Re: SIS: Talk about a shift in partners...

Obnoxio The Clown wrote: > I'm surprised that Morgan the ACE Director hasn't been along to tell us > about Dice and Oracle jobs yet. Did you know that ACE Directors sign up > to be an official Oracle shill? It does rather call "academic > impartiality" into question. > > http://www.oracle.com/technology/community/oracle_ace/index.html says: > "Oracle ACE Directors work more closely and formally with Oracle in > terms of their community activity." > > I did read the entire website and didn't find any requirement for > pompousness. That must be Daniel's own contribution. Why thank you. I'm flattered. But since you asked: Oracle 18,870 Sybase 1,486 RPG 328 Informix 326 Pick 317 Keeping ahead of Pick and neck-and-neck with RPG. Well done! -- Daniel A. Morgan University of Washington damorgan@x.washington.edu (replace x with u to respond)

DA Morgan wrote: > Obnoxio The Clown wrote: > > >> I'm surprised that Morgan the ACE Director hasn't been along to tell us >> about Dice and Oracle jobs yet. Did you know that ACE Directors sign up >> to be an official Oracle shill? It does rather call "academic >> impartiality" into question. >> >> http://www.oracle.com/technology/community/oracle_ace/index.html says: >> "Oracle ACE Directors work more closely and formally with Oracle in >> terms of their community activity." >> >> I did read the entire website and didn't find any requirement for >> pompousness. That must be Daniel's own contribution. >> > > Why thank you. I'm flattered. > So, Mr Oracle Shill, given that you've formally signed up to promote Oracle, why should we give a rat's ass about your opinion of an Oracle competitor? -- Cheers, Obnoxio the Clown http://obotheclown.blogspot.com

On Aug 26, 6:17 pm, Obnoxio The Clown <obno...@serendipita.com> wrote: > DA Morgan wrote: [SNIP] > > So, Mr Oracle Shill, given that you've formally signed up to promote > Oracle, why should we give a rat's ass about your opinion of an Oracle > competitor? > > -- > Cheers, > Obnoxio the Clown > > http://obotheclown.blogspot.com Oh that is so bad. The fact that you have a couple of schmendricks (sorry Yiddish is a spoken language :-) that want to bash informix, you should be proud. I'm sorry but I don't hate the product. Just the incompetent slackers who claim to be marketing / selling the product to new partners and customers. Don't get me wrong, I like the fact that Cisco is still a great OEM customer. But when you have defections in the bread and butter apps, that's not good. Custom apps? Yeah that's the niche. But IBM hasn't done *anything* to replace NAG and go after the financial marketplace. (THAT IS WHITESPACE!) Oh and Splitntter or spatter what ever name you choose. SIAC mean anything to you? ;-)

Gumpy, I think you need to adapt. I'm concerned that your message is getting lost in a lot of distractions. For one thing, you need to change your name to something more shall we say, "offshore". I'm thinking that maybe you can keep Gumby, but offshore it, something like SriniGumb, or maybe Gumbamurthy, or possibly just Gumbi. This I think will help you reach a more global audience who may not understand your tongue-in-cheek american humor. You also should have a blog, and reach outside the usenet community, just as others have done. Don't let cockgobblers like Sphincter or whoever he is distract you. I'm thinking the next release of IDS should also have a more "offshore" name too. This is something I think we all should be thinking about to get IDS in the hands of as many people around the world as possible. Instead of an animal name for IDS I really hope we see something more futuristic, more imaginative that really reflects the global image and message IDS can bring to the database market. Best Regards, InDeep Ian Michael Gumby wrote: > On Aug 26, 6:17 pm, Obnoxio The Clown <obno...@serendipita.com> wrote: >> DA Morgan wrote: > [SNIP] >> So, Mr Oracle Shill, given that you've formally signed up to promote >> Oracle, why should we give a rat's ass about your opinion of an Oracle >> competitor? >> >> -- >> Cheers, >> Obnoxio the Clown >> >> http://obotheclown.blogspot.com > > Oh that is so bad. > The fact that you have a couple of schmendricks (sorry Yiddish is a > spoken language :-) that want to bash informix, you should be proud. > > I'm sorry but I don't hate the product. Just the incompetent slackers > who claim to be marketing / selling the product to new partners and > customers. > > Don't get me wrong, I like the fact that Cisco is still a great OEM > customer. But when you have defections in the bread and butter apps, > that's not good. > > Custom apps? Yeah that's the niche. But IBM hasn't done *anything* to > replace NAG and go after the financial marketplace. (THAT IS > WHITESPACE!) Oh and Splitntter or spatter what ever name you choose. > SIAC mean anything to you? ;-)

