Re: informix market share

"rkusenet" <rkusenet@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:2dnif.1163$wf2.60245@news20.bellglobal.com... > "Bob Jones" <email@me.not> wrote in message > news:RLmif.34038$6e1.27895@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com... > > > Ok, let's just talk about LUW then. The market share for Informix was about 5% in 2004, down 1% > > from 2003. That just doesn't make me feel any better. Keep in mind, IBM bought Informix to > > increase its database share on UNIX. So far I am not seeing it happening. If Informix sales > > continue to dwindle, customers will be forced to migrate soon. > > of course true. When did I ever dispute this? All I said was that 1.4% is on > all platforms, not on LUW. > > IBM did not buy Informix to increase. It bought Informix for following reasons:- > > - to assuage concerns of big Informix customers like Wal-Mart. It is strongly > rumored that IBM bought Informix upon advise from Wal-Mart. One thing is > sure. With IBM as its new owner, Informix can never go bankrupt, leaving > its customer high and dry. > > - to bring much needed high end technology to DB2 UDB. Notice that Db2 is > rapidly incorporating Informix technology. Like HADR. Version 9.0 of Db2, > known as Viper is out on beta now. It has table partitioning. I am pretty sure > that Informix's proven and stable fragmentation technology is behind it. > > Until late 2004, DB2/UDB was embarrassingly deficient in features. It is a matter > of another one yr before it will have almost all features expected in an enterprise > class database. > > I was one of those who suspected IBM's intention back in 2001. Indeed some > IBM employees did admit that they never wanted Informix to succeed. But > what they saw in next few years after Apr 2001 was that Informix customers > are fanatical about their product and the reputation is excellent. That forced > them to change their tactics. > I was genuinely surprised to see the features in Informix's latest version 10. > IBM has added lot of new exciting features. If they were interested in killing it, > why bother keeping Informix up-to-date. This doesn't make sense. > > Informix is still toast bcos of FUD. What I think is going to happen is that > in another 1/2 yrs DB2 will match Informix in features and performance > and at that time many of Informix customer will migrate to DB2. Add to it > that no one wants to learn Informix skills, the demise will be further accelerated. > > Oracle has more to worry in about a year when IBM will start poaching > Oracle customers with a version of DB2 which can stand up to Oracle, > if not already. IBM has deep pockets and is into many things. Imagine > when they tell customers "get a hardware from us and you will get DB2 > free. Why are u paying Oracle so much". I use to work for a giant > consulting company till few months back and they lost out a multi million > contract to IBM Global Services in NY. I believe my company was > winning the bid till about the last day, when an IBM rep wrote a cheque > of few million dollars to the customer as cash back if they buy hardware, > software and services from IBM. Don't take it literally, but what I mentioned > actually happened. It was too tempting for the client to not ink the deal with > IBMGS. > > BTW given the predatory tactics of Larry Ellison, why didn't he buy Informix > in 2001. He would have easily killed it by now. Was that a big mistake by > him. Is that a reason why he does not want to repeat the mistake with > Peoplesoft and Siebel. > > > > > > Rumor has it IBM picked up Informix due to potential questions about patent infringement. It was easier to give Informix to IBM than fight it. Jim