Re: Database market share 2004

Stu Charlton wrote: > Paul wrote: > > >>Where was any mention of Sybase? Pervasive? IBM's Informix offerings? > > > Yes, in the actual Gartner report, not the eWeek diluted one. They > break out Informix revenues. Oracle beats IBM by a few points if you > don't count Informix. > > >>Borland's Interbase? Someone must buy these products! What about MySQL >>and/or Firebird? MySQL is not free for commercial use - what's its >>market share? Pervasive have also started to support PostgreSQL, as > > > MySQL *is* free for internal commercial use, it's just not supported. > Companies like Google make a mint by modifying GPL software and not > re-releasing the source because they don't ship a product, they offer a > service. IF they do release components, it's out of a spirit of > community giving ;) > But it should also be pointed out that MySQL appears at just about every single ISP ( Internet Service Provider ) even when the ISP doesn't really do anything with it. For example, many ISP's have been offering for some time multiple number of MySQL databases per domain account. I get 10 databases per domain on mine, and don't pay any kind of "license" fee for MySQL, it's part of the cost of the site. So the pervasiveness is important to understand. As I alluded to in previous postings, this is the kind of presence Informix SE should have. Notice MySQL is using its MyISAM product as a base entry to other product offerings. The pervasiveness makes web developers very happy, because a web developer knows they can go to just about any domain on the net and it will have MySQL, PHP, and/or Perl/CGI. Sure there's also ASP ISP's but these are a fraction of the Linux offerings. It's not just the download or the one license, it's the market presence and proliferation of the product. Even Oracle can't touch this market. As you can imagine, the name MySQL is everywhere for web developers, and amazingly enough, Informix SE would be a better product to have on a web site, but nobody knows about it. MySQL also has a tight relationship with PHP, thus giving it the very push I talk about, DEVELOPERS. :: :: :: > Look at it this way: most full time Linux or MySQL developers are > subsidised by venture or public capital today (MySQL has 17 million EUR > if I recall). They need license revenue to sustain that investment or > it's effectively going to be supported and developed by hobbiests, > college students, and engineers with an itch to scratch. That model > works well enough for creating a good product (like Linux up to 1.2 > arguably). But it doesn't quite give one warm fuzzies about their > ability topple the big boys. > It should also be noted that nobody uses just ONE database in most organizations. Most shops today support more than one vendor. MySQL is also interesting in that you might have a web application that will use MySQL for parts, and then connect to other databases for other parts. You can't make the assumption that companies will use one or the other, it's not real world. The real world is applications, and a mix of all the players. What it baffling is why Informix has had to be such a step child in the past 20 years, when it has features and technology that make it a winner. Informix should just change its name, and put DB2-this or DB2-that on it, and this whole problem will probably disappear. - SE -> DB2-ISAM - IDS -> DB2-IDS - RedBrick ->DB2-RedBrick - XPS -> DB2-XPS . .