Re: XPS to IDS - a positive note for all from the road

On 27 Aug, 15:52, InDeep <ind...@indeep.com> wrote: > Ok, and so what is the point? > > If you can't download XPS and play with it, what's the point?  That if > you were one of the handful of what 2 or 3 customers that are actually > using XPS that you can get the upgrade?   Sorry to rain cynicism on your > parade, it's all nice to hear, but doesn't amount to much of anything > other than nice news. > > And why would you downshift from XPS to an OLTP engine if the whole > point to XPS was to offer features you can't do with IDS, such as real > database clustering.  FWIW I actually was an XPS DBA, so I have a bit > of experience with the product, probably one of a handful of people on > the entire planet that actually used it hands-on as a customer.  Another > great product that nobody knows about. > > Mark Scranton (Xtivia Inc.) wrote: > > > > > As I had mentioned, I've been doing a number of XPS assignments > > lately. Good news is that these customers are ALL considering moving > > their XPS environments to IDS (along with doing POC's against other > > products). Some of the clients have relatively small XPS environments, > > so IDS in most cases will work fine. > > > Rumor also has it that even though it was stated awhile back that IBM > > would not make anymore enhancements to XPS, a German bank wanted the > > "multiple fragments in a single dbspace" feature that came out in IDS > > 10 to be ported to XPS, and in fact, paid for the port. I have no idea > > IF this new port will be 8.5.2 or what, but this approach was > > something that was done at Informix back in the day as well (having a > > customer pay for a port they want). > > > So I encourage those with XPS in house, or those working with clients > > that fit that description, to strongly consider IDS for a move if they > > are considering one. There are a few things to consider though first - > > I'm not saying it just as easy as moving to IDS and all is well. There > > are functionalities and internals that need to be considered in most > > cases. > > > IF you want more details, please contact me directly at > > mark.scran...@xtivia.com. Would be glad to answer any questions. > > > Thanks - > > Mark Scranton > > Xtivia Inc. > >www.markscranton.com- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - Also where is the IDS equivalent of DB2 DPF? Oracle has RAC DB2 has DPF Sybase now has Cluster Edition and Informix has? This is why people I know say Informix is not a contender for serious systems, it cannot deploy a database aroudn mulitple hosts.

david@smooth1.co.uk wrote: > On 27 Aug, 15:52, InDeep <ind...@indeep.com> wrote: > >> Ok, and so what is the point? >> >> If you can't download XPS and play with it, what's the point? That if >> you were one of the handful of what 2 or 3 customers that are actually >> using XPS that you can get the upgrade? Sorry to rain cynicism on your >> parade, it's all nice to hear, but doesn't amount to much of anything >> other than nice news. >> >> And why would you downshift from XPS to an OLTP engine if the whole >> point to XPS was to offer features you can't do with IDS, such as real >> database clustering. FWIW I actually was an XPS DBA, so I have a bit >> of experience with the product, probably one of a handful of people on >> the entire planet that actually used it hands-on as a customer. Another >> great product that nobody knows about. >> >> Mark Scranton (Xtivia Inc.) wrote: >> >> >> >> >>> As I had mentioned, I've been doing a number of XPS assignments >>> lately. Good news is that these customers are ALL considering moving >>> their XPS environments to IDS (along with doing POC's against other >>> products). Some of the clients have relatively small XPS environments, >>> so IDS in most cases will work fine. >>> >>> Rumor also has it that even though it was stated awhile back that IBM >>> would not make anymore enhancements to XPS, a German bank wanted the >>> "multiple fragments in a single dbspace" feature that came out in IDS >>> 10 to be ported to XPS, and in fact, paid for the port. I have no idea >>> IF this new port will be 8.5.2 or what, but this approach was >>> something that was done at Informix back in the day as well (having a >>> customer pay for a port they want). >>> >>> So I encourage those with XPS in house, or those working with clients >>> that fit that description, to strongly consider IDS for a move if they >>> are considering one. There are a few things to consider though first - >>> I'm not saying it just as easy as moving to IDS and all is well. There >>> are functionalities and internals that need to be considered in most >>> cases. >>> >>> IF you want more details, please contact me directly at >>> mark.scran...@xtivia.com. Would be glad to answer any questions. >>> >>> Thanks - >>> Mark Scranton >>> Xtivia Inc. >>> www.markscranton.com- Hide quoted text - >>> >> - Show quoted text - >> > > Also where is the IDS equivalent of DB2 DPF? > > Oracle has RAC > DB2 has DPF > Sybase now has Cluster Edition > > and Informix has? SDS? > This is why people I know say Informix is not a > contender for serious systems, it cannot deploy a database > aroudn mulitple hosts. Haven't you been paying attention? It can do so, it can do so very easily and it scales as well. Unlike RAC. -- Cheers, Obnoxio the Clown http://obotheclown.blogspot.com

----- Original Message ----- From: <david@smooth1.co.uk> Newsgroups: comp.databases.informix To: <informix-list@iiug.org> Sent: Saturday, August 30, 2008 10:14 AM Subject: Re: XPS to IDS - a positive note for all from the road On 27 Aug, 15:52, InDeep <ind...@indeep.com> wrote: > Ok, and so what is the point? > > If you can't download XPS and play with it, what's the point? That if > you were one of the handful of what 2 or 3 customers that are actually > using XPS that you can get the upgrade? Sorry to rain cynicism on your > parade, it's all nice to hear, but doesn't amount to much of anything > other than nice news. > > And why would you downshift from XPS to an OLTP engine if the whole > point to XPS was to offer features you can't do with IDS, such as real > database clustering. FWIW I actually was an XPS DBA, so I have a bit > of experience with the product, probably one of a handful of people on > the entire planet that actually used it hands-on as a customer. Another > great product that nobody knows about. > > Mark Scranton (Xtivia Inc.) wrote: > > > > > As I had mentioned, I've been doing a number of XPS assignments > > lately. Good news is that these customers are ALL considering moving > > their XPS environments to IDS (along with doing POC's against other > > products). Some of the clients have relatively small XPS environments, > > so IDS in most cases will work fine. > > > Rumor also has it that even though it was stated awhile back that IBM > > would not make anymore enhancements to XPS, a German bank wanted the > > "multiple fragments in a single dbspace" feature that came out in IDS > > 10 to be ported to XPS, and in fact, paid for the port. I have no idea > > IF this new port will be 8.5.2 or what, but this approach was > > something that was done at Informix back in the day as well (having a > > customer pay for a port they want). > > > So I encourage those with XPS in house, or those working with clients > > that fit that description, to strongly consider IDS for a move if they > > are considering one. There are a few things to consider though first - > > I'm not saying it just as easy as moving to IDS and all is well. There > > are functionalities and internals that need to be considered in most > > cases. > > > IF you want more details, please contact me directly at > > mark.scran...@xtivia.com. Would be glad to answer any questions. > > > Thanks - > > Mark Scranton > > Xtivia Inc. > >www.markscranton.com- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - Also where is the IDS equivalent of DB2 DPF? Oracle has RAC DB2 has DPF Sybase now has Cluster Edition and Informix has? This is why people I know say Informix is not a contender for serious systems, it cannot deploy a database aroudn mulitple hosts. What about Mach 11? Multiple updateable Shared Disk Secondarys or Multiple updateable Remote Standalone Secondarys? I think RSS has an edge over RAC because it does not need to share the same storage subsystem and can provide geographical redundancy. Andrew _______________________________________________ Informix-list mailing list Informix-list@iiug.org http://www.iiug.org/mailman/listinfo/informix-list

