Why you can't trust IBM when it comes to committing to Informix.

We have all heard the stories and rumors about on LUW aka 'distributed' in IBM parlance, where IDS is outselling DB2. We have all heard and read statements that IBM's SWG IM executive management is standing behind IDS. We have all heard that IBM is positioning IDS as their transactional (read OLTP) database of choice and DB2 as their DW platform of choice. Then there's the rumors of IBM doing a TPC-E benchmark using IDS. Don't drink the cool-aid folks. While the IM staff has been preaching this to the choir (Thats you and I ;-), the reality is a bit different. The reality can be seen here: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/03/21/ibm_superdome_parisc/ And at www.tpc.org Here's the TPC-C link: http://www.tpc.org/tpcc/results/tpcc_results.asp?print=false&orderby=submitted&sortby=desc And the TPC-E link: http://www.tpc.org/tpce/tpce_all_results.asp Now TPC-C is OLTP and is supposed to be superceded by TPC-E. But why is it that there are no TPC-E benchmarks of IDS? (IBM benchmarks w Microsoft...) And if IDS is your OLTP engine of choice, why do you release a TPC-C benchmark using DB2? Smoke and mirrors folks. Smoke and mirrors. This is in part why IBM has no credibility when you talk to a customer who is outside of their core integrated and aligned accounts. As much as Stuart and the IIUG want to pound their chest about how much we've accomplished, the actual results show that we've done nothing to scratch the surface. Sorry Stuart, but this just goes to show you that while the Informix community is strong, IBM isn't playing ball and is only delivering lip service. Sure they're supporting the product and its getting better with each new release, but they're not marketing or attempting to grow the market. That is all lip service and they're expecting the Informix community to do the heavy lifting for them on little or no budget. Too bad Rodney Dangerfield is dead. He'd be the perfect Informix pitchman... -G _________________________________________________________________ Watch “Cause Effect,” a show about real people making a real difference. Learn more. http://im.live.com/Messenger/IM/MTV/?source=text_watchcause

Ian, Look at the features released with IDS 11.10 (aka Cheetah) compared to the amount of enhancement IDS received in the five or so years before that. I would count that as a piece of hard evidence that the amount of investment in IDS has gone way up. When the next release is officially announced, people can repeat the same exercise and judge for themselves whether they think the investment is being stripped back to zero as you claim or whether IBM is still spending money on IDS. Having worked in both DB2 and IDS, my perspective is that IBM is committed to both of these products, and both are producing a lot of satisfied customers out in the real world. With a large company like IBM (~330,000 employees spread all over the globe), I think your reasoning along the lines of, "Product A did X, therefore we may infer that product B is being abandoned," is off track. Not every benchmark release, marketing program, feature addition, etc., is done simultaneously across all related products like a sychronized swimming performance. (If they were, then all related products would tend to be more or less identical, and they're just not.) -- Kevin Cherkauer Software Engineer IBM Informix Dynamic Server -- Database Kernel "Ian Michael Gumby" <im_gumby@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:mailman.749.1206118005.20610.informix-list@iiug.org... We have all heard the stories and rumors about on LUW aka 'distributed' in IBM parlance, where IDS is outselling DB2. We have all heard and read statements that IBM's SWG IM executive management is standing behind IDS. We have all heard that IBM is positioning IDS as their transactional (read OLTP) database of choice and DB2 as their DW platform of choice. Then there's the rumors of IBM doing a TPC-E benchmark using IDS. Don't drink the cool-aid folks. While the IM staff has been preaching this to the choir (Thats you and I ;-), the reality is a bit different. The reality can be seen here: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/03/21/ibm_superdome_parisc/ And at www.tpc.org Here's the TPC-C link: http://www.tpc.org/tpcc/results/tpcc_results.asp?print=false&orderby=submitted&sortby=desc And the TPC-E link: http://www.tpc.org/tpce/tpce_all_results.asp Now TPC-C is OLTP and is supposed to be superceded by TPC-E. But why is it that there are no TPC-E benchmarks of IDS? (IBM benchmarks w Microsoft...) And if IDS is your OLTP engine of choice, why do you release a TPC-C benchmark using DB2? Smoke and mirrors folks. Smoke and mirrors. This is in part why IBM has no credibility when you talk to a customer who is outside of their core integrated and aligned accounts. As much as Stuart and the IIUG want to pound their chest about how much we've accomplished, the actual results show that we've done nothing to scratch the surface. Sorry Stuart, but this just goes to show you that while the Informix community is strong, IBM isn't playing ball and is only delivering lip service. Sure they're supporting the product and its getting better with each new release, but they're not marketing or attempting to grow the market. That is all lip service and they're expecting the Informix community to do the heavy lifting for them on little or no budget. Too bad Rodney Dangerfield is dead. He'd be the perfect Informix pitchman... -G Watch 'Cause Effect,' a show about real people making a real difference. Learn more.

