RE: Informix Roundup: 14 Nov 08

OTC writes: " What I do not have any idea of, is how much the DB2 z/OS market is worth. That could be a considerable mountain to climb before Informix is more important to IBM than DB2 overall. " Its huge. You can't just consider DB2 on z/OS but also DB2 on z/Linux (which isn't that big of a revenue stream). But what IBM doesn't do outside of IM management is break down the numbers by platform. That is, IBM IM execs know the numbers. IBM SWG senior execs know the numbers. No one else does. If you look at the segemented DB2 license revenue, you'll see that IDS is actually doing a better job in the "distributed" LUW space. Much better than DB2. I would guess that before you see IDS overtaking DB2 overall, you'll find that IDS will continue to outpace DB2 in LUW space. It makes sense that IBM consider IDS as their LUW database of choice and DB2 the database of choice in I-Series (AS/400) and z/OS. This is actually a win/win situation for all of IBM IM. (Of course there would still be continued support and enhancements for DB2 distributed...) As crazy as it sounds, there is actually a sound business model for this. (Unlike Janet's effort to kill off the bastid step child....) ;-) But hey! What do I know? Informix didn't listen to either Timmy or me when it came to the Linux port and we were spot on! -G > Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2008 15:29:54 +0000 > From: obnoxio@serendipita.com > To: informix-list@iiug.org > Subject: Re: Informix Roundup: 14 Nov 08 > > Captain Pedantic wrote: > > "Obnoxio The Clown" <obnoxio@serendipita.com> wrote in message > > news:mailman.331.1226759741.874.informix-list@iiug.org... > >> Captain Pedantic wrote: > >>> it might be better if we all look at *why* he thinks what he thinks, and > >>> try our best to change the perception > >> Craig S. Mullins makes a living as a DB2 consultant. He is, of course, > >> going to adopt a more positive attitude towards DB2 and imply that DB2 is > >> more important, because it's a commercially sensible attitude to adopt. > >> > >> I can understand the basis of his position that DB2 is more important to > >> IBM, because it helps to protect his income. > >> > >> Whereas the position of someone who depends on IDS for his income arguing > >> that DB2 is more important to IBM is somewhat less clear. > > > > Your opinion on whether you believe DB2 to be IBM's flagship database, or > > Informix, or both are given equal billing should have nothing to do with > > from where your income is derived. > > Unless you are concerned that DB2 might not be IBM's flagship database > any longer and your livelihood is at risk. :o) > > > I've worked with, and sell, both and think Informix is comfortably the > > superior product. > > I still don't believe they receive equal billing from the vendor though. > > That's what he said. Is he wrong in your opinion then? > > In my opinion, DB2 has decades-worth of seeding into the DNA of IBM that > is hard to undo, especially with IBM's fondness for shipping people > around the company internally. In my opinion, there is a lot of cruft > around that is quite hard to undo. I've worked in big companies and I've > worked in small companies, and in big companies, not only do you have > more politics to fight, but you also have more nooks and crannies where > you have to dig around to fix things. And this latter problem, in my > opinion, is why in five years' time we'll still have people moaning > about bits of IBM's website that talk about Informix, but the URL still > includes DB2. It's not that people don't want to fix these things, it's > just that there are 50 bazillion things to fix and two people doing the > fixing. And nobody knows where they all are. > > But, also in my opinion, money talks. And from what little I have been > told (and not told) I think that Informix money is starting to become > important and visible. From the things that I'm NOT being told (and > possibly some personal optimism) I choose to infer that Informix is > growing faster than DB2 LUW. Consequently, I choose to infer that DB2 > LUW will become less important than Informix in future. > > What I do not have any idea of, is how much the DB2 z/OS market is > worth. That could be a considerable mountain to climb before Informix is > more important to IBM than DB2 overall. > > But these are my choices of belief. As others quite rightly point out, > IBM doesn't break out the numbers, so I could be talking out of my arse. > > Which I'm sure we'll all agree is a talent that's not as rare as it > should be. :o) > > -- > Cheers, > Obnoxio The Clown > > http://obotheclown.blogspot.com > > > > _______________________________________________ > Informix-list mailing list > Informix-list@iiug.org > http://www.iiug.org/mailman/listinfo/informix-list _________________________________________________________________ Windows Live Hotmail now works up to 70% faster. http://windowslive.com/Explore/Hotmail?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_hotmail_acq_faster_112008