Obnoxio The Clown wrote: > david@smooth1.co.uk wrote: >> On 27 Aug, 15:52, InDeep <ind...@indeep.com> wrote: >> >>> Ok, and so what is the point? >>> >>> If you can't download XPS and play with it, what's the point? That if >>> you were one of the handful of what 2 or 3 customers that are actually >>> using XPS that you can get the upgrade? Sorry to rain cynicism on your >>> parade, it's all nice to hear, but doesn't amount to much of anything >>> other than nice news. >>> >>> And why would you downshift from XPS to an OLTP engine if the whole >>> point to XPS was to offer features you can't do with IDS, such as real >>> database clustering. FWIW I actually was an XPS DBA, so I have a bit >>> of experience with the product, probably one of a handful of people on >>> the entire planet that actually used it hands-on as a customer. Another >>> great product that nobody knows about. >>> >>> Mark Scranton (Xtivia Inc.) wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>> As I had mentioned, I've been doing a number of XPS assignments >>>> lately. Good news is that these customers are ALL considering moving >>>> their XPS environments to IDS (along with doing POC's against other >>>> products). Some of the clients have relatively small XPS environments, >>>> so IDS in most cases will work fine. >>>> Rumor also has it that even though it was stated awhile back >>>> that IBM >>>> would not make anymore enhancements to XPS, a German bank wanted the >>>> "multiple fragments in a single dbspace" feature that came out in IDS >>>> 10 to be ported to XPS, and in fact, paid for the port. I have no idea >>>> IF this new port will be 8.5.2 or what, but this approach was >>>> something that was done at Informix back in the day as well (having a >>>> customer pay for a port they want). >>>> So I encourage those with XPS in house, or those working with >>>> clients >>>> that fit that description, to strongly consider IDS for a move if they >>>> are considering one. There are a few things to consider though first - >>>> I'm not saying it just as easy as moving to IDS and all is well. There >>>> are functionalities and internals that need to be considered in most >>>> cases. >>>> IF you want more details, please contact me directly at >>>> mark.scran...@xtivia.com. Would be glad to answer any questions. >>>> Thanks - >>>> Mark Scranton >>>> Xtivia Inc. >>>> www.markscranton.com- Hide quoted text - >>>> >>> - Show quoted text - >>> >> >> Also where is the IDS equivalent of DB2 DPF? >> >> Oracle has RAC >> DB2 has DPF >> Sybase now has Cluster Edition >> >> and Informix has? > SDS? > >> This is why people I know say Informix is not a >> contender for serious systems, it cannot deploy a database >> aroudn mulitple hosts. > > Haven't you been paying attention? It can do so, it can do so very > easily and it scales as well. > > Unlike RAC. > yeah but customers are willing to blow money on RAC, even if it isn't good because management can't go wrong deploying Oracle. They buy the application, and the app says it has to go on RAC. It's a win-win for everyone. IBM needs to have apps like Oracle does, and insist that the app goes on either DB2 or IDS. It'll never happen because IBM sells too much hardware for RAC systems, so why hurt their own hardware sales by diverting people to DB2 or IDS. They can't even get a straight DB2 & hardware sale done without hurting either the software sale or the hardware sale in one form or another. Oracle is different because they don't have to fight against their own hardware sales.

