IBM and Oracle - Let's Rrrrrrrrrrrrruuuuuuuuumbbbbbbbbbbleeeeeeee

http://www.physorg.com/news97246418.html Officials at IBM are throwing verbal haymakers at Oracle as Big Blue touts its successes in the database market. The two database heavyweights alternated between offensive and defensive postures recently after IBM questioned Oracle's claims of database dominance. "The rapid adoption of DB2 9 would seem to call their claims into question and analysts are starting to question their numbers as well," said Bernie Spang, director of IBM data servers. He cited commentary by Philip Howard of UK-based Bloor Research, who noted that when reporting Oracle's results for the third quarter of fiscal year 2007, CEO Larry Ellison said new license revenues for the database and middleware division grew 17 percent. However, Ellison also noted the middleware portion had grown roughly 80 percent, which Howard argued indicates a slow down in the growth of Oracle's database portfolio. In an interview with eWEEK, Howard said increased competition not just from IBM but from a number of vendors, has affected sales of 10g. "11g may make a difference compared to DB2 but probably not versus SQL Server, Netezza and EnterpriseDB - as these all compete as much on lower TCO and reduced administration as on features and performance," Howard said. But for Oracle's part, company officials are not breaking much of a sweat, and are convinced the company's hold on the database market is not slipping. "There's no doubt about that," said Willie Hardie, Oracle vice president of database product marketing. Hardie pointed to a study by IDC that included estimated 2006 revenue totals from the five biggest relational database management system providers and had Oracle in the top spot with a 44.4 percent of the market. IBM was second with 21.2 percent. According to IDC, those figures represent a growth of 14.7 and 11.9 percent between 2005 and 2006 for Oracle and IBM, respectively. "There's always going to be competitors in the market," Hardie said. "An organization like Oracle continues to do business with its extensive install-base." The IDC study did not include features sold by vendors as separation options and did not break out subscription and maintenance revenue, which can obscure the true growth rate of a vendor's database license sales. IBM's Spang said the $4.3 billion in revenue earned by the company's software segment in the first quarter of fiscal 2007 was driven largely by sales of the DB2 9 Viper data server. "The volume of new DB2 customers since we launched DB2 9 last July has exceeded all expectations," he said. "We have seen literally thousands of new customers in that timeframe - and a large percentage of those are migrations from Oracle." However, Forrester Research analyst Noel Yuhanna disputed IBM's claims of how aggressively the market is adopting DB2. "I think we have seen less aggressive movement with IBM DB2," he said, adding that he thinks IBM has not aggressively marketed DB2. "Oracle still rules the world." Spang strongly disagreed. "I would also say that the large numbers of new customers - backed up by our earnings - support the claims that our marketing strategy has been right on target," he said.

Bill Martinez wrote: > DA Morgan wrote: > >> In other words ... we don't know anything more than we did before we >> read this. >> >> But for those who have to pay their mortgage and feed their families >> the only metrics that matter are those that can be found at: >> www.dice.com. >> >> As of 6 May, 2007: >> ========================= >> DB2 3,419 8.9% >> Informix 452 1.2% >> Oracle 17,861 46.7% >> SQL Server 14,171 37.0% >> Sybase 2,355 6.2% >> ========================= >> >> If these aren't the numbers you're looking at you aren't paying >> attention to putting the kids through college and your retirement. > > Are these market share figures? > > Shouldn't people consider things like performance, cost of maintenance, > etc... if they want to put their kids through college? > > I notice that Anheisur-Busch has the lion's (clydesdale) share of the > beer market here in the US. > > I don't particularly like any of their beers - should I drink them > anyway just because their popular? > >> Small comfort to remember your product loyalty to a particular brand >> when living off your Social Security check. Good points Bill. Microsoft has the lions' share of office software, but like Anheuser, it isn't always the best choice in it's space. There is also a lot of muddy water with trying to compare Oracle with DB2, at least on an apples-for-apples comparison. At the high 'executive' level it works, but when it gets down to implementation DB2 and Oracle are not exactly comparable products. Oracle is also selling it's db in most cases as a result of selling an application that requires it, but rarely do you really hear about a company outright deciding to buy an Oracle database on its own. I have yet to walk into a shop that has a bunch of Oracle bigots in it, in most cases Oracle is treated as something that was required for an application, not because some database expert said it was the best choice among databases. I do see a lot of shops buying SQL-Server because of the perceived value that it's good for developing applications, and that's of course due to some marketing from Microsoft. You see MySQL being recommended too, because developers love it.

