Re: Informix 10 vs Oracle 10g

RollForward Wizard said: > > This is awesome work. I think it touches on some very salient points, > especially regarding virtual processors and threading. It is amazing > that Oracle technology could have gone so wrong despite the amount of > money they have as a company, and how they could not come up with a > better engine--or why haven't they dumped the current engine and made a > new one that is actually better than any other product. Simply amazing. > All that money and they can't find anyone to make their technology better > than it is. They must have their priorities wrong, spending so much money > on sales and marketing. :-) > > RE: http://www.IIUG.org/resources/articles/IDS10vsOracle10g.pdf You're pushing on an open door, trust me. I don't think there's a single person who uses Informix who doesn't wish that Informix and IBM were as effective at creating brand awareness for Informix as Oracle is. And then you'll find plenty of people who say Oracle don't spend ENOUGH on sales and marketing. -- Bye now, Obnoxio "C'est pas parce qu'on n'a rien ` dire qu'il faut fermer sa gueule" - Coluche did i mention i like nulls? heck, i even go so far as to say that all columns in a table except the primary key could/should be nullable. this has certain advantages, for example, if you need to insert a child record and you don't have a parent row for it, just do an insert into the parent table with the primary key value (everything else null), and voila, relational integrity is preserved. but this is, admittedly, a bit controversial among modellers. --r937, dbforums.com sending to informix-list

Obnoxio The Clown wrote: > RollForward Wizard said: >> This is awesome work. I think it touches on some very salient points, >> especially regarding virtual processors and threading. It is amazing >> that Oracle technology could have gone so wrong despite the amount of >> money they have as a company, and how they could not come up with a >> better engine--or why haven't they dumped the current engine and made a >> new one that is actually better than any other product. Simply amazing. >> All that money and they can't find anyone to make their technology better >> than it is. They must have their priorities wrong, spending so much money >> on sales and marketing. :-) >> >> RE: http://www.IIUG.org/resources/articles/IDS10vsOracle10g.pdf > > You're pushing on an open door, trust me. I don't think there's a single > person who uses Informix who doesn't wish that Informix and IBM were as > effective at creating brand awareness for Informix as Oracle is. > > And then you'll find plenty of people who say Oracle don't spend ENOUGH on > sales and marketing. > If you're IBM or any company, you have to have something to sell, and a market that likes what you sell. If there isn't a market for Informix, no matter how great it is, you are not going to sell Informix to anyone. IBM, Oracle, and Microsoft all sell a lot of software, some products more than others. At the end of the day, they look at what they sell, and make decisions, just like any business would. If it doesn't make money, why would they continue to push it? Oracle and Microsoft by the way do an excellent job of putting some pretty wrapping around all their products, something that is instructive for all of us. What does IBM need to do specifically to sell more Informix? Or is it less about "selling" Informix, and just making it more prominent, or visible, or legit, or ??? What do IBM need to do with Informix that gives the product its' proper place? New books? New co-op developer programs? ( IBM DB2 and Zend PHP Core for example ) New promotions? New advertising? New Web Seminars? Road shows? More White Papers? An Informix Magazine? Bumper Stickers? Kiosk/Appliance PCs with Informix pre-installed? Redbooks? Boat Races? Press Releases?

