Re: flagship sunk

"IBM should carefully listen to the points that DoubleEcho and other Informix followers mentioned and it would be encouraging to see immediate results. " Doubelecho etc need to not whine but say how things can be improved. Whine at me I'll tell you to fuck off. IBM people do not have that luxury so they smile and ignore you.

david@smooth1.co.uk wrote: > > "IBM should carefully listen to the points that DoubleEcho and other > Informix followers mentioned and it would be encouraging to see > immediate results. " > > Doubelecho etc need to not whine but say how things can be improved. > > Whine at me I'll tell you to fuck off. IBM people do not have that > luxury so they smile and ignore you. I think this is not fair. DoubleEcho mentioned several points (like IDS downloads without time limit) and we still got no answer on these. BTW I appreciate his comments as he seems to be one of the few people who realize what is really happening. Did you read this: http://www.heise.de/english/newsticker/news/68816 If IBM really takes Informix seriously why can't we see the same offer for IDS Express ? It would have been encouraging if IBM had done the same offer for IDS Express at the SAME moment as for DB2. But this is not the case as you see. Why ? Make a search on news.google.com with the keywords "Informix" and "DB2". Amazing alle these news about DB2 "Viper". A release which is currently in beta and might be available someday in the 2nd half of 2006. Can you see any newer press notice about Informix ? Did you see any news about IDS 10 BEFORE it has been released ? I accept that changing the IBM website might take some time as different teams may be involved. Funny, but the IDS flagship message has been removed by night and they were also been able to substitute the pleasing graphic ("powerful, reliable, secure") with a new, awful one. Visit some customers and talk them about their experience with IBM salespeople in terms of Informix knowledge or awareness of a new strategy. You will be disappointed as the customers are. Come back to reality instead of meeting with the Informix marketing guys and listening to their lies. You have this wonderful IDS feature list, which is a good thing in my opionion. I will do the same and publish a list with marketing requests and encourage everybody to send me an email (eric@herber-consulting.de) with constructive ideas and we will see how things will improve or not. Believe me, I really appreciate any actions that support the further life of the Informix product family. But we have to be realistic and must realize that it is five to twelve. We could no longer wait for anything planned, it has to happen here and now. The new message about Informix has to be distributed in the market, not limited to the eyes of the Informix community only. That's an important point. I think it is fair to give the new IDS product manager Cindy Fung a chance to improve things. But the time is short and we have to control the result of her work soon.