I think you've missed the point. This isn't a technical issue regarding IDS. IBM had committed from day one that they would continue to maintain and support the IDS code line. That was a critical statement as part of the acquisition. Had they not made that commitment, then the deal would not have gone through. Committing to investing in a product, and promoting the product are two different things. IBM has not committed to promoting IDS for whatever reason. Look at it this way... How many IT Specialists are certified on IDS? What percentage of the total number of IM IT Specialists? Now subtract the number of heritage Informix IT Specialists. Now what's that percentage? Do the same for DB2. And lets limit it to distributed and ignore the Z and I platforms since there isn't an IDS port. Also look at the number of IT Specialists who are IDS certified and are also now DB2 certified. Shocking, isn't it? 8-0 :-) How can IBM sell a product if they don't *know* the product? Meaning that the sales teams go out to a customer, they rely on the local IT Specialist and IM brand specialist sales rep. If they don't know or have IDS expertise locally, then how can they sell it? And of course, you're missing the point on the TPC benchmarking issue all together. Doing a TPC-C on DB2 *AFTER* you state that IDS is your OLTP platform of choice? C'mon GET REAL. What message are you sending to the IT community? The point is that there are a *lot* of things that IBM can do regarding the marketing and positioning of IDS. Yet they are doing none of it. Personally, if I were you and I was working on IDS, I'd feel betrayed and let down by someone in senior management, including at the SWG level. But hey! What do I know? Its not like I was working for IBM SWG IM and cross matrixed to S&D. Then I would know first hand how IBM's customer interfacing team works. Naw, those years were just a bad dream, and I was on Acid or something... ;-) Now why do I have this 5Axxxx number in my head? Mommy? Make those bad men in the blue suits go away! I don't want to lie and say that DB2 is the best choice for a database platform.... :-P -G PS. Sorry, while you work in the lab, you're not customer interfacing or part of S&D. Yes I know IBM is 340K strong, and you have to understand that while you're doing your job, someone else isn't doing theirs and its affecting the net results. The bottom line, someone who's pay grade is much higher than yours isn't promoting IDS. > From: invalid_address@nowhere.com > Subject: Re: Why you can't trust IBM when it comes to committing to Informix. > Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2008 10:44:13 -0700 > To: informix-list@iiug.org > > Ian, > > Look at the features released with IDS 11.10 (aka Cheetah) compared to the > amount of enhancement IDS received in the five or so years before that. I > would count that as a piece of hard evidence that the amount of investment > in IDS has gone way up. When the next release is officially announced, > people can repeat the same exercise and judge for themselves whether they > think the investment is being stripped back to zero as you claim or whether > IBM is still spending money on IDS. > > Having worked in both DB2 and IDS, my perspective is that IBM is committed > to both of these products, and both are producing a lot of satisfied > customers out in the real world. > > With a large company like IBM (~330,000 employees spread all over the > globe), I think your reasoning along the lines of, "Product A did X, > therefore we may infer that product B is being abandoned," is off track. Not > every benchmark release, marketing program, feature addition, etc., is done > simultaneously across all related products like a sychronized swimming > performance. (If they were, then all related products would tend to be more > or less identical, and they're just not.) > > -- > Kevin Cherkauer > Software Engineer > IBM Informix Dynamic Server -- Database Kernel > > > "Ian Michael Gumby" <im_gumby@hotmail.com> wrote in message > news:mailman.749.1206118005.20610.informix-list@iiug.org... > We have all heard the stories and rumors about on LUW aka 'distributed' in > IBM parlance, where IDS is outselling DB2. > We have all heard and read statements that IBM's SWG IM executive management > is standing behind IDS. > We have all heard that IBM is positioning IDS as their transactional (read > OLTP) database of choice and DB2 as their DW platform of choice. > > Then there's the rumors of IBM doing a TPC-E benchmark using IDS. > > Don't drink the cool-aid folks. > While the IM staff has been preaching this to the choir (Thats you and I > ;-), the reality is a bit different. > > The reality can be seen here: > http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/03/21/ibm_superdome_parisc/ > > And at www.tpc.org > Here's the TPC-C link: > http://www.tpc.org/tpcc/results/tpcc_results.asp?print=false&orderby=submitted&sortby=desc > And the TPC-E link: > http://www.tpc.org/tpce/tpce_all_results.asp > > Now TPC-C is OLTP and is supposed to be superceded by TPC-E. > But why is it that there are no TPC-E benchmarks of IDS? (IBM benchmarks w > Microsoft...) > And if IDS is your OLTP engine of choice, why do you release a TPC-C > benchmark using DB2? > > Smoke and mirrors folks. > Smoke and mirrors. > > This is in part why IBM has no credibility when you talk to a customer who > is outside of their core integrated and aligned accounts. > > As much as Stuart and the IIUG want to pound their chest about how much > we've accomplished, the actual results show that we've done nothing to > scratch the surface. > > Sorry Stuart, but this just goes to show you that while the Informix > community is strong, IBM isn't playing ball and is only delivering lip > service. Sure they're supporting the product and its getting better with > each new release, but they're not marketing or attempting to grow the > market. That is all lip service and they're expecting the Informix community > to do the heavy lifting for them on little or no budget. > > Too bad Rodney Dangerfield is dead. He'd be the perfect Informix pitchman... > > -G > > > > > > Watch “Cause Effect,” a show about real people making a real difference. > Learn more. > > _________________________________________________________________ How well do you know your celebrity gossip? http://originals.msn.com/thebigdebate?ocid=T002MSN03N0707A

