086 jobs and Informix 345, then Sybase is providing 1,741 jobs more than Informix, which is 504%, not 600%, more. If anyone can't figure out that basic calculation s/he needs to take a maths class. Pip! Pip!

Jean Georges Perrin wrote: > Gosh Informix is 600% easier & productive than all the others! Does that pay the mortgage or buy a stubbie? -- Daniel A. Morgan University of Washington damorgan@x.washington.edu (replace x with u to respond)

Ian Michael Gumby wrote: > > > >> From: DA Morgan <damorgan@psoug.org> > >> Superboer wrote: > [SNIP] >> >> All this fire and brimstone around what? Whether the shareholders at >> IBM get a few more pence in their dividend check if it is real? What >> does any of this have to do with anyone not in marketing and sales? >> > > Actually no. > > Since you want to talk about this from a financial perspective... > > The fact that Guy posted some "numbers" that were internal to IBM and > not officially released, this could be considered a violation of FD > (Full Disclosure). From a US, purely legal, standpoint you are likely correct. Revealing them in a BLOG violates SEC regulations. Given this the chances that the numbers are official is vanishingly small. That doesn't mean they are wrong but it also is no reason to give them any credibility. Right or wrong though they will likely earn the OP a trip to HR. -- Daniel A. Morgan University of Washington damorgan@x.washington.edu (replace x with u to respond)

Captain Pedantic wrote: > "DA Morgan" <damorgan@psoug.org> wrote in message > news:1169658859.608159@bubbleator.drizzle.com... >> Superboer wrote: >>> may be a fist in the face of 'tool' will help. >>> goto the obstacle news group if you do not like what is said here or do >>> not read it >>> to begin with. >>> >>> Superboer. >> All this fire and brimstone around what? Whether the shareholders at >> IBM get a few more pence in their dividend check if it is real? What >> does any of this have to do with anyone not in marketing and sales? >> >> Here are the only numbers that matter: >> >> Informix: >> www.dice.com 345 jobs worldwide >> www.monster.com 318 jobs worldwide >> www.hotjobs.com 247 jobs worldwide >> >> and just from dice.com alone >> DB2 3,171 jobs >> Oracle 16,638 jobs >> SQL Server 12,584 jobs >> Sybase 2,086 jobs >> >> If anyone can't figure out the implication of Sybase providing 600% more >> jobs than Informix (dice.com) they need to take a tuning class. > > If we take Sybase as providing 2,086 jobs and Informix 345, then Sybase is > providing 1,741 jobs more than Informix, which is 504%, not 600%, more. > If anyone can't figure out that basic calculation s/he needs to take a maths > class. > > Pip! Pip! Calculator must be broken. <g> You are correct. As I look at the world from the standpoint of education and where the jobs are ... the biggest issue I see facing IBM is not their current licenses ... it is the size of the future workforce. Who is going to build new systems when my generation retires? That is not a technical challenge. That is not an issue that will be solved by being easier to install and maintain. That is not something a usenet group can alter. It is a question of why would anyone 20 years old want to learn the technology? And it is the battle IBM is losing at an accelerating rate. -- Daniel A. Morgan University of Washington damorgan@x.washington.edu (replace x with u to respond)

DA Morgan said: >stubbie? I'm scared to even ask, but what is this? -- Bye now, Obnoxio "I don't read newspapers anymore except the local rag which I do weekly to cheer myself trying to see if anyone I hate has been stabbed." -- Horribilis XVI -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by OpenProtect(http://www.openprotect.com), and is believed to be clean.

