Re: Why you can't trust IBM when it comes to committing to Informix.

Neil Truby wrote: > But the premise of your question is wrong in any case because, as Eric > points out, ""IDS neither competes with nor represents an alternative to > DB2. Rather, IDS represents an embeddable transaction-oriented RDBMS > featuring valuable capabilities that distinguish it from DB2 in a > significant way." ! Perhaps you might also want to ask why, if IDS, is IBM's answer for an embeddable DB they did this? http://www.nytimes.com/idg/IDG_002570DE00740E18C12573B800335866.html Which is described as a "an embedded database with in-memory database engine, which means it can store and retrieve data from main memory, giving faster performance than traditional disk-based systems." -- Daniel A. Morgan University of Washington damorgan@x.washington.edu (replace x with u to respond)

DA Morgan wrote: > Perhaps you might also want to ask why, if IDS, is IBM's answer for > an embeddable DB they did this? > > http://www.nytimes.com/idg/IDG_002570DE00740E18C12573B800335866.html > > Which is described as a "an embedded database with in-memory database > engine, which means it can store and retrieve data from main memory, > giving faster performance than traditional disk-based systems." ...and TimesTen competes with Oracle...get a grip, man! -- Serge Rielau DB2 Solutions Development IBM Toronto Lab

Serge Rielau wrote: > DA Morgan wrote: >> Perhaps you might also want to ask why, if IDS, is IBM's answer for >> an embeddable DB they did this? >> >> http://www.nytimes.com/idg/IDG_002570DE00740E18C12573B800335866.html >> >> Which is described as a "an embedded database with in-memory database >> engine, which means it can store and retrieve data from main memory, >> giving faster performance than traditional disk-based systems." > ...and TimesTen competes with Oracle...get a grip, man! There isn't even a chance you missed the point of my post. Oracle, the database, competes with DB2 and SQL Server. This isn't about Oracle. This is about IBM. And IBM clearly stated that its new purchase was an embeddable DB. Why did they need it if they have IDS? Ball's in your court. -- Daniel A. Morgan University of Washington damorgan@x.washington.edu (replace x with u to respond)

DA Morgan wrote: > Serge Rielau wrote: >> DA Morgan wrote: >>> Perhaps you might also want to ask why, if IDS, is IBM's answer for >>> an embeddable DB they did this? >>> >>> http://www.nytimes.com/idg/IDG_002570DE00740E18C12573B800335866.html >>> >>> Which is described as a "an embedded database with in-memory database >>> engine, which means it can store and retrieve data from main memory, >>> giving faster performance than traditional disk-based systems." >> ...and TimesTen competes with Oracle...get a grip, man! > > There isn't even a chance you missed the point of my post. > > Oracle, the database, competes with DB2 and SQL Server. > > This isn't about Oracle. This is about IBM. And IBM clearly stated > that its new purchase was an embeddable DB. Why did they need it > if they have IDS? > > Ball's in your court. For the same reason Oracle needed TimesTen. That was my point. Solid is an in-memory front for an IDS or DB2 system, just like TimesTen is a front for an Oracle system. Solid is FEW MB of c-library. If anything it competes with object grid (which is very simplified speaking it's Java equivalent). I am utterly puzzled by your post. Either you have no understanding whatsoever what in memory databases are being used for (Talk to Mark T and have him explain) or you just spew nonsense because - heck who knows why... There recently was a thread in this group about the wisdom of choosing the term "embedded" for IDS. Seems like we're looping back to that one. Cheers Serge -- Serge Rielau DB2 Solutions Development IBM Toronto Lab

