Re: Why you can't trust IBM when it comes to committing to Informix.

This is a very enjoyable discussion. Particularly for an end user like me, whose management has all but decided that Oracle will best suit our company needs better than Informix, in the near future. I wish IBM would work toward providing some practical proof of how much better IDS is than Oracle, at least in terms of performance, uptime and ease of maintenance. I also wish they would get more market share and make it easier for a development team to feel like they can have more choices in third party tools and product knowledgeable developers. ----- Original Message ----- Subject: Re: Why you can't trust IBM when it comes to committing to Informix. Date: Sat, March 22, 2008 9:14 From: "Neil Truby" <neil.truby@ardenta.com> <dcruncher4@aim.com> wrote in message news:fs2ut1013m8@drn.newsguy.com... > > Neil Truby says... > > > >>The reason why the messages about IDS > >>continues to lack clarity stems from IBM's reluctance to diminish DB2, and > >>this presumably comes from at or near the top. > > > > > > Pop quiz: Name one software company which markets/promotes two > > products doing the same thing. > > Well, there are literally hundreds. Outside IT, Diaego promotes mutiple > brands of wine, beer and spirits in every category without apparent > discomfort. Record labels promote multiple artists without evidently > suffering guilt pangs about having to choose one over another. Within IT, > how about Verisign, who offer both their own and their (cheaper) subsiduary > Thawte's SSL certificates? > > But the premise of your question is wrong in any case because, as Eric > points out, ""IDS neither competes with nor represents an alternative to > DB2. Rather, IDS represents an embeddable transaction-oriented RDBMS > featuring valuable capabilities that distinguish it from DB2 in a > significant way." ! > > Eric's other idea, bringing up direct questions to the senior IBM execs > about "Which is your premier OLTP database product", would be a waste of > time. These people are far too smart to fall into the trap of giving a > direct answer to suchg a question. There seems to be a feeling abroad on > this newsgroup that IBM execs are stupid and are somehow missing the > glaringly obvious. Nothing could be futher from ther truth. > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Informix-list mailing list > Informix-list@iiug.org > http://www.iiug.org/mailman/listinfo/informix-list > >

I agree. IBM is trying to exploit similar products making sure each has a chance for success. Unfortunately, Gumby's small brain can't think but in 1 dimension and therefore misses beauty of IBM's strategy. While I certainly can agree that IBM could promote IDS more and things are a bit screwed up when it comes to some of the sales support and collateral issues and develoment investment, IBM has done a pretty spectacular job in resurrecting IDS from the ashes and Janet's attempts to kill it. IDS has a difficult job competing against Oracle, especially in mixed shops. Lets say there are an equal number of instances being maintained at a given site. For every Oracle instance, there is a dedicated DBA. For every 20 IDS instances, there is 1 DBA. So, when Mr. CIO comes in and says, what db should we do our next projects on?, IDS is out voted 20 to 1 because there is way more knowlege and skill in the shop to handle more Oracle apps than a new IDS app. This perpetuates to VARs and OEMs as well. Happy Easter! On Mar 22, 6:21 am, "Floyd Wellershaus" <fl...@fwellers.com> wrote: > This is a very enjoyable discussion. Particularly for an end user like me, > whose management has all but decided that Oracle will best suit our > company needs better than Informix, in the near future. > > I wish IBM would work toward providing some practical proof of how much > better IDS is than Oracle, at least in terms of performance, uptime and > ease of maintenance. I also wish they would get more market share and make > it easier for a development team to feel like they can have more choices > in third party tools and product knowledgeable developers. > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > Subject: Re: Why you can't trust IBM when it comes to committing to Informix. > Date: Sat, March 22, 2008 9:14 > From: "Neil Truby" <neil.tr...@ardenta.com> > <dcrunch...@aim.com> wrote in messagenews:fs2ut1013m8@drn.newsguy.com... > > > Neil Truby says... > > > >>The reason why the messages about IDS > > >>continues to lack clarity stems from IBM's reluctance to diminish DB2, > and > > >>this presumably comes from at or near the top. > > > > Pop quiz: Name one software company which markets/promotes two > > > products doing the same thing. > > > Well, there are literally hundreds.  Outside IT, Diaego promotes mutiple > > brands of wine, beer and spirits in every category without apparent > > discomfort.  Record labels promote multiple artists without evidently > > suffering guilt pangs about having to choose one over another.  Within IT, > > how about Verisign, who offer both their own and their (cheaper) subsiduary > > Thawte's SSL certificates? > > > But the premise of your question is wrong in any case because, as Eric > > points out, ""IDS neither competes with nor represents an alternative to > > DB2.  Rather, IDS represents an embeddable transaction-oriented RDBMS > > featuring valuable capabilities that distinguish it from DB2 in a > > significant way." ! > > > Eric's other idea, bringing up direct questions to the senior IBM execs > > about "Which is your premier OLTP database product", would be a waste of > > time.  These people are far too smart to fall into the trap of giving a > > direct answer to suchg a question.  There seems to be a feeling abroad on > > this newsgroup that IBM execs are stupid and are somehow missing the > > glaringly obvious.  Nothing could be futher from ther truth. > > > _______________________________________________ > > Informix-list mailing list > > Informix-l...@iiug.org > >http://www.iiug.org/mailman/listinfo/informix-list- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text -