Eric Herber wrote: > david@smooth1.co.uk wrote: > >>"IBM should carefully listen to the points that DoubleEcho and other >>Informix followers mentioned and it would be encouraging to see >>immediate results. " >> >>Doubelecho etc need to not whine but say how things can be improved. >> >>Whine at me I'll tell you to fuck off. IBM people do not have that >>luxury so they smile and ignore you. > > > > I think this is not fair. DoubleEcho mentioned several points (like > IDS downloads without time limit) and we still got no answer on these. > BTW I appreciate his comments as he seems to be one of the few > people who realize what is really happening. > Thanks for your support. I typically don't expect much here, as there are too many too close to the fire to see what is happening. :-) > Did you read this: > > http://www.heise.de/english/newsticker/news/68816 > Yes, another missed opportunity. It is really important to see the lack of parity between DB2 and Informix. And this is not an emotional view, it is important for people to see that if Informix were not purchased by IBM it would be competing with IBM. These two products would be competing openly in the market. IBM basically spared Informix an immediate death in the market, but now it keeps it on a short leash in the basement, away from the ballroom, never able to dance. Oh sure there have been advancements in the product, but technical advancements do not sell product, marketing campaigns sell product. When the sales people show up, they are backed up by a market presence that has been put in place by advertising and marketing programs. This means more than just a web site, a user group, and a few web casts. It means discrete advertising just like Tivoli, Lotus, Rational, and other IBM products. Let the market decide. So what to do... 1. Informix needs its own color on the IBM web site. It needs to be a product of its own, not under the umbrella of DB2 or 'Information Management'. DB2 should be its own product, as it already is. I would suggest a dark navy color similar to the original Informix color as the 'Informix color'. When you visit the IBM site, you should see the new Informix-colored box just like you see the green DB2, the yellow Lotus, the red Tivoli, and the purple WebSphere. This positions Informix as a separate product, a peer product, just as if we go back to the argument about car manufacturers--and I'm supporting the clown's arguments as well as everyone elses. This is consistent with what they insisted on, that you can sell peer products owned by one manufacturer. 2. Redbrick and other U2 type databases should also be moved away from Informix brand. They were purchased by Informix, and have little in common with IDS or XPS. They too need a life of their own. Most IDS users and customers will never touch this product or even understand its use. It is a niche product that also deserves a chance to develop its own market. By keeping it close to Informix it adulterates the Informix brand, and again, it causes confusion. 3. Developer programs. Again, move the handful of Informix developer programs over to a Informix-only developer website and programs. Make sure there are trade-press announcements for developer programs. Make sure ALL the Informix engines are available for download, and take off the crippling timeouts and any other thing that makes it not suitable for production. Today DB2 is good to go from download to production, Informix products should have the same track. When you offer the downloads, make the download area easy to find, and set it up under platform types. This will help technology people find patches, and other products easier. Put the products under platform, and bundle the necessary components as suites, to make sure when you download the server you find the other pieces for the client, etc. Today products are separated by product-type, all the servers in one area, etc. This is tedious and time consuming to have to hunt for everything. And makes it easy to miss something. I shouldn't have to hunt for all the pieces for a Linux machine, or an HP/UX machine, these should be under their own platform. 4. Trade press and other communications should emphasize autonomy of the Informix brand. To be sure we don't want to throw the baby out with the bath water, the advancements to both products via technology sharing are a good thing, but each product should not be held back because one does something better than the other. Let the market decide what they want. Announcements should come ad hoc, infrequently and with competitive energy. 5. Marketing program. There should be real marketing, and real advertising of the Informix brand in trade press and other optimized methods to get the Informix brand out there. In the grand scheme of things IBM gets yet another REAL channel of their name brand ownership out there. It's owned by IBM, but it has a life of its own. Developers and the SMB space should have direct access to products, there needs to be incentives to using the product as a developer, and this will move the product into the widest audience for maximum product exposure. Developers are the first audience to go after, not the last. They will help you inside to get the product into the corporate space. Also start selling Informix pens, pencils, t-shirts, coffee-cups, and make these items promotional give-aways as incentives in developer programs. 6. Continue the efforts by the dedicated people who are on the road to make the product more visible. Get David some help and visibility on the FAQ. :-) 7. Dare I say, take the money away from the IIUG. If you're going to have end-user advocacy, then make sure it is represented honestly. The IIUG is too close to IBM, funded by IBM, and no longer is a voice for Informix users. If you need money, sell memberships and sponsorships, but keep your voice honest, and support the end-user first, not the vendor. Hold an eBay auction and make your way honest. I realize that having an IBM insider linked to your user advocacy is important but it adulterates your autonomy, and your ability to speak your mind. Let's get the IIUG back to real advocacy and real autonomy. Either do that or rename it to IBM Informix User Group, making it clear it is sponsored by IBM. That's all I have for now Eric. I appreciate your insights, and efforts. Keep up the good work. Roll these ideas into your list, and make it so. -DE- > If IBM really takes Informix seriously why can't we see the same > offer for IDS Express ? > > It would have been encouraging if IBM had done the same offer > for IDS Express at the SAME moment as for DB2. But this is not > the case as you see. > > Why ? > > Make a search on news.google.com with the keywords "Informix" > and "DB2". Amazing alle these news about DB2 "Viper". A release > which is currently in beta and might be available someday in the > 2nd half of 2006. > > Can you see any newer press notice about Informix ? > Did you see any news about IDS 10 BEFORE it has been released ? > > I accept that changing the IBM website might take some time@@

