Re: Note to Kate...
Not a technical thread at all: it's a flame war in the Informix newsgroup about whether IBM is genuinely investing in and growing IDS sales. One poster (Wikking) claims strong product sales growth and renewed development focus; Ian Michael Gumby and others counter with anecdotes about SAP and ERP vendors dropping IDS, questionable 'wins' (US Army, a bank), lingering damage from Janet Perna's era, and sales reps who don't know the product. Requests for actual sales figures or a URL go unanswered, and the exchange ends in insults with no resolution or technical content.
Auto-generated by DrWatson from the posts below — may be imperfect; read the full thread.
On Feb 4, 7:18 pm, Wikking <Wik.Ki...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote: The king of wanking spews forth this little tid bit... > You really don't have enough substance to respond to. I know that > might astound you, but there's no real insight there. > > -- Enough substance? LOL a 48 hour old sock puppet wants substance? Lets recap, shall we? Wanker King maintains that all is well and that R&D $$$ are because that product is selling like hotcakes. When asked to show the numbers, he gets a clue and admits that only IBM knows the numbers but that all the customers love IDS and are going to stay on IDS and the product will grow. Wanker King is in a bit of denial. When confronted with SAP customers being forced to port off of IDS (Thanks Janet!), the bulk of the ports are not to DB2 as Janet expected, but to Oracle and some I believe to SQLServer. We even have one of the few people who watched the transformation from IDS to DB2 for SAP, while her company still had Oracle databases installed. She has since left the building. Then there's the question about other ERP and vendors who have indicated that they will no longer be supporting IDS. Lawson? ATG? Peoplesoft? All making noise. If Jerry K thinks maintaining a benchmark team and doing benchmarks is an expensive proposition, how about maintaining a port, performing regression testing where there are no net new customers on the port? Now that's expensive. But wait there's more. The king of wankers talks about the wonderful wins that were in Jerry Keesee's presentation. Sounds nice. But when you look at closer examination, the 'win' with the US Military (trying to hide the fact that it was with the US ARMY? you, not so nice...), we see that there was an Army contract awarded to IBM to continue to provide maintenance licenses. Why? Because they're not sure that their port to Oracle will be done on time and will perform as expected, so they want to hedge their bets. Now is that a win, or is that a reprieve. Then a little birdie told me more about the huge 'win' against Oracle in a banking client. Seems that this client had IDS 9.x installed. Client started to investigate RAC... Then the sales team woke up and started to pitch a fight against Oracle RAC. I guess that's how IBM manages the relationship with their clients these days. ;-) (Oh those 'thick headed' sales reps. Damn! Them!) If that's not enough, Ye olde wanker king, decries that we (those of us without rose colored glasses) must have an agenda, or why else would we be exposing that the wonderful IBM isn't so wonderful after all. So he reverts to attacking the poster. In terms of substance, I have a tad bit more substance that I share. Unlike the Wanker King who suddenly appears in the last 48 hours decrying us as FUD mongers with an agenda. What the wanker king forgets is that most of us have been around for a long time. While we may find defects, we don't trash the product. Just the sales execs who are for the most part asleep at the switch. We have all seen Ambush's open letter, yet same old, same old. Nothing has changed. So at the end of the day, when confronted by these facts, poor little wanker runs away with "... you don't have enough substance to respond to...". But hey, what do I know? Oh yeah, my IBM Serial Number and 5 years on my second tour with Informix and then IBM. -G