RollForward Wizard wrote: > Obnoxio The Clown wrote: > >> RollForward Wizard said: >> >>> This is awesome work. I think it touches on some very salient points, >>> especially regarding virtual processors and threading. It is amazing >>> that Oracle technology could have gone so wrong despite the amount of >>> money they have as a company, and how they could not come up with a >>> better engine--or why haven't they dumped the current engine and made a >>> new one that is actually better than any other product. Simply amazing. >>> All that money and they can't find anyone to make their technology >>> better >>> than it is. They must have their priorities wrong, spending so much >>> money >>> on sales and marketing. :-) >>> >>> RE: http://www.IIUG.org/resources/articles/IDS10vsOracle10g.pdf >> >> >> You're pushing on an open door, trust me. I don't think there's a single >> person who uses Informix who doesn't wish that Informix and IBM were as >> effective at creating brand awareness for Informix as Oracle is. >> >> And then you'll find plenty of people who say Oracle don't spend >> ENOUGH on >> sales and marketing. >> > > If you're IBM or any company, you have to have something to sell, and a > market > that likes what you sell. If there isn't a market for Informix, no > matter how > great it is, you are not going to sell Informix to anyone. IBM, Oracle, > and > Microsoft all sell a lot of software, some products more than others. > At the > end of the day, they look at what they sell, and make decisions, just > like any > business would. If it doesn't make money, why would they continue to > push it? > > Oracle and Microsoft by the way do an excellent job of putting some > pretty wrapping > around all their products, something that is instructive for all of us. > > What does IBM need to do specifically to sell more Informix? Or is it > less about > "selling" Informix, and just making it more prominent, or visible, or > legit, or ??? > > What do IBM need to do with Informix that gives the product its' proper > place? > > New books? > > New co-op developer programs? ( IBM DB2 and Zend PHP Core for example ) > > New promotions? > > New advertising? > > New Web Seminars? > > Road shows? > > More White Papers? > > An Informix Magazine? > > Bumper Stickers? > > Kiosk/Appliance PCs with Informix pre-installed? > > Redbooks? > > Boat Races? > > Press Releases? Convince C-level management that it isn't a path without a future. Right now it is impossible to view it as more viable than Sybase. Most business owners are looking at the list of major app vendors ... SAP ... Ok, eBusiness Suite (Oracle), PeopleSoft (Oracle), JD Edwards (Oracle), Siebel (Oracle), and thinking ... why? And Informix is not the only product where the question is asked. I think if one approaches it objectively, dispassionately, one can reasonably conclude that it is too late. A world in which the market is split between Oracle and Microsoft is not that hard to envision. -- Daniel A. Morgan http://www.psoug.org damorgan@x.washington.edu (replace x with u to respond)

"RollForward Wizard" <rollforward@rollforward.com> wrote in message news:j98hf.10600$Ad5.5295@fe59.usenetserver.com... > Obnoxio The Clown wrote: >> RollForward Wizard said: > If you're IBM or any company, you have to have something to sell, and a > market > that likes what you sell. If there isn't a market for Informix, no matter > how > great it is, you are not going to sell Informix to anyone. IBM, Oracle, > and > Microsoft all sell a lot of software, some products more than others. At > the > end of the day, they look at what they sell, and make decisions, just like > any > business would. If it doesn't make money, why would they continue to push > it? > > Oracle and Microsoft by the way do an excellent job of putting some pretty > wrapping > around all their products, something that is instructive for all of us. > > What does IBM need to do specifically to sell more Informix? Or is it > less about > "selling" Informix, and just making it more prominent, or visible, or > legit, or ??? > > What do IBM need to do with Informix that gives the product its' proper > place? I don't think many people will claim that Informix failed because its technology wasn't the best, or up there with the best. The concensus is that it failed because other products in its space were better advertised, marketed or supported with application development features. Those of us who like Informix were disappointed, I believe, that when it was acquired by IBM its new owners chose not to use their enormous product promotion budgets to revitalise the profile of Informix in its traditionally strong areas, but to promote in its place a mainframe-native product (DB2) with little presence in that market. So it isn't a question of Informix having some inherent "right" to publicity and promotion: it is (and remains) a great product in its space, but the chance to consolidate and improve its position has been passed up in favour of a wider strategy of publicising only one, flagship, DBMS. The answer to your question: "What do IBM need to do with Informix ...?" was actually answered quite well by Daniel Morgan.