>From: DA Morgan <damorgan@psoug.org> >Ian Michael Gumby wrote: > > > > > > > >> From: DA Morgan <damorgan@psoug.org> > > > >> Superboer wrote: > > [SNIP] > > The fact that Guy posted some "numbers" that were internal to IBM and > > not officially released, this could be considered a violation of FD > > (Full Disclosure). > > From a US, purely legal, standpoint you are likely correct. Revealing >them in a BLOG violates SEC regulations. > No. It doesn't. If you don't believe me, I'm sure I can find you a contact at the SEC who could explain it to you, using simple words. Let me try this again.... This isn't a violation of the SEC regulations because its Noise. Suppose an "insider" posted about a "huge" deal at Acme Toy Company where they are planning a large purchase of Informix licenses. (Note: THERE IS NO ACME TOY COMPANY) While this on the surface would look like it violated FD, it doesn't because the total dollar amount of this "huge" deal may be in the millions, but its noise compared to the billions that IBM makes each quarter. So the net net is that this news doesn't help or hurt the investor. Compare this to someone who posts that Oracle is getting sued by Nike for screwing up their SAP installation. (I do believe this event did happen. My point is that they posted it prior to the event occuring.) Since the lawsuit did have a material effect on corporate earnings, the early post would be a violation of FD and there would be an SEC investigation. >Given this the chances that the numbers are official is vanishingly >small. That doesn't mean they are wrong but it also is no reason to >give them any credibility. > Small is relative. The difference between 3" and 10" is neglible when you're talking about the length of your new power crusier. But I bet if I ask your wife, she'd blush and tell me that size doesn't matter and its the motion of the ocean. ;-) (Most women that I *know* tell me that size does count. ;-) _________________________________________________________________ Check out all that glitters with the MSN Entertainment Guide to the Academy Awards' http://movies.msn.com/movies/oscars2007/?icid=ncoscartagline2

"Ian Michael Gumby" <im_gumby@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:mailman.79.1169665612.10648.informix-list@iiug.org... > The difference between 3" and 10" is neglible when you're talking about > the length of your new power crusier. But I bet if I ask your wife, she'd > blush and tell me that size doesn't matter ... I constantly tell Mrs Pedantic that there's no difference between 3 inches and 10 inches. Probably why she's so crap at parking ...

> > > The difference between 3" and 10" is neglible when you're talking about > > the length of your new power crusier. But I bet if I ask your wife, >she'd > > blush and tell me that size doesn't matter ... > >I constantly tell Mrs Pedantic that there's no difference between 3 inches >and 10 inches. Probably why she's so crap at parking ... > > Well its a good thing that you're not the type to over compensate and buy and expensive sports car. That would *really* be embarassing. Unless of course you don't let your wife drive your car. ;-) _________________________________________________________________ Turn searches into helpful donations. Make your search count. http://click4thecause.live.com/search/charity/default.aspx?source=hmemtagline_donation&FORM=WLMTAG

>From: DA Morgan <damorgan@psoug.org> > > If we take Sybase as providing 2,086 jobs and Informix 345, then Sybase >is > > providing 1,741 jobs more than Informix, which is 504%, not 600%, more. > > If anyone can't figure out that basic calculation s/he needs to take a >maths > > class. > > > > Pip! Pip! > >Calculator must be broken. <g> You are correct. > >As I look at the world from the standpoint of education and where the >jobs are ... the biggest issue I see facing IBM is not their current >licenses ... it is the size of the future workforce. Who is going to >build new systems when my generation retires? That is not a technical >challenge. That is not an issue that will be solved by being easier to >install and maintain. That is not something a usenet group can alter. >It is a question of why would anyone 20 years old want to learn the >technology? And it is the battle IBM is losing at an accelerating rate. >-- >Daniel A. Morgan >University of Washington >damorgan@x.washington.edu >(replace x with u to respond) Daniel, It sounds like you've definitely have a technical challenge using a simple calculator or *gasp* a spread sheet. You want to talk about why there are so many oracle database jobs out there? Its simple. People are fed up with the fact that when they *hire* a certified oracle dba, they don't know jack about databases or how to tune or keep oracle up and running. Many companies take good care of their Informix DBAs. Why? Cause they all look like geniuses cause Informix doesn't fail. If I weren't under an NDA, there are some stories I could talk about with horacle... ;-) -G _________________________________________________________________ >From predictions to trailers, check out the MSN Entertainment Guide to the Academy Awards' http://movies.msn.com/movies/oscars2007/?icid=ncoscartagline1

I must say that it is refreshing to back in this collegial atmosphere discussing the finer intricacies of technical issues with intelligent professionals who left the schoolyard behind oh so many years ago. cheers j.

Obnoxio The Clown wrote: > DA Morgan said: >> stubbie? > > I'm scared to even ask, but what is this? Australian for a bottle of beer. -- Daniel A. Morgan University of Washington damorgan@x.washington.edu (replace x with u to respond) Puget Sound Oracle Users Group www.psoug.org

"DA Morgan" <damorgan@psoug.org> wrote in message news:1169668630.522625@bubbleator.drizzle.com... > Obnoxio The Clown wrote: >> DA Morgan said: >>> stubbie? >> >> I'm scared to even ask, but what is this? > > Australian for a bottle of beer. Well, to be pedantic, it's actually a general English word for a type of beer bottle most prevalent in Australia.

