Re: [Fwd: BUSINESS ANALYST/ CALIPER/ CONTRACT/ VA]

Obnoxio The Clown wrote: > Eric Herber said: >> Christine Normile wrote: >>> Hi Marco - >>> >>> Thanks for bring this to my attention. I've contacted Checkfree's CTO >>> and >>> will work to bring them up to date on our data server strategy and our >>> team will work to turn this around. >>> >>> Thanks again. >>> >> Christine, >> >> this is only one example of the consequences of a non-existing >> Informix product marketing. >> >> It doesn't help if you speak with every Informix software vendor >> personally. >> Reserve your time and do an appropriate, vital product marketing for >> Informix and then those things will not happen. > > To be fair to Christine, she is doing what she can and it's great that she > is prepared to make the effort. How do you know that? Since when are you an apologist for IBM or Informix? Did you get hit on the head? > However, it is crazy to have to have a > team that goes around to one vendor after another and says "this is what > we're doing, this is why you should support it, yadda, yadda, yadda..." It > would be much more efficient for IBM to just start advertising IDS again, > and start trumpeting the deals they get for IDS. That will tell vendors > about IBM's commitment much more clearly than having a SWAT team going > round and picking up the pieces. > Agreed. But even if IBM _starts_ to make the effort to market the product, what good would it do at this point? Last report I saw was that Informix brought in something around $110 million USD annually. Not a small number for a small company, but a fraction of where it should be for a big company. The real effort now should be to get IDS into Open Source. This is the genius move for IBM, because it means the product would live forever. It would no longer have to play by the same rules as DB2, since it would no longer be "competing" in the same space as DB2--which is what the argument is really all about in the first place. Informix is a peer product with DB2 as long as it sits on the same shelf as DB2. There can be only one "flagship" database at IBM. Putting IDS into Open Source takes it off the shelf marked "our beloved" and puts it over on the other shelf marked "open source", with Derby aka Cloudscape. Now it stands a chance, and it eliminates the confusion about what IBM is really saying, that DB2 is what they really want to sell. Great. Go sell DB2, and cut IDS free into Open Source. Let the market decide, and you have eliminated the obviously confusing problem about marketing IDS. The Open Source community would most likely rally around IDS in Open Source, IBM would get all the credit, and dumbfound the critics. Then if the product flops, blame open source, but in the end the product would live forever anyway, impervious to the competition on technical merits, needing only a service contract for support. I'm not sure, but it would be easy to guess that a whole lot more people would be willing to offer support contracts and start new projects with Informix in Open Source since they would not have the pall of uncertainty hanging over the product.

Double Echo said: > How do you know that? Because she said so. > Since when are you an apologist for IBM or Informix? Did you get hit on > the > head? How does commending someone for doing what they can constitute being an apologist for the company that hamstrings them from doing their job properly? > Agreed. But even if IBM _starts_ to make the effort to market the > product, what > good would it do at this point? Last report I saw was that Informix > brought in > something around $110 million USD annually. Not a small number for a > small > company, but a fraction of where it should be for a big company. The real > effort > now should be to get IDS into Open Source. This is the genius move for > IBM, > because it means the product would live forever. It would no longer have > to play > by the same rules as DB2, since it would no longer be "competing" in the > same > space as DB2--which is what the argument is really all about in the first > place. If you don't mind me saying so, you are fucked in the head. Who is going to give away $110M a year (or whatever the number is -- that sounds low to me) just because it will ensure the life of a product *in your opinion*? I can't believe people think that IBM would just drop IDS out in the world of OSS, and somehow, utterly mystically, everyone who is busy with other stuff in the OSS community would a) drop what they are doing and b) grok how IDS all hangs together. That's assuming they'd happily forego the $110M a year in the first place. > The Open Source community would most likely rally > around > IDS in Open Source, IBM would get all the credit, and dumbfound the > critics. Yeah, and then they'll find the weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and Bill Gates will drop Windows in favour of Linux, too. And they'll prove the Da Vinci code. > I'm not sure, but it would be easy to guess that a whole lot more people > would be > willing to offer support contracts and start new projects with Informix in > Open Source > since they would not have the pall of uncertainty hanging over the > product. Well, I'm sure IBM would be willing to take that chance and chuck away $110M a year. The shareholders won't mind that, will they? Or the people in IBM whose jobs you're pissing away? Or the customers who adhere to or buy new IDS precisely because it has IBM standing (albeit not doing anything more constructive than just standing!) behind it? For fuck's sake, lay off the pills, they're going to do permanent damage. -- Bye now, Obnoxio Information within this post contains forward looking statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933 and Section 21B of the S E C Act of 1934. Statements that involve discussions with respect to projections of future events are not statements of historical fact and may be forward looking statements. Don't rely on them to make a decision. The poster is not a reporting company registered under the Exchange Act of 1934. I have received a life peerage from Her Majesty, who is not an officer, minister or affiliate Labour party member. I intend to recover my loan now, which could cause the parliamentary majority to go down, resulting in losses for you. Today's Labour party has: an accumulated deficit and a reliance on loans from officers and affiliates to pay expenses. It is not an operating political party. The party is going to need financing to continue as a going concern. A failure to finance could cause the party to go out of business. This report shall not be construed as any kind of investment advice or solicitation. You can lose all your money by investing in this party.