On Aug 26, 10:41 pm, InDeep <ind...@indeep.com> wrote: > Gumpy, > [SNIP] InDeep, Glad you spoke up. Yeah the sockpuppets pop up, but unfortunately you have to address them because ignoring them doesn't work. And you are right to talk about focus on the topic. Trying to push IDS in to the "offshore" market is a joke. Sure you need a global base, and I don't disagree there. However, its not "offshore" but "on shore" in those countries. You can't focus on the "start up" marketplace. Sure one can download IDS and learn it for "free", however, when you put your product out the door, you now have a high percentage of your software margin going to cover your "slightly" discounted IDS that you purchased from IBM. I think the best you can do is 25% off list. Looking to larger companies, try percentage discounts off a level J. Big difference. So you the small startup look towards databases that meet your need that have a much lower price tag. PostgressSQL and MySQL are much less where Postgress is "free". As long as you don't push the product, you're ok. Then you can worry about scalability down the road. Need to improve performance beyond tuning? Buy/lease a bigger box. IBM needs to know where and how to hit a niche that will open other doors. I asked splintard if he new SIAC and the deal done back in December of 2003. He seems to think he knows a lot about me, but I wonder what his "friends" in IBM know. He also doesn't know who I know/knew and who I spoke to within the company. But getting on track with this thread, sales reps will always take the least resistant path. (hmmm just like an electron) So not pushing a product, in the favor, of even a competitor's product so that they can still take away part of the deal... That's life. As OTC points out, nothing new under the sun there. And that's the point. Oracle pushes the hardware deal to IBM who can then capitalize on everything that doesn't interfere with Oracle and heck I think IBM is even a reseller of Oracle so they can take some margin off the top too. But even if they don't. They capture the hardware/services portion of the deal, then also get a new relationship with the customer. IMHO, SIAC was a failure because IBM IM didn't capitalize on the door that was opened. And that was a huge mistake. Efforts to re-open doors elsewhere have fallen on deaf ears. Why? Because it would have required some work and well lets face it. Today's US corporate "leaders" focus on the current quarter and not the deals down the road. No investment in to the future. And that logic is taking hold in B-Schools and corporate middle management. If IBM IM was *truly* interested in seeing IDS succeed, they would have made those investments. The media says that Hillary Clinton's speech was ok, going through the motions, but it wasn't from the heart and many of her supporters where skeptical. That pretty much sums up my feelings about IBM IDS's strategy. Doing things so that you can check off your PBC list saying you at least tried something. So the saleforce partners with Oracle and IDS loses. (As if the IBM salesteam knows IDS exists....) -G

