IIUG Returns to Kansas for its 2009 Conference

http://www.ibmdatabasemag.com/story/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=211300326 -- }(:

On Feb 6, 6:34 am, Wikking <Wik.Ki...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote: > http://www.ibmdatabasemag.com/story/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=21130... > > -- > > }(: Wow the king of wankers can regurgitate a link to a url. But one has to ask what will Ambuj or Jerry Keesee say about Informix marketing? 'Hey Rocky, watch me pull a rabbit out of my hat!' 'Bullwinkle, that trick never works!' 'This time for sure!' Ok, so you may not remember or even have seen the old Rocky and Bullwinkle cartoons. That bit was a running gag in each episode. Informix marketing by IBM kind of reminds me of that gag. Each year, we hear a lot of promises. Each year we don't see anything. But *this* year will be different! IBM doesn't want to spend any money on Informix marketing. Or if they have to, they want to spend as little as possible. Take the IIUG event. True, IBM helped jumpstart it. The reason KC (Lenexa/Overland Park) was chosen was that IBM Lenexa (The old Informix offices) are just a mile down the road. Holding the conference here meant that more IBMers could attend because for the most part, they wouldn't have to travel. But the interesting thing about this conference... Its not IBM doing the heavy lifting, its the user group community. Thats the point. Informix survives not because of IBM, but because of its user base. So when you go to Lenexa, ask Jerry Keesee what's IBM's go to market strategy now that DB2 and IDS are going to overlap even more when they add more DW features in to IDS.

Ian Michael Gumby wrote: > On Feb 6, 6:34 am, Wikking <Wik.Ki...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote: >> http://www.ibmdatabasemag.com/story/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=21130... >> >> -- >> >> }(: > > Wow the king of wankers can regurgitate a link to a url. > > But one has to ask what will Ambuj or Jerry Keesee say about Informix > marketing? > > IBM doesn't want to spend any money on Informix marketing. Or if they > have to, they want to spend as little as possible. Take the IIUG > event. > True, IBM helped jumpstart it. The reason KC (Lenexa/Overland Park) > was chosen was that IBM Lenexa (The old Informix offices) are just a > mile down the road. Not entirely true. By having the conference in a place like Kansas City the cost to the attendees is significantly reduced. We wanter to have a location centrally located and also a place where the hotel costs would be fairly reasonable. That eliminated places like Chicago, Dallas, and Houston. Holding the conference here meant that more IBMers > could attend because for the most part, they wouldn't have to travel. Well I have to travel. John Miller has to travel. Scott Lashley has to travel. Fred Ho has to travel. Curt Cotner has to travel. Srinivasan Mottupalli has to travel. Vijay Lolabattu has to travel. Keshava Murthy has to travel. Alan Caldera has to travel. (etc....). A large percentage of the IBM speakers will have to travel. > > But the interesting thing about this conference... Its not IBM doing > the heavy lifting, its the user group community. > > Thats the point. Informix survives not because of IBM, but because of > its user base. > > So when you go to Lenexa, ask Jerry Keesee what's IBM's go to market > strategy now that DB2 and IDS are going to overlap even more when they > add more DW features in to IDS. Hummmmm Guess you know something that I don't.