Ian Michael Gumby wrote: > On Feb 4, 7:18 pm, Wikking <Wik.Ki...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote: > The king of wanking spews forth this little tid bit... > >> You really don't have enough substance to respond to. I know that >> might astound you, but there's no real insight there. >> >> -- > Enough substance? LOL a 48 hour old sock puppet wants substance? > > Lets recap, shall we? > > Wanker King maintains that all is well and that R&D $$$ are because > that product is selling like hotcakes. > When asked to show the numbers, he gets a clue and admits that only > IBM knows the numbers but that all the customers love IDS and are > going to stay on IDS and the product will grow. > > Wanker King is in a bit of denial. > > When confronted with SAP customers being forced to port off of IDS > (Thanks Janet!), the bulk of the ports are not to DB2 as Janet > expected, but to Oracle and some I believe to SQLServer. > > We even have one of the few people who watched the transformation from > IDS to DB2 for SAP, while her company still had Oracle databases > installed. She has since left the building. > > Then there's the question about other ERP and vendors who have > indicated that they will no longer be supporting IDS. Lawson? ATG? > Peoplesoft? All making noise. If Jerry K thinks maintaining a > benchmark team and doing benchmarks is an expensive proposition, how > about maintaining a port, performing regression testing where there > are no net new customers on the port? Now that's expensive. > > But wait there's more. > The king of wankers talks about the wonderful wins that were in Jerry > Keesee's presentation. Sounds nice. But when you look at closer > examination, the 'win' with the US Military (trying to hide the fact > that it was with the US ARMY? you, not so nice...), we see that there > was an Army contract awarded to IBM to continue to provide maintenance > licenses. Why? Because they're not sure that their port to Oracle will > be done on time and will perform as expected, so they want to hedge > their bets. Now is that a win, or is that a reprieve. > > Then a little birdie told me more about the huge 'win' against Oracle > in a banking client. Seems that this client had IDS 9.x installed. > Client started to investigate RAC... Then the sales team woke up and > started to pitch a fight against Oracle RAC. I guess that's how IBM > manages the relationship with their clients these days. ;-) (Oh those > 'thick headed' sales reps. Damn! Them!) > > If that's not enough, Ye olde wanker king, decries that we (those of > us without rose colored glasses) must have an agenda, or why else > would we be exposing that the wonderful IBM isn't so wonderful after > all. > So he reverts to attacking the poster. > > In terms of substance, I have a tad bit more substance that I share. > Unlike the Wanker King who suddenly appears in the last 48 hours > decrying us as FUD mongers with an agenda. > > What the wanker king forgets is that most of us have been around for a > long time. While we may find defects, we don't trash the product. Just > the sales execs who are for the most part asleep at the switch. > > We have all seen Ambush's open letter, yet same old, same old. Nothing > has changed. > > So at the end of the day, when confronted by these facts, poor little > wanker runs away with "... you don't have enough substance to respond > to...". > > But hey, what do I know? > Oh yeah, my IBM Serial Number and 5 years on my second tour with > Informix and then IBM. Nice try. Fact is Perna and many other duds that tried to get people off the product are nowhere to be seen now and as to your comment that nothing has changed, thats totally spurious as seen by the product sales growth and increased focus on development, way beyond other rdbms products. Anyway, as I stated I see nothing much new here, no real substance, just tired old nonsense that I could easily hear from Microsoft or Oracle or those that are still trying to build those little empires at various customers, so forgive me if I peel away to do something else. -- }(:
"Wikking" <Wik.King!@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message news:gmer69$42r$1@news.motzarella.org... > Nice try. Fact is Perna and many other duds that tried to get people > off the product are nowhere to be seen now and as to your comment that > nothing has changed, thats totally spurious as seen by the product > sales growth ... "As seen by the [Informix] product sales growth ..." But, how do you know this? If it can be seen, can we see it please? Could you post a URL detailing this sales growth?