>"DA Morgan" <damorgan@psoug.org> wrote in message >news:1169668630.522625@bubbleator.drizzle.com... > > Obnoxio The Clown wrote: > >> DA Morgan said: > >>> stubbie? > >> > >> I'm scared to even ask, but what is this? > > > > Australian for a bottle of beer. > >Well, to be pedantic, it's actually a general English word for a type of >beer bottle most prevalent in Australia. > > Sure, sure, whatever you say... As long as it makes you feel better and your wife doesn't correct you as to what *she* means when she talks about your "stubbie".... _________________________________________________________________ Get in the mood for Valentine's Day. View photos, recipes and more on your Live.com page. http://www.live.com/?addTemplate=ValentinesDay&ocid=T001MSN30A0701

DA Morgan said: > Obnoxio The Clown wrote: >> DA Morgan said: >>> stubbie? >> >> I'm scared to even ask, but what is this? > > Australian for a bottle of beer. I thought that was a tinnie? -- Bye now, Obnoxio "I don't read newspapers anymore except the local rag which I do weekly to cheer myself trying to see if anyone I hate has been stabbed." -- Horribilis XVI -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by OpenProtect(http://www.openprotect.com), and is believed to be clean.

"Obnoxio The Clown" <obnoxio@serendipita.com> wrote in message news:mailman.85.1169671862.10648.informix-list@iiug.org... > > DA Morgan said: >> Obnoxio The Clown wrote: >>> DA Morgan said: >>>> stubbie? >>> >>> I'm scared to even ask, but what is this? >> >> Australian for a bottle of beer. > > I thought that was a tinnie? A stubbie is a bottle. A tinnie is (would you believe it?) a tin. You dag!

Captain Pedantic said: > "Obnoxio The Clown" <obnoxio@serendipita.com> wrote in message > news:mailman.85.1169671862.10648.informix-list@iiug.org... >> >> DA Morgan said: >>> Obnoxio The Clown wrote: >>>> DA Morgan said: >>>>> stubbie? >>>> >>>> I'm scared to even ask, but what is this? >>> >>> Australian for a bottle of beer. >> >> I thought that was a tinnie? > > A stubbie is a bottle. A tinnie is (would you believe it?) a tin. > You dag! Sorry, my Strine is limited to Paul Hogan. He always said tinnie. -- Bye now, Obnoxio "I don't read newspapers anymore except the local rag which I do weekly to cheer myself trying to see if anyone I hate has been stabbed." -- Horribilis XVI -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by OpenProtect(http://www.openprotect.com), and is believed to be clean.

Ian Michael Gumby wrote: > Many companies take good care of their Informix DBAs. Why? Cause they > all look like geniuses cause Informix doesn't fail. Or, alternatively, because there are so few of them out there. > If I weren't under an NDA, there are some stories I could talk about > with horacle... ;-) Anyone in this business at more than a superficial level has stories aplenty. I live on the same island as Paul Allen and pass enough alcohol around at the Christmas party and you get enough to fill a year's worth of juicy stories. Not one of which affects the job market or Microsoft's ability to sell into the Enterprise. The talk here is more suitable for evangelists and zealots than it is developers and DBAs. I can't think of one reason why it is in my best interests that Larry gets a new boat or Informix sales are up. Neither one pays the bill at the kid's university. -- Daniel A. Morgan University of Washington damorgan@x.washington.edu (replace x with u to respond)

Captain Pedantic wrote: > "Obnoxio The Clown" <obnoxio@serendipita.com> wrote in message > news:mailman.85.1169671862.10648.informix-list@iiug.org... >> DA Morgan said: >>> Obnoxio The Clown wrote: >>>> DA Morgan said: >>>>> stubbie? >>>> I'm scared to even ask, but what is this? >>> Australian for a bottle of beer. >> I thought that was a tinnie? > > A stubbie is a bottle. A tinnie is (would you believe it?) a tin. > You dag! The UK, US, and Australia. Three countries separated by a common language. -- Daniel A. Morgan University of Washington damorgan@x.washington.edu (replace x with u to respond) Puget Sound Oracle Users Group www.psoug.org