Double Echo wrote: > 1. Informix needs its own color on the IBM web site. It needs to be > a product of its own, not under the umbrella of DB2 or 'Information > Management'. > DB2 should be its own product, as it already is. I would suggest a dark > navy color similar to the original Informix color as the 'Informix color'. > When you visit the IBM site, you should see the new Informix-colored box > just > like you see the green DB2, the yellow Lotus, the red Tivoli, and the > purple > WebSphere. > > This positions Informix as a separate product, a peer product, just as > if we > go back to the argument about car manufacturers--and I'm supporting the > clown's arguments as well as everyone elses. This is consistent with what > they insisted on, that you can sell peer products owned by one > manufacturer. Double Echo, You are absolutely missing teh point on this one. IBM SWG is split into themes. It is one thing to say: "DB2 is a relational database product and it's brand name should not have been used for Information Management as a whole" (and it appears that this has been realized and teh change is slowly rolled out). It's quite another to remove a data base engine from information management. Are you saying Informix is so special that it can't even be living in the same town as other DBMS? I know this product and for sure it's users are very special, but THAT special to take the special bus to the special school..? If you wait for this to happen, start playing the lottery and definitely stay away form metal objects when it starts raining. It ain't gonna happen.. If IDS were to eveolve into an entirely different animoal altogether (like DB2 Information Integrator did) then perhaps it could move to Websphere or Rational... But a DBMS is a DBMS is a DBMS. Cheers Serge -- Serge Rielau DB2 Solutions Development DB2 UDB for Linux, Unix, Windows IBM Toronto Lab

Serge Rielau wrote: > Double Echo wrote: > >> 1. Informix needs its own color on the IBM web site. It needs to be >> a product of its own, not under the umbrella of DB2 or 'Information >> Management'. >> DB2 should be its own product, as it already is. I would suggest a dark >> navy color similar to the original Informix color as the 'Informix >> color'. >> When you visit the IBM site, you should see the new Informix-colored >> box just >> like you see the green DB2, the yellow Lotus, the red Tivoli, and the >> purple >> WebSphere. >> >> This positions Informix as a separate product, a peer product, just as >> if we >> go back to the argument about car manufacturers--and I'm supporting the >> clown's arguments as well as everyone elses. This is consistent with >> what >> they insisted on, that you can sell peer products owned by one >> manufacturer. > > Double Echo, > > You are absolutely missing teh point on this one. > IBM SWG is split into themes. It is one thing to say: > "DB2 is a relational database product and it's brand name should not > have been used for Information Management as a whole" (and it appears > that this has been realized and teh change is slowly rolled out). > It's quite another to remove a data base engine from information > management. Fuck that. That is total bullshit. Smart people who buy these products are smarter than you give them credit for. They see IBM buy Informix, and the first words out of their mouth? "It's over". And for the most part it is true. It has been some kind of effort of placating the Informix crowd that this is not the case, but we all know confidence is still under the water line for the future of Informix. The damage is done, but the Informix brand is still the Informix brand and you can't change that no matter WHERE you stick the product. > Are you saying Informix is so special that it can't even be > living in the same town as other DBMS? I know this product and for sure > it's users are very special, but THAT special to take the special bus to > the special school..? > Yes. The same is true for Redbrick or any other BRAND. > If you wait for this to happen, start playing the lottery and definitely > stay away form metal objects when it starts raining. It ain't gonna > happen.. If IDS were to eveolve into an entirely different animoal > altogether (like DB2 Information Integrator did) then perhaps it could > move to Websphere or Rational... But a DBMS is a DBMS is a DBMS. > > Cheers > Serge Serge, Actually YOU are the one missing the point. As I told you the last time stick to your job, and stay away from marketing or anything to do with that. Get back to work on what you are paid to do, and stay away from this topic, you are not paid to market Informix, and if you were, my wish would be that you too would get out of the way. Informix has too many 'friends' like you getting in the way of making it a success. Too many cheerleaders for the status quo, and nothing original or fresh. And I really don't give a rats ass about what themes exist today, or any of that other bullshit. It's all a mess, all too confusing. Nobody can tell you or me what the hell all these products are doing in the same 'department'. It's a failed exersize to push them all into one bucket. Move on. Split them out into discrete BRANDS. Janet Perna is gone, she did her job, now it's time to get the branding corrected. Informix is a separate BRAND not a subset of DB2. Calling it Information Management is about as vague as it gets. When you and others inside IBM get it then it will make sense. Until then we will have to endure more of your stupid comments and more bad moves based on a total lack of understanding of what to do. I laid out specific ideas that if taken to heart would produce measurable results. I would stake my reputation on it. Currently IBM is STRUGGLING with Informix because they DO NOT KNOW WHAT TO DO WITH TWO COMPETING PEER PRODUCTS AND BRANDS. TRUE PARITY would exist under my plan, it does not exist today. Thanks for all your hard work on the SQL compiler, you're doing a great job, now get back to work and stay out the marketing department, you do not have a clue about marketing or branding. Know your role and stick to it.