InDeep wrote: > Obnoxio The Clown wrote: > >> david@smooth1.co.uk wrote: >> >>> On 27 Aug, 15:52, InDeep <ind...@indeep.com> wrote: >>> >>> >>>> Ok, and so what is the point? >>>> >>>> If you can't download XPS and play with it, what's the point? That if >>>> you were one of the handful of what 2 or 3 customers that are actually >>>> using XPS that you can get the upgrade? Sorry to rain cynicism on your >>>> parade, it's all nice to hear, but doesn't amount to much of anything >>>> other than nice news. >>>> >>>> And why would you downshift from XPS to an OLTP engine if the whole >>>> point to XPS was to offer features you can't do with IDS, such as real >>>> database clustering. FWIW I actually was an XPS DBA, so I have a bit >>>> of experience with the product, probably one of a handful of people on >>>> the entire planet that actually used it hands-on as a customer. Another >>>> great product that nobody knows about. >>>> >>>> Mark Scranton (Xtivia Inc.) wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> As I had mentioned, I've been doing a number of XPS assignments >>>>> lately. Good news is that these customers are ALL considering moving >>>>> their XPS environments to IDS (along with doing POC's against other >>>>> products). Some of the clients have relatively small XPS environments, >>>>> so IDS in most cases will work fine. >>>>> Rumor also has it that even though it was stated awhile back >>>>> that IBM >>>>> would not make anymore enhancements to XPS, a German bank wanted the >>>>> "multiple fragments in a single dbspace" feature that came out in IDS >>>>> 10 to be ported to XPS, and in fact, paid for the port. I have no idea >>>>> IF this new port will be 8.5.2 or what, but this approach was >>>>> something that was done at Informix back in the day as well (having a >>>>> customer pay for a port they want). >>>>> So I encourage those with XPS in house, or those working with >>>>> clients >>>>> that fit that description, to strongly consider IDS for a move if they >>>>> are considering one. There are a few things to consider though first - >>>>> I'm not saying it just as easy as moving to IDS and all is well. There >>>>> are functionalities and internals that need to be considered in most >>>>> cases. >>>>> IF you want more details, please contact me directly at >>>>> mark.scran...@xtivia.com. Would be glad to answer any questions. >>>>> Thanks - >>>>> Mark Scranton >>>>> Xtivia Inc. >>>>> www.markscranton.com- Hide quoted text - >>>>> >>>>> >>>> - Show quoted text - >>>> >>>> >>> Also where is the IDS equivalent of DB2 DPF? >>> >>> Oracle has RAC >>> DB2 has DPF >>> Sybase now has Cluster Edition >>> >>> and Informix has? >>> >> SDS? >> >> >>> This is why people I know say Informix is not a >>> contender for serious systems, it cannot deploy a database >>> aroudn mulitple hosts. >>> >> Haven't you been paying attention? It can do so, it can do so very >> easily and it scales as well. >> >> Unlike RAC. >> >> > > yeah but customers are willing to blow money on RAC, even if it isn't > good because management can't go wrong deploying Oracle. They buy the > application, and the app says it has to go on RAC. It's a win-win for > everyone. IBM needs to have apps like Oracle does, and insist that the > app goes on either DB2 or IDS. It'll never happen because IBM sells too > much hardware for RAC systems, so why hurt their own hardware sales by > diverting people to DB2 or IDS. They can't even get a straight DB2 & > hardware sale done without hurting either the software sale or the hardware > sale in one form or another. Oracle is different because they don't have > to fight against their own hardware sales. > > Next time I see Sam, I'll tell him to shut down those extraneous hardware and consulting divisions. They don't generate any money anyway. And I'll get him to flog off Websphere as well, because that runs more on Oracle than IDS. And Rational. And Tivoli. And I'll tell him to get rid of DB2 as well, because it competes with IDS. Then, I'll tell him to concentrate on the behemoth that's left: Lotus and IDS. I'm sure he'll listen to me. I'll tell him you sent me. -- Cheers, Obnoxio the Clown http://obotheclown.blogspot.com

david@smooth1.co.uk wrote: > Also where is the IDS equivalent of DB2 DPF? That is XPS... or rather it was "Arrowhead" > Oracle has RAC > DB2 has DPF Apples and Oranges. If you want to compare you have to compare RAC to DB2 on a Sysplex Cheers Serge -- Serge Rielau DB2 Solutions Development IBM Toronto Lab

Serge Rielau wrote: > david@smooth1.co.uk wrote: > >> Also where is the IDS equivalent of DB2 DPF? >> > That is XPS... or rather it was "Arrowhead" > > >> Oracle has RAC >> DB2 has DPF >> > Apples and Oranges. > If you want to compare you have to compare RAC to DB2 on a Sysplex > How DARE you contradict the all-knowing Gumby? Don't you know that he's busy developing a paradigm-shifting Unicode geodetic, etc.? :o) -- Cheers, Obnoxio the Clown http://obotheclown.blogspot.com

Obnoxio The Clown wrote: > Serge Rielau wrote: >> david@smooth1.co.uk wrote: >>> Also where is the IDS equivalent of DB2 DPF? >> That is XPS... or rather it was "Arrowhead" >>> Oracle has RAC >>> DB2 has DPF >> Apples and Oranges. >> If you want to compare you have to compare RAC to DB2 on a Sysplex > How DARE you contradict the all-knowing Gumby? Don't you know that he's > busy developing a paradigm-shifting Unicode geodetic, etc.? *peep*But, but, but, ... I didn't .. I contradicted David...*buahhh* -- Serge Rielau DB2 Solutions Development IBM Toronto Lab

InDeep wrote: > > > Obnoxio The Clown wrote: >> david@smooth1.co.uk wrote: >>> On 27 Aug, 15:52, InDeep <ind...@indeep.com> wrote: >>> >>>> Ok, and so what is the point? >>>> >>>> If you can't download XPS and play with it, what's the point? That if >>>> you were one of the handful of what 2 or 3 customers that are actually >>>> using XPS that you can get the upgrade? Sorry to rain cynicism on >>>> your >>>> parade, it's all nice to hear, but doesn't amount to much of anything >>>> other than nice news. >>>> >>>> And why would you downshift from XPS to an OLTP engine if the whole >>>> point to XPS was to offer features you can't do with IDS, such as real >>>> database clustering. FWIW I actually was an XPS DBA, so I have a bit >>>> of experience with the product, probably one of a handful of people on >>>> the entire planet that actually used it hands-on as a customer. >>>> Another >>>> great product that nobody knows about. >>>> >>>> Mark Scranton (Xtivia Inc.) wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> As I had mentioned, I've been doing a number of XPS assignments >>>>> lately. Good news is that these customers are ALL considering moving >>>>> their XPS environments to IDS (along with doing POC's against other >>>>> products). Some of the clients have relatively small XPS environments, >>>>> so IDS in most cases will work fine. >>>>> Rumor also has it that even though it was stated awhile back >>>>> that IBM >>>>> would not make anymore enhancements to XPS, a German bank wanted the >>>>> "multiple fragments in a single dbspace" feature that came out in IDS >>>>> 10 to be ported to XPS, and in fact, paid for the port. I have no idea >>>>> IF this new port will be 8.5.2 or what, but this approach was >>>>> something that was done at Informix back in the day as well (having a >>>>> customer pay for a port they want). >>>>> So I encourage those with XPS in house, or those working with >>>>> clients >>>>> that fit that description, to strongly consider IDS for a move if they >>>>> are considering one. There are a few things to consider though first - >>>>> I'm not saying it just as easy as moving to IDS and all is well. There >>>>> are functionalities and internals that need to be considered in most >>>>> cases. >>>>> IF you want more details, please contact me directly at >>>>> mark.scran...@xtivia.com. Would be glad to answer any questions. >>>>> Thanks - >>>>> Mark Scranton >>>>> Xtivia Inc. >>>>> www.markscranton.com- Hide quoted text - >>>>> >>>> - Show quoted text - >>>> >>> >>> Also where is the IDS equivalent of DB2 DPF? >>> >>> Oracle has RAC >>> DB2 has DPF >>> Sybase now has Cluster Edition >>> >>> and Informix has? >> SDS? >> >>> This is why people I know say Informix is not a >>> contender for serious systems, it cannot deploy a database >>> aroudn mulitple hosts. >> >> Haven't you been paying attention? It can do so, it can do so very >> easily and it scales as well. >> >> Unlike RAC. >> > > yeah but customers are willing to blow money on RAC, even if it isn't > good because management can't go wrong deploying Oracle. They buy the > application, and the app says it has to go on RAC. It's a win-win for > everyone. IBM needs to have apps like Oracle does, and insist that the > app goes on either DB2 or IDS. It'll never happen because IBM sells too > much hardware for RAC systems, so why hurt their own hardware sales by > diverting people to DB2 or IDS. They can't even get a straight DB2 & > hardware sale done without hurting either the software sale or the hardware > sale in one form or another. Oracle is different because they don't have > to fight against their own hardware sales. The decision was not Oracle's it was IBM's. Oracle went to both IBM and Microsoft and offered them help in making their databases compatible with the apps. IBM chose to do it with DB2, thus the new compatibility features, and Microsoft chose to do it with SQL Server 2008 which they now loudly trumpet as "Certified by Oracle." IBM makes good business decisions ... for IBM the corporation. That may or may not translate to a good decision for a specific product. -- Daniel A. Morgan University of Washington damorgan@x.washington.edu (replace x with u to respond)