On Aug 27, 7:50 am, Ian Michael Gumby <im_gu...@hotmail.com> wrote: > On Aug 26, 10:41 pm, InDeep <ind...@indeep.com> wrote: > > > Gumpy, > > [SNIP] > > InDeep, > > Glad you spoke up. Yeah the sockpuppets pop up, but unfortunately you > have to address them because ignoring them doesn't work. > And you are right to talk about focus on the topic. > > Trying to push IDS in to the "offshore" market is a joke. Sure you > need a global base, and I don't disagree there. However, its not > "offshore" but "on shore" in those countries. > > You can't focus on the "start up" marketplace. Sure one can download > IDS and learn it for "free", however, when you put your product out > the door, you now have a high percentage of your software margin going > to cover your "slightly" discounted IDS that you purchased from IBM. I > think the best you can do is 25% off list. Looking to larger > companies, try percentage discounts off a level J. Big difference. So > you the small startup look towards databases that meet your need that > have a much lower price tag. PostgressSQL and MySQL are much less > where Postgress is "free". As long as you don't push the product, > you're ok. Then you can worry about scalability down the road. Need to > improve performance beyond tuning? Buy/lease a bigger box. > > IBM needs to know where and how to hit a niche that will open other > doors. > I asked splintard if he new SIAC and the deal done back in December of > 2003. He seems to think he knows a lot about me, but I wonder what his > "friends" in IBM know. He also doesn't know who I know/knew and who I > spoke to within the company. > > But getting on track with this thread, sales reps will always take the > least resistant path. (hmmm just like an electron) So not pushing a > product, in the favor, of even a competitor's product so that they can > still take away part of the deal... That's life. As OTC points out, > nothing new under the sun there. And that's the point. Oracle pushes > the hardware deal to IBM who can then capitalize on everything that > doesn't interfere with Oracle and heck I think IBM is even a reseller > of Oracle so they can take some margin off the top too. But even if > they don't. They capture the hardware/services portion of the deal, > then also get a new relationship with the customer. > > IMHO, SIAC was a failure because IBM IM didn't capitalize on the door > that was opened. And that was a huge mistake. Efforts to re-open doors > elsewhere have fallen on deaf ears. Why? Because it would have > required some work and well lets face it. Today's US corporate > "leaders" focus on the current quarter and not the deals down the > road. No investment in to the future. And that logic is taking hold in > B-Schools and corporate middle management. > > If IBM IM was *truly* interested in seeing IDS succeed, they would > have made those investments.  The media says that Hillary Clinton's > speech was ok, going through the motions, but it wasn't from the heart > and many of her supporters where skeptical. That pretty much sums up > my feelings about IBM IDS's strategy. Doing things so that you can > check off your PBC list saying you at least tried something. > > So the saleforce partners with Oracle and IDS loses. (As if the IBM > salesteam knows IDS exists....) > > -G What is "sock-puppet"? And Gumbi - InDeep not serious. You too ignorant to know difference. My question to those in dialogue with Gumpy - why would you get involved on discussion with writer who knows very little, since he parade that he know everything about any topic raised, and cannot answer simple question from the curious? When person able to answer at length everything raised, a wise man must question what he really know. Or perhaps those who dialogue with Gumball also know very little but want crowd to think differerent. Entertainment value increasing rapidly. How many years you with Informix Gump? It is important for writers to know this thing. Would reveal how little you know of IDS, and how well other long-time Informix employee respect you opinion. Splintter

> From: splintter@ymail.com > Subject: Re: SIS: Talk about a shift in partners... > Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2008 06:36:25 -0700 > To: informix-list@iiug.org > > On Aug 27, 7:50 am, Ian Michael Gumby <im_gu...@hotmail.com> wrote: > > On Aug 26, 10:41 pm, InDeep <ind...@indeep.com> wrote: > > [SNIP] Spintard, you've already outed yourself as a sock puppet. If you don't know what a sock puppet is, then google it. But rather than have a dialogue and participate, all you do is attempt to attack the poster. I know what I know, and apparently, its far more than you do. Why don't you ping your friends about SIAC. Cindy White may still remember it. So to would Deb Landers. But alas, those contacts are probably above your pay grade. ;-) Also, since you pretend/claim to be an IBMer. Why don't you explain to the rest of the world what IBM considers "White Space". Sorry Spintard, I know what I know. And frankly, its a heck of a lot more than you. -G _________________________________________________________________ See what people are saying about Windows Live. Check out featured posts. http://www.windowslive.com/connect?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_connect2_082008