1. Will never happen IDS is just another database to IBM. DB2 and IDS are two databases and you pick the one that best fits your needs. That is the IBM strategy and will not change. 2. Redbrick/U2. Again they are a just another database to IBM. IBM wants to treat all databases as part of a list and you use the one that best fits your needs. 3. OK that sounds good. An Informix development area. Removing timeouts on trials. So people can take the download, put it into production and not pay IBM for it? In the UK one reseller did this and had an end user with 50 users running in production, had charged the end user for IDS and not paid IBM a bean. IBM found out when the end user talked to IBM and that was the end of non-time limited downloads. 4. OK. The problem is that the Ambuj Goyal does not belive in advertising. I need to meet him and find out why. Luckily I am on the Steering Committe for the UK Usergroup..watch this space. 5. OK. I will mention this to IBM. 6. Thanks! I have had a reply from "Andrew Ford" at IBM that IBM has noticed my Feature Request list. We need to get everyone to add to this list! One central point for IBM to look at. IBM can't say we are not easy to find! 7. The IIUG can do whatever they want. The more people trying to help the better. It does not mean that we can not also club together and talk to IBM. I would say get active in your local usergroup.

david@smooth1.co.uk said: > > > 1. Will never happen IDS is just another database to IBM. DB2 and IDS > are > two databases and you pick the one that best fits your needs. That is > the > IBM strategy and will not change. Sad but true. EchoEcho and the rest of us may well rail against Informix being in the "Information Management" brand, but that's where all the stuff that manages databases goes. IBM's software stack is jaw-droppingly huge and only a very few product groupings exist within the software division. I was actually quite surprised that Rational managed to get their own colour, I would have guessed that they'd wind up being swallowed up by Websphere. I suspect that some of their products have already disappeared into the Purple Pile and that the brand will one day be fully subsumed. When IBM recently bought Omegamon (a Tivoli competitor) they just got shoved straight into the Tivoli brand and colour. Although the scale might be different, conceptually this is exactly what happened with Informix. -- Bye now, Obnoxio "C'est pas parce qu'on n'a rien ' dire qu'il faut fermer sa gueule" - Coluche did i mention i like nulls? heck, i even go so far as to say that all columns in a table except the primary key could/should be nullable. this has certain advantages, for example, if you need to insert a child record and you don't have a parent row for it, just do an insert into the parent table with the primary key value (everything else null), and voila, relational integrity is preserved. but this is, admittedly, a bit controversial among modellers. --r937, dbforums.com

<david@smooth1.co.uk> wrote in message news:1138496739.053520.127160@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com... > > 3. OK that sounds good. An Informix development area. Removing timeouts > on > trials. So people can take the download, put it into production and not > pay IBM > for it? In the UK one reseller did this and had an end user with 50 > users > running in production, had charged the end user for IDS and not paid > IBM a > bean. IBM found out when the end user talked to IBM and that was the > end of > non-time limited downloads. I don't believe this. At least, I don;t believe it as a reason for time-limited downloads. Any reseller worth his salt will have access to Informix software in other ways. I could download almost any IBM software I wanted right now through customers' Passport Advantage sites. What keeps me honest, apart from the fact that I *am* fundamentally honest, is that if I got caught I'd lose my IBM reseller status and might go to prison.