Interesting question! Another (interesting?) question: Why do we use cutlery (i.e. knife, fork, spoon, teaspoon, etc.) for eating? Couldn't we just have a swiss army knife and use that instead? So, why is nobody asking this question today? Because as a civilization we have gone through many years of development and it is clearly apparent to most people that having specialized tools for eating (i.e. cutlery) is much better and easier than using a "one-for-all" tool like a swiss army knife. We'd use the swiss army knife for something else, but normally not for eating. Hypothetically ask the same question to stone age people and you may well get a different answer (or reaction). Last question: What can be revealed about the development level of the person when this person asks a question? Think about possible answers ... and have fun! :) Regards, Martin -- Martin Fuerderer IBM Informix Development Munich, Germany Information Management IBM Deutschland Entwicklung GmbH Chairman of the Supervisory Board: Martin Jetter Board of Management: Herbert Kircher Corporate Seat: Boeblingen, Germany Reg.-Gericht: Amtsgericht Stuttgart, HRB 243294 informix-list-bounces@iiug.org wrote on 23.03.2008 17:59:14: > Neil Truby wrote: > > > But the premise of your question is wrong in any case because, as Eric > > points out, ""IDS neither competes with nor represents an alternative to > > DB2. Rather, IDS represents an embeddable transaction-oriented RDBMS > > featuring valuable capabilities that distinguish it from DB2 in a > > significant way." ! > > Perhaps you might also want to ask why, if IDS, is IBM's answer for > an embeddable DB they did this? > > http://www.nytimes.com/idg/IDG_002570DE00740E18C12573B800335866.html > > Which is described as a "an embedded database with in-memory database > engine, which means it can store and retrieve data from main memory, > giving faster performance than traditional disk-based systems." > -- > 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: srielau@ca.ibm.com> > Ball's in your court.> For the same reason Oracle needed TimesTen. That was my point.> > Solid is an in-memory front for an IDS or DB2 system, just like TimesTen > is a front for an Oracle system. Well actually you *didnt* need to acquire an in-memory database. You actually had the beginning of one as part of the real time loader. Ooops! That meant working on an Informix only technology that couldn't readily be adapted to DB2... ;-) BTW, what ever happened to DB2 Extenders? I mean, heck even while at IBM, I couldn't find anyone who could really talk about them... Sort of like Oracle's OO solution. Ooops! Yet again a technology that was before its time. Pokey, you seem to think that the Illustra Acquistion was a waste. It wasn't and if you follow through to today's "web 2.0", the ORDBMs features of IDS should make it the platform of choice in today's e-commerce websites. Especially when you think green. It takes less horsepower to run IDS than eiter Oracle or DB2 to get the level of performance that you want. Again, something IBM hasn't really promoted. LOL IBM and green computing.... Oh and what about when IBM comes out with their cell based blades? IDS *is* already ported to the cell. (PS2 anyone or was that PS3? I don't know. I'm not a gamer) Now that would be an interesting platform to benchmark. Perhaps IBM IM should be proactive and plan something out with their hardware folks rather than jump to do something on DB2 since they already have it set up for TPC-C benchmarks. HINT: HEY IBM... BE PROACTIVE! THINK AND PLAN AHEAD. ITS EASIER THAN DOING A FIREDRILL AND RUN WITH A HALF BAKED SOLUTION... ;-) There. I'm venting and I'm being proactive and dropping polite hints. I wonder if it will sink in. Maybe they'll have people writing articles that appear in CMP and not just DB2 Magazine. (WHICH IS A WHOLE DIFFERENT KIND OF RANT. Non?) But hey! What do I know? I'm just a regular guy who has to gulp down his coffee and run to his day job saving the world from driving themselves blindly in to lakes, ponds and the neighbor's back yard. ;-) -G> > Solid is FEW MB of c-library. If anything it competes with object grid > (which is very simplified speaking it's Java equivalent).> > I am utterly puzzled by your post. Either you have no understanding > whatsoever what in memory databases are being used for (Talk to Mark T > and have him explain) or you just spew nonsense because - heck who knows > why...> > There recently was a thread in this group about the wisdom of choosing > the term "embedded" for IDS. Seems like we're looping back to that one.> > Cheers> Serge> -- > Serge Rielau> DB2 Solutions Development> IBM Toronto Lab> _______________________________________________> Informix-list mailing list> Informix-list@iiug.org> http://www.iiug.org/mailman/listinfo/informix-list _________________________________________________________________ Windows Live Hotmail is giving away Zunes. http://www.windowslive-hotmail.com/ZuneADay/?locale=en-US&ocid=TXT_TAGLM_Mobile_Zune_V3

