RE: Funny Numbers?

> Date: Tue, 21 Apr 2009 07:18:24 +0100 > From: obnoxio@serendipita.com > CC: informix-list@iiug.org > Subject: Re: Funny Numbers? > > Ian Michael Gumby wrote: > > > > Anyone know any of the rumors? > > We do now. :o) > Oh what I could say ... ;-) But seriously, Fernando said I should do my own due diligence and get my own numbers. Ok, I went on a search for the truth about IBM's numbers. Unfortunately IBM's own web site proved to be less than helpful. Seems that they wanted to hide their overall performance because normally after a 'good' quarter, they would have everything up on their site with a lot of fan fare. This quarter, not so much... So I went to the next best place. EDGAR filings. Got the latest 8K information published by IBM. These are the filing to the SEC so IBM can't lie. At least bad enough to break the 1934 safe harbor rules which were later modified in 1995... So we have the following : "Information Management software declined 8 percent, or up 1 percent at constant currency. Distributed Relational Database continued to perform well, up 2 percent and double-digit at constant currency." Wow! I guess for all of the loyal Informixers converging on the mecca in Lenexa, here's the smoking gun that you've been waiting for. You need to take your Informix er IBM sales reps or execs out for a couple of drinks. Ok a lot of drinks. See if they'll cough up to the 'Informix still has double digit growth'. What is interesting about the quote in the SEC filing is that IBM never breaks down product numbers like that. What they were saying was that IM numbers dropped, but the bright spot was that their distributed relational databases did pretty much on target. So one has to ask, what was the drag on IM's profitability? Was it DB2 z/OS? Was it 'Ass-n-tail' and the other acquisitions? Or a combination of them? My guess is that it was DB2 z/OS that took the biggest hit and pulled down IM. What you are starting to see is the trend that started a couple of years ago taking effect. Companies are ditching their DB2 mainframe apps for distributed systems. (LUW) Going back to our look at a 2 socket 8 core Xeon based computer, you can crank out the throughput. Replace the SSDs with 2.5" SAS at Ultra 320 speeds and you could probably still crank out ~500K tpm on a box that costs 20K. Double that for HA and you now have your mainframe replace by two mini racks sitting in two different sites. This should be no surprise in that IBM should have seen it coming. So now IBM needs to look closely at the IBM DB2 LUW number (ignoring iSeries and embedded apps) vs the IDS numbers. The numbers don't lie. While I don't know what those numbers are, I can guess and Gumby's edjucated guesses tend to be on the mark. ;-) If you look at the numbers and the trend for the last 4 years, you'll then understand why I think that Alyse and Inhi are incompetent and should be RIF'd or sent off to India at Indian wages. I mean that pretty much sums up their net worth to IBM. IDS is growing but could be growing faster if a certain set of IBM execs understood how to do their jobs. The education of the salesforce takes time. Now IBM is behind the curve. Keesee, you may not like what I'm saying, but its the plain simple truth. IBM's sales force is not prepared to sell IDS. Nor has S&D management created solutions or stories around IDS that could be leveraged in the sales cycle. IBM hasn't made the investment. In IBM terms, IBM didn't put any skin in the game when it came to promoting IDS. There is no excuse for this short sightedness and it wouldn't have taken a large investment either. But hey! What do I know? I've got a bunch of Puffs telling me I have to always have the last word in an argument. That's not true. The truth is that I have to keep repeating myself because the reality doesn't sink in until its too late. ;-) -G _________________________________________________________________ Rediscover Hotmail®: Now available on your iPhone or BlackBerry http://windowslive.com/RediscoverHotmail?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_HM_Rediscover_Mobile2_042009