Re: Announcing: The IBM Customer Advisory Council for Informix

mark.scranton@gmail.com wrote: > Wow ... > > Why can't the announcement of the CAC for Informix be what it was > intended? ....good news for the Informix community. It has now been > twisted and changed into a completely different meaning than was > intended. > > 1. I simply posted that we are forming a Customer Advisory Council for > Informix - for more input from customers on the future development of > Informix products. I expected some "woo hoo's" from the Informix crowd. > > 2. I also made note that IBM has had a CAC for DB2 for many years, and > it's very active. There is also the IDUG (for DB2) which is very active > too - they don't compete with each other. They "compliment each other." > Why can't the Informix folks see this as an indicator that IBM would > spend the money to fund and build a CAC for Informix as a good thing? > > 3. I never mentioned that IIUG at all in my post - and didn't need to, > since this CAC is not related to, does not compete with, nor does it > alter the goals and job of the IIUG. > > 4. No - it is not "inbound marketing" - whatever that means. It is a > chance for IBM to get more detailed input of technology requirements, > feedback on current releases, and start a positive dialogue about the > future of Informix. > > I really am starting to wonder if my continued mission of furthering > the Informix cause and "recapturing the Informix family" will ever > stick on CDI. I have posted "good news" many times here, and man, does > it get morphed into all kinds of things! Those of you that know me well > know that I always speak directly and you can take my message at face > value - with no hidden agenda or veiled message. > > As I've always said - there are many things we continue to work on to > put Informix where it belongs with respect to clients and positioning > within IBM. I continue to report positive information - of which I have > ALOT. I'm not denying that there is still work to do. But I am very > frustrated that we don't acknowledge "great news" when it is made known > on CDI. > > Simply put - why do we have to twist "great news" into negative > sentiment? I continue to travel nearly 100% of the time to > Informix-only customers. My peers are currently overseas doing internal > IBM training on, yes, Informix, to the SE and technical folks. the > Informix team at IBM are very, very busy. > > Maybe some of you don't know me well, but I joined Informix in 1995, > and have been focused on IDS and XPS...period. Exclusively. I intended > to retire at Informix. Instead, now I intend to retire working on > Informix products. So again - I'm like a little kid that gets all all > excited about stuff like the forming of the CAC for Informix. I know > there are others that share that enthusiasm. Would love to hear from > them. > > Anyone wanna join me on this effort to positively influence the future > of Informix? And I don't mean "think positive thoughts and all will be > fine" - I mean recognize and move on the areas that need improvement, > as we have been doing, but also acknowledge the positive steps that are > being taken. This is the only way we will know if what we are doing is > working. > > Thanks - > Mark Scranton I appreciate the building of the CAC. This is certainly a good decision. But I will not accept that DoubleEcho is now stamped as bad guy who is always negative. This is certainly not true. He contributed a lot of interesting, good ideas to the marketing request list (http://www.herber-consulting.de/cgi-bin/IfxMarkReq.pl). Ideas which would certainly help to get Informix back on track in terms of market visibility and market share. With his brainstorming he has done the work of people who will be paid every day for doing that, but have not been able to deliver reasonable results in terms of vital marketing work thru the last years. As I said we should welcome this good news but we should also remain critical to the marketing deficiencies. The withdrawal of the 'flagship' message was certainly not a good start this year, the website is still not fixed. Still waiting for encouraging messages and press coverage around Informix not limited to the eyes of the Informix community only. Customers pay a lot of money for IDS and they have the right to see a vital product marketing happening. If IBM is not able or willing to do this for IDS, then it would be fair, to reduce the price for IDS as there are no noteworthy marketing costs happening. If not reducing the price for IDS, please do a vital, cute marketing around IDS like it is already done for DB2. Make sure that the offers for both products are emancipated.