Obnoxio The Clown wrote: > Double Echo said: >> How do you know that? > > Because she said so. > >> Since when are you an apologist for IBM or Informix? Did you get hit on >> the >> head? > > How does commending someone for doing what they can constitute being an > apologist for the company that hamstrings them from doing their job > properly? > Because it's not your character to be nice to anyone or say nice things. :-) >> Agreed. But even if IBM _starts_ to make the effort to market the >> product, what >> good would it do at this point? Last report I saw was that Informix >> brought in >> something around $110 million USD annually. Not a small number for a >> small >> company, but a fraction of where it should be for a big company. The real >> effort >> now should be to get IDS into Open Source. This is the genius move for >> IBM, >> because it means the product would live forever. It would no longer have >> to play >> by the same rules as DB2, since it would no longer be "competing" in the >> same >> space as DB2--which is what the argument is really all about in the first >> place. > > If you don't mind me saying so, you are fucked in the head. Who is going > to give away $110M a year (or whatever the number is -- that sounds low to > me) just because it will ensure the life of a product *in your opinion*? > "fucked in the head" is a bit dramatic, don't you think? Open Source has indeed more going on than you might know. By putting the code into a public trust it will no longer be headed for the slaughterhouse. It's only a matter of time before Informix will be no longer relevant--which is basically where its at now. > I can't believe people think that IBM would just drop IDS out in the world > of OSS, and somehow, utterly mystically, everyone who is busy with other > stuff in the OSS community would a) drop what they are doing and b) grok > how IDS all hangs together. That's assuming they'd happily forego the > $110M a year in the first place. It does fly in the face of "commercial" common sense, but that doesn't mean it wouldn't work, or that it is the wrong thing to do. I know you want to rally a challenge here, but just a teeny tiny bit of creativity is all that's needed in the Open Source arena to spark a lot of interest. The obvious reason of course is that the code is free, the software freely available for people to do with as they choose. In the current climate, the product is kept commercial in the illusory hope that it will someday become accepted in the broadest of circles. But that's not reality, and it will never happen. Put it in Open Source, and guarantee immortality of the product. Even if you ignore the assumption that the product needs wide acceptance, the reality is that unless you do indeed get the broadest acceptance of your product, you are basically spinning your wheels--which is where Informix is today. The idea that it is somehow too valuable to be Open Source is based on mythical, delusionary hope that it will have the same relevance as Oracle or DB2. It will never have that as long as IBM sits on it and wants DB2 to shine. >> The Open Source community would most likely rally >> around >> IDS in Open Source, IBM would get all the credit, and dumbfound the >> critics. > > Yeah, and then they'll find the weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and > Bill Gates will drop Windows in favour of Linux, too. And they'll prove > the Da Vinci code. > That's a lot to think about. :-) >> I'm not sure, but it would be easy to guess that a whole lot more people >> would be >> willing to offer support contracts and start new projects with Informix in >> Open Source >> since they would not have the pall of uncertainty hanging over the >> product. > > Well, I'm sure IBM would be willing to take that chance and chuck away > $110M a year. The shareholders won't mind that, will they? Or the people > in IBM whose jobs you're pissing away? Or the customers who adhere to or > buy new IDS precisely because it has IBM standing (albeit not doing > anything more constructive than just standing!) behind it? > Every economy has a balance. If the decision would be made to make IDS Open Source, there is the obvious need to balance the release against the real world realities of the cost to do so. This is where creative business minds come up with the right combination of such a release, in concert with developers. Informix needs developers no matter which way it goes, but it is not hard to imagine a ground swell if it did go Open Source. > For fuck's sake, lay off the pills, they're going to do permanent damage. > ROTFL Ya killin' me. :-) ( It's too late... )