> If you look at the segemented DB2 license revenue, > you'll see that IDS is actually doing a better job in the "distributed" LUW space. Much better than DB2. > > I would guess that before you see IDS overtaking DB2 overall, you'll find that IDS will continue to outpace DB2 in LUW space. Do you mean absolute revenue numbers, or revenue growth (or both) ?

Ian Michael Gumby wrote: > OTC writes: > " > > What I do not have any idea of, is how much the DB2 z/OS market is > worth. That could be a considerable mountain to climb before Informix is > more important to IBM than DB2 overall. > " > > Its huge. You can't just consider DB2 on z/OS but also DB2 on z/Linux (which isn't that big of a revenue stream). > > But what IBM doesn't do outside of IM management is break down the numbers by platform. That is, IBM IM execs > know the numbers. IBM SWG senior execs know the numbers. No one else does. If you look at the segemented DB2 license revenue, > you'll see that IDS is actually doing a better job in the "distributed" LUW space. Much better than DB2. > > I would guess that before you see IDS overtaking DB2 overall, you'll find that IDS will continue to outpace DB2 in LUW space. On what grounds? Where is the proof? > It makes sense that IBM consider IDS as their LUW database of choice and DB2 the database of choice in I-Series (AS/400) and > z/OS. This is actually a win/win situation for all of IBM IM. (Of course there would still be continued support and enhancements > for DB2 distributed...) > > As crazy as it sounds, there is actually a sound business model for this. (Unlike Janet's effort to kill off the bastid step > child....) ;-) > > But hey! What do I know? > Informix didn't listen to either Timmy or me when it came to the Linux port and we were spot on! > > -G > I've always been curious about insiders and their paralysis. On the one hand, there has always been a fear factor for the insider, if they stand up and push for what they want, they could lose their employment. But the irony is, what exactly are you losing if you lost your job? You work on a product ( IDS ) that is ultimately doomed to fail in the market because your management won't market it. So where is the loss if you stand up and tell Ambush to get off his Indian ass and get the marketing going? Is the alternative that you just love IBM so much, and are just content to hang out and accomplish nothing, and THAT is what you lose if you get booted out of IBM? Perhaps I'll never understand the employee mindset, where keeping the job is more important than anything else, despite the fact that what you save is ultimate mediocrity. I could never live or work like that, what a loser life that would be. A life lived without ever taking a chance at winning. -ID-

Mark Townsend wrote: > > If you look at the segemented DB2 license revenue, >> you'll see that IDS is actually doing a better job in the "distributed" LUW space. Much better than DB2. >> >> I would guess that before you see IDS overtaking DB2 overall, you'll find that IDS will continue to outpace DB2 in LUW space. > > > Do you mean absolute revenue numbers, or revenue growth (or both) ? Would you just not love to know? :o) -- Cheers, Obnoxio The Clown http://obotheclown.blogspot.com

> Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2008 19:25:54 -0800 > From: indeep@indeep.com > Subject: Re: Informix Roundup: 14 Nov 08 > To: informix-list@iiug.org > > > I would guess that before you see IDS overtaking DB2 overall, you'll find that IDS will continue to outpace DB2 in LUW space. > > On what grounds? > > Where is the proof? > On the grounds that IBM DB2 on LUW is a fraction of the DB2 overall license revenue. So do the math. If you believe the rumors (since IBM doesn't break out the numbers publicly so you have to rely on the *rumors*), IDS is outpacing DB2 on LUW. So this trend will continue in order for IDS to outsell DB2 overall. As long as people continue to use Mainframes, DB2 will have a home. On the big iron, DB2 is king. > > I've always been curious about insiders and their paralysis. On the one hand, > there has always been a fear factor for the insider, if they stand up and push > for what they want, they could lose their employment. But the irony is, what > exactly are you losing if you lost your job? You work on a product ( IDS ) that > is ultimately doomed to fail in the market because your management won't market it. > No. IDS isn't doomed. You have a large enough and powerful enough client base for it to succeed. Janet wanted to kill IDS. She literally did as much as she legally could do to kill it. Yet IDS survived and without Janet, its actually growing market share. Incidentally, one of the reasons that I know that Ambush could be doing more to give parity to IDS is because of the tactics used by Janet to kill IDS. The fact that Ambush hasn't is very interesting. I would guess that the internal politics have something to do with it and with the continued belief that regardless of Ambush's letter, DB2 is still the "flagship" database of IBM. Even if you discount the comments from the NEON consultant as being biased, it is representative of the same opinion that customers/consultants who bleed blue feel. I think you have to consider the mindset of "Why spend money to market a commodity?". This appears to be the same issue that plauged Informix under Dexmier and Finnochio. Really more under Dexmier. Hence the decision to purchase Ass-n-tail.... But that's a different discussion... > So where is the loss if you stand up and tell Ambush to get off his Indian ass and > get the marketing going? Is the alternative that you just love IBM so much, and > are just content to hang out and accomplish nothing, and THAT is what you lose if > you get booted out of IBM? Perhaps I'll never understand the employee mindset, > where keeping the job is more important than anything else, despite the fact that > what you save is ultimate mediocrity. I could never live or work like that, what > a loser life that would be. A life lived without ever taking a chance at winning. > > -ID- Lets take ethencity out of the equation. Lets take "marketing" off the table too. Marketing is a very vaugue and general term. What you consider marketing would have a huge cost and will not have a good ROI. What IBM is doing with the IIUG has an effective ROI, yet doesn't reach the audience that needs to be reached. There are steps that can be done that are more than what the IIUG can do for IBM yet less than the cost of a full marketing blitz. You need to think in terms of zen and deflection of market forces rather than head on collisions. In terms of working for the blue pig, its difficult to understand unless you've been there. Experiences within EMEA are going to be different than those in NA because of labor laws. In terms of keeping one's job. Those who work on a product in the labs can continue to work on a product in the lab. Those in lab services that didn't want to work with DB2 are pretty much gone. There are exceptions, but they can be counted on one hand. Those in S&D don't care about how good/bad the product is. They care about taking the path of least resistance in getting the sale done and that what they sell works well enough to get the job done. They care about hitting their numbers any way they can. In NA, Charlie Ills drilled this one point home when he met with the Informix crew in Disneyland right after the acquisition. You have 1 qtr to prove yourself. You don't make your numbers, you have 1 qtr of probation. If you don't make your numbers, you're gone. If you had gotten a set of "gold plated" handcuffs, you would have been bought out of your bonus contract. Working for IBM requires a totally different mindset that what you and a lot of Informix employees were used to. Its like working for the US government. And we all have our own opinions about government employees. ;-) You talk about winning. IBM sales teams do win. The issue is that the client rep will not present DB2 or even IDS if they think that they can make more money selling Websphere with Oracle and then BCS services on IBM hardware. If the sale is easier to resell Oracle, then they will do it. Where IBM sales teams fail is in the White Space and in the SMB market. There's more to why IBM fails here than just the price tag. ;-) I guess the point is that I think you're getting a bit off base in calling IBMers losers. While I do single a few people out, I do so because they are in position to do their jobs and make a difference, yet they either lack the ability to think outside of the box, or the incentive to do so. If either is true then they are the wrong person for the job. If you are suggesting that IBMers are "groomed" to not think outside of the box, I would have to agree with you. Beaureaucratic companies breed beaureaucrats. While it gives the company stability, it also reduces their ability to compete with more agile companies. Like the large dinosaurs, they are doomed to extinction. Unlike large diosaurs, they can always bring in outside talent to change the company's direction. -G _________________________________________________________________ Get 5 GB of storage with Windows Live Hotmail. http://windowslive.com/Explore/Hotmail?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_hotmail_acq_5gb_112008