DA Morgan wrote: > Oracle went to both IBM and Microsoft and offered them help in making > their databases compatible with the apps. IBM chose to do it with DB2, > thus the new compatibility features..." Daniel, You imply that there is an agreement between Oracle and IBM to make DB2 for LUW compatible with Oracle apps. I lead the team that did the work and can with certainty say this is incorrect. Cheers Serge -- Serge Rielau DB2 Solutions Development IBM Toronto Lab

On Aug 30, 10:44 am, "Andrew Ford" <af...@networkip.net> wrote: > What about Mach 11? > > Multiple updateable Shared Disk Secondarys or Multiple updateable Remote Standalone Secondarys? > > I think RSS has an edge over RAC because it does not need to share the same storage subsystem and can provide geographical > redundancy. > > Andrew > Interesting is that part of Express ?

On Aug 30, 11:41 am, Obnoxio The Clown <obno...@serendipita.com> wrote: > > Apples and Oranges. > > If you want to compare you have to compare RAC to DB2 on a Sysplex > > How DARE you contradict the all-knowing Gumby? Don't you know that he's > busy developing a paradigm-shifting Unicode geodetic, etc.? > > :o) > > -- > Cheers, > Obnoxio the Clown > > http://obotheclown.blogspot.com Actually, he makes my point well. XPS disappeared because it competed with DB2. As to RAC, I may get a chance to play with it shortly. However... I've seen machines slow to a crawl because they have two instances of Oracle (9 and 10). So I'm not impressed with Oracle.... As to Unicode, yeah, it sucks cause I can't read Thai so I don't know if what I want is working. ;-)

Serge Rielau wrote: > DA Morgan wrote: >> Oracle went to both IBM and Microsoft and offered them help in making >> their databases compatible with the apps. IBM chose to do it with DB2, >> thus the new compatibility features..." > Daniel, > > You imply that there is an agreement between Oracle and IBM to make DB2 > for LUW compatible with Oracle apps. I lead the team that did the work > and can with certainty say this is incorrect. > > Cheers > Serge Are you saying that a JD Edwards customer must now abandon DB2? Are you saying that someone wanting to run any Oracle App on DB2 must now go with either Oracle or Microsoft? That's not what I have heard so please correct any misunderstanding. -- Daniel A. Morgan University of Washington damorgan@x.washington.edu (replace x with u to respond)

Ian Michael Gumby wrote: > On Aug 30, 11:41 am, Obnoxio The Clown <obno...@serendipita.com> > wrote: > >>> Apples and Oranges. >>> If you want to compare you have to compare RAC to DB2 on a Sysplex >> How DARE you contradict the all-knowing Gumby? Don't you know that he's >> busy developing a paradigm-shifting Unicode geodetic, etc.? >> >> :o) >> >> -- >> Cheers, >> Obnoxio the Clown >> >> http://obotheclown.blogspot.com > > Actually, he makes my point well. > XPS disappeared because it competed with DB2. > > As to RAC, I may get a chance to play with it shortly. However... I've > seen machines slow to a crawl because they have two instances of > Oracle (9 and 10). So I'm not impressed with Oracle.... You should be directing your ire at the DBA. There is no excuse for what you described other than either incompetence or not paying attention. -- Daniel A. Morgan University of Washington damorgan@x.washington.edu (replace x with u to respond)

Ian Michael Gumby said: > On Aug 30, 10:44 am, "Andrew Ford" <af...@networkip.net> wrote: > >> What about Mach 11? >> >> Multiple updateable Shared Disk Secondarys or Multiple updateable Remote >> Standalone Secondarys? >> >> I think RSS has an edge over RAC because it does not need to share the >> same storage subsystem and can provide geographical >> redundancy. >> >> Andrew >> > Interesting is that part of Express ? That is entirely irrelevant to the discussion. Or are you saying that you can buy DB2 DPF Express Edition? -- Bye now, Obnoxio http://obotheclown.blogspot.com/

DA Morgan said: > Serge Rielau wrote: >> DA Morgan wrote: >>> Oracle went to both IBM and Microsoft and offered them help in making >>> their databases compatible with the apps. IBM chose to do it with DB2, >>> thus the new compatibility features..." >> Daniel, >> >> You imply that there is an agreement between Oracle and IBM to make DB2 >> for LUW compatible with Oracle apps. I lead the team that did the work >> and can with certainty say this is incorrect. > > Are you saying that a JD Edwards customer must now abandon DB2? > > Are you saying that someone wanting to run any Oracle App on DB2 > must now go with either Oracle or Microsoft? > > That's not what I have heard so please correct any misunderstanding. Perhaps IBM was making the changes to DB2 to make it easier for Oracle vendors to port to DB2, you never know. I hope your students are better served by your Oracle skills than your logic. -- Bye now, Obnoxio http://obotheclown.blogspot.com/

"Obnoxio The Clown" <obnoxio@serendipita.com> wrote in message news:mailman.1657.1220138711.20610.informix-list@iiug.org... Ian Michael Gumby said: > Interesting is that part of Express ? That is entirely irrelevant to the discussion. Or are you saying that you can buy DB2 DPF Express Edition? I wonder if he may be juxtaposing your argument yesterday - "IDS Express is good and cheap" - with today's argument - "IDS has features that make it better than RAC" - for mischievous effect ...?