Gumbi, In the global on-line market, everything sells. IBM knows this, and even the dolts on Informix's marketing staff know this. They know they are getting sales, but it is clear that they want to go through the VAR channel. This is where I think and insist that they have really missed web 2.0, which is a much larger market than just pushing product to VARs. If you put it out there, it will sell, this is the mantra of the long tail, however, what I think IBM has failed to realize is that IDS and DB2 are on a combined or merged shopping list, instead of just the IBM list. IDS and DB2 are on the same shopping list as Oracle and MySQL, this is where I think the problem lies. Most of the hands-on developers out there will pay little effort to becoming a channel partner, especially if they have to pay for it, and the same is true about the databases they choose to work with. This is why if you're going to charge money for a program that it fits in line with what people are willing to pay--especially for a product that is essentially an emerging market. Informix has basically to start over from scratch, since the Informix market was basically ruined. Now all those 20-somethings out there that are looking at products are going to go for the easy, cheap products. The colleges and schools are not going to pay for big $$$ items to teach in schools either, despite there being educational discounts. Developers are smarter than that anyway and are going to hunt down real product that equates to real work and real money. Until IBM gets this concept they will continue to push into top tier markets and miss the biggest market of all, web 2.0. -ID- Ian Michael Gumby wrote: > On Aug 26, 10:41 pm, InDeep <ind...@indeep.com> wrote: >> Gumpy, >> > > [SNIP] > > InDeep, > > Glad you spoke up. Yeah the sockpuppets pop up, but unfortunately you > have to address them because ignoring them doesn't work. > And you are right to talk about focus on the topic. > > Trying to push IDS in to the "offshore" market is a joke. Sure you > need a global base, and I don't disagree there. However, its not > "offshore" but "on shore" in those countries. > > You can't focus on the "start up" marketplace. Sure one can download > IDS and learn it for "free", however, when you put your product out > the door, you now have a high percentage of your software margin going > to cover your "slightly" discounted IDS that you purchased from IBM. I > think the best you can do is 25% off list. Looking to larger > companies, try percentage discounts off a level J. Big difference. So > you the small startup look towards databases that meet your need that > have a much lower price tag. PostgressSQL and MySQL are much less > where Postgress is "free". As long as you don't push the product, > you're ok. Then you can worry about scalability down the road. Need to > improve performance beyond tuning? Buy/lease a bigger box. > > IBM needs to know where and how to hit a niche that will open other > doors. > I asked splintard if he new SIAC and the deal done back in December of > 2003. He seems to think he knows a lot about me, but I wonder what his > "friends" in IBM know. He also doesn't know who I know/knew and who I > spoke to within the company. > > But getting on track with this thread, sales reps will always take the > least resistant path. (hmmm just like an electron) So not pushing a > product, in the favor, of even a competitor's product so that they can > still take away part of the deal... That's life. As OTC points out, > nothing new under the sun there. And that's the point. Oracle pushes > the hardware deal to IBM who can then capitalize on everything that > doesn't interfere with Oracle and heck I think IBM is even a reseller > of Oracle so they can take some margin off the top too. But even if > they don't. They capture the hardware/services portion of the deal, > then also get a new relationship with the customer. > > IMHO, SIAC was a failure because IBM IM didn't capitalize on the door > that was opened. And that was a huge mistake. Efforts to re-open doors > elsewhere have fallen on deaf ears. Why? Because it would have > required some work and well lets face it. Today's US corporate > "leaders" focus on the current quarter and not the deals down the > road. No investment in to the future. And that logic is taking hold in > B-Schools and corporate middle management. > > If IBM IM was *truly* interested in seeing IDS succeed, they would > have made those investments. The media says that Hillary Clinton's > speech was ok, going through the motions, but it wasn't from the heart > and many of her supporters where skeptical. That pretty much sums up > my feelings about IBM IDS's strategy. Doing things so that you can > check off your PBC list saying you at least tried something. > > So the saleforce partners with Oracle and IDS loses. (As if the IBM > salesteam knows IDS exists....) > > > -G