DA Morgan wrote: > RollForward Wizard wrote: > >> Obnoxio The Clown wrote: >> >>> RollForward Wizard said: >>> >>>> This is awesome work. I think it touches on some very salient points, >>>> especially regarding virtual processors and threading. It is amazing >>>> that Oracle technology could have gone so wrong despite the amount of >>>> money they have as a company, and how they could not come up with a >>>> better engine--or why haven't they dumped the current engine and made a >>>> new one that is actually better than any other product. Simply >>>> amazing. >>>> All that money and they can't find anyone to make their technology >>>> better >>>> than it is. They must have their priorities wrong, spending so much >>>> money >>>> on sales and marketing. :-) >>>> >>>> RE: http://www.IIUG.org/resources/articles/IDS10vsOracle10g.pdf >>> >>> >>> >>> You're pushing on an open door, trust me. I don't think there's a single >>> person who uses Informix who doesn't wish that Informix and IBM were as >>> effective at creating brand awareness for Informix as Oracle is. >>> >>> And then you'll find plenty of people who say Oracle don't spend >>> ENOUGH on >>> sales and marketing. >>> >> >> If you're IBM or any company, you have to have something to sell, and >> a market >> that likes what you sell. If there isn't a market for Informix, no >> matter how >> great it is, you are not going to sell Informix to anyone. IBM, >> Oracle, and >> Microsoft all sell a lot of software, some products more than others. >> At the >> end of the day, they look at what they sell, and make decisions, just >> like any >> business would. If it doesn't make money, why would they continue to >> push it? >> >> Oracle and Microsoft by the way do an excellent job of putting some >> pretty wrapping >> around all their products, something that is instructive for all of us. >> >> What does IBM need to do specifically to sell more Informix? Or is it >> less about >> "selling" Informix, and just making it more prominent, or visible, or >> legit, or ??? >> >> What do IBM need to do with Informix that gives the product its' >> proper place? >> >> New books? >> >> New co-op developer programs? ( IBM DB2 and Zend PHP Core for example ) >> >> New promotions? >> >> New advertising? >> >> New Web Seminars? >> >> Road shows? >> >> More White Papers? >> >> An Informix Magazine? >> >> Bumper Stickers? >> >> Kiosk/Appliance PCs with Informix pre-installed? >> >> Redbooks? >> >> Boat Races? >> >> Press Releases? > > > Convince C-level management that it isn't a path without a future. > Right now it is impossible to view it as more viable than Sybase. > Most business owners are looking at the list of major app vendors > ... SAP ... Ok, eBusiness Suite (Oracle), PeopleSoft (Oracle), > JD Edwards (Oracle), Siebel (Oracle), and thinking ... why? > > And Informix is not the only product where the question is asked. > I think if one approaches it objectively, dispassionately, one > can reasonably conclude that it is too late. A world in which the > market is split between Oracle and Microsoft is not that hard to > envision. #revenue(eBusiness Suite + PeopleSoft + JDEdwards + Sievel) < #revenue(SAP) #revenue(all of the above) << #revenue(ISV market). I am not concerned for the future of DBMS in IBM due to shifts in apps. Even if one were to believe that IBM's strategy were wrong and the DBMS "war" is being decided by owning the global ISVs, then one also had to believe that both the EU and US monopoly watchdogs didn't get it either. I simply can't believe that so many folks whose business is to understand market dynamics are wrong and only Larry is right. Maybe it's time to build a calendar for your prophecies Nostradamus? Cheers Serge -- Serge Rielau DB2 SQL Compiler Development IBM Toronto Lab

Comments in-line. Serge Rielau wrote: >> Convince C-level management that it isn't a path without a future. >> Right now it is impossible to view it as more viable than Sybase. >> Most business owners are looking at the list of major app vendors >> ... SAP ... Ok, eBusiness Suite (Oracle), PeopleSoft (Oracle), >> JD Edwards (Oracle), Siebel (Oracle), and thinking ... why? >> >> And Informix is not the only product where the question is asked. >> I think if one approaches it objectively, dispassionately, one >> can reasonably conclude that it is too late. A world in which the >> market is split between Oracle and Microsoft is not that hard to >> envision. > > #revenue(eBusiness Suite + PeopleSoft + JDEdwards + Sievel) < #revenue(SAP) It isn't about application revenue. A $10,000 PeopleSoft install takes just as much database as a $10,000,000 SAP install so this is a bit of a red herring. > I am not concerned for the future of DBMS in IBM due to shifts in apps. You may not be. But the marketing folks at IBM are and for a very good reason: It matters. > Even if one were to believe that IBM's strategy were wrong and the DBMS > "war" is being decided by owning the global ISVs, then one also had to > believe that both the EU and US monopoly watchdogs didn't get it either. And looking at how the regulators handled Microsoft convinces you they are out there, night and day, protecting us from monopolies? > I simply can't believe that so many folks whose business is to > understand market dynamics are wrong and only Larry is right. I'd be more than a bit hesitant to put my faith in the Gartner's of the world ... opinions for sale to the highest bidder. Their track record is abyssmal. Larry is not the only one that is right. He is just one of many saying the same thing. -- Daniel A. Morgan http://www.psoug.org damorgan@x.washington.edu (replace x with u to respond)