..further, when I check TPC-E it seems like SQL Server is the only vendor with a benchmark. The reason is pretty obvious (yet not well known): SQL Server was used for the "reference implementation" during the creation of the benchmark. If DB2 had a TPC-E submission I could at least follow your reasoning. As is I'm at a loss. Thanks to DB2's investment into TPC-C in DB2 V8.1.4 popping out yet another midrange result is easy to us. If I were the IDS team I wouldn't invest into yesteryear's TPC-C benchmark either. Cheers Serge PS: The register's article is quite funny. If there is one thing that's more screwed in TPC results than anything else it's the TCO numbers. You need to look at item's discount and ask yourself: Would I really a) be able to get such a rate and b) want such a rate. Some vendors appear to claim that you'd install a big system and get away with one service call, others essentially assume you just lease the software for the three years. I'm surprised the register fell for that cheap trick. -- Serge Rielau DB2 Solutions Development IBM Toronto Lab

Ian Michael Gumby wrote: > But hey! What do I know? Just for reference: When did you quit IBM? Cheers Serge -- Serge Rielau DB2 Solutions Development IBM Toronto Lab

Ian, I think the space needs to be forked into at least three, not two: 1. Commitment to maintaining and supporting a product. 2. Committing to "investing in" a product (which usually means new features, new platforms, etc.) 3. Committing to marketing and promoting a product. When IBM first acquired Informix, the message was #1, #1, and #1 all the way. IBM was committed to making sure that existing IDS customers could continue running IDS -- bugs would be fixed, and tech support people would still be supporting it. However #2 and #3 were definitely out -- the official position was that new investment and promotion would all be DB2 LUW, with the strategy of selling DB2 to all new customers, and if IDS customers wanted new functionality, they should migrate to DB2. After about five years, however, they did change the official strategy, to also become committed to #2 and #3. Externally verifiable proof of #2 is that lots of new features went into the 11.10 release, whereas for the previous five years there had mostly been just bug fixing. At MacWorld this year it was announced that IDS is porting to MacOS. That kind of thing would not be happening if IBM was not spending money on #2. For #3, presumably one could find Cheetah ads in trade magazines, etc. Before the strategy shift, they were not trying to sell IDS into new accounts. After the strategy shift, they are. Whether every salesperson has the message straight all the time is another question that I can't speak to. -- Kevin Cherkauer Software Engineer IBM Informix Dynamic Server -- Database Kernel "Ian Michael Gumby" <im_gumby@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:mailman.750.1206124935.20610.informix-list@iiug.org... I think you've missed the point. This isn't a technical issue regarding IDS. IBM had committed from day one that they would continue to maintain and support the IDS code line. That was a critical statement as part of the acquisition. Had they not made that commitment, then the deal would not have gone through. Committing to investing in a product, and promoting the product are two different things. IBM has not committed to promoting IDS for whatever reason.