I would think the question refers somehow to products IBM has in its inventory. On that premise, I'd say you are trying to suggest that the IDS and DB2 offerings are there as forks and knives. But I think this is a false choice. IDS clearly has enough features on its own merits to compete against DB2. This is the problem that IBM has, and refuses to admit. If I'm right as to your suggestion, it is wrong to assume that IDS and DB2 are vastly different, in fact, most of the press has been about how each have gained from each other. But one is clearly the pet, and the other the step-child. That would be a better comparison. There are plenty of IBM people in both IDS and DB2 camps that want the average user to believe in weak arguments, but customers are smarter than you give them credit for. In fact, a lot of would-be customers defer to other products simply because neither DB2 or IDS are marketed well, if at all. That's why Oracle and Microsoft succeed, and IBM has to constantly play catch up. Martin Fuerderer wrote: > Interesting question! > > Another (interesting?) question: > > Why do we use cutlery (i.e. knife, fork, spoon, teaspoon, etc.) > for eating? > Couldn't we just have a swiss army knife and use that instead? > > So, why is nobody asking this question today? > > Because as a civilization we have gone through many years of > development and it is clearly apparent to most people that > having specialized tools for eating (i.e. cutlery) is much better > and easier than using a "one-for-all" tool like a swiss army knife. > We'd use the swiss army knife for something else, but normally > not for eating. > Hypothetically ask the same question to stone age people and > you may well get a different answer (or reaction). > > Last question: > > What can be revealed about the development level of the > person when this person asks a question? > > Think about possible answers ... and have fun! :) > > Regards, > Martin > -- > Martin Fuerderer > IBM Informix Development Munich, Germany > Information Management > > IBM Deutschland Entwicklung GmbH > Chairman of the Supervisory Board: Martin Jetter > Board of Management: Herbert Kircher > Corporate Seat: Boeblingen, Germany > Reg.-Gericht: Amtsgericht Stuttgart, HRB 243294 > > informix-list-bounces@iiug.org wrote on 23.03.2008 17:59:14: > >> Neil Truby wrote: >> >>> But the premise of your question is wrong in any case because, as Eric > >>> points out, ""IDS neither competes with nor represents an alternative > to >>> DB2. Rather, IDS represents an embeddable transaction-oriented RDBMS >>> featuring valuable capabilities that distinguish it from DB2 in a >>> significant way." ! >> Perhaps you might also want to ask why, if IDS, is IBM's answer for >> an embeddable DB they did this? >> >> http://www.nytimes.com/idg/IDG_002570DE00740E18C12573B800335866.html >> >> Which is described as a "an embedded database with in-memory database >> engine, which means it can store and retrieve data from main memory, >> giving faster performance than traditional disk-based systems." >> -- >> 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 >

I'm not sure of how Solid fits into the big picture, but I saw this article and found it interesting. http://weblog.infoworld.com/enterprisemac/archives/2008/03/iphone_20_safar.html This platform is the next big thing right now, but there will be others. In fact, predictions are that the iPhone interface is how future computing platforms are going to look. Ian Michael Gumby wrote: > > > > From: srielau@ca.ibm.com > > > > Ball's in your court. > > For the same reason Oracle needed TimesTen. That was my point. > > > > Solid is an in-memory front for an IDS or DB2 system, just like TimesTen > > is a front for an Oracle system. > > Well actually you *didnt* need to acquire an in-memory database. You > actually had the beginning of one as part of the real time loader. > > Ooops! That meant working on an Informix only technology that couldn't > readily be adapted to DB2... ;-) > > BTW, what ever happened to DB2 Extenders? I mean, heck even while at > IBM, I couldn't find anyone who could really talk about them... Sort of > like Oracle's OO solution. > Ooops! Yet again a technology that was before its time. > > Pokey, you seem to think that the Illustra Acquistion was a waste. It > wasn't and if you follow through to today's "web 2.0", the ORDBMs > features of IDS should make it the platform of choice in today's > e-commerce websites. Especially when you think green. It takes less > horsepower to run IDS than eiter Oracle or DB2 to get the level of > performance that you want. Again, something IBM hasn't really promoted. > LOL IBM and green computing.... > > Oh and what about when IBM comes out with their cell based blades? IDS > *is* already ported to the cell. (PS2 anyone or was that PS3? I don't > know. I'm not a gamer) Now that would be an interesting platform to > benchmark. > > Perhaps IBM IM should be proactive and plan something out with their > hardware folks rather than jump to do something on DB2 since they > already have it set up for TPC-C benchmarks. HINT: HEY IBM... BE > PROACTIVE! THINK AND PLAN AHEAD. ITS EASIER THAN DOING A FIREDRILL AND > RUN WITH A HALF BAKED SOLUTION... ;-) > > There. I'm venting and I'm being proactive and dropping polite hints. I > wonder if it will sink in. > Maybe they'll have people writing articles that appear in CMP and not > just DB2 Magazine. > (WHICH IS A WHOLE DIFFERENT KIND OF RANT. Non?) > > But hey! What do I know? > I'm just a regular guy who has to gulp down his coffee and run to his > day job saving the world from driving themselves blindly in to lakes, > ponds and the neighbor's back yard. ;-) > > -G > > > > Solid is FEW MB of c-library. If anything it competes with object grid > > (which is very simplified speaking it's Java equivalent). > > > > I am utterly puzzled by your post. Either you have no understanding > > whatsoever what in memory databases are being used for (Talk to Mark T > > and have him explain) or you just spew nonsense because - heck who knows > > why... > > > > There recently was a thread in this group about the wisdom of choosing > > the term "embedded" for IDS. Seems like we're looping back to that one. > > > > Cheers > > Serge > > -- > > Serge Rielau > > DB2 Solutions Development > > IBM Toronto Lab > > _______________________________________________ > > Informix-list mailing list > > Informix-list@iiug.org > > http://www.iiug.org/mailman/listinfo/informix-list > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Windows Live Hotmail is giving away Zunes. Enter for your chance to win. > <http://www.windowslive-hotmail.com/ZuneADay/?locale=en-US&ocid=TXT_TAGLM_Mobile_Zune_V1>;