On Feb 6, 9:18 am, Madison Pruet <mpru...@verizon.net> wrote: > Ian Michael Gumby wrote: > > On Feb 6, 6:34 am, Wikking <Wik.Ki...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote: > >>http://www.ibmdatabasemag.com/story/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=21130... > > >> -- > > >> }(: > > > Wow the king of wankers can regurgitate a link to a url. > > > But one has to ask what will Ambuj or Jerry Keesee say about Informix > > marketing? > > > IBM doesn't want to spend any money on Informix marketing. Or if they > > have to, they want to spend as little as possible. Take the IIUG > > event. > > True, IBM helped jumpstart it. The reason KC (Lenexa/Overland Park) > > was chosen was that IBM Lenexa (The old Informix offices) are just a > > mile down the road. > > Not entirely true.  By having the conference in a place like Kansas City > the cost to the attendees is significantly reduced.  We wanter to have a > location centrally located and also a place where the hotel costs would > be fairly reasonable.  That eliminated places like Chicago, Dallas, and > Houston. > > Holding the conference here meant that more IBMers > > > could attend because for the most part, they wouldn't have to travel. > > Well I have to travel.  John Miller has to travel.  Scott Lashley has to > travel.  Fred Ho has to travel.  Curt Cotner has to travel.  Srinivasan > Mottupalli has to travel.  Vijay Lolabattu has to travel.  Keshava > Murthy has to travel.  Alan Caldera has to travel. (etc....). > > A large percentage of the IBM speakers will have to travel. > Madison, Outside of speakers, where do the majority of Informix people live and work? Menlo Park? Not really anymore. Portland? That's Steve Miller's team Atlanta? That's Alan Caldera and he's really the only one from that area unless he's relocated. True cost was a factor, but then you could have held the event at the Courtyard Marriot in Brookpark, OH (Its by the airport bordering Cleveland.) But when we planned the first one, there was this idea of getting back to Informix's roots. Ok so Menlo would have been too expensive and well Lenexa is almost as good. ;-) > > > > But the interesting thing about this conference... Its not IBM doing > > the heavy lifting, its the user group community. > > > Thats the point. Informix survives not because of IBM, but because of > > its user base. > > > So when you go to Lenexa, ask Jerry Keesee what's IBM's go to market > > strategy now that DB2 and IDS are going to overlap even more when they > > add more DW features in to IDS. > > Hummmmm   Guess you know something that I don't. Well, if you had listened to Jerry's last call, he did a bit of a road map. If you missed it, I can send you the slide deck, or you can read his comments on Eric's InformixZone's website. Eric posted a translation from the Czech Computerworld interview. Yes there is overlap already. IBM continues to perform OLTP benchmarks using DB2. This is a bit ironic because it's counter to their 'go to market' strategy which states IDS is their OLTP platform of choice. Yet no benchmarks. Jerry defended IBM's position on benchmarks by saying that it is very expensive (no numbers given) and that once you start playing the benchmarking game, you're going to have to continue and defend your benchmarks. My guess is that IBM doesn't want to embarass themselves by doing a benchmark on IDS that would directly compete with DB2's numbers. (I think he alluded to this as well.) That would be a reason not to do the TPC-C benchmark. There is the TPC-E benchmark, but Jerry made the point in that unless you have two competitors, you don't have much of a war. Meaning that IBM is willing to cede the TPC-E benchmark to Microsoft and let the hardware players slug it out. So if Informix is going to get features that were in XPS and better integration with Cognos, you can bet that there will be even more overlap with DB2. While Jerry didn't give specifics and what features will be in which release, the roadmap is a clear indication of continuing confusion in moving forward. This is a critical mess that IBM needs to resolve ASAP. The king of wankers is correct about FUD. Unfortunately its IBM that is creating the FUD. Almost as bad as Diane F. did back in the Informix days. ;-) -G