Neil Truby wrote: > <david@smooth1.co.uk> wrote in message > news:1138496739.053520.127160@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com... > >>3. OK that sounds good. An Informix development area. Removing timeouts >>on >>trials. So people can take the download, put it into production and not >>pay IBM >>for it? In the UK one reseller did this and had an end user with 50 >>users >>running in production, had charged the end user for IDS and not paid >>IBM a >>bean. IBM found out when the end user talked to IBM and that was the >>end of >>non-time limited downloads. > > > > I don't believe this. At least, I don;t believe it as a reason for > time-limited downloads. Any reseller worth his salt will have access to > Informix software in other ways. I could download almost any IBM software I > wanted right now through customers' Passport Advantage sites. > > What keeps me honest, apart from the fact that I *am* fundamentally honest, > is that if I got caught I'd lose my IBM reseller status and might go to > prison. > > I know who got this started, in the IIUG, and the thinking is based on some Informix site using Informix in a production environment without getting a license. Interesting to note how 'old school' this thinking is, compare with more modern thought with products from MySQL, and even Microsoft, Oracle and yes IBM DB2. It is a protectionist thought, but is flawed by the reality that developers will hesitate to download or install something they know will timeout. They need the real deal, which only helps the vendor to sell more product. Your inside sales force is your best friend. SQL-Server has a developer version that installs on a desktop, that is everything as much as the production version. And everyone knows the reality of how developers get production-grade database software to learn and play with. This is how you grow your base. Otherwise you will never get your server into the production space where you charge for support. There will be no one to support your sale. ISV's won't port to something they know that nobody is using.

Obnoxio The Clown wrote: > david@smooth1.co.uk said: > >> >>1. Will never happen IDS is just another database to IBM. DB2 and IDS >>are >>two databases and you pick the one that best fits your needs. That is >>the >>IBM strategy and will not change. > > > Sad but true. EchoEcho and the rest of us may well rail against Informix > being in the "Information Management" brand, but that's where all the > stuff that manages databases goes. IBM's software stack is jaw-droppingly > huge and only a very few product groupings exist within the software > division. I was actually quite surprised that Rational managed to get > their own colour, I would have guessed that they'd wind up being swallowed > up by Websphere. I suspect that some of their products have already > disappeared into the Purple Pile and that the brand will one day be fully > subsumed. > Interesting too that the president of Rational stayed on with the brand to help with the transition. There is no visionary ( no pun intended ) for Informix, and I'm guessing that's because of the vegas-style acquisition atmosphere when IBM consumed Informix. It was hot-stocks-gambling, customer acquisition, and the rest is history. We have yet to see anyone in the 'marketing' space offer any kind of vision for Informix, that's probably a big differentiator, and more important that a color-box. But without any kind of vision, you would at least need to show your customers that the brand remains distinct and not just throwing a few bones to the loyal to shut them up. This is where the color-box at least shows a willingness to keep the brand alive. Today, if even possible, they have to play constant defense, and catch-up games, instead of a real marketing message that says anything meaningful. > When IBM recently bought Omegamon (a Tivoli competitor) they just got > shoved straight into the Tivoli brand and colour. Although the scale might > be different, conceptually this is exactly what happened with Informix. > I can almost visualize the shoving.... :-)

Double Echo said: > > Interesting too that the president of Rational stayed on with the brand > to help with the transition. There is no visionary ( no pun intended ) > for Informix, and I'm guessing that's because of the vegas-style > acquisition > atmosphere when IBM consumed Informix. It was hot-stocks-gambling, > customer > acquisition, and the rest is history. We have yet to see anyone in the Well, do you think having the carpetbaggers on board would have helped Informix? :o) (I've noticed that they don't seem to be hanging around for the Ascential transition, either.) Can hardly blame IBM for that, though. -- Bye now, Obnoxio "C'est pas parce qu'on n'a rien ' dire qu'il faut fermer sa gueule" - Coluche did i mention i like nulls? heck, i even go so far as to say that all columns in a table except the primary key could/should be nullable. this has certain advantages, for example, if you need to insert a child record and you don't have a parent row for it, just do an insert into the parent table with the primary key value (everything else null), and voila, relational integrity is preserved. but this is, admittedly, a bit controversial among modellers. --r937, dbforums.com

