Re: IBM and Oracle - Let's Rrrrrrrrrrrrruuuuuuuuumbbbbbbbbbbleeeeeeee

Serge Rielau wrote: > DA Morgan wrote: >> Data Cruncher wrote: >>> http://www.physorg.com/news97246418.html >>> >>> Officials at IBM are throwing verbal haymakers at Oracle as Big Blue >>> touts its successes in the database market. >>> >>> >>> >>> The two database heavyweights alternated between offensive and >>> defensive postures recently after IBM questioned Oracle's claims of >>> database dominance. >>> >>> "The rapid adoption of DB2 9 would seem to call their claims into >>> question and analysts are starting to question their numbers as >>> well," said Bernie Spang, director of IBM data servers. >>> >>> He cited commentary by Philip Howard of UK-based Bloor Research, who >>> noted that when reporting Oracle's results for the third quarter of >>> fiscal year 2007, CEO Larry Ellison said new license revenues for the >>> database and middleware division grew 17 percent. >>> >>> However, Ellison also noted the middleware portion had grown roughly >>> 80 percent, which Howard argued indicates a slow down in the growth >>> of Oracle's database portfolio. >>> >>> In an interview with eWEEK, Howard said increased competition not >>> just from IBM but from a number of vendors, has affected sales of 10g. >>> >>> "11g may make a difference compared to DB2 but probably not versus >>> SQL Server, Netezza and EnterpriseDB - as these all compete as much >>> on lower TCO and reduced administration as on features and >>> performance," Howard said. >>> >>> But for Oracle's part, company officials are not breaking much of a >>> sweat, and are convinced the company's hold on the database market is >>> not slipping. >>> >>> "There's no doubt about that," said Willie Hardie, Oracle vice >>> president of database product marketing. >>> >>> Hardie pointed to a study by IDC that included estimated 2006 revenue >>> totals from the five biggest relational database management system >>> providers and had Oracle in the top spot with a 44.4 percent of the >>> market. IBM was second with 21.2 percent. >>> >>> According to IDC, those figures represent a growth of 14.7 and 11.9 >>> percent between 2005 and 2006 for Oracle and IBM, respectively. >>> >>> "There's always going to be competitors in the market," Hardie said. >>> "An organization like Oracle continues to do business with its >>> extensive install-base." >>> >>> The IDC study did not include features sold by vendors as separation >>> options and did not break out subscription and maintenance revenue, >>> which can obscure the true growth rate of a vendor's database license >>> sales. >>> >>> IBM's Spang said the $4.3 billion in revenue earned by the company's >>> software segment in the first quarter of fiscal 2007 was driven >>> largely by sales of the DB2 9 Viper data server. >>> >>> "The volume of new DB2 customers since we launched DB2 9 last July >>> has exceeded all expectations," he said. "We have seen literally >>> thousands of new customers in that timeframe - and a large percentage >>> of those are migrations from Oracle." >>> >>> However, Forrester Research analyst Noel Yuhanna disputed IBM's >>> claims of how aggressively the market is adopting DB2. >>> >>> "I think we have seen less aggressive movement with IBM DB2," he >>> said, adding that he thinks IBM has not aggressively marketed DB2. >>> "Oracle still rules the world." >>> >>> Spang strongly disagreed. >>> >>> "I would also say that the large numbers of new customers - backed up >>> by our earnings - support the claims that our marketing strategy has >>> been right on target," he said. >> >> In other words ... we don't know anything more than we did before we >> read this. >> >> But for those who have to pay their mortgage and feed their families >> the only metrics that matter are those that can be found at: >> www.dice.com. >> >> As of 6 May, 2007: >> ========================= >> DB2 3,419 8.9% >> Informix 452 1.2% >> Oracle 17,861 46.7% >> SQL Server 14,171 37.0% >> Sybase 2,355 6.2% >> ========================= >> >> If these aren't the numbers you're looking at you aren't paying >> attention to putting the kids through college and your retirement. >> Small comfort to remember your product loyalty to a particular brand >> when living off your Social Security check. > Following that logic we should be working for WalMart to get your kids > safely through college .... lotsa greeters needed - always. > > Cheers > Serge If they paid more than what I do now you'd be absolutely right. <g> I don't work 12+ hours a day because of my deep love of living the life of Dilbert. -- Daniel A. Morgan University of Washington damorgan@x.washington.edu (replace x with u to respond) Puget Sound Oracle Users Group www.psoug.org