Ian Michael Gumby wrote: > On Feb 6, 9:18 am, Madison Pruet <mpru...@verizon.net> wrote: >> Ian Michael Gumby wrote: >>> On Feb 6, 6:34 am, Wikking <Wik.Ki...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote: >>>> http://www.ibmdatabasemag.com/story/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=21130... >>>> -- >>>> }(: >>> Wow the king of wankers can regurgitate a link to a url. >>> But one has to ask what will Ambuj or Jerry Keesee say about Informix >>> marketing? >>> IBM doesn't want to spend any money on Informix marketing. Or if they >>> have to, they want to spend as little as possible. Take the IIUG >>> event. >>> True, IBM helped jumpstart it. The reason KC (Lenexa/Overland Park) >>> was chosen was that IBM Lenexa (The old Informix offices) are just a >>> mile down the road. >> Not entirely true. By having the conference in a place like Kansas City >> the cost to the attendees is significantly reduced. We wanter to have a >> location centrally located and also a place where the hotel costs would >> be fairly reasonable. That eliminated places like Chicago, Dallas, and >> Houston. >> >> Holding the conference here meant that more IBMers >> >>> could attend because for the most part, they wouldn't have to travel. >> Well I have to travel. John Miller has to travel. Scott Lashley has to >> travel. Fred Ho has to travel. Curt Cotner has to travel. Srinivasan >> Mottupalli has to travel. Vijay Lolabattu has to travel. Keshava >> Murthy has to travel. Alan Caldera has to travel. (etc....). >> >> A large percentage of the IBM speakers will have to travel. >> > Madison, > Outside of speakers, where do the majority of Informix people live and > work? > > Menlo Park? Not really anymore. Menlo Park has been closed for some time now. > > Portland? That's Steve Miller's team That is simply not true. Steve Miller is a marketing person. There are several developers working out of the Portland/Beaverton area and they are not on Steve Miller's team. > > Atlanta? That's Alan Caldera and he's really the only one from that > area unless he's relocated. > > True cost was a factor, but then you could have held the event at the > Courtyard Marriot in Brookpark, OH (Its by the airport bordering > Cleveland.) > But when we planned the first one, there was this idea of getting back > to Informix's roots. Ok so Menlo would have been too expensive and > well Lenexa is almost as good. ;-) My point is that the development team is highly dispersed. Some folks are in Lenexa, but some folks are in Portland, Chicago, Atlanta, Dallas, San Jose, Denver, Boston, etc. And there will be quite a bit of travel required on IBM's part to attend. > >> >>> But the interesting thing about this conference... Its not IBM doing >>> the heavy lifting, its the user group community. >>> Thats the point. Informix survives not because of IBM, but because of >>> its user base. >>> So when you go to Lenexa, ask Jerry Keesee what's IBM's go to market >>> strategy now that DB2 and IDS are going to overlap even more when they >>> add more DW features in to IDS. >> Hummmmm Guess you know something that I don't. > > Well, if you had listened to Jerry's last call, he did a bit of a road > map. If you missed it, I can send you the slide deck, or you can read > his comments on Eric's InformixZone's website. Eric posted a > translation from the Czech Computerworld interview. We haven't even got the feature list in the next release finalized yet so there's no sense in trying to project what will be in that release. We do have as part of our charter to integrate IDS with as much of IBM's portfolio as possible. Since Cognos is an IBM product, then it only stands to reason that we would increase our inter-operatibility with it. > > Yes there is overlap already. IBM continues to perform OLTP benchmarks > using DB2. This is a bit ironic because it's counter to their 'go to > market' strategy which states IDS is their OLTP platform of choice. > Yet no benchmarks. Jerry defended IBM's position on benchmarks by > saying that it is very expensive (no numbers given) and that once you > start playing the benchmarking game, you're going to have to continue > and defend your benchmarks. > > My guess is that IBM doesn't want to embarass themselves by doing a > benchmark on IDS that would directly compete with DB2's numbers. > (I think he alluded to this as well.) That would be a reason not to do > the TPC-C benchmark. There is the TPC-E benchmark, but Jerry made the > point in that unless you have two competitors, you don't have much of > a war. Meaning that IBM is willing to cede the TPC-E benchmark to > Microsoft and let the hardware players slug it out. > > So if Informix is going to get features that were in XPS and better > integration with Cognos, you can bet that there will be even more > overlap with DB2. > While Jerry didn't give specifics and what features will be in which > release, the roadmap is a clear indication of continuing confusion in > moving forward. > This is a critical mess that IBM needs to resolve ASAP. > > The king of wankers is correct about FUD. Unfortunately its IBM that > is creating the FUD. Almost as bad as Diane F. did back in the > Informix days. ;-) > > -G > >