Double Echo said: > Obnoxio The Clown wrote: >> Double Echo said: >>> How do you know that? >> >> Because she said so. >> >>> Since when are you an apologist for IBM or Informix? Did you get hit on >>> the >>> head? >> >> How does commending someone for doing what they can constitute being an >> apologist for the company that hamstrings them from doing their job >> properly? >> > > Because it's not your character to be nice to anyone or say nice things. Let me immediately rectify the situation. >>> Agreed. But even if IBM _starts_ to make the effort to market the >>> product, what >>> good would it do at this point? Last report I saw was that Informix >>> brought in >>> something around $110 million USD annually. Not a small number for a >>> small >>> company, but a fraction of where it should be for a big company. The >>> real >>> effort >>> now should be to get IDS into Open Source. This is the genius move for >>> IBM, >>> because it means the product would live forever. It would no longer >>> have >>> to play >>> by the same rules as DB2, since it would no longer be "competing" in >>> the >>> same >>> space as DB2--which is what the argument is really all about in the >>> first >>> place. >> >> If you don't mind me saying so, you are fucked in the head. Who is going >> to give away $110M a year (or whatever the number is -- that sounds low >> to >> me) just because it will ensure the life of a product *in your opinion*? >> > > "fucked in the head" is a bit dramatic, don't you think? Open Source has > indeed No, I don't fucking think fucked in the head is a bit dramatic. I think it's fucking restrained, given the bollocks you're spouting. > more going on than you might know. By putting the code into a public > trust it > will no longer be headed for the slaughterhouse. It's only a matter of Prove that this is the case. > time > before Informix will be no longer relevant--which is basically where its > at now. > >> I can't believe people think that IBM would just drop IDS out in the >> world >> of OSS, and somehow, utterly mystically, everyone who is busy with other >> stuff in the OSS community would a) drop what they are doing and b) grok >> how IDS all hangs together. That's assuming they'd happily forego the >> $110M a year in the first place. > > It does fly in the face of "commercial" common sense, but that doesn't OK, let me spell it out for you, tard-boy: 1. If IBM dumps IDS into the public domain, every Informix-focused staff member of IBM becomes redundant. Let's say 10% are retained for whatever IDS stuff IBM still does, and another 10% find jobs elsewhere in IBM. The other 80% are now cheering for Double Enema: "Fucking thanks, double enema! You fucked us all out of our jobs." 2. If IBM dumps IDS into the public domain, every shareholder of IBM loses out on dividend. So every shareholder now cheers double enema: "Fucking thanks, double enema! You cost us about $80M of profit! Because of that, IBM's not making it's numbers, so the stock has tanked, and we're losing dividends." 3. If IBM dumps IDS into the public domain, someone has to learn how to support it. Unlike MySQL, which was designed from the outset to be OSS, IDS is insanely challenging to work with. There is an awful lot more in IDS than their is in MySQL, so a lot of people are going to have to spend a LOT of time figuring out what the hell is going on. I suspect most of the OSS community are going to say: "fuck that -- MySQL is fine for what we want, and this is too much for us to learn." The MySQL (and PostgreSQL, and and and) guys will have a field day, of course, filching code left right and centre. Personally, I think most of the OSS community will look at IDS for a couple of days and then leave it alone. The IDS *will* be utterly fucked. This isn't "not commercial common sense." This is commercial suicide. Just because you want access to the source code for IDS, doesn't mean the world needs to stop rotating to please yo. > mean it wouldn't work, or that it is the wrong thing to do. I know you > want to rally a challenge here, but just a teeny tiny bit of creativity > is all that's needed in the Open Source arena to spark a lot of interest. What interest is it going to spark, Double Enema? You can already get commercial databases (Oracle, DB2 and SQL Server) for free. The people who sign the cheques like "free". They couldn't give a flying fuck about the source. > The obvious reason of course is that the code is free, the software > freely available for people to do with as they choose. In the current Like Oracle Express or SQL Server Express or DB2 Express? > climate, the product is kept commercial in the illusory hope that it > will someday become accepted in the broadest of circles. But that's > not reality, and it will never happen. Put it in Open