Captain Pedantic said: > "Obnoxio The Clown" <obnoxio@serendipita.com> wrote in message > news:mailman.1657.1220138711.20610.informix-list@iiug.org... > > Ian Michael Gumby said: >> Interesting is that part of Express ? > > That is entirely irrelevant to the discussion. Or are you saying that you > can buy DB2 DPF Express Edition? > > I wonder if he may be juxtaposing your argument yesterday - "IDS Express > is > good and cheap" - with today's argument - "IDS has features that make it > better than RAC" - for mischievous effect ...? OK, you do the pricing and get back to us. -- Bye now, Obnoxio http://obotheclown.blogspot.com/

DA Morgan wrote: > Serge Rielau wrote: >> DA Morgan wrote: >>> Oracle went to both IBM and Microsoft and offered them help in making >>> their databases compatible with the apps. IBM chose to do it with DB2, >>> thus the new compatibility features..." >> Daniel, >> >> You imply that there is an agreement between Oracle and IBM to make >> DB2 for LUW compatible with Oracle apps. I lead the team that did the >> work and can with certainty say this is incorrect. >> >> Cheers >> Serge > > Are you saying that a JD Edwards customer must now abandon DB2? > > Are you saying that someone wanting to run any Oracle App on DB2 > must now go with either Oracle or Microsoft? > > That's not what I have heard so please correct any misunderstanding. JD Edwards is and was already compatible with DB2 prior to the acquisition. Peoplesoft is and was already compatible with DB2 prior to the acquisition. Siebel is and was already compatible with DB2 prior to the acquisition. "Making compatible" implies support for something that wasn't before. Say for "heritage" Oracle Apps. We used to have a Peoplesoft team on site in Toronto. They left the day of the acquisition. There are no requirements or offers for help from Oracle to make DB2 for LUW compatible with Oracle apps. I do talk a lot with ISVs (with a capital "I") though, so it's not that I'm feeling lonely. :-) It is those ISVs who have influenced the DB2 9.5 compatibility features, NOT Oracle. Cheers Serge -- Serge Rielau DB2 Solutions Development IBM Toronto Lab

Obnoxio The Clown wrote: > InDeep wrote: >> Obnoxio The Clown wrote: >> >>> david@smooth1.co.uk wrote: >>> >>>> On 27 Aug, 15:52, InDeep <ind...@indeep.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>> Ok, and so what is the point? >>>>> >>>>> If you can't download XPS and play with it, what's the point? That if >>>>> you were one of the handful of what 2 or 3 customers that are actually >>>>> using XPS that you can get the upgrade? Sorry to rain cynicism on >>>>> your >>>>> parade, it's all nice to hear, but doesn't amount to much of anything >>>>> other than nice news. >>>>> >>>>> And why would you downshift from XPS to an OLTP engine if the whole >>>>> point to XPS was to offer features you can't do with IDS, such as real >>>>> database clustering. FWIW I actually was an XPS DBA, so I have a bit >>>>> of experience with the product, probably one of a handful of people on >>>>> the entire planet that actually used it hands-on as a customer. >>>>> Another >>>>> great product that nobody knows about. >>>>> >>>>> Mark Scranton (Xtivia Inc.) wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> As I had mentioned, I've been doing a number of XPS assignments >>>>>> lately. Good news is that these customers are ALL considering moving >>>>>> their XPS environments to IDS (along with doing POC's against other >>>>>> products). Some of the clients have relatively small XPS >>>>>> environments, >>>>>> so IDS in most cases will work fine. >>>>>> Rumor also has it that even though it was stated awhile back >>>>>> that IBM >>>>>> would not make anymore enhancements to XPS, a German bank wanted the >>>>>> "multiple fragments in a single dbspace" feature that came out in IDS >>>>>> 10 to be ported to XPS, and in fact, paid for the port. I have no >>>>>> idea >>>>>> IF this new port will be 8.5.2 or what, but this approach was >>>>>> something that was done at Informix back in the day as well (having a >>>>>> customer pay for a port they want). >>>>>> So I encourage those with XPS in house, or those working >>>>>> with clients >>>>>> that fit that description, to strongly consider IDS for a move if >>>>>> they >>>>>> are considering one. There are a few things to consider though >>>>>> first - >>>>>> I'm not saying it just as easy as moving to IDS and all is well. >>>>>> There >>>>>> are functionalities and internals that need to be considered in most >>>>>> cases. >>>>>> IF you want more details, please contact me directly at >>>>>> mark.scran...@xtivia.com. Would be glad to answer any questions. >>>>>> Thanks - >>>>>> Mark Scranton >>>>>> Xtivia Inc. >>>>>> www.markscranton.com- Hide quoted text - >>>>>> >>>>> - Show quoted text - >>>>> >>>> Also where is the IDS equivalent of DB2 DPF? >>>> >>>> Oracle has RAC >>>> DB2 has DPF >>>> Sybase now has Cluster Edition >>>> >>>> and Informix has? >>> SDS? >>> >>> >>>> This is why people I know say Informix is not a >>>> contender for serious systems, it cannot deploy a database >>>> aroudn mulitple hosts. >>>> >>> Haven't you been paying attention? It can do so, it can do so very >>> easily and it scales as well. >>> >>> Unlike RAC. >>> >>> >> >> yeah but customers are willing to blow money on RAC, even if it isn't >> good because management can't go wrong deploying Oracle. They buy the >> application, and the app says it has to go on RAC. It's a win-win for >> everyone. IBM needs to have apps like Oracle does, and insist that the >> app goes on either DB2 or IDS. It'll never happen because IBM sells too >> much hardware for RAC systems, so why hurt their own hardware sales by >> diverting people to DB2 or IDS. They can't even get a straight DB2 & >> hardware sale done without hurting either the software sale or the >> hardware >> sale in one form or another. Oracle is different because they don't have >> to fight against their own hardware sales. >> >> > > Next time I see Sam, I'll tell him to shut down those extraneous > hardware and consulting divisions. They don't generate any money anyway. > And I'll get him to flog off Websphere as well, because that runs more > on Oracle than IDS. And Rational. And Tivoli. And I'll tell him to get > rid of DB2 as well, because it competes with IDS. Then, I'll tell him to > concentrate on the behemoth that's left: Lotus and IDS. > > I'm sure he'll listen to me. I'll tell him you sent me. > I'll admit to a certain amount of applying some rather 'sweeping' logic to what I said, but the point is, Oracle as a brand is doing more with less. They don't sell hardware, and this seems to be helping them rather than IBM's model of selling software ( poorly ) and hardware. If I go to Oracle's website, it's all consistent and despite the gargantuan amount of products, ( who cares if the product is total shyte thats not the point ) there is actually less clutter than going to IBMs' website. Maybe IBM should get out of the software business altogether because they don't seem to be very good at it. They seem to be good at professional services, and selling humans, taking advantage of developing countries. I'm even curious if there is a statistical illustration of IBM's success before selling a lot of software vs selling almost no software and selling a lot of hardware. They seem to be mixed up as a company, with a lot of conflicting products and messages. I'm curious if they will eventually collapse under their own weight. It's not like their software is even good, in fact they seemed to get a lot of lift from Informix, because DB2's GUI was really awful in its earlier releases. Now as far as consulting services they seem to be able to send the right message, "We're happy to soak you but there is no guarantee that we will deliver a single fucking thing. Did you pay your bill yet?" . Kinda humorous when you think about it because fortune 100's keep paying them, it's hard to tell which is the bigger fool. *<8o)

