Re: database market share 2003

Noons said: > Serge Rielau allegedly said,on my timestamp of 4/06/2004 11:02 AM: > >> Well, Blair commented on the language, so I shall refrain from that. > > Stop posting stupid and idiotic replies (not you!) and it will stop. > Until then, you get it back in whatever fashion I deem appropriate, > and there is preciously nothing anyone can do about it. > Sorry, but that's the way it goes when someone tries to insult > everyone's intelligence. Have you tried the RENAME DATABASE command? Failing which, you have to unload the data, recreate the database and reload. Maybe ALTER FRAGMENT ... INIT IN ... >> Either way: IBM does NOT know how many customers use which parts of the >> i/Series's operation system. > > Good. Can I quote that WIDELY as a truth finally admitted? > Just like the "same code base everywhere" three years ago that turned > out to be "only here and there" after the derision got too loud? > >> What you refer to as DB2 is a surpringly small SQL interface to OS/400. > > I don't get this: Is it small in user base? Or small in code size? > Complexity? Or irrelevant to this discussion (as it should have > remained)? > > > Customers choose to work with OS/400 filesystem or the SQL interface. > > Yes. Therefore and until IBM knows precisely who is using what, > it is pointless, stupid and inaccurate to claim that ALL AS400 licenses > are DB2/UDB licenses (implied as being used as such). > >> etc. i/Series is a DBMS with a capital S for SYSTEM. It is what >> Microsoft wants to have. One big "magic box" (remember the commercial?). > > Serge, Serge, Serge: I KNOW what it is. When it came out, it was > a BIG step ahead in all this OS rubbish. And lauded as such, and the > customer base responded accordingly by making the AS400 the most > successful IBM platform EVER! Long before DB2 existed anywhere else other > than as SQL/DS. > > What it NEVER was, is NOT and NEVER will be is DB2, or UDB! > No matter how many times the deranged IBM marketing decides to > change its name. > >> It is IMPOSSIBLE to separate DB2 function from OS/400 function. > > But like you said above: many customers decide what to use. > Amazing how those customers can be more discerning than IBM's own > people... > >> when we discuss new "DB2" features I get: "Oh we do this through the >> filesystem interface like that since n-years". > > Bingo. > >> If a customers use OS/400 but not the SQL Interface, are they not using >> DB2? If customers are using Oracle through XQuery are they not using >> Oracle the database system? Should they not be counted? Does Oracle >> know? > > Serge, when will you "folks" just wake up from the marketing > bullshit you're fed every day? Can't you even spot the cretin > abuse of language that is such an argument? > > Here is a clue: Oracle does not bundle Oracle licenses with > other totally inappropriate products. They only sell Oracle. > Therefore, what they sell cannot be other than Oracle licenses. > > > A more clear example, in case you have not clicked yet: > NO ONE goes to Oracle to buy a coffee grinder and ends up with an > Oracle license (as much as it may hurt Larry's over-sensitive pocket). > > However, in IBM's case it is perfectly possible to buy an AS400 - > or whatever IBM calls coffee grinders now - with a bunch of inherited > and badly ported 3rd party System 38 packages and end up counted as a > DB2/UDB(this last one is even more cretin!...) "user". > > > In Microsoft's and IBM's case, the onus is on the maker to > PROVE they are not just churning numbers. > And IBM's poor excuse of "we do not know how many" is at best > a poor attempt to get their arses off the firing line. > > > Got it now? Do you understand why I consider this kind of > semantics (by Gartner, IBM or whomever!) an offensive abuse of > anyone's patience and intelligence? Or do I have to use smaller > words to explain myself? > > Cripes, you people have some really smart cookies around, maybe > you should bounce these moronic marketing campaigns off them > every once in a while? > > >> Brace yourself, because that whole "relational" DBMS categorization is >> going to get pretty meaningless anyway as MS, Oracle and IBM bury XML >> deep into their "engines" and Information Integration and Content >> Management gets bigger and bigger. > > I've been braced for it since, let me see: around 1997. > >> It's all data. Your favorite email repository, text, image, XML, network >> router for crying out lout. > > Did I ever say it wasn't? > > > -- > Cheers > Nuno Souto > wizofoz2k@yahoo.com.au.nospam > -- Bye now, Obnoxio "C'est pas parce qu'on n'a rien ' dire qu'il faut fermer sa gueule" - Coluche "I'm trying to see things your way, but I can't get my head up my ass" - JCH "Ogni uomo mi guarda come se fossi una testa di cazzo" - Marco sending to informix-list