Source, and > guarantee immortality of the product. Even if you ignore the assumption How the fuck does it guarantee immortality? In my opinion, it will be a lethal injection for IDS. Is that your idea of immortality? > that the product needs wide acceptance, the reality is that unless you > do indeed get the broadest acceptance of your product, you are basically > spinning your wheels--which is where Informix is today. The idea that > it is somehow too valuable to be Open Source is based on mythical, > delusionary > hope that it will have the same relevance as Oracle or DB2. It will never > have that as long as IBM sits on it and wants DB2 to shine. $110M says it's too valuable. No fucking myth or delusion. > Every economy has a balance. If the decision would be made to make IDS > Open Source, there is the obvious need to balance the release against the > real world realities of the cost to do so. This is where creative > business > minds come up with the right combination of such a release, in concert > with > developers. Informix needs developers no matter which way it goes, but it > is not hard to imagine a ground swell if it did go Open Source. It's not hard to imagine it. I reckon it's fucking impossible. Just tell me, what, exactly, IBM would get out of this, to justify pissing away $110M a year for the next 50 years? -- Bye now, Obnoxio Information within this post contains forward looking statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933 and Section 21B of the S E C Act of 1934. Statements that involve discussions with respect to projections of future events are not statements of historical fact and may be forward looking statements. Don't rely on them to make a decision. The poster is not a reporting company registered under the Exchange Act of 1934. I have received a life peerage from Her Majesty, who is not an officer, minister or affiliate Labour party member. I intend to recover my loan now, which could cause the parliamentary majority to go down, resulting in losses for you. Today's Labour party has: an accumulated deficit and a reliance on loans fr

Obnoxio The Clown wrote: >> Double Echo said: >> "fucked in the head" is a bit dramatic, don't you think? Open Source has >> indeed > > No, I don't fucking think fucked in the head is a bit dramatic. I think > it's fucking restrained, given the bollocks you're spouting. > >> more going on than you might know. By putting the code into a public >> trust it >> will no longer be headed for the slaughterhouse. It's only a matter of > > Prove that this is the case. > We have already seen the discussions here about how insignificant Informix is in the market place, so I won't bore you with that repeat discussion. You seem to think that Informix is important, and yet, I would need just as much proof to believe _that_. Informix is just a legacy product, hardly relevant anymore. >> time >> before Informix will be no longer relevant--which is basically where its >> at now. >> >>> I can't believe people think that IBM would just drop IDS out in the >>> world >>> of OSS, and somehow, utterly mystically, everyone who is busy with other >>> stuff in the OSS community would a) drop what they are doing and b) grok >>> how IDS all hangs together. That's assuming they'd happily forego the >>> $110M a year in the first place. If Informix is so doggone important, then how come there is no marketing plan or any advertising? It's a dead product, that's why. >> It does fly in the face of "commercial" common sense, but that doesn't > > OK, let me spell it out for you, tard-boy: > > 1. If IBM dumps IDS into the public domain, every Informix-focused staff > member of IBM becomes redundant. Let's say 10% are retained for whatever > IDS stuff IBM still does, and another 10% find jobs elsewhere in IBM. The > other 80% are now cheering for Double Enema: "Fucking thanks, double > enema! You fucked us all out of our jobs." > I would hardly think that _I_ would be the one to blame for that. It's inevitable that there would be some staff that would be affected, but I'm sure smarter people than you or I have already done the numbers on the future of this product, whether it stays as it is, or goes open source, or free, without the source. > 2. If IBM dumps IDS into the public domain, every shareholder of IBM loses > out on dividend. So every shareholder now cheers double enema: "Fucking > thanks, double enema! You cost us about $80M of profit! Because of that, > IBM's not making it's numbers, so the stock has tanked, and we're losing > dividends." > Keeping a lid on it won't grow the base of customers and users, it doesn't matter how good the product is. For a company the size of IBM, $110 million is not a lot of