> Ian Michael Gumby wrote: > >> Many companies take good care of their Informix DBAs. Why? Cause they >> all look like geniuses cause Informix doesn't fail. > > Or, alternatively, because there are so few of them out there. > >> If I weren't under an NDA, there are some stories I could talk about >> with horacle... ;-) > > Anyone in this business at more than a superficial level has stories > aplenty. I live on the same island as Paul Allen and pass enough > alcohol around at the Christmas party and you get enough to fill a > year's worth of juicy stories. Not one of which affects the job market > or Microsoft's ability to sell into the Enterprise. > > The talk here is more suitable for evangelists and zealots than it is > developers and DBAs. I can't think of one reason why it is in my best > interests that Larry gets a new boat or Informix sales are up. Neither > one pays the bill at the kid's university. > -- > Daniel A. Morgan > University of Washington > damorgan@x.washington.edu > (replace x with u to respond) > Or, alternatively, because there are so few of them out there. Increased license revenue and a declining Informix DBA resource pool... It would seem that this is a good thing for those that have continued to work with Informix and are up to date with the latest technology and certifications. It is also a good reason for that 20 year old to consider becoming an Informix DBA. Andrew

DA Morgan wrote: > The talk here is more suitable for evangelists and zealots than it is > developers and DBAs. I can't think of one reason why it is in my best > interests that Larry gets a new boat or Informix sales are up. Neither > one pays the bill at the kid's university. It may not be in _your_ best interests for the sake of Informix, but if we hear about poor poor Oracle having troubles, suddenly it becomes relevant. Informix doesn't really compare to Oracle on marketing terms simply because it doesn't get much if any press at all. This is purely the fault of IBM who has seen fit to sit on it. Has anything changed with the zealots and evangelists for Informix? It has done little, which is why no amount of cheerleading is going to help the product. Until _IBM_ opens its marketing mouth and starts promoting the product will it ever matter. It unfortunately appears that IBM has too many people in the custodial care of Informix that want to use cute and trendy concepts to market the product, rather than doing what works. You can tell what works simply by watching and duplicating what the successful companies are doing. I am guessing that the geniuses that are in charge of Informix probably read too many marketing magazines and try to do things that sound good, but produce little results. Instead they should try to at the very least copy their competition, and see what happens. We will never see that happen, never, with all the arrogant fucks in charge of the product.

Tool wrote: > I am guessing that the geniuses that are > in charge of Informix probably read too many marketing magazines and try to > do things that sound good, but produce little results. Instead they should > try to at the very least copy their competition, and see what happens. > We will never see that happen, never, with all the arrogant fucks in > charge of the product. The world needs multiple SQL RDBMS products like it needed multiple word processors. I'm not saying that is a good thing but it is a thing. For Informix to survive IBM has got to figure out what it is and why anyone should buy it rather than DB2: So far they haven't. It is Rdb to Oracle, Fox to Microsoft, a source of revenue without a compelling reason for why anyone should use it to start a new project. And that is, as you state, clearly IBM's failing. What I find fascinating is that other than you it seems that most here have confused loyalty with an old friend, the Informix database, for loyalty to a company slowly but assuredly starving that old friend to death (so no I don't believe the 28% figure except to note that it is couched as revenue which might mean nothing more than relicensing of existing customers). -- Daniel A. Morgan University of Washington damorgan@x.washington.edu (replace x with u to respond)

> Tool wrote: >> I am guessing that the geniuses that are >> in charge of Informix probably read too many marketing magazines and try >> to >> do things that sound good, but produce little results. Instead they >> should >> try to at the very least copy their competition, and see what happens. >> We will never see that happen, never, with all the arrogant fucks in >> charge of the product. > > The world needs multiple SQL RDBMS products like it needed multiple word > processors. I'm not saying that is a good thing but it is a thing. For > Informix to survive IBM has got to figure out what it is and why anyone > should buy it rather than DB2: So far they haven't. It is Rdb to Oracle, > Fox to Microsoft, a source of revenue without a compelling reason for > why anyone should use it to start a new project. And that is, as you > state, clearly IBM's failing. > > What I find fascinating is that other than you it seems that most here > have confused loyalty with an old friend, the Informix database, for > loyalty to a company slowly but assuredly starving that old friend to > death (so no I don't believe the 28% figure except to note that it is > couched as revenue which might mean nothing more than relicensing of > existing customers). > -- > Daniel A. Morgan > University of Washington > damorgan@x.washington.edu > (replace x with u to respond) >> a source of revenue without a compelling reason for why anyone should use >> it to start a new project. If I'm not mistaken, Cisco chose Informix for a major new project based on its ability to run unattended and replication features. Andrew