"Madison Pruet" <mpruet1@verizon.net> wrote in message news:498C54E5.8050504@verizon.net... > Ian Michael Gumby wrote: >> On Feb 6, 6:34 am, Wikking <Wik.Ki...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote: >>> http://www.ibmdatabasemag.com/story/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=21130... >>> >>> -- >>> >>> }(: >> >> Wow the king of wankers can regurgitate a link to a url. >> >> But one has to ask what will Ambuj or Jerry Keesee say about Informix >> marketing? >> > >> IBM doesn't want to spend any money on Informix marketing. Or if they >> have to, they want to spend as little as possible. Take the IIUG >> event. >> True, IBM helped jumpstart it. The reason KC (Lenexa/Overland Park) >> was chosen was that IBM Lenexa (The old Informix offices) are just a >> mile down the road. > > Not entirely true. By having the conference in a place like Kansas City > the cost to the attendees is significantly reduced. We wanter to have a > location centrally located Er, well, speak for yourself! There are no direct flights to Kansas from outside the US. > and also a place where the hotel costs would be fairly reasonable. That > eliminated places like Chicago, Dallas, and Houston. But your central point is spot on. It was truly great value last year, and indeed this year, although with the economy as it is, and the plunging pound, I can't affird to go :-(

Neil Truby wrote: > "Madison Pruet" <mpruet1@verizon.net> wrote in message > news:498C54E5.8050504@verizon.net... >> Ian Michael Gumby wrote: >>> On Feb 6, 6:34 am, Wikking <Wik.Ki...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote: >>>> http://www.ibmdatabasemag.com/story/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=21130... >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> >>>> }(: >>> >>> Wow the king of wankers can regurgitate a link to a url. >>> >>> But one has to ask what will Ambuj or Jerry Keesee say about Informix >>> marketing? >>> >> >>> IBM doesn't want to spend any money on Informix marketing. Or if they >>> have to, they want to spend as little as possible. Take the IIUG >>> event. >>> True, IBM helped jumpstart it. The reason KC (Lenexa/Overland Park) >>> was chosen was that IBM Lenexa (The old Informix offices) are just a >>> mile down the road. >> >> Not entirely true. By having the conference in a place like Kansas >> City the cost to the attendees is significantly reduced. We wanter to >> have a location centrally located > > Er, well, speak for yourself! There are no direct flights to Kansas > from outside the US. Er, well, I usually drive to Kansas City.... ;-) > >> and also a place where the hotel costs would be fairly reasonable. >> That eliminated places like Chicago, Dallas, and Houston. > > But your central point is spot on. It was truly great value last year, > and indeed this year, although with the economy as it is, and the > plunging pound, I can't affird to go :-(

Ian Michael Gumby wrote: > Yes there is overlap already. IBM continues to perform OLTP benchmarks > using DB2. This is a bit ironic because it's counter to their 'go to > market' strategy which states IDS is their OLTP platform of choice. > Yet no benchmarks. Jerry defended IBM's position on benchmarks by > saying that it is very expensive (no numbers given) and that once you > start playing the benchmarking game, you're going to have to continue > and defend your benchmarks. > I really hope that when available, people will listen the webcast recording. You keep saying the same thing (and it's true that Jerry said more or less that), but you don't say everything he said... And what he said is a straight answer, very honest and with very valid points. I will not repeat what he said. It's better for anyone interested to go to: http://www.ibm.com/informix/webcasts and listen for themselves (the sound is not thery yet, just the slides. Usually the sound recording will show up in about a month). We're all free to disagree with the answer, but it's a point of view. With valid reasons. > My guess is that IBM doesn't want to embarass themselves by doing a > benchmark on IDS that would directly compete with DB2's numbers. > (I think he alluded to this as well.) That would be a reason not to do > the TPC-C benchmark. There is the TPC-E benchmark, but Jerry made the > point in that unless you have two competitors, you don't have much of > a war. Meaning that IBM is willing to cede the TPC-E benchmark to > Microsoft and let the hardware players slug it out. Oh... after a dozen posts you get to the point... You "think" he "alluded" to that. I would put it in other words, but as I wrote, hopefully anyone interested will listen to it (when and where they feel comfortable) Regards. -- Fernando Nunes Portugal http://informix-technology.blogspot.com My email works... but I don't check it frequently...