I work in an Oracle shop, and I celebrate EVERY DAY Oracle's success. They get me better billable than I could ever imagine. The ratio of Oracle DBAs to instances is not quite 1:1 but there are a lot of people doing a lot of things simply because these wonderful Oracle people keep creating more databases, more instances, and more work for me, as a system administrator. I'm getting so much overtime I love Oracle!!! They have app servers, and databases, and so much shit to work on and tape backups and it's just wonderful. If IDS were to come in they'd probably have to lay off 2/3 of the staff! So as much as I think IBM is run by dipshits and a preponderance of idiots, I'm quite content to live off of Oracles' mess. It's wonderful! Management is happy as a bunch of pigs in poop! pokeyman wrote: > I agree. IBM is trying to exploit similar products making sure each > has a chance for success. Unfortunately, Gumby's small brain can't > think but in 1 dimension and therefore misses beauty of IBM's > strategy. While I certainly can agree that IBM could promote IDS more > and things are a bit screwed up when it comes to some of the sales > support and collateral issues and develoment investment, IBM has done > a pretty spectacular job in resurrecting IDS from the ashes and > Janet's attempts to kill it. > > IDS has a difficult job competing against Oracle, especially in mixed > shops. Lets say there are an equal number of instances being > maintained at a given site. For every Oracle instance, there is a > dedicated DBA. For every 20 IDS instances, there is 1 DBA. So, when > Mr. CIO comes in and says, what db should we do our next projects on?, > IDS is out voted 20 to 1 because there is way more knowlege and skill > in the shop to handle more Oracle apps than a new IDS app. This > perpetuates to VARs and OEMs as well. > > Happy Easter! > > > On Mar 22, 6:21 am, "Floyd Wellershaus" <fl...@fwellers.com> wrote: >> This is a very enjoyable discussion. Particularly for an end user like me, >> whose management has all but decided that Oracle will best suit our >> company needs better than Informix, in the near future. >> >> I wish IBM would work toward providing some practical proof of how much >> better IDS is than Oracle, at least in terms of performance, uptime and >> ease of maintenance. I also wish they would get more market share and make >> it easier for a development team to feel like they can have more choices >> in third party tools and product knowledgeable developers. >> >> >> >> >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> Subject: Re: Why you can't trust IBM when it comes to committing to Informix. >> Date: Sat, March 22, 2008 9:14 >> From: "Neil Truby" <neil.tr...@ardenta.com> >> <dcrunch...@aim.com> wrote in messagenews:fs2ut1013m8@drn.newsguy.com... >>>> Neil Truby says... >>>>> The reason why the messages about IDS >>>>> continues to lack clarity stems from IBM's reluctance to diminish DB2, >> and >>>>> this presumably comes from at or near the top. >>>> Pop quiz: Name one software company which markets/promotes two >>>> products doing the same thing. >>> Well, there are literally hundreds. Outside IT, Diaego promotes mutiple >>> brands of wine, beer and spirits in every category without apparent >>> discomfort. Record labels promote multiple artists without evidently >>> suffering guilt pangs about having to choose one over another. Within IT, >>> how about Verisign, who offer both their own and their (cheaper) subsiduary >>> Thawte's SSL certificates? >>> But the premise of your question is wrong in any case because, as Eric >>> points out, ""IDS neither competes with nor represents an alternative to >>> DB2. Rather, IDS represents an embeddable transaction-oriented RDBMS >>> featuring valuable capabilities that distinguish it from DB2 in a >>> significant way." ! >>> Eric's other idea, bringing up direct questions to the senior IBM execs >>> about "Which is your premier OLTP database product", would be a waste of >>> time. These people are far too smart to fall into the trap of giving a >>> direct answer to suchg a question. There seems to be a feeling abroad on >>> this newsgroup that IBM execs are stupid and are somehow missing the >>> glaringly obvious. Nothing could be futher from ther truth. >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Informix-list mailing list >>> Informix-l...@iiug.org >>> http://www.iiug.org/mailman/listinfo/informix-list- Hide quoted text - >> - Show quoted text - >