Obnoxio The Clown wrote: > DA Morgan said: >> stubbie? > I'm scared to even ask, but what is this? A small beer bottle with a short neck...? At least that's what it is where I grew up. To get back on topic. The number stated officially in the Q4 call was +32% new-transaction for "distributed databases". (That comment by the CFO is verifiable via the webcast and anyone who doesn't believe it should send a note to SEC...). I can _officially_ (being my own spokesperson of Serge Inc.) state that I am going to do an unplanned furniture purchase of excellent quality thanks to my variable pay which I expect to get thanks to that number. Now if IBM goes through the trouble of lying to SEC and keep the illusion up by rewarding me for what I (and my fellow pals at IDS) didn't actually pull of, then they are sneaker than I an imagine. Given that undeniably the two big ingredients to "distributed databses" are IDS and DB2 for LUW (with a sprinkling of U2, Redbrick, ...) there are two choices here. IDS grew at least 64% (for those who believe IDS and DB2 for LUW are of equal size) and DB2 for LUW was flat or down. A cause for celebration in this group I suppose, so we let it stand. DB2 for LUW grew at least 64% (for those same believers) and IDS was flatted or down. A scenario even the worst critics would not believe since if there is one thing everyone believes more than IBM's inability to grow IDS is that it can grow DB2 for LUW :-) Now there is the remote chance that the numbers are correct and both IDS and DB2 had a good year. Up to the valued reader to decide. Fact is: IBM did break out growth for distributed database revenue growth. Oracle did not! If they did please point me. -- Serge Rielau DB2 Solutions Development IBM Toronto Lab

Serge Rielau wrote: > To get back on topic. The number stated officially in the Q4 call was > +32% new-transaction for "distributed databases". > (That comment by the CFO is verifiable via the webcast and anyone who > doesn't believe it should send a note to SEC...). > > Given that undeniably the two big ingredients to "distributed databses" > are IDS and DB2 for LUW (with a sprinkling of U2, Redbrick, ...) there > are two choices here. > Well - the actual prepared remarks for the Q4 call refer to "Our distributed relational database was particularly strong, growing 32 percent" not "Our distributed relational databases were particularly strong.." but I am sure that is just a typo (or two).

Daniel, I am often reminded of the folks in Iraq who parade through the streets at certain times of the year, cutting themselves with knives in a public display of self mutilation, in very passionate displays of religious devotion and loyalty to their beliefs. Informix has that same atmosphere where at certain times and moments everyone, including myself, vent our feelings. But it has become prayers to a god that doesn't listen. I can see that it is as ridiculous as those poor religious zealots cutting themselves--yet to the believer it is most sincere, and filled with the utmost passion. Everyone believes, and everyone hopes their prayers will be answered. I see tragedy in believing, yet I hope things will change, that the Informix product will be advertised, promoted, and developed in the market. Maybe we're all wrong, and IBM has it right. Maybe they know something about the marketing of this product that we all missed. Maybe they have a strategy that will work, even though the best advice from some of the best in the business would tell them they are wrong. It's interesting that Oracle seems to have a strategy that everyone understands, the same for Microsoft, and even MySQL. But it is indeed baffling that one could understand the how and why Oracle, MySQL, Sybase, Microsoft and others do their marketing, and yet, IBM is on a different track that few if any can understand. It is just baffling that IBM and the Informix team have such a divergent strategy of no advertising for the product, no press releases, a whimpering developer program, and yet they think the product will hold its own in the market. Just plain baffling. Excuse me now, I have to prepare for the next parade, and sharpen my knives. :-) -t- DA Morgan wrote: > Tool wrote: >> I am guessing that the geniuses that are >> in charge of Informix probably read too many marketing magazines and >> try to >> do things that sound good, but produce little results. Instead they >> should >> try to at the very least copy their competition, and see what >> happens. We will never see that happen, never, with all the arrogant >> fucks in charge of the product. > > The world needs multiple SQL RDBMS products like it needed multiple word > processors. I'm not saying that is a good thing but it is a thing. For > Informix to survive IBM has got to figure out what it is and why anyone > should buy it rather than DB2: So far they haven't. It is Rdb to Oracle, > Fox to Microsoft, a source of revenue without a compelling reason for > why anyone should use it to start a new project. And that is, as you > state, clearly IBM's failing. > > What I find fascinating is that other than you it seems that most here > have confused loyalty with an old friend, the Informix database, for > loyalty to a company slowly but assuredly starving that old friend to > death (so no I don't believe the 28% figure except to note that it is > couched as revenue which might mean nothing more than relicensing of > existing customers).