Obnoxio The Clown wrote: > Double Echo said: > >>Interesting too that the president of Rational stayed on with the brand >>to help with the transition. There is no visionary ( no pun intended ) >>for Informix, and I'm guessing that's because of the vegas-style >>acquisition >>atmosphere when IBM consumed Informix. It was hot-stocks-gambling, >>customer >>acquisition, and the rest is history. We have yet to see anyone in the > > > Well, do you think having the carpetbaggers on board would have helped > Informix? :o) No, you're probably right. Elan Le Blanc's postings imply that she was a legacy dead head, and it appears that a lot of other dead heads were kept around simply because IBM had no clue what to do with the product, wanting only the customer base. It is amazing to see how this product continues to be in the custodial care of idiots who have no clue what to do with it. It's gone from one extreme to the next, from buying race cars to nothing. (I've noticed that they don't seem to be hanging around for > the Ascential transition, either.) > > Can hardly blame IBM for that, though. > I would love to have Phil White back. He's paid for his mistakes, and would probably be one of the few people with any vision and energy for the product. He had great marketing collateral too; the cigar-cutter, and the leather plane-ticket document holder are still my favorites, both I still use.

Double Echo wrote: > Oh sure > there have been advancements in the product, but technical advancements > do not sell product, marketing campaigns sell product. When the sales > people show up, they are backed up by a market presence that has been > put in place by advertising and marketing programs. This means more > than just a web site, a user group, and a few web casts. What you describe "just a web site, a user group, and a few web casts" is what you do to keep an existing customer base from bolting. It will never sold a new license. What you are describing is an effort not to expand the herd but rather to keep getting milk from the same cow. -- Daniel A. Morgan http://www.psoug.org damorgan@x.washington.edu (replace x with u to respond)

Neil Truby wrote: > I don't believe this. At least, I don;t believe it as a reason for > time-limited downloads. Any reseller worth his salt will have access to > Informix software in other ways. I could download almost any IBM software I > wanted right now through customers' Passport Advantage sites. > > What keeps me honest, apart from the fact that I *am* fundamentally honest, > is that if I got caught I'd lose my IBM reseller status and might go to > prison. http://www.oracle.com/technology/software/index.html Says it all. Some companies trust their customers ... some don't. -- Daniel A. Morgan http://www.psoug.org damorgan@x.washington.edu (replace x with u to respond)

DA Morgan wrote: > Double Echo wrote: > >> Oh sure >> there have been advancements in the product, but technical advancements >> do not sell product, marketing campaigns sell product. When the sales >> people show up, they are backed up by a market presence that has been >> put in place by advertising and marketing programs. This means more >> than just a web site, a user group, and a few web casts. > > > What you describe "just a web site, a user group, and a few web casts" > is what you do to keep an existing customer base from bolting. It will > never sold a new license. > > What you are describing is an effort not to expand the herd but rather > to keep getting milk from the same cow. Yes. Understood. But we have seen and known this for 10+ YEARS. It is having a negative effect, one being that there will soon be no one available to support the product external to the owner company, IBM. A self-fulfilling prophecy: "See, nobody is using it, so we can kill it now." . The ENTIRE infrastructure needs to be supported, not just chatter coming from IBM that the product is alive. The entire market has to SEE real advertising and marketing that shows the product is moving forward, not just in maintenance mode. Telling the faithful there is a new release is not advertising, it's just maintenance. Advertising would tell the total market, "Look see, we have something here". Staying in maintenance mode means the product is essentially dead, it's up to the customer to decide on what to switch to. And that friend is the rub. It's been in maintenance mode practically as long as it has been a product! Every incremental release of DB2 has had real marketing and advertising, Informix has not.

DA Morgan wrote: > Neil Truby wrote: > >> I don't believe this. At least, I don;t believe it as a reason for >> time-limited downloads. Any reseller worth his salt will have access >> to Informix software in other ways. I could download almost any IBM >> software I wanted right now through customers' Passport Advantage sites. >> >> What keeps me honest, apart from the fact that I *am* fundamentally >> honest, is that if I got caught I'd lose my IBM reseller status and >> might go to prison. > > > http://www.oracle.com/technology/software/index.html > > Says it all. Some companies trust their customers ... some don't. Yep. Great example! I have the latest SQL-Server download too, it can go right into production, at which time I can work on the TrueUp licensing over time with MS.

