Re: Informix running on Linux
Mark D. Stock wrote: > > John R. Galloway, Jr. wrote: > > > > Infomrix-on-linux-posters, > > So what sort of data do you guys have that Informix on Linux is > > a big market? It's not on Linux so we don't have the numbers to show it. However, the whole point to getting it on Linux is the low cost associated with the extremely high value. My Solaris x86 doesn't come with probably half the stuff that comes with the Slackware install. I also have 64 MB of memory on the Solaris box, barely enough to run Solaris and Informix. Linux is running on my OLD 486, with only 40 MB of memory, and uses only about 16 MB, WITH XWINDOWS RUNNING. So, it's not only free, it's more efficient, and it's like breathing new life into my old 486. I'm seriously thinking of removing Solaris x86 and putting Linux on my Pentium. The Slackware install is quite smoothe compared to Solaris--the latest Sun MDB disks you can download are better than the original distribution, but Sun x86 was/is a lot more of a pain than Slackware was. Linux comes with a better openwin than Solaris, and several desktop managers--and a Tcl kernel configurator that is very slick. Solaris is good, but a real pig, and is missing so much compared to Linux. The ONLY reason I have it is to run Informix. Same reason many have SCO probably. Windows NT is distributed by ONE distributor, and no one else. It is also UNDOCUMENTED for the most part, a resource hog, and slow as hell for many applications, unless you build a system with lots of CPUs and lots of memory. This is a far cry from the intent of NT, which was supposed to run with a small amount of memory, and usually one CPU. NT was also originally targeted at mom-n-pop businesses, but these people wouldn't have a clue how to run NT in its' current state. At least with Linux there's plenty of help out there available and a lot more solutions to computing problems than with NT. ( Win95 is such a joke I don't mention it ) The biggest obstacle to UNIX users going to NT is the miserable shell provided with NT, and loss of an environment like UNIX. When you use UNIX, you are part of something bigger, when you use NT, it's part of something smaller: One vendor, limited tools, and limited approaches available to solving problems. You have to buy add-on everything for NT. > > You all look to be from Europe so maybe things are > > different there, but in the US I get the impression that Linux is > > not popular in the commercial sector, or at least the sector that > > buys Infomirx/Oracle/etc. I'm in America, and Linux is extremely popular among heavy hitter developers and DBAs. > > Are you talking about a much cheaper > > license? (i.e. down to "PC" prices?). Absolutely. When UNIX vendors finally get the idea that NT is replacing the footprint once ripe for a cheap UNIX, the prices will fall. Most UNIX vendors want to quickly jam multi-user pricing on everything they sell, as if the number of users was relative. This formula is so hard to manage it should be thrown out--it's obsolete. NT is now being priced against Novell, for all the wrong reasons, and will not scale like UNIX. Linux proves that. > > Other than the fact that it would be fun and neat for them > > to do, and maybe could be done unsupported (though no other > > port is dealt wtih this way to my knowledge) what is the business > > case to do this? (especially in ligght of the illegal copies > > that would be circulating, as one of you suggested might be > > the result). As I stated earlier, saturation bombing works. You want to be an Oracle? Or a Microsoft? Act like one, and you'll get there. The development environment on Linux is mind boggling. You name it, it was installed when I put Slackware on. C++, Perl, Objective C, etc. > > Why am I asking? Well we're always looking for interesting > > business opportunities and are not without contacts at Informix... > Rapid response to the market is the biggest indicator that the vendor understands the business they are trying to serve. While Universal Server is a wonderful product, many of us are really trying to get a handle on 7.x. Maybe if we could all have not only a better set of DBA interfaces to 7.x, and low-cost availability of a truly scaled <<--past tense here ) data base product, then we wouldn't even be wasting our time with NT or other inefficient operating systems. Most of the people I know who use NT try to turn it into UNIX first chance they get. Why bother when you could use Linux instead? ( SCO? I hate it. ) > I don't know if you've heard of the "Internet"? Weeeell, about > 99% of all Internet servers run Linux. :-) > > I'll leave the rest to your imagination. ;-) > > Cheers, > -- > Mark. > > +------------------------------------------------------------------+ > |Mark D. Stock - The West Solutions Group http://www.west.co.za | > | The Informix FAQ is at http://www.iiug.org | If Phil White wants to do something that will shake the ground he'll invest in developers and DBAs. Putting Informix 7.x on Linux will get a lot of free press he couldn't buy with all the money from Oracle. Besides if you really want to sell Universal Server, let go of 7.x. If you have more people using 7.x, they can migrate their experience to Universal Server, thus more momentum in the market. Who knows, if 7.x were on Linux, some of the Linux community might build some really cool tools for it. They're a busy bunch... Cheers, Tim -- Tim Schaefer \\\\|// tschaefe@mindspring.com (6 6) ------------------------oOOo---( )---o00o--------- http://www.mindspring.com/~tschaefe