Translating with DrWatson… this can take a few seconds the first time.
This is a genuine, complex translation. DrWatson protects commands, error codes, and log output while naturally translating the surrounding text. It’s translated once and saved.
Not a technical problem but a marketing/positioning debate: a poster noticed IBM had dropped the phrase "flagship for pure OLTP" from the IDS 10 product page and read it as DB2 pushing Informix aside. Others pointed out IDS was still described as IBM's "flagship database for industrial-strength, embedded computing" and appeared on the mobility page, so the wording may just have shifted. The thread is mostly speculation and jokes about Informix's future under IBM, with calls for IBM staff to comment; no official explanation or resolution is recorded.
Auto-generated by DrWatson from the posts below — may be imperfect; read the full thread.
Our brand new flagship sunk after a short, but heavy battle with it's
stepbrother.
The label "flagship for pure oltp" is gone on the IBM website:
http://www-306.ibm.com/software/data/informix/ids10/
Seems to me the IDS ship came into the reach of the DB2 guns.
J'rgen Buck said:
>
> Our brand new flagship sunk after a short, but heavy battle with it's
> stepbrother.
> The label "flagship for pure oltp" is gone on the IBM website:
> http://www-306.ibm.com/software/data/informix/ids10/
>
> Seems to me the IDS ship came into the reach of the DB2 guns.
'When they said "flagship", I didn't realise they meant the Belgrano.'
--
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
Obnoxio The Clown wrote:
>
> 'When they said "flagship", I didn't realise they meant the Belgrano.'
>
Sailing in the other direction and shot from behind - gotcha!
↪ replying to =?iso-8859-1?B?SvxyZ2VuIEJ1Y2s=?=
DA Morgan — — source: Usenet: comp.databases.informix
J'rgen Buck wrote:
> Our brand new flagship sunk after a short, but heavy battle with it's
> stepbrother.
> The label "flagship for pure oltp" is gone on the IBM website:
> http://www-306.ibm.com/software/data/informix/ids10/
>
> Seems to me the IDS ship came into the reach of the DB2 guns.
Such pretty words I've had written to me in protest by IBM
employees. Yet actions speak far louder than words. IBM
continues to demonstrate that its Informix customers should
start looking for a lifeboat.
--
Daniel A. Morgan
http://www.psoug.org
damorgan@x.washington.edu
(replace x with u to respond)
↪ replying to =?iso-8859-1?B?SvxyZ2VuIEJ1Y2s=?=
Will Wheel — — source: Usenet: comp.databases.informix
J'rgen Buck wrote:
> Our brand new flagship sunk after a short, but heavy battle with it's
> stepbrother.
> The label "flagship for pure oltp" is gone on the IBM website:
> http://www-306.ibm.com/software/data/informix/ids10/
>
> Seems to me the IDS ship came into the reach of the DB2 guns.
>
I don't see 'pure oltp' just embedded.
"Informix Dynamic Server (IDS) is IBM's flagship database for industrial-strength, embedded computing. "
What were they thinking?
-WW-
↪ replying to =?iso-8859-1?B?SvxyZ2VuIEJ1Y2s=?=
John Carlson — — source: Usenet: comp.databases.informix
On 24 Jan 2006 12:09:03 -0800, "J'rgen Buck"
<juergenb@buck-consulting.de> wrote:
>Our brand new flagship sunk after a short, but heavy battle with it's
>stepbrother.
>The label "flagship for pure oltp" is gone on the IBM website:
>http://www-306.ibm.com/software/data/informix/ids10/
>
>Seems to me the IDS ship came into the reach of the DB2 guns.
I noticed that, too . . .
While there is the other place where "flagship" exists, this one was
the most noticeable to me. Either the removal was an oversight
(marketing got carried away and it will be put back soon) or there's
something else going on behind the scenes . . . . .
I'm interested to see what IBM says about that one . . . . . any
takers? Christine . . . . ? Mark . . . . . ? Madison . . . . . ?
JWC
We use strictly necessary cookies to make this site work. With your
consent we’d also use optional cookies for analytics and marketing. You can accept all,
reject all, or choose. Read our Cookie Policy.