"Kevin Cherkauer" <invalid_address@nowhere.com> wrote in message news:fs0s39$oj9$1@aioe.org... > Ian, > > Look at the features released with IDS 11.10 (aka Cheetah) compared to the > amount of enhancement IDS received in the five or so years before that. I > would count that as a piece of hard evidence that the amount of investment > in IDS has gone way up. When the next release is officially announced, > people can repeat the same exercise and judge for themselves whether they > think the investment is being stripped back to zero as you claim or > whether IBM is still spending money on IDS. I think you've missed his point. It isn't that IBM is not investing money in R&D for Informix - more or less everyone agrees that their record has been exemplary in this regard - it's that they can't bring themselves to advertise and promote it.

Serge, I guess that's why you work for IBM. ;-) The point was that IBM did release TPC-E benchmarks using IBM hardware and Microsoft SQL Server. Where's the IBM benchmark using IBM hardware and IDS? Oh wait! Let me guess. IBM SWG IM is doing a TPC-E benchmark using IDS and SUN? Don't think that's going to happen any time soon! Maybe HP? As to the TPC-C, Again. Please correct me if I'm wrong but TPC-C is an *OLTP* BENCHMARK. Non? So why is it that IBM will *say* that IDS is their go to platform for OLTP when they publish a DB2 benchmark in its place? Perhaps in some form of twisted IBM logic, spending the time and money on a TPC-C benchmark with DB2 instead of their stated platform for OLTP makes sense. If you're not going to use your "go to OLTP platform" aka IDS, then why waste the effort showcasing DB2? Do ya think John Q public who doesn't know Jack about IDS is going to listen to a sales rep talk about IDS as their OLTP engine when IBM still produces TPC-C benchmarks on DB2? Of course that *ass*u*me*s that you have a sales team that knows IDS exists and is its OLTP platform of choice. C'mon Serge, please stop. You're making me laugh so hard my sides hurt. IBM yet again snubs IDS. Whether intentional or not, IBM is creating their own FUD that any Oracle sales rep worth their weight can point to this and say that IBM pays IDS lip service and doesn't even consider it worthy enough to do a lousy TPC-C benchmark. Congrats IBM! You're your own worst nightmare. BTW, there are a couple of former IBM sales reps who now work for Oracle and are saying just that. > From: srielau@ca.ibm.com > Subject: Re: Why you can't trust IBM when it comes to committing to Informix. > Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2008 14:52:16 -0400 > To: informix-list@iiug.org > > ..further, when I check TPC-E it seems like SQL Server is the only > vendor with a benchmark. The reason is pretty obvious (yet not well known): > SQL Server was used for the "reference implementation" during the > creation of the benchmark. > If DB2 had a TPC-E submission I could at least follow your reasoning. As > is I'm at a loss. > Thanks to DB2's investment into TPC-C in DB2 V8.1.4 popping out yet > another midrange result is easy to us. If I were the IDS team I wouldn't > invest into yesteryear's TPC-C benchmark either. > > Cheers > Serge > > PS: The register's article is quite funny. If there is one thing that's > more screwed in TPC results than anything else it's the TCO numbers. You > need to look at item's discount and ask yourself: Would I really a) be > able to get such a rate and b) want such a rate. > Some vendors appear to claim that you'd install a big system and get > away with one service call, others essentially assume you just lease the > software for the three years. I'm surprised the register fell for that > cheap trick. > -- > Serge Rielau > DB2 Solutions Development > IBM Toronto Lab > _______________________________________________ > Informix-list mailing list > Informix-list@iiug.org > http://www.iiug.org/mailman/listinfo/informix-list _________________________________________________________________ Watch “Cause Effect,” a show about real people making a real difference. Learn more. http://im.live.com/Messenger/IM/MTV/?source=text_watchcause