Captain Pedantic wrote: > "Wikking" <Wik.King!@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message > news:gmer69$42r$1@news.motzarella.org... > >> Nice try. Fact is Perna and many other duds that tried to get people >> off the product are nowhere to be seen now and as to your comment that >> nothing has changed, thats totally spurious as seen by the product >> sales growth ... > > "As seen by the [Informix] product sales growth ..." > > But, how do you know this? > If it can be seen, can we see it please? > Could you post a URL detailing this sales growth? No, but that doesn't mean it doesn't exist and that what I have been saying is untrue. As I said, take it or leave it. -- }(:
In article <6v0d4nFhedb3U1@mid.individual.net>, Captain Pedantic says... > >"Wikking" <Wik.King!@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message >news:gmer69$42r$1@news.motzarella.org... > >> Nice try. Fact is Perna and many other duds that tried to get people >> off the product are nowhere to be seen now and as to your comment that >> nothing has changed, thats totally spurious as seen by the product >> sales growth ... > >"As seen by the [Informix] product sales growth ..." > >But, how do you know this? >If it can be seen, can we see it please? >Could you post a URL detailing this sales growth? Have u seen anything re: db2 also
On Feb 5, 10:00 am, Wikking <Wik.Ki...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote: > No, but that doesn't mean it doesn't exist and that what I have been > saying is untrue. As I said, take it or leave it. > Q: 'How do you know an IBM exec is lying?' A: 'Because their lips are moving' Unless it can be verified, its nothing more than smoke and mirrors. We've just been through this already. Like that Bank win against Oracle RAC, or that US Army deal... Speaking of DB2, CPS (Chicago Public Schools) is phasing out DB2 for SQLServer. While that doesn't mean much to you, its an indication as to the shift in the market. Mainframe DB2 going to SQLServer, now DB2 (LUW) going to SQLServer. Going back on point, Janet Perna left at the end of 2005. Yet, the damage she did has yet to be repaired. Eric and I have been keeping track and like I said in many posts, you can't sell a product that you don't know. While Jerry K has a team that's going around the world doing Informix training, that product knowledge won't stick unless the IT Specialist is incent'd to get certified and maintain certification on Informix. This was told to IBM back in 2006, 2007 and 2008. Oh yes, Janet had left the building, but it looks like for some strange reason, IBM IM execs haven't pulled the trigger on fixing the problem. Now why is that?
On Feb 5, 8:50 am, "Captain Pedantic" <theharlequi...@hotmail.com> wrote: > "Wikking" <Wik.Ki...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message > > news:gmer69$42r$1@news.motzarella.org... > > > Nice try. Fact is Perna and many other duds that tried to get people > > off the product are nowhere to be seen now and as to your comment that > > nothing has changed, thats totally spurious as seen by the product > > sales growth ... > What growth? Really, I mean we don't see the numbers because they aren't released. So either you're a shill (with a brown neck) or you're full of shit. So how can a sales team sell a product they don't know? C'mon ya silly wanker, answer the question.
dcruncher4@aim.not.com wrote: > In article <6v0d4nFhedb3U1@mid.individual.net>, Captain Pedantic says... >> "Wikking" <Wik.King!@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message >> news:gmer69$42r$1@news.motzarella.org... >> >>> Nice try. Fact is Perna and many other duds that tried to get people >>> off the product are nowhere to be seen now and as to your comment that >>> nothing has changed, thats totally spurious as seen by the product >>> sales growth ... >> "As seen by the [Informix] product sales growth ..." >> >> But, how do you know this? >> If it can be seen, can we see it please? >> Could you post a URL detailing this sales growth? > > Have u seen anything re: db2 also > LOL -- }(:
Ian Michael Gumby wrote: > On Feb 5, 10:00 am, Wikking <Wik.Ki...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote: > >> No, but that doesn't mean it doesn't exist and that what I have been >> saying is untrue. As I said, take it or leave it. >> > Q: 'How do you know an IBM exec is lying?' > > A: 'Because their lips are moving' > > Unless it can be verified, its nothing more than smoke and mirrors. I suggest your piffle is just that. You cannot prove the contrary to anything I have stated. You're merely a disgruntled ex-employee who was somewhat in the know once, knows very little now and has an axe to grind. -- }(:
Wikking wrote: > Ian Michael Gumby wrote: >> On Feb 5, 10:00 am, Wikking <Wik.Ki...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote: >> >>> No, but that doesn't mean it doesn't exist and that what I have been >>> saying is untrue. As I said, take it or leave it. >>> >> Q: 'How do you know an IBM exec is lying?' >> >> A: 'Because their lips are moving' >> >> Unless it can be verified, its nothing more than smoke and mirrors. > > I suggest your piffle is just that. You cannot prove the contrary to > anything I have stated. You're merely a disgruntled ex-employee who > was somewhat in the know once, knows very little now and has an axe to > grind. It is strange how many of the longer-running denizens of this group live under a bridge. -- Cheers, Obnoxio The Clown http://obotheclown.blogspot.com -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by OpenProtect(http://www.openprotect.com), and is believed to be clean.