Re: Out of Box Experience for Cheetah.
Ian Michael Gumby said: > > So while its easier to only support the unix command line interface, is it > better? ;-) Let me ask you a different question: with a finite amount of resources, would you rather have a developer fixing bugs or enhancing the engine itself, or would you rather have someone spend their life maintaining this suite of scripts that would not do the full job anyway? -- Bye now, Obnoxio "I'm astonished anyone pays real money for this crap." -- Cosmo -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by OpenProtect(http://www.openprotect.com), and is believed to be clean.
"Obnoxio The Clown" <obnoxio@serendipita.com> wrote in message news:mailman.470.1174594634.10648.informix-list@iiug.org... Ian Michael Gumby said: > > So while its easier to only support the unix command line interface, is it > better? ;-) >> Let me ask you a different question: with a finite amount of resources, would you rather have a developer fixing bugs or enhancing the engine itself, or would you rather have someone spend their life maintaining this suite of scripts that would not do the full job anyway? I'd rather the former, but I know what I'm doing. If, as one of the other correspondents suggested, IBM is pitching IDS as a low-maintenance install-it-and-forget-about-it option then the latter assumes much more importance. Obviously, if he's right, I'll soon be living in a cardboard box ....
On Mar 22, 4:17 pm, "Obnoxio The Clown" <obno...@serendipita.com> wrote: > Ian Michael Gumby said: > > > > > So while its easier to only support the unix command line interface, is it > > better? ;-) > > Let me ask you a different question: with a finite amount of resources, > would you rather have a developer fixing bugs or enhancing the engine > itself, or would you rather have someone spend their life maintaining this > suite of scripts that would not do the full job anyway? > > -- > Bye now, > Obnoxio > > "I'm astonished anyone pays real money for this crap." > -- Cosmo > > -- > This message has been scanned for viruses and > dangerous content by OpenProtect(http://www.openprotect.com), and is > believed to be clean. The vast majority of small systems programmers/users expect an easy an good-enough installation - they would rather have an appliance, if possible. By making a product that more people will find useful and appealing, there is a good possibility that more people will buy, and then the resources will not be so limited. If IBM (and us, presumably) wants Informix to get out of the extreme niche market, it needs to have the expected ease-of-use features.
Zachi said: > The vast majority of small systems programmers/users expect an easy an > good-enough installation - they would rather have an appliance, if > possible. By making a product that more people will find useful and > appealing, there is a good possibility that more people will buy, and > then the resources will not be so limited. If IBM (and us, presumably) > wants Informix to get out of the extreme niche market, it needs to > have the expected ease-of-use features. But if you take the point of view that the database is an appliance, then why would you buy IDS rather than MySQL or SQLServer? -- Bye now, Obnoxio "I'm astonished anyone pays real money for this crap." -- Cosmo -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by OpenProtect(http://www.openprotect.com), and is believed to be clean.
On Mar 23, 1:00 pm, "Obnoxio The Clown" <obno...@serendipita.com> wrote: > Zachi said: > > > The vast majority of small systems programmers/users expect an easy an > > good-enough installation - they would rather have an appliance, if > > possible. By making a product that more people will find useful and > > appealing, there is a good possibility that more people will buy, and > > then the resources will not be so limited. If IBM (and us, presumably) > > wants Informix to get out of the extreme niche market, it needs to > > have the expected ease-of-use features. > > But if you take the point of view that the database is an appliance, then > why would you buy IDS rather than MySQL or SQLServer? > > -- > Bye now, > Obnoxio > > "I'm astonished anyone pays real money for this crap." > -- Cosmo > > -- > This message has been scanned for viruses and > dangerous content by OpenProtect(http://www.openprotect.com), and is > believed to be clean. for the same reasons that people choose other appliances: capabilities. Not all toasters are the same: some are bigger, some are sturdier, some are faster and some just *look* better. Same thing here. Some will still choose MySQL because it is free, some will still stick to the one they are used to. But now some will try the "new" one, and probably be impressed with its capabilities. Then they will start using it. How many times did you give up on trying something because it wasn't easy enough to start with (i.e. a steep learning curse)? That's the whole idea. And, if IBM will release a limited free version (say, without replication), then the cost will also cease to be a factor in choosing a new database. If this ever happens, then more will start using it. Then after a while, it will no longer be a niche product: it will be mainstream - perhaps even market leader. But it can never be a mainstream product if it doesn't have the basic mainstream feature: that most programmers can easily install and use it.