Re: IDS Next Version - features wanted - again widely on topic

Data Goob said: > Dirk Moolman wrote: >> One thing I love about Informix, is how simple yet powerful it is. We >> started moving to Oracle, and I don't want to go into detail - but I >> appreciate Informix more now. >> >> It is easy to install, easy to setup, and very stable - like Unix. >> >> Maybe I am old school, I don't know. >> > > And you didn't tell me one thing about Informix that is different > or compelling enough to use it instead of something else. Oracle > is not too difficult to install, but I do agree it is more difficult > to use and manage than Informix. But think about life outside Informix > for a moment: > > DB2 is easy to install, easy to setup, and very stable - like UNIX. > MySQL is easy to install, easy to setup, and very stable. - like UNIX. > Sybase is easy to install, easy to setup, and very stable. - like UNIX. > Postgres is easy to install, easy to setup, and very stable. - like UNIX. > Ms-SQL-Server is easy to install, easy to setup, and very stable. - like > UNIX. > > So, after a day of waiting for someone to say something compelling about > Informix vs something else, NONE OF YOU have done so. Informix is > interesting, > and has a lot of great features, but I've yet to hear why it should be > chosen over any other product in the mainstream market. Because it's interesting and has a lot of great features? -- Bye now, Obnoxio "C'est pas parce qu'on n'a rien ' dire qu'il faut fermer sa gueule" - Coluche A smile is a gift that is free to the giver and precious to the recipient. But giving someone the finger is free too, and I find it more personal and sincere. sending to informix-list

I spoke about Oracle because I have a Unix bias. Other markets, same or other competitor(s) indeed. In my experience, DB2 UDB (Unix again) is as easy (or not) to administrate as IDS. I do not see a reason to prefer IDS compared to DB2, being it in SMB. Informix was able (more than 15 years ago) to move developers from Cobol to 4GL or find new ISV's developing with it. As 4gl did fade away, is there a reason to stay with IDS, as the more or less thigth integration with the database is gone when leaving 4GL? The DB2 development environment is a/it's problem. With embedded languages, DB2 UDB static SQL comes with the bind/package concept, it can be mastered but can also be a major hurdle, I would suggest the UDB precompiler as an option to generate pure dynamic SQL even for static SQL so that no bind is needed. And for Java, as IBM says Java and DB2 UDB are both important, I would expect SQLJ to understand the full DB2 syntax as embedded C or Cobol can, and not a (DB2) SQL subset. Keep IDS and DB2 UDB both on development side and administration side alive? Qui trop embrasse mal étreint ... (http://www.francparler.com/syntagme.php?id=128). Bernard Dhooghe