DA Morgan wrote: > RollForward Wizard wrote: >> Obnoxio The Clown wrote: >> >>> RollForward Wizard said: >>> >>>> This is awesome work. I think it touches on some very salient points, >>>> especially regarding virtual processors and threading. It is amazing >>>> that Oracle technology could have gone so wrong despite the amount of >>>> money they have as a company, and how they could not come up with a >>>> better engine--or why haven't they dumped the current engine and made a >>>> new one that is actually better than any other product. Simply >>>> amazing. >>>> All that money and they can't find anyone to make their technology >>>> better >>>> than it is. They must have their priorities wrong, spending so much >>>> money >>>> on sales and marketing. :-) >>>> >>>> RE: http://www.IIUG.org/resources/articles/IDS10vsOracle10g.pdf >>> >>> >>> You're pushing on an open door, trust me. I don't think there's a single >>> person who uses Informix who doesn't wish that Informix and IBM were as >>> effective at creating brand awareness for Informix as Oracle is. >>> >>> And then you'll find plenty of people who say Oracle don't spend >>> ENOUGH on >>> sales and marketing. >>> >> >> If you're IBM or any company, you have to have something to sell, and >> a market >> that likes what you sell. If there isn't a market for Informix, no >> matter how >> great it is, you are not going to sell Informix to anyone. IBM, >> Oracle, and >> Microsoft all sell a lot of software, some products more than others. >> At the >> end of the day, they look at what they sell, and make decisions, just >> like any >> business would. If it doesn't make money, why would they continue to >> push it? >> >> Oracle and Microsoft by the way do an excellent job of putting some >> pretty wrapping >> around all their products, something that is instructive for all of us. >> >> What does IBM need to do specifically to sell more Informix? Or is it >> less about >> "selling" Informix, and just making it more prominent, or visible, or >> legit, or ??? >> >> What do IBM need to do with Informix that gives the product its' >> proper place? >> >> New books? >> >> New co-op developer programs? ( IBM DB2 and Zend PHP Core for example ) >> >> New promotions? >> >> New advertising? >> >> New Web Seminars? >> >> Road shows? >> >> More White Papers? >> >> An Informix Magazine? >> >> Bumper Stickers? >> >> Kiosk/Appliance PCs with Informix pre-installed? >> >> Redbooks? >> >> Boat Races? >> >> Press Releases? > > Convince C-level management that it isn't a path without a future. > Right now it is impossible to view it as more viable than Sybase. > Most business owners are looking at the list of major app vendors > ... SAP ... Ok, eBusiness Suite (Oracle), PeopleSoft (Oracle), > JD Edwards (Oracle), Siebel (Oracle), and thinking ... why? > > And Informix is not the only product where the question is asked. > I think if one approaches it objectively, dispassionately, one > can reasonably conclude that it is too late. A world in which the > market is split between Oracle and Microsoft is not that hard to > envision. In it's best of times did Informix ever hit past %5 of the market? Applications are the key. I recently downloaded some kind of Java application, and it automagically installed Cloudscape, and Apache to make it work. The application was the center of attention not the database. It often gets into commodity reasoning, similar to tape backup software when considering databases these days. But in the high-performance space this is where the database becomes the application and in that context a meaningful, something-remembered discussion can happen if this-or-that database is said to be better or worse. But when in an application mindset, where the database is not the center of attention, you, just like a manager, couldn't care less where the database comes from, as long as the application runs, and doesn't fall down. Is there some kind of meaningful application that has to use Informix or its features where Informix is the preferred choice? It would appear that this could be the starting point, rather than just huffing and puffing about how great Informix is. Without some kind of meaningful application context to showcase Informix it has no relevance. 4GL was one of the propellants that really made Informix relevant, but today there is not a single application of any prominence that needs Informix more than any other database to work. Unless Informix has a point, there is nothing to market it, no propellant. A "4GL" won't work today, there are already too many languages, and application environments with momentum, what Informix needs is that one killer app, and then the world will be right once again. Sales people need something to sell, give them something.