> From: neil.truby@ardenta.com > Subject: Re: Why you can't trust IBM when it comes to committing to Informix. > Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2008 20:57:33 +0000 > To: informix-list@iiug.org > > "Kevin Cherkauer" <invalid_address@nowhere.com> wrote in message > news:fs0s39$oj9$1@aioe.org... > > Ian, > > > > Look at the features released with IDS 11.10 (aka Cheetah) compared to the > > amount of enhancement IDS received in the five or so years before that. I > > would count that as a piece of hard evidence that the amount of investment > > in IDS has gone way up. When the next release is officially announced, > > people can repeat the same exercise and judge for themselves whether they > > think the investment is being stripped back to zero as you claim or > > whether IBM is still spending money on IDS. > > I think you've missed his point. It isn't that IBM is not investing money > in R&D for Informix - more or less everyone agrees that their record has > been exemplary in this regard - it's that they can't bring themselves to > advertise and promote it. > > Abso-fscking-lutely! Its fscking pathetic to have Serge basically say "Well, gosh, we had everything set up for doing a TPC-C benchmark on DB2, so we ran that instead of what we say is our OLTP platform of choice...". I mean seriously, the point of the EL Reg's article on the TPC-C benchmark was for the hardware team to take a swipe at HP and not for the sake of the database platform. It doesn't matter that the reality is that IDS outperforms DB2 and Oracle. It doesn't matter that IDS is *the* ORDBMS benchmark of how to do it right. It *DOES* matter that the perception made by these gaffs is that IDS isn't on IBM's radar. That IBM is creating their own FUD for Oracle to use against IDS. IDS is off *everyone's* RADAR except those in the Informix community. Now who do we have to thank for that? Hmmm? ;-) Sorry, but there are things that IBM can do if they wanted to promote IDS. But somehow, that's not high on their priority. Either that, or they lack the creativity to think outside the box. I know of one project that will put IDS in the forefront of Wall Street and Chicago and London.... Actually there's a couple of projects. But hey! What do I know? My hero is Bender, the all metal anti-hero. ;-) -G _________________________________________________________________ Watch “Cause Effect,” a show about real people making a real difference. Learn more. http://im.live.com/Messenger/IM/MTV/?source=text_watchcause

Gumpy, You had a really great moment of lucidity, making a lot of great points. Seriously, I think over the years the expectations customers have and what the vendor has in mind, have never aligned, whether Informix was its own company, or now owned by IBM. ( Almost sounds like a video game right ) Seems like Informix is destined to be perpetually owned by dipshits, neophytes, and morons who just can't get it right. What a bunch of weak-minded ball-less little boys running IBM. Really amazing that IBM would actually admit these lumps of shit are IBM employees. No balls, just a bunch of whimpy, spineless little cocksuckers. It doesn't take much to understand the product, and form some kind of perception as to its worth compared to other products, but apparently IBM doesn't have a single employee other than the software engineers that can articulate what Informix is compared to Oracle or Sybase or MySQL or SQL-Server. IBM must have a building filled with these cocksuckers completely surrounding the software engineers in some kind of hostage situation, preventing Informix marketing. I say we storm the building and free the software engineers and get the software out of the bldg. Most of the cocksuckers will probably back down without a fight, they'll make some noise, bleating like goats, but won't do anything. We'll get the software team(s) to rush out the exits, grabbing their Macs of course, and get IDS out, free of the cocksuckers. Anybody interested in helping liberate IDS? -ID- Ian Michael Gumby wrote: > > > > From: neil.truby@ardenta.com > > Subject: Re: Why you can't trust IBM when it comes to committing to > Informix. > > Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2008 20:57:33 +0000 > > To: informix-list@iiug.org > > > > "Kevin Cherkauer" <invalid_address@nowhere.com> wrote in message > > news:fs0s39$oj9$1@aioe.org... > > > Ian, > > > > > > Look at the features released with IDS 11.10 (aka Cheetah) compared > to the > > > amount of enhancement IDS received in the five or so years before > that. I > > > would count that as a piece of hard evidence that the amount of > investment > > > in IDS has gone way up. When the next release is officially announced, > > > people can repeat the same exercise and judge for themselves > whether they > > > think the investment is being stripped back to zero as you claim or > > > whether IBM is still spending money on IDS. > > > > I think you've missed his point. It isn't that IBM is not investing > money > > in R&D for Informix - more or less everyone agrees that their record has > > been exemplary in this regard - it's that they can't bring themselves to > > advertise and promote it. > > > > > Abso-fscking-lutely! > > Its fscking pathetic to have Serge basically say "Well, gosh, we had > everything set up for doing a TPC-C benchmark on DB2, so we ran that > instead of what we say is our OLTP platform of choice...". > I mean seriously, the point of the EL Reg's article on the TPC-C > benchmark was for the hardware team to take a swipe at HP and not for > the sake of the database platform. > > It doesn't matter that the reality is that IDS outperforms DB2 and > Oracle. It doesn't matter that IDS is *the* ORDBMS benchmark of how to > do it right. > It *DOES* matter that the perception made by these gaffs is that IDS > isn't on IBM's radar. That IBM is creating their own FUD for Oracle to > use against IDS. > > IDS is off *everyone's* RADAR except those in the Informix community. > Now who do we have to thank for that? > Hmmm? > > ;-) > > Sorry, but there are things that IBM can do if they wanted to promote IDS. > But somehow, that's not high on their priority. Either that, or they > lack the creativity to think outside the box. > > I know of one project that will put IDS in the forefront of Wall Street > and Chicago and London.... > Actually there's a couple of projects. > > But hey! > What do I know? > My hero is Bender, the all metal anti-hero. ;-) > > -G > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Watch 'Cause Effect,' a show about real people making a real difference. > Learn more. <http://im.live.com/Messenger/IM/MTV/?source=text_watchcause>;