InDeep said: > I'm not sure of how Solid fits into the big picture, but I > saw this article and found it interesting. Depressing, maybe. > http://weblog.infoworld.com/enterprisemac/archives/2008/03/iphone_20_safar.html The guy sounds like a typical techno-geek fanboi wanker. > This platform is the next big thing right now, but there will be > others. In fact, predictions are that the iPhone interface > is how future computing platforms are going to look. Yeah, a device that's too big to be really portable, too small to be legible and too slow to be of any use, with shit battery life. I can see how that's going to take off. -- Bye now, Obnoxio "There were a myriad of problems which conspired to corrupt your reason and rob you of your common sense. Fear got the best of you, and in your panic you turned to the Labour Party. They promised you order, they promised you peace, and all they demanded in return was your silent, obedient consent."

I can always depend on you to see the positive side of things. 8o) Obnoxio The Clown wrote: > InDeep said: >> I'm not sure of how Solid fits into the big picture, but I >> saw this article and found it interesting. > > Depressing, maybe. > >> http://weblog.infoworld.com/enterprisemac/archives/2008/03/iphone_20_safar.html > > The guy sounds like a typical techno-geek fanboi wanker. > >> This platform is the next big thing right now, but there will be >> others. In fact, predictions are that the iPhone interface >> is how future computing platforms are going to look. > > Yeah, a device that's too big to be really portable, too small to be > legible and too slow to be of any use, with shit battery life. I can see > how that's going to take off. >

> From: indeep@indeep.com > Subject: Re: Why you can't trust IBM when it comes to committing to Informix. > Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2008 07:22:16 -0700 > To: informix-list@iiug.org > > I'm not sure of how Solid fits into the big picture, but I > saw this article and found it interesting. > > http://weblog.infoworld.com/enterprisemac/archives/2008/03/iphone_20_safar.html > > This platform is the next big thing right now, but there will be > others. In fact, predictions are that the iPhone interface > is how future computing platforms are going to look. > C-ISAM ??? ;-) competes against Cloudscape/Derby/JavaDB "Serverless" has significant meaning. C/C++ also has meaning. _________________________________________________________________ How well do you know your celebrity gossip? http://originals.msn.com/thebigdebate?ocid=T002MSN03N0707A

InDeep said: > I can always depend on you to see the positive side of things. I'm old enough to remember how the Java was going to to make everything better. And the web. And client/server. And CASE. And 4GLs. And ... The Treo was a better platform for real computing, and look where that is today. You're just looking at a sexy new toy and thinking that it would be nice to admin your SQL server off of it so you can cockwave at your next Star Trek convention. -- Bye now, Obnoxio "There were a myriad of problems which conspired to corrupt your reason and rob you of your common sense. Fear got the best of you, and in your panic you turned to the Labour Party. They promised you order, they promised you peace, and all they demanded in return was your silent, obedient consent."

Obnoxio The Clown wrote: > InDeep said: >> I can always depend on you to see the positive side of things. > > I'm old enough to remember how the Java was going to to make everything > better. And the web. And client/server. And CASE. And 4GLs. And ... > > The Treo was a better platform for real computing, and look where that is > today. You're just looking at a sexy new toy and thinking that it would be > nice to admin your SQL server off of it so you can cockwave at your next > Star Trek convention. > Yah... so what's your point? :-) Seriously if you look at what Apple is doing, they are integrating a lot of Open Source into their stack. Just as much as 4GL was important back in the 80's, the Apple platform is shaking out to be quite impressive. I created an iPhone app as easy as they showed in the video, and did it without having a real device attached to my Mac. Even AppleScript is showing itself as an interesting beast, all because Vista is falling down around the ankles. What are the options outside of Windows Vista? Apple and Linux. Even OSX is simply FreeBSD. The apple-stack suddenly becomes a lot more interesting knowing that Vista and even Windows XP are up for grabs.

Ian Michael Gumby wrote: > > > > From: indeep@indeep.com > > Subject: Re: Why you can't trust IBM when it comes to committing to > Informix. > > Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2008 07:22:16 -0700 > > To: informix-list@iiug.org > > > > I'm not sure of how Solid fits into the big picture, but I > > saw this article and found it interesting. > > > > > http://weblog.infoworld.com/enterprisemac/archives/2008/03/iphone_20_safar.html > > > > This platform is the next big thing right now, but there will be > > others. In fact, predictions are that the iPhone interface > > is how future computing platforms are going to look. > > > > C-ISAM ??? ;-) competes against Cloudscape/Derby/JavaDB > > "Serverless" has significant meaning. C/C++ also has meaning. > A lot of stuff is coming for the iPhone. Even Flash is coming in a version specific for the iPhone, optimized for the platform. I will predict Java will be there before the end of the year.