DA Morgan said: > > What you are describing is an effort not to expand the herd but rather > to keep getting milk from the same cow. The only way to expand the herd is to shag the cow. -- Bye now, Obnoxio "C'est pas parce qu'on n'a rien ' dire qu'il faut fermer sa gueule" - Coluche did i mention i like nulls? heck, i even go so far as to say that all columns in a table except the primary key could/should be nullable. this has certain advantages, for example, if you need to insert a child record and you don't have a parent row for it, just do an insert into the parent table with the primary key value (everything else null), and voila, relational integrity is preserved. but this is, admittedly, a bit controversial among modellers. --r937, dbforums.com

Obnoxio The Clown wrote: > DA Morgan said: > >>What you are describing is an effort not to expand the herd but rather >>to keep getting milk from the same cow. > > > The only way to expand the herd is to shag the cow. And all you're getting from IBM is is a website and an 800 number. C'est dommage. -- Daniel A. Morgan http://www.psoug.org damorgan@x.washington.edu (replace x with u to respond)

DA Morgan said: > > Obnoxio The Clown wrote: >> DA Morgan said: >> >>>What you are describing is an effort not to expand the herd but rather >>>to keep getting milk from the same cow. >> >> >> The only way to expand the herd is to shag the cow. > > And all you're getting from IBM is is a website and an 800 number. > C'est dommage. 0800-MILK-ME-NOW ... :o) -- Bye now, Obnoxio "C'est pas parce qu'on n'a rien ' dire qu'il faut fermer sa gueule" - Coluche did i mention i like nulls? heck, i even go so far as to say that all columns in a table except the primary key could/should be nullable. this has certain advantages, for example, if you need to insert a child record and you don't have a parent row for it, just do an insert into the parent table with the primary key value (everything else null), and voila, relational integrity is preserved. but this is, admittedly, a bit controversial among modellers. --r937, dbforums.com

Double Echo wrote: <SNIP> > I would love to have Phil White back. He's paid for his mistakes, and > would > probably be one of the few people with any vision and energy for the > product. He > had great marketing collateral too; the cigar-cutter, and the leather > plane-ticket > document holder are still my favorites, both I still use. I'm personally fond of my bright blue Informix swiss army knife. ;-) Art S. Kagel

Obnoxio The Clown wrote: > DA Morgan said: > >>What you are describing is an effort not to expand the herd but rather >>to keep getting milk from the same cow. > > > The only way to expand the herd is to shag the cow. > Unfortunately it looks like they're trying to shag the bull in drag. Art S. Kagel

Obnoxio The Clown wrote: > DA Morgan said: > >>What you are describing is an effort not to expand the herd but rather >>to keep getting milk from the same cow. > > > The only way to expand the herd is to shag the cow. > Unfortunately it looks like they're trying to shag the bull in drag. Art S. Kagel

On Sun, 29 Jan 2006 16:06:29 -0000, "Neil Truby" <neil.truby@ardenta.com> wrote: > ><david@smooth1.co.uk> wrote in message >news:1138496739.053520.127160@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com... >> >> 3. OK that sounds good. An Informix development area. Removing timeouts >> on >> trials. So people can take the download, put it into production and not >> pay IBM >> for it? In the UK one reseller did this and had an end user with 50 >> users >> running in production, had charged the end user for IDS and not paid >> IBM a >> bean. IBM found out when the end user talked to IBM and that was the >> end of >> non-time limited downloads. > > >I don't believe this. At least, I don;t believe it as a reason for >time-limited downloads. Any reseller worth his salt will have access to >Informix software in other ways. I could download almost any IBM software I >wanted right now through customers' Passport Advantage sites. > >What keeps me honest, apart from the fact that I *am* fundamentally honest, >is that if I got caught I'd lose my IBM reseller status and might go to >prison. > Agreed . . .. .it's a problem with IDS but NOT DB2????? JWC