On 21 Mrz., 19:42, Ian Michael Gumby <im_gu...@hotmail.com> wrote: > I think you've missed the point. > > This isn't a technical issue regarding IDS. > > IBM had committed from day one that they would continue to maintain and support the IDS code line. That was a critical statement as part of the acquisition. Had they not made that commitment, then the deal would not have gone through. > > Committing to investing in a product, and promoting the product are two different things. > > IBM has not committed to promoting IDS for whatever reason. > > Look at it this way... > > How many IT Specialists are certified on IDS? What percentage of the total number of IM IT Specialists? > Now subtract the number of heritage Informix IT Specialists. > Now what's that percentage? > > Do the same for DB2. > And lets limit it to distributed and ignore the Z and I platforms since there isn't an IDS port. > > Also look at the number of IT Specialists who are IDS certified and are also now DB2 certified. > > Shocking, isn't it? 8-0 :-) > > How can IBM sell a product if they don't *know* the product? Meaning that the sales teams go out to a customer, they rely on the local IT Specialist and IM brand specialist sales rep. If they don't know or have IDS expertise locally, then how can they sell it? > > And of course, you're missing the point on the TPC benchmarking issue all together. > Doing a TPC-C on DB2 *AFTER* you state that IDS is your OLTP platform of choice? > C'mon GET REAL. What message are you sending to the IT community? > > The point is that there are a *lot* of things that IBM can do regarding the marketing and positioning of IDS. Yet they are doing none of it. > > Personally, if I were you and I was working on IDS, I'd feel betrayed and let down by someone in senior management, including at the SWG level. > > But hey! What do I know? > Its not like I was working for IBM SWG IM and cross matrixed to S&D. Then I would know first hand how IBM's customer interfacing team works. > Naw, those years were just a bad dream, and I was on Acid or something... ;-) Now why do I have this 5Axxxx number in my head? Mommy? Make those bad men in the blue suits go away! I don't want to lie and say that DB2 is the best choice for a database platform.... :-P > > -G > > PS. Sorry, while you work in the lab, you're not customer interfacing or part of S&D. Yes I know IBM is 340K strong, and you have to understand that while you're doing your job, someone else isn't doing theirs and its affecting the net results. The bottom line, someone who's pay grade is much higher than yours isn't promoting IDS. > > > > > From: invalid_addr...@nowhere.com > > Subject: Re: Why you can't trust IBM when it comes to committing to Informix. > > Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2008 10:44:13 -0700 > > To: informix-l...@iiug.org > > > Ian, > > > Look at the features released with IDS 11.10 (aka Cheetah) compared to the > > amount of enhancement IDS received in the five or so years before that. I > > would count that as a piece of hard evidence that the amount of investment > > in IDS has gone way up. When the next release is officially announced, > > people can repeat the same exercise and judge for themselves whether they > > think the investment is being stripped back to zero as you claim or whether > > IBM is still spending money on IDS. > > > Having worked in both DB2 and IDS, my perspective is that IBM is committed > > to both of these products, and both are producing a lot of satisfied > > customers out in the real world. > > > With a large company like IBM (~330,000 employees spread all over the > > globe), I think your reasoning along the lines of, "Product A did X, > > therefore we may infer that product B is being abandoned," is off track. Not > > every benchmark release, marketing program, feature addition, etc., is done > > simultaneously across all related products like a sychronized swimming > > performance. (If they were, then all related products would tend to be more > > or less identical, and they're just not.) > > > -- > > Kevin Cherkauer > > Software Engineer > > IBM Informix Dynamic Server -- Database Kernel > > > "Ian Michael Gumby" <im_gu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message > >news:mailman.749.1206118005.20610.informix-list@iiug.org... > > We have all heard the stories and rumors about on LUW aka 'distributed' in > > IBM parlance, where IDS is outselling DB2. > > We have all heard and read statements that IBM's SWG IM executive management > > is standing behind IDS. > > We have all heard that IBM is positioning IDS as their transactional (read > > OLTP) database of choice and DB2 as their DW platform of choice. > > > Then there's the rumors of IBM doing a TPC-E benchmark using IDS. > > > Don't drink the cool-aid folks. > > While the IM staff has been preaching this to the choir (Thats you and I > > ;-), the reality is a bit different. > > > The reality can be seen here: > >http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/03/21/ibm_superdome_parisc/ > > > And atwww.tpc.org > > Here's the TPC-C link: > >http://www.tpc.org/tpcc/results/tpcc_results.asp?print=false&orderby=... > > And the TPC-E link: > >http://www.tpc.org/tpce/tpce_all_results.asp > > > Now TPC-C is OLTP and is supposed to be superceded by TPC-E. > > But why is it that there are no TPC-E benchmarks of IDS? (IBM benchmarks w > > Microsoft...) > > And if IDS is your OLTP engine of choice, why do you release a TPC-C > > benchmark using DB2? > > > Smoke and mirrors folks. > > Smoke and mirrors. > > > This is in part why IBM has no credibility when you talk to a customer who > > is outside of their core integrated and aligned accounts. > > > As much as Stuart and the IIUG want to pound their chest about how much > > we've accomplished, the actual results show that we've done nothing to > > scratch the surface. > > > Sorry Stuart, but this just goes to show you that while the Informix > > community is strong, IBM isn't playing ball and is only delivering lip > > service. Sure they're supporting the product and its getting better with > > each new release, but they're not marketing or attempting to grow the > > market. That is all lip service and they're expecting the Informix community > > to do the heavy lifting for them on little or no budget. > > > Too bad Rodney Dangerfield is dead. He'd be the perfect Informix pitchman... > > > -G > > > Watch "Cause Effect," a show about real people making a real difference. > > Learn more. > > _________________________________________________________________ > How well do you know your celebrity gossip?http://originals.msn.com/thebigdebate?ocid=T002MSN03N0707A I think that there is some confusion produced by ambiguous IBM marketing messages: IDS is a 'first class' data server inside the IM portfolio for OLTP. DB2 is also a 'first class' class data server for OLTP, U2 is probably not. IDS is IBM's 'leading' data server for industrial-strength integrated and/or embedded solutions. DB2 is, in addition to it's role as 'first class' data server for OLTP, IBM's 'leading' data server for data warehousing, XML centered environments, SAP and probably everything else.@@NL@