money, so it is hard to imagine how the product shapes the stock price to any measurable amount. Going Open Source, the announcement alone would probably help DB2 and the other products immensely, thus helping the share holder value. I would fully expect an announcement of how IDS professional services and support would continue to be offered for the product, as well as opening a flood gate of support from this community as well as others that would probably spring up knowing the product won't be killed. It is probably the best endorsement for the product, but you have to think like Open Source people do, not like the old business model where the licensing is driving the product. In the future, professional services would drive the product, and this means anyone and everyone can drive the market, since nobody owns the product anymore but the public trust. It could turn the whole thing around. Uncertainty is killing this product, Open Source gives it new life. > 3. If IBM dumps IDS into the public domain, someone has to learn how to > support it. Unlike MySQL, which was designed from the outset to be OSS, > IDS is insanely challenging to work with. There is an awful lot more in > IDS than their is in MySQL, so a lot of people are going to have to spend > a LOT of time figuring out what the hell is going on. I suspect most of > the OSS community are going to say: "fuck that -- MySQL is fine for what > we want, and this is too much for us to learn." The MySQL (and PostgreSQL, > and and and) guys will have a field day, of course, filching code left > right and centre. Personally, I think most of the OSS community will look > at IDS for a couple of days and then leave it alone. The IDS *will* be > utterly fucked. > ( I think you just like to say "fuck" too much. ) Back on topic, services and support is what it's all about. Today, when managers decide on what to buy, they have to be able to find people to support the product. Not only has the number of Informix jobs declined, so too has the number of people out in the workforce declined that could actually support the product. It's on its way out, not enough Informix people, and managers buying other products that they know they can find people for, and developers moving to other products they know will be around. > This isn't "not commercial common sense." This is commercial suicide. > Only when you think old school. > Just because you want access to the source code for IDS, doesn't mean the > world needs to stop rotating to please yo. > I personally could care less about the code. But under the GPL, the code is not only preserved, anyone who modifies it would have to give back to the community their changes and/or improvements. You have missed the biggest benefit to Open Source, the concept that no one company or person would own it, it is freely available in the public domain, and thusly it would no longer be at the whim of one company or the other to maintain the viability of the product. It is a life-saving measure, and like I pointed out before, guarantees the immortality of the product. For you and me it means all that time spent learning and using the product doesn't go in vain. In fact it means we could build on it even more. >> mean it wouldn't work, or that it is the wrong thing to do. I know you >> want to rally a challenge here, but just a teeny tiny bit of creativity >> is all that's needed in the Open Source arena to spark a lot of interest. > > What interest is it going to spark, Double Enema? You can already get > commercial databases (Oracle, DB2 and SQL Server) for free. The people who > sign the cheques like "free". They couldn't give a flying fuck about the > source. > You really don't understand the Open Source model. It is also equally interesting to note that right here in c.d.i. and the IIUG repository are plenty of tools and programs anyone here can use for free. They get the source too. So there is already a good percentage of people here in Informix-related environments that understand the community concepts behind Open Source. >> The obvious reason of course is that the code is free, the software >> freely available for people to do with as they choose. In the current > > Like Oracle Express or SQL Server Express or DB2 Express? > >> climate, the product is kept commercial in the illusory hope that it >> will someday become accepted in the broadest of circles. But that's@@

> Well, I'm sure IBM would be willing to take that chance and chuck away > $110M a year. The shareholders won't mind that, will they? Or the people > in IBM whose jobs you're pissing away? Or the customers who adhere to or > buy new IDS precisely because it has IBM standing ... behind it? Well, slouching, really.