Madison Pruet wrote: > We haven't even got the feature list in the next release finalized yet > so there's no sense in trying to project what will be in that release. > We do have as part of our charter to integrate IDS with as much of IBM's > portfolio as possible. Since Cognos is an IBM product, then it only > stands to reason that we would increase our inter-operatibility with it. > I have a cheer of customers voting on idsdb00171373 :P -- Fernando Nunes Portugal http://informix-technology.blogspot.com My email works... but I don't check it frequently...

> > I will not repeat what he said. It's better for anyone interested to go to: > > http://www.ibm.com/informix/webcasts > Slide 27 pretty much sums it up - Informix. Invisible, Agile, Resilient

Mark Townsend wrote: > >> >> I will not repeat what he said. It's better for anyone interested to >> go to: >> >> http://www.ibm.com/informix/webcasts >> > > > Slide 27 pretty much sums it up - Informix. Invisible, Agile, Resilient lad you agree. Depending on how you interpret it, these are very good characteristics for the customers or for the competitors. Oracle is the opposite... In both interpretations.... Regards. -- Fernando Nunes Portugal http://informix-technology.blogspot.com My email works... but I don't check it frequently...

Fernado, A good DBA / IT Architect to make any system agile and resilient. The fact that Mark points to the one word. 'Invisible'. That's not a good word when you're trying to describe any product that isn't supposed to be stealthy. Your exact quote 'Depending on how you interpret it,...' is the exact problem. If you can take what you say and twist it, you open the door to FUD. When Jerry K. defends IBM's position about not getting IDS into the benchmark wars, it opens the door to FUD. Doing OLTP benchmarks (TCP-C) on DB2 while stating that Informix is your OLTP engine of choice is a major contradiction. If there were other marketing effors being made, then there is more credibility to his defense of IBM's benchmarking practice. No other efforts, how can we trust what Jerry or other IBMers say? Thus FUD. This is why I and others doubt IBM. They have not done anything visible to the outside world to show that they are supporting IDS. Adding features and support IDS was a major condition to the Informix acquistion. I can assure you that if IBM didn't agree to continuing support of the product, the deal would not have gone through. So when will IBM actually put skin in to the game? Thinking of all the money IBM is saving by their 'green' initiatives and moving all of their jobs to cheaper labor markets, they should have something that they could spend on marketing or visible programs. -G > From: domusonline@gmail.com > Subject: Re: IIUG Returns to Kansas for its 2009 Conference > Date: Sun, 8 Feb 2009 01:21:07 +0000 > To: informix-list@iiug.org > > Mark Townsend wrote: > > > >> > >> I will not repeat what he said. It's better for anyone interested to > >> go to: > >> > >> http://www.ibm.com/informix/webcasts > >> > > > > > > Slide 27 pretty much sums it up - Informix. Invisible, Agile, Resilient > > lad you agree. Depending on how you interpret it, these are very good > characteristics for the customers or for the competitors. > > Oracle is the opposite... In both interpretations.... > > Regards. > > -- > Fernando Nunes > Portugal > > http://informix-technology.blogspot.com > My email works... but I don't check it frequently... > _______________________________________________ > Informix-list mailing list > Informix-list@iiug.org > http://www.iiug.org/mailman/listinfo/informix-list _________________________________________________________________ Windows Live™: E-mail. Chat. Share. Get more ways to connect. http://windowslive.com/howitworks?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_t2_allup_howitworks_022009