"InDeep" <indeep@indeep.com> wrote in message news:gr1Fj.3021$SU.2510@fe75.usenetserver.com... > Gumpy, > > You had a really great moment of lucidity, making a lot of great points. > > Seriously, I think over the years the expectations customers have and what > the vendor > has in mind, have never aligned, whether Informix was its own company, or > now owned > by IBM. ( Almost sounds like a video game right ) Seems like Informix > is destined > to be perpetually owned by dipshits, neophytes, and morons ... (continued > p94) Invective like this detracts from some reasonable points you sometimes make, IMHO. Anyway I think your analysis is wrong. IBM is not entirely staffed by idiots who don't know their jobs and people who can't promote the benefits of IDS. On the contrary, IBM is full of such people at all levels, people whose ability in technical, marketing and sales leave me, and possibly even you, standing in their wake. The reason why the messages about IDS continues to lack clarity stems from IBM's reluctance to diminish DB2, and this presumably comes from at or near the top.

eric@herber-consulting.de wrote: > responsible people to get answers from and I'm sure that Serge will > inform them so that > they are prepared to deliver answers. Why me? Remember I'm from the evil DB2 under whose knuckles poor IDS has suffers ;-) Plenty of IDSers in this group. If you believe I am your best channel to Arvind and Bernie I'm both honored and deeply disturbed. Cheers Serge -- Serge Rielau DB2 Solutions Development IBM Toronto Lab

On 22 Mrz., 13:08, Serge Rielau <srie...@ca.ibm.com> wrote: > e...@herber-consulting.de wrote: > > responsible people to get answers from and I'm sure that Serge will > > inform them so that > > they are prepared to deliver answers. > > Why me? Remember I'm from the evil DB2 under whose knuckles poor IDS has > suffers ;-) > Plenty of IDSers in this group. > If you believe I am your best channel to Arvind and Bernie I'm both > honored and deeply disturbed. > > Cheers > Serge > -- > Serge Rielau > DB2 Solutions Development > IBM Toronto Lab Hmm, it seemed to me that your engagement in the Informix newsgroup is driven by your management. Maybe I'm wrong, no offense. There are enough IBM (Informix) people reading this newsgroup. Someone should be able to hand over the questions to the responsible people in IBM IM management, so that the Informix community get answers to their legitimate questions at the IIUG conference. Thank you.