"Obnoxio The Clown" <obnoxio@serendipita.com> wrote in message news:mailman.1660.1220141614.20610.informix-list@iiug.org... Captain Pedantic said: > "Obnoxio The Clown" <obnoxio@serendipita.com> wrote in message > news:mailman.1657.1220138711.20610.informix-list@iiug.org... > > Ian Michael Gumby said: >> Interesting is that part of Express ? > > That is entirely irrelevant to the discussion. Or are you saying that you > can buy DB2 DPF Express Edition? > > I wonder if he may be juxtaposing your argument yesterday - "IDS Express > is > good and cheap" - with today's argument - "IDS has features that make it > better than RAC" - for mischievous effect ...? >> OK, you do the pricing and get back to us. The point being that the sexy Continuous Availability features are only as purchasable optional extras in a version, Enterprise, where - no two ways about this - Informix is *already* more expensive than Oracle and DB2 even before you buy the optional extras! The pricing of the features is a huge disappointment. Now that is something that IBM could easily do something about, even just to put IDS on the same footing price-wise as DB2 ...

InDeep wrote: > It's not like their > software is even good, in fact they seemed to get a lot of lift from > Informix, because DB2's GUI was really awful in its earlier releases. Informix is not the only company IBM has ever bought. So let's place credit where credit is due: http://www.internetnews.com/bus-news/article.php/1553341 The boss of the tooling business is Curt Cotner former lead architect of zOS and reigning CTO of IBM Data Servers. IBM is elevating the tooling business form a hobby to a division. See the comments on Oracle support below: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lIOMiZTzIGk Cheers Serge -- Serge Rielau DB2 Solutions Development IBM Toronto Lab

Captain Pedantic wrote: > "Obnoxio The Clown" <obnoxio@serendipita.com> wrote in message > news:mailman.1660.1220141614.20610.informix-list@iiug.org... > > Captain Pedantic said: > >> "Obnoxio The Clown" <obnoxio@serendipita.com> wrote in message >> news:mailman.1657.1220138711.20610.informix-list@iiug.org... >> >> Ian Michael Gumby said: >> >>> Interesting is that part of Express ? >>> >> That is entirely irrelevant to the discussion. Or are you saying that you >> can buy DB2 DPF Express Edition? >> >> I wonder if he may be juxtaposing your argument yesterday - "IDS Express >> is >> good and cheap" - with today's argument - "IDS has features that make it >> better than RAC" - for mischievous effect ...? >> > > >>> OK, you do the pricing and get back to us. >>> > > The point being that the sexy Continuous Availability features are only as > purchasable optional extras in a version, Enterprise, where - no two ways > about this - Informix is *already* more expensive than Oracle and DB2 even > before you buy the optional extras! > The pricing of the features is a huge disappointment. > Now that is something that IBM could easily do something about, even just to > put IDS on the same footing price-wise as DB2 ... Assuming a single-CPU Intel box again: IDS Enterprise Edition: $51,500 Oracle EE: $47,500 Twiddly bits for a 4-way cluster: CAF: $20,000 RAC: $23,000 Licensing total: IDS: $286,000 Oracle: $282,000 Assumption for the above: Oracle to be fully licensed (EE+RAC) on each RAC node. I'm sure an ACE Director will be along shortly to tell me if I'm wrong. I'm willing to be that you'll save that $4,000 just in installation and configuration time on IDS vs Oracle. Chuck in Dataguard and there's no real difference. Chuck in Partitioning and IDS is cheaper. I don't think a <1.5% list price difference is a particularly "compelling" argument, especially when you factor in negative scalability. ;o) Just for shits and giggles, though: SQL Server EE: $25,000 SQL Server cluster: $0 SQL Server HDR: $0 SQL Server Total: $100,000 Further assuming that a 4-way cluster is even possible in SQL Server, of course. I have no idea. Note that I am not saying I agree with the pricing, I'm just saying that at that level, list price differences aren't really the issue. I'd love IDS to be able to take the fight to SQL Server on price and my personal take on this is that EE should include everything. But, er, hey! What do I know? It's not like I'm sitting here naked and blogging! Oh wait, I am! http://i17.photobucket.com/albums/b60/Ely94/FatComputer.jpg :o) -- Cheers, Obnoxio the Clown http://obotheclown.blogspot.com

