RE: IBM & Informix
Personally I would choose anything ahead of SQL Server, I need my DBMS to run 24 x 7 and nothing I have seen convinces me SQL Server even comes close. I've never used Oracle, but would need a lot of convincing to convert from the ease of use of IDS. As I have a major influence in the RDBMS the company uses we will be sticking with IDS for the foreseeable future, currently migrating to IDS 9.4 and Tools 7.32 with plans for IDS 10 next year. Keith -> -----Original Message----- -> From: Traveller [mailto:vavavoom_th14@yahoo.co.uk] -> Sent: Monday, November 28, 2005 10:48 AM -> To: informix-list@iiug.org -> Subject: Re: IBM & Informix -> -> -> You are right. They have had no bad press. Just no press and -> as you say -> when you do -> not the know the furture of a product , would you as a -> business make a -> decision to buy in Informix -> as a database when you have the choice of Oracle and MS-SQL server. I -> say nothing about DB2 -> because I have never come across it any enviornments I have -> worked in. -> -> Again my two pence worth as a pi**ed of Informix soon to be -> ex informix -> professional. -> -> -> Traveller -> ********************************************************************************** This message is sent in strict confidence for the addressee only. It may contain legally privileged information. The contents are not to be disclosed to anyone other than the addressee. Unauthorised recipients are requested to preserve this confidentiality and to advise the sender immediately of any error in transmission. This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept for the presence of computer viruses, however we cannot guarantee that this message is free from such problems. ********************************************************************************** sending to informix-list
Simmons, Keith wrote: > Personally I would choose anything ahead of SQL Server, I need > my DBMS to run 24 x 7 and nothing I have seen convinces me SQL > Server even comes close. > I've never used Oracle, but would need a lot of convincing to > convert from the ease of use of IDS. > As I have a major influence in the RDBMS the company uses we will > be sticking with IDS for the foreseeable future, currently migrating > to IDS 9.4 and Tools 7.32 with plans for IDS 10 next year. > > Keith I don't want to be a troll here and talk about Oracle ... so I won't. But as an instructor I am always amazed by statements about the 'ease of use' of any product. From my experience 'what I know' is always easy to use. And 'what I am learning' is always painful no matter which product is the former and which the later. That is not to say there aren't some horrific pieces of garbage out there. But I'd be fascinated to hear from someone that had 10 years of experience with RDBMS 'A' then was forced to use RDBMS 'B' and wrote: "Wow it was so much easier to use." To my experience it has never happened. I remember when I moved from Fortran to Cobol and then Cobol to DB2 to Oracle ... each time, initially, thinking the new product was a horror. -- Daniel A. Morgan http://www.psoug.org damorgan@x.washington.edu (replace x with u to respond)