Re: IIUG - Linux and Informix

In article <336C9E8D.B54F563A@mindspring.com>, Tim Schaefer <tschaefe@mindspring.com> writes >Alan Denney wrote: >> >> In article <5kd646$646$1@news.xmission.com>, >> DBA Resources <dbaresrc@xmission.xmission.com> wrote: >> >The issues surrounding the technical viability of a Linux port can be raised >> >**politely** during the Ask The Experts session the IIUG is sponsoring during >> >the 1997 Informix Worldwide User Conference. With Tim Shetler, VP of Product >> >Development and Don Top, Director of OnLine Kernel Development available to >> >respond, you should be able to get a better perspective of the issues from >> >Informix's point of view. >> > >> >Carlton Doe >> >> Without speaking for anybody else... it seems to me that the key areas >> of Informix involved in such a decision would be a) the group that selects >> are prioritizes ports, generally based on commitments with hardware >> vendors and on business cases (e.g. those who have "shown the money"), >> and b) Platform Engineering (who would actually be doing the work). >> > >Yes Alan, this is the reasonable model for commercial products. I would not >expect anybody playing by the current model to do anything different. Please >understand that Linux defies the current model. This is it's strength. If Yes! >there was an alternative to all the expensive solutions out there, Linux is >proving it. > >Linux allows UNIX to be ubiquitos and portable--literally. > >> I don't even know who's in charge of "group a" above, nor what its >> title is anymore, but I doubt that it's under Tim or Don's realm, and >> Platform Engineering isn't either. Therefore, while taking up the subject >> of Linux issues with them is a good starting point, please don't get angry >> with them if you find them unable to make specific commitments or give >> much detail on the Linux issue, as it isn't really their area. Try >> to acknowledge that fact going in, and rather than beat on them for specific >> answers, get them to have the responsible parties in "group a" and >> Platform Engineering follow up to the Linux audience in some manner >> after the conference. (Perhaps an interested party could fire up an >> Informix-on-Linux-SIG listserv.) >> > >OK, I wasn't going to say anymore, but since there's actually an Informix >person responding, here we go. > >Alan, if you or anybody else got the impression that I am angry with Informix >please don't think that. I'm not angry, just confused, and basically >disappointed. > Agreed. >I have to break out a megaphone occasionally and raise the volume. After >watching >the way Informix has gone in the dumper I have to say what must be said. I've >also received a lot of off-line mail in support of my rants, mainly because a >majority of people out there do not want to risk saying anything. I'm not a >lunatic, but merely someone who ain't afraid to say what must be said, in the >face of ridicule, and scorn. I'm just a small potatos developer, not rich, and >not famous. Informix products have fed me well over the years, but a lottery >would do much better. > >Your company has the best data base product on the market. However, your Yes! >marketing >department is the worst. In the face of common sense, and proof to better ways >of doing things, your marketing people have ignored the success of Microsoft >and Oracle. Greed has taken its' toll. Informix wants to compete against the >likes of these, but refuses to play by the same rules. > >Informix may be the "thinking man's" company, filled with the brighest technical >minds, but if you can't move the products, you need to sit down and think about Definately the brightest technical minds - I've spoken to a few in the UK and it has been a pleasure to talk to such switched on people.. >what went wrong. How did the stock go in the dumper? I'll reiterate, like a >while-loop that needs a break, YOU DID NOT BUILD CONSENSUS WITH YOUR PRODUCTS, >BY INVOLVING YOUR DEVELOPER COMMUNITY. Not your internal developers, but the >folks out here in consumer-land, that consume your products, and MAKE MONEY >with them. > >The developers who've stayed with you the longest have heard the least from you. Come to think of it - I don't remember the last time Informix wrote to me...except once after I went on a training course when I got a leaflet advertising more training courses. Where is my copy of Universal Server to play with? >We don't get ANY communications from you, and we now have to compete with >Informix >consultants. Informix as a company has missed the mark. > >Informix is now trying to force consensus with their products by catering to the >top companies, in the effort to trickle the product down. Microsoft has used >just the opposite theory, building a market from the grass roots up. Even >Oracle, with their sh***y products, has understood this. Oracle is also playing >both markets against the middle. Larry is no dummy. > >> Also, keep in mind that supporting a platform for ANY length of time >> creates a longish-term commitment to supporting a product line. Also, >> since in this case you don't have a software vendor to work with >> (or, ahem, go after) when you run into operating system or compiler >> problems, you add risk to the project. The Linux faithful certainly >> think that Linux has a lot of productive years ahead of it (as do I). >> However, history has shown that "free" O/Ses can be abandoned as >> quickly as they are adopted (I don't read much about 386BSD anymore, >> for example). >> > >OK, I'll say it once again real slow: you can download the source code to >the operating system, and develop your release with a safe version. When >you announce the ported version, you do like Netscape, offer it amongst >all the other versions. Netscape stock is doing a lot better than Informix >by the way. > >Linux has turned UNIX into a commodity. It's intricate, complex, and comes >with a lot of cool software programs. But it's now a commodity. It has it's >place with DOS, only light years ahead. > >Linux people understand the risk involved in an uncommercial OS, but in bringing >DSA to Linux, you port it to a safe release, and this very effort will help to >stabilize it. By putting a commercial data base on Linux, you will in ><indirect> means, add stability to Linux. You will be endorsing it as a viable >platform for whatever application people plan to use it for. Small businesses, >students, researchers, libraries, retirement homes, small hospitals, places >where the expensive UNIXes will not be found. Places where Informix is not >currently found. > >> People here seem to be made most angry by the lack of Linux support >> to date because they view the technical/porting issues as solvable. > >I can't speak for the others, but I'm not angry. I'm disappointed. We >do not know the half of what goes on in your company. All we see is the >end result. We talk to the customer support, or work with your consultants. > >The inside stuff, that belongs to you. So, what appears extremely important >to Informix as a company INSIDE the company will never be