<eric@herber-consulting.de> wrote in message news:1225052d-12a4-414f-8998-e7d177ca11fb@s50g2000hsb.googlegroups.com... > On 21 Mrz., 19:42, Ian Michael Gumby <im_gu...@hotmail.com> wrote: > From the IDC whitepaper (which has been probably written by IBM > marketing): > "IDS neither competes with nor represents an alternative to DB2. > Rather, IDS represents an embeddable transaction-oriented RDBMS featuring > valuable capabilities > that distinguish it from DB2 in a significant way." Albeit that no-one seems able to articualte that dictinction!

Neil Truby wrote: > "InDeep" <indeep@indeep.com> wrote in message > news:gr1Fj.3021$SU.2510@fe75.usenetserver.com... >> Gumpy, >> >> You had a really great moment of lucidity, making a lot of great points. >> >> Seriously, I think over the years the expectations customers have and what >> the vendor >> has in mind, have never aligned, whether Informix was its own company, or >> now owned >> by IBM. ( Almost sounds like a video game right ) Seems like Informix >> is destined >> to be perpetually owned by dipshits, neophytes, and morons ... (continued >> p94) > > Invective like this detracts from some reasonable points you sometimes make, > IMHO. > Sometimes you simply have to put aside all the bullshit and say what must be said. Gumby got me fired up, and he really put it all together. Those IBM cocksuckers need to be fired and let some people get in there that can get the job done. IBM = I BUILD MEDIOCRITY. They have applied this brand blanding to everything they touch. They fucked up OS/2 and now they're after IDS. It's a tragedy plain and simple. If IDS were a crap product nobody would care, but it's a first-class product that deserves just as much attention as <gasp> DB2 if not more. But this product is doomed as long as IBM owns it. > Anyway I think your analysis is wrong. IBM is not entirely staffed by > idiots who don't know their jobs and people who can't promote the benefits > of IDS. On the contrary, IBM is full of such people at all levels, people > whose ability in technical, marketing and sales leave me, and possibly even > you, standing in their wake. The reason why the messages about IDS > continues to lack clarity stems from IBM's reluctance to diminish DB2, and > this presumably comes from at or near the top. > > You're smoking better shit than I can get. IBM cocksuckers are keeping this product down, plain and simple. IDS people are being held hostage, and there is no hope for Informix, it's going nowhere. I wish there were some people who could come along and buy Informix away from IBM so the product could move forward on its own merit. Who cares what IBM spent investing in improving the product! You have to market it! You need promotions! You need sales people! Geez this is so simple.

eric@herber-consulting.de wrote: > On 22 Mrz., 13:08, Serge Rielau <srie...@ca.ibm.com> wrote: >> e...@herber-consulting.de wrote: >>> responsible people to get answers from and I'm sure that Serge will >>> inform them so that >>> they are prepared to deliver answers. >> Why me? Remember I'm from the evil DB2 under whose knuckles poor IDS has >> suffers ;-) >> Plenty of IDSers in this group. >> If you believe I am your best channel to Arvind and Bernie I'm both >> honored and deeply disturbed. > Hmm, it seemed to me that your engagement in the Informix newsgroup is > driven by your management. Maybe I'm wrong, no offense. None of my engagements in usenet are driven by management. Over the years my forays have become officially supported by my boss because they allow me to keep a pulse. I do take the liberty of adding "L0-support through usenet" to my PBC (Personal Business Commitment). Consider my participation here as an attempt to learn about different cultures, no more. Cheers Serge -- Serge Rielau DB2 Solutions Development IBM Toronto Lab

InDeep wrote: > You're smoking better shit than I can get. IBM cocksuckers are keeping Does it bother you at all that some day your children or otherwise people you care about may find these posts of yours? There is passion and there is being offensive. In other groups someone would have hit the abuse-button by now... Cheers Serge -- Serge Rielau DB2 Solutions Development IBM Toronto Lab

My apologies to you or anyone who was offended. Consider it an equal offense to understand the clear logic of things mere children can understand, and somehow the same rules of reality don't apply at IBM or other monster size corporations. Almost as if corporate drones have a mystic grip on people and hypnotize people into doing the wrong things, including inaction, and apathy. It's just really weird. At any rate...Laugh all you want, snicker at Apple, and you are missing out on watching the marketing machine of technology, Apple Inc., blow people away with their stuff. Informix should have and deserves being taken just as seriously, marketed with passion. Serge Rielau wrote: > InDeep wrote: >> You're smoking better shit than I can get. IBM cocksuckers are keeping > Does it bother you at all that some day your children or otherwise > people you care about may find these posts of yours? > There is passion and there is being offensive. > In other groups someone would have hit the abuse-button by now... > > Cheers > Serge