Serge Rielau wrote: > InDeep wrote: >> It's not like their >> software is even good, in fact they seemed to get a lot of lift from >> Informix, because DB2's GUI was really awful in its earlier releases. > Informix is not the only company IBM has ever bought. So let's place > credit where credit is due: > http://www.internetnews.com/bus-news/article.php/1553341 > I have yet to stumble into a company using Rational. It must be something IBM uses internally, right? Same for Clearcase, another behemoth package you'd only find at IBM, along with Websphere, does anybody actually use this shit? It's soooooo far removed from 99% of the companies IDS should be hitting. So maybe IBM works well with the top fortune 100s with these kinds of softwares, but that means IBM misses most of the rest of the market that Informix is ripe for. And yet they continue to sell billions of dollars of this crap--which I have yet to see actually being used by 99% of the companies out there that most of us run into. > The boss of the tooling business is Curt Cotner former lead architect of > zOS and reigning CTO of IBM Data Servers. > IBM is elevating the tooling business form a hobby to a division. See > the comments on Oracle support below: > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lIOMiZTzIGk > Nice to see the video is related to the Village People and Hooters. :P Seriously Surge, after seeing more of these kinds of videos I'm convinced more than ever that Informix is never going to make it. IBM can't figure out how to bolt on one of the other existing products to it and sell it into one of those 1% companies they make billions off of. Which is surprising, since they've managed to sell pure shyte without too much difficulty, now IDS comes along and they can't seem to even remember it's something to sell. Oh by the way, that Ambush character's video explains it all. No wonder! We've got a thick-accent Indian in charge of IDS! What we need to do is to figure out how to sell it in India! It all makes sense now.. I get it! Those two sexy guys in the video are going to get IDS in to the hands of millions of US developers....Riiiiiiiight! I give up! IDS is doomed. > Cheers > Serge

InDeep wrote: > I have yet to stumble into a company using Rational. It must be something IBM uses internally, right? Same for > That's rubbish. Grady Booch practically *invented* OO programming. Rational was a very successful tooling business long before IBM bought them. > Clearcase, another behemoth package you'd only find at IBM, along with Websphere, does anybody actually use this shit? > Clearcase, I'm not going to argue with. :o) But loads of people use Websphere, same as loads of people use Weblogic. Just because *you* don't ever develop for them, doesn't mean they don't use it. > It's soooooo far removed from 99% of the companies IDS should be hitting. So maybe IBM works well with the top fortune > I agree. > > Nice to see the video is related to the Village People and Hooters. :P > I wasn't going to watch it, but now I will. :o) > Oh by the way, that Ambush character's video explains it all. No wonder! We've got a thick-accent Indian in charge of > IDS! What we need to do is to figure out how to sell it in India! It all makes sense now.. I get it! Those two sexy > guys in the video are going to get IDS in to the hands of millions of US developers....Riiiiiiiight! > Isn't that racist? I mean, I know lots of people in the UK who have thick accents, doesn't mean they're incapable, though. -- Cheers, Obnoxio the Clown http://obotheclown.blogspot.com

"Obnoxio The Clown" <obnoxio@serendipita.com> wrote in message news:mailman.1661.1220189097.20610.informix-list@iiug.org... > Captain Pedantic wrote: >> The point being that the sexy Continuous Availability features are only >> as purchasable optional extras in a version, Enterprise, where - no two >> ways about this - Informix is *already* more expensive than Oracle and >> DB2 even before you buy the optional extras! >> The pricing of the features is a huge disappointment. >> Now that is something that IBM could easily do something about, even just >> to put IDS on the same footing price-wise as DB2 ... > > Assuming a single-CPU Intel box again: > > IDS Enterprise Edition: $51,500 > Oracle EE: $47,500 Come and live in England! Here, the cost at today's exchange rates is: IDS EE: $64,210 Oracle EE: $43,871.91 (Before you dismiss this as exchange-rate aberration, consider that the pound-dollar conversion rate that would equlaise these prices is 1.46. The pound has not dipped below 1.6 US dollars this century. This is not a blip in a cyclical trend. It is policy, pure and simple. IBM absolutely canes UK, Euro and Australian dollar customers by comparison with those in the US (and these are the only currencies for which I have studied this in any depth, it may well be true worldwide), in a way that Oracle evidently doesn't). But your premise is fatuous anyway! Who on earth would run IDS EE on a single-CPU box?!!!! If you're buying Entreprise of either product you're a serious player, not a one-cpu shop. Hence the US$21,000 differential is multiplied many times over, disregarding special bids. > Note that I am not saying I agree with the pricing, I'm just saying that > at that level, list price differences aren't really the issue. My guess here, and from the highly technical nature of your previous posts, is that you do not make your living actually having to sell the product! Believe me, pricing is a big factor. However, the fact remains that some customers will pay the price demanded. My hunch is that IBM calculates that it has more to lose from having to discount licence and mainteannce to the exitsing customer base than it would gain through increased sales, particualrly given the much-discussed reluctance it already has to serious promotion of Informix. > I'd love IDS to be able to take the fight to SQL Server on price and my > personal take on this is that EE should include everything. Believe it! > But, er, hey! What do I know? It's not like I'm sitting here naked and > blogging! Nice!