Eric Herber wrote: > mark.scranton@gmail.com wrote: > >> Wow ... >> >> Why can't the announcement of the CAC for Informix be what it was >> intended? ....good news for the Informix community. It has now been >> twisted and changed into a completely different meaning than was >> intended. >> >> 1. I simply posted that we are forming a Customer Advisory Council for >> Informix - for more input from customers on the future development of >> Informix products. I expected some "woo hoo's" from the Informix crowd. >> >> 2. I also made note that IBM has had a CAC for DB2 for many years, and >> it's very active. There is also the IDUG (for DB2) which is very active >> too - they don't compete with each other. They "compliment each other." >> Why can't the Informix folks see this as an indicator that IBM would >> spend the money to fund and build a CAC for Informix as a good thing? >> >> 3. I never mentioned that IIUG at all in my post - and didn't need to, >> since this CAC is not related to, does not compete with, nor does it >> alter the goals and job of the IIUG. >> >> 4. No - it is not "inbound marketing" - whatever that means. It is a >> chance for IBM to get more detailed input of technology requirements, >> feedback on current releases, and start a positive dialogue about the >> future of Informix. >> >> I really am starting to wonder if my continued mission of furthering >> the Informix cause and "recapturing the Informix family" will ever >> stick on CDI. I have posted "good news" many times here, and man, does >> it get morphed into all kinds of things! Those of you that know me well >> know that I always speak directly and you can take my message at face >> value - with no hidden agenda or veiled message. >> >> As I've always said - there are many things we continue to work on to >> put Informix where it belongs with respect to clients and positioning >> within IBM. I continue to report positive information - of which I have >> ALOT. I'm not denying that there is still work to do. But I am very >> frustrated that we don't acknowledge "great news" when it is made known >> on CDI. >> >> Simply put - why do we have to twist "great news" into negative >> sentiment? I continue to travel nearly 100% of the time to >> Informix-only customers. My peers are currently overseas doing internal >> IBM training on, yes, Informix, to the SE and technical folks. the >> Informix team at IBM are very, very busy. >> >> Maybe some of you don't know me well, but I joined Informix in 1995, >> and have been focused on IDS and XPS...period. Exclusively. I intended >> to retire at Informix. Instead, now I intend to retire working on >> Informix products. So again - I'm like a little kid that gets all all >> excited about stuff like the forming of the CAC for Informix. I know >> there are others that share that enthusiasm. Would love to hear from >> them. >> >> Anyone wanna join me on this effort to positively influence the future >> of Informix? And I don't mean "think positive thoughts and all will be >> fine" - I mean recognize and move on the areas that need improvement, >> as we have been doing, but also acknowledge the positive steps that are >> being taken. This is the only way we will know if what we are doing is >> working. >> >> Thanks - >> Mark Scranton > > I appreciate the building of the CAC. This is certainly a > good decision. > > But I will not accept that DoubleEcho is now stamped as > bad guy who is always negative. This is certainly not > true. He contributed a lot of interesting, good ideas > to the marketing request list > (http://www.herber-consulting.de/cgi-bin/IfxMarkReq.pl). > Ideas which would certainly help to get Informix back > on track in terms of market visibility and market share. > With his brainstorming he has done the work of people who > will be paid every day for doing that, but have not been able > to deliver reasonable results in terms of vital marketing > work thru the last years. > > As I said we should welcome this good news but we should > also remain critical to the marketing deficiencies. > The withdrawal of the 'flagship' message was certainly not > a good start this year, the website is still not fixed. > Still waiting for encouraging messages and press coverage > around Informix not limited to the eyes of the Informix > community only. > > Customers pay a lot of money for IDS and they have the right to > see a vital product marketing happening. If IBM is not able or > willing to do this for IDS, then it would be fair, to reduce > the price for IDS as there are no noteworthy marketing costs > happening. > If not reducing the price for IDS, please do a vital, cute > marketing around IDS like it is already done for DB2. > Make sure that the offers for both products are emancipated. > Eric, Thanks for your support. I think it is important that we all try to align our frustrations in the right direction. I see anger on both sides of the fence here. I see a somewhat unhealthy mindset here in c.d.i. from the cheerleaders that says "Forget the past.". As you are probably all too aware, this is dangerous. It suggests permitting a lack of accountability and responsibility. There are still sins of the fathers that have not been addressed, even after the end of Informix Corp, etc etc etc what 5 years ago. If you or anyone participated in the recent webcast, it was a great list of questions presented to IBM, and this was not due to one person, but a great group of people each asking great questions. IBM has already paid for professional cheerleaders, and they did their part in the webcast. But cheerleading alone is not going to make anything really happen. There is still work to be done. It is important right here right now to speak up about issues, and not encourage or reward bad behaviors that are already present, preventing real issues from being addressed. It is also important to recognize the public square, where debate is alive in all its forms, both positive and negative, that this will allow the real issues to bubble to the top. Cheerleading, while a valuable part of end-user-support, and product mind share, cannot be the sole voice of the customer, or the end-user--it is not only a disservice to the vendor, it is a disservice to the customers and end-users. IBM has already paid for cheerleaders, both in the marketing department and the IIUG, what they really need is a wider selection of people to hear what to do. This is why I said from the start, the CAC will be a good thing for IBM. But don't expect it to be advocacy. Expect it to be inbound marketing, plain and simple, and a great opportunity for anyone to speak up. If you don't take advantage of this big opportunity, forget about Informix, it will soon be over. The CAC may have more to do with the future of Informix than anything else.