Indeep, The answer is a bit more complex and I'll respond later tonight. -G > From: indeep@indeep.com > Subject: Re: SIS: Talk about a shift in partners... > Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2008 07:16:41 -0700 > To: informix-list@iiug.org > > Gumbi, > > In the global on-line market, everything sells. IBM knows this, and > even the dolts on Informix's marketing staff know this. They know > they are getting sales, but it is clear that they want to go through > the VAR channel. This is where I think and insist that they have really > missed web 2.0, which is a much larger market than just pushing product > to VARs. If you put it out there, it will sell, this is the mantra of > the long tail, however, what I think IBM has failed to realize is that > IDS and DB2 are on a combined or merged shopping list, instead of just > the IBM list. IDS and DB2 are on the same shopping list as Oracle and > MySQL, this is where I think the problem lies. Most of the hands-on > developers out there will pay little effort to becoming a channel > partner, especially if they have to pay for it, and the same is true > about the databases they choose to work with. This is why if you're > going to charge money for a program that it fits in line with what > people are willing to pay--especially for a product that is essentially > an emerging market. Informix has basically to start over from scratch, > since the Informix market was basically ruined. Now all those > 20-somethings out there that are looking at products are going to go for > the easy, cheap products. The colleges and schools are not going to pay > for big $$$ items to teach in schools either, despite there being > educational discounts. Developers are smarter than that anyway and are > going to hunt down real product that equates to real work and real > money. Until IBM gets this concept they will continue to push into top > tier markets and miss the biggest market of all, web 2.0. > > -ID- > > > Ian Michael Gumby wrote: > > On Aug 26, 10:41 pm, InDeep <ind...@indeep.com> wrote: > >> Gumpy, > >> > > > > [SNIP] > > > > InDeep, > > > > Glad you spoke up. Yeah the sockpuppets pop up, but unfortunately you > > have to address them because ignoring them doesn't work. > > And you are right to talk about focus on the topic. > > > > Trying to push IDS in to the "offshore" market is a joke. Sure you > > need a global base, and I don't disagree there. However, its not > > "offshore" but "on shore" in those countries. > > > > You can't focus on the "start up" marketplace. Sure one can download > > IDS and learn it for "free", however, when you put your product out > > the door, you now have a high percentage of your software margin going > > to cover your "slightly" discounted IDS that you purchased from IBM. I > > think the best you can do is 25% off list. Looking to larger > > companies, try percentage discounts off a level J. Big difference. So > > you the small startup look towards databases that meet your need that > > have a much lower price tag. PostgressSQL and MySQL are much less > > where Postgress is "free". As long as you don't push the product, > > you're ok. Then you can worry about scalability down the road. Need to > > improve performance beyond tuning? Buy/lease a bigger box. > > > > IBM needs to know where and how to hit a niche that will open other > > doors. > > I asked splintard if he new SIAC and the deal done back in December of > > 2003. He seems to think he knows a lot about me, but I wonder what his > > "friends" in IBM know. He also doesn't know who I know/knew and who I > > spoke to within the company. > > > > But getting on track with this thread, sales reps will always take the > > least resistant path. (hmmm just like an electron) So not pushing a > > product, in the favor, of even a competitor's product so that they can > > still take away part of the deal... That's life. As OTC points out, > > nothing new under the sun there. And that's the point. Oracle pushes > > the hardware deal to IBM who can then capitalize on everything that > > doesn't interfere with Oracle and heck I think IBM is even a reseller > > of Oracle so they can take some margin off the top too. But even if > > they don't. They capture the hardware/services portion of the deal, > > then also get a new relationship with the customer. > > > > IMHO, SIAC was a failure because IBM IM didn't capitalize on the door > > that was opened. And that was a huge mistake. Efforts to re-open doors > > elsewhere have fallen on deaf ears. Why? Because it would have > > required some work and well lets face it. Today's US corporate > > "leaders" focus on the current quarter and not the deals down the > > road. No investment in to the future. And that logic is taking hold in > > B-Schools and corporate middle management. > > > > If IBM IM was *truly* interested in seeing IDS succeed, they would > > have made those investments. The media says that Hillary Clinton's > > speech was ok, going through the motions, but it wasn't from the heart > > and many of her supporters where skeptical. That pretty much sums up > > my feelings about IBM IDS's strategy. Doing things so that you can > > check off your PBC list saying you at least tried something. > > > > So the saleforce partners with Oracle and IDS loses. (As if the IBM > > salesteam knows IDS exists....) > > > > > > -G > > _______________________________________________ > Informix-list mailing list > Informix-list@iiug.org > http://www.iiug.org/mailman/listinfo/informix-list _________________________________________________________________ See what people are saying about Windows Live. Check out featured posts. http://www.windowslive.com/connect?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_connect2_082008