Captain Pedantic wrote: > "Obnoxio The Clown" <obnoxio@serendipita.com> wrote in message > news:mailman.1661.1220189097.20610.informix-list@iiug.org... > >> Captain Pedantic wrote: >> >>> The point being that the sexy Continuous Availability features are only >>> as purchasable optional extras in a version, Enterprise, where - no two >>> ways about this - Informix is *already* more expensive than Oracle and >>> DB2 even before you buy the optional extras! >>> The pricing of the features is a huge disappointment. >>> Now that is something that IBM could easily do something about, even just >>> to put IDS on the same footing price-wise as DB2 ... >>> >> Assuming a single-CPU Intel box again: >> >> IDS Enterprise Edition: $51,500 >> Oracle EE: $47,500 >> > > Come and live in England! > Here, the cost at today's exchange rates is: > IDS EE: $64,210 > Oracle EE: $43,871.91 > > (Before you dismiss this as exchange-rate aberration, consider that the > pound-dollar conversion rate that would equlaise these prices is 1.46. The > pound has not dipped below 1.6 US dollars this century. This is not a blip > in a cyclical trend. It is policy, pure and simple. IBM absolutely canes > UK, Euro and Australian dollar customers by comparison with those in the US > (and these are the only currencies for which I have studied this in any > depth, it may well be true worldwide), in a way that Oracle evidently > doesn't). > I honestly don't know anything about that. > But your premise is fatuous anyway! Who on earth would run IDS EE on a > single-CPU box?!!!! If you're buying Entreprise of either product you're a > serious player, not a one-cpu shop. Hence the US$21,000 differential is > multiplied many times over, disregarding special bids. > My premise may be fatuous, but I didn't want to get any more complicated than my original Express pricing model. > >> Note that I am not saying I agree with the pricing, I'm just saying that >> at that level, list price differences aren't really the issue. >> > > My guess here, and from the highly technical nature of your previous posts, > is that you do not make your living actually having to sell the product! > Mercifully not. I just have to use it. :o) > Believe me, pricing is a big factor. However, the fact remains that some > customers will pay the price demanded. My hunch is that IBM calculates that > it has more to lose from having to discount licence and mainteannce to the > exitsing customer base than it would gain through increased sales, > particualrly given the much-discussed reluctance it already has to serious > promotion of Informix. > Well, I'm just comparing published list prices. I can't say any more than that. At published list prices, there is a price difference of less than 1.5%. There are lots of ways I could have muddied the waters, by chucking DataGuard and / or Partitioning into the mix, which at *published list prices* would make Oracle absolutely more expensive. -- Cheers, Obnoxio the Clown http://obotheclown.blogspot.com

Obnoxio The Clown wrote: > InDeep wrote: >> I have yet to stumble into a company using Rational. It must be >> something IBM uses internally, right? Same for > > That's rubbish. Grady Booch practically *invented* OO programming. > Rational was a very successful tooling business long before IBM bought > them. > >> Clearcase, another behemoth package you'd only find at IBM, along with >> Websphere, does anybody actually use this shit? > > Clearcase, I'm not going to argue with. :o) > > But loads of people use Websphere, same as loads of people use Weblogic. > Just because *you* don't ever develop for them, doesn't mean they don't > use it. > >> It's soooooo far removed from 99% of the companies IDS should be >> hitting. So maybe IBM works well with the top fortune > > I agree. > >> >> Nice to see the video is related to the Village People and Hooters. :P >> > > I wasn't going to watch it, but now I will. :o) >> Oh by the way, that Ambush character's video explains it all. No >> wonder! We've got a thick-accent Indian in charge of IDS! What we >> need to do is to figure out how to sell it in India! It all makes >> sense now.. I get it! Those two sexy guys in the video are going >> to get IDS in to the hands of millions of US developers....Riiiiiiiight! >> > > Isn't that racist? I mean, I know lots of people in the UK who have > thick accents, doesn't mean they're incapable, though. > It may indeed be racist, but I'm not an expert on that. I do find it consistent with IBMs' migration to India. So I guess they're trying to figure out how to get all those Indians up to speed on Informix, and then make a major assault on the US with Informix. To us unwashed americans we obviously don't understand this process and are to just love all these Indians and other offshores taking jobs away from us--no thanks of course to IBM, who is big on exploitation of developing and disadvantaged nations. Seriously to ignore the cultural background that the head of Informix comes from is to just be incredibly naive. This guy is never going to reach native Americans, in fact, just the idea that an another Indian is in charge is somewhat of a deal killer for me. I don't think, "Great Guy!" I think, oh fuck here we go again another goddam Indian running something that an american should be doing. Is that racist or nationalist? I'd go with nationalist, at the risk of offending every indian out there. Just his presence is an offense to me, and sorry if Indians don't get that, but this whole offshoring thing and Indian lovefest grates on me. It's yet another part of our culture and business community here in the us that shows corporate greed and insensitivity to US workers. Again, sorry if you Indians don't get that, but this is a raw nerve for a lot of us native americans.

InDeep wrote: > > Again, sorry if you Indians > don't get that, but this is a raw nerve for a lot of us native americans. > > Luckily you won't be offending any native American Indians. They're all dead. :o) -- Cheers, Obnoxio the Clown http://obotheclown.blogspot.com

Obnoxio The Clown wrote: > InDeep wrote: >> >> Again, sorry if you Indians >> don't get that, but this is a raw nerve for a lot of us native americans. >> >> > > Luckily you won't be offending any native American Indians. They're all > dead. :o) > Actually they're not dead, they're getting even by running casinos. And I think they can actually think, code, and speak better than the Indian Indians. Chinese do better work too, the DBA we have is from China, and his SQL skills are top notch, some of the best stuff I've seen. He's giving me tips on how I can migrate to China, and be an offshore myself. I can be one of a huddled masses too once India takes complete control of the US, and we have to leave for better opportunities outside our country. *<8o)

"InDeep" <indeep@indeep.com> wrote in message news:Vfzuk.7189$A82.4684@fe197.usenetserver.com... > Seriously to ignore the cultural background that the head of Informix > comes from is to just be incredibly naive. This guy is never going to > reach native Americans, ...Again, sorry if you Indians > don't get that, but this is a raw nerve for a lot of us native americans. I'm sure we're not allowed to say "Native Americans" anymore. Instead, we have to say "Red Indians". Hang on, that's not right, is it ...?

Captain Pedantic wrote: > "InDeep" <indeep@indeep.com> wrote in message > news:Vfzuk.7189$A82.4684@fe197.usenetserver.com... > >> Seriously to ignore the cultural background that the head of Informix >> comes from is to just be incredibly naive. This guy is never going to >> reach native Americans, ...Again, sorry if you Indians >> don't get that, but this is a raw nerve for a lot of us native americans. > > I'm sure we're not allowed to say "Native Americans" anymore. > Instead, we have to say "Red Indians". > > Hang on, that's not right, is it ...? I was born in america, that makes me a Native American. If you're born in Canada, or basically most of the western hemisphere, you too are a native American!