I believe this is a troll and should be treated as such

Data Cruncher wrote: > http://www.physorg.com/news97246418.html > > Officials at IBM are throwing verbal haymakers at Oracle as Big Blue touts > its successes in the database market. > > > > The two database heavyweights alternated between offensive and defensive > postures recently after IBM questioned Oracle's claims of database > dominance. > > "The rapid adoption of DB2 9 would seem to call their claims into question > and analysts are starting to question their numbers as well," said Bernie > Spang, director of IBM data servers. > > He cited commentary by Philip Howard of UK-based Bloor Research, who noted > that when reporting Oracle's results for the third quarter of fiscal year > 2007, CEO Larry Ellison said new license revenues for the database and > middleware division grew 17 percent. > > However, Ellison also noted the middleware portion had grown roughly 80 > percent, which Howard argued indicates a slow down in the growth of Oracle's > database portfolio. > > In an interview with eWEEK, Howard said increased competition not just from > IBM but from a number of vendors, has affected sales of 10g. > > "11g may make a difference compared to DB2 but probably not versus SQL > Server, Netezza and EnterpriseDB - as these all compete as much on lower TCO > and reduced administration as on features and performance," Howard said. > > But for Oracle's part, company officials are not breaking much of a sweat, > and are convinced the company's hold on the database market is not slipping. > > "There's no doubt about that," said Willie Hardie, Oracle vice president of > database product marketing. > > Hardie pointed to a study by IDC that included estimated 2006 revenue totals > from the five biggest relational database management system providers and > had Oracle in the top spot with a 44.4 percent of the market. IBM was second > with 21.2 percent. > > According to IDC, those figures represent a growth of 14.7 and 11.9 percent > between 2005 and 2006 for Oracle and IBM, respectively. > > "There's always going to be competitors in the market," Hardie said. "An > organization like Oracle continues to do business with its extensive > install-base." > > The IDC study did not include features sold by vendors as separation options > and did not break out subscription and maintenance revenue, which can > obscure the true growth rate of a vendor's database license sales. > > IBM's Spang said the $4.3 billion in revenue earned by the company's > software segment in the first quarter of fiscal 2007 was driven largely by > sales of the DB2 9 Viper data server. > > "The volume of new DB2 customers since we launched DB2 9 last July has > exceeded all expectations," he said. "We have seen literally thousands of > new customers in that timeframe - and a large percentage of those are > migrations from Oracle." > > However, Forrester Research analyst Noel Yuhanna disputed IBM's claims of > how aggressively the market is adopting DB2. > > "I think we have seen less aggressive movement with IBM DB2," he said, > adding that he thinks IBM has not aggressively marketed DB2. "Oracle still > rules the world." > > Spang strongly disagreed. > > "I would also say that the large numbers of new customers - backed up by our > earnings - support the claims that our marketing strategy has been right on > target," he said. In other words ... we don't know anything more than we did before we read this. But for those who have to pay their mortgage and feed their families the only metrics that matter are those that can be found at: www.dice.com. As of 6 May, 2007: ========================= DB2 3,419 8.9% Informix 452 1.2% Oracle 17,861 46.7% SQL Server 14,171 37.0% Sybase 2,355 6.2% ========================= If these aren't the numbers you're looking at you aren't paying attention to putting the kids through college and your retirement. Small comfort to remember your product loyalty to a particular brand when living off your Social Security check. -- Daniel A. Morgan University of Washington damorgan@x.washington.edu (replace x with u to respond) Puget Sound Oracle Users Group www.psoug.org

DA Morgan wrote: > In other words ... we don't know anything more than we did before we > read this. > > But for those who have to pay their mortgage and feed their families > the only metrics that matter are those that can be found at: www.dice.com. > > As of 6 May, 2007: > ========================= > DB2 3,419 8.9% > Informix 452 1.2% > Oracle 17,861 46.7% > SQL Server 14,171 37.0% > Sybase 2,355 6.2% > ========================= > > If these aren't the numbers you're looking at you aren't paying > attention to putting the kids through college and your retirement. Are these market share figures? Shouldn't people consider things like performance, cost of maintenance, etc... if they want to put their kids through college? I notice that Anheisur-Busch has the lion's (clydesdale) share of the beer market here in the US. I don't particularly like any of their beers - should I drink them anyway just because their popular? > Small comfort to remember your product loyalty to a particular brand > when living off your Social Security check.

Bill Martinez wrote: > DA Morgan wrote: > >> In other words ... we don't know anything more than we did before we >> read this. >> >> But for those who have to pay their mortgage and feed their families >> the only metrics that matter are those that can be found at: >> www.dice.com. >> >> As of 6 May, 2007: >> ========================= >> DB2 3,419 8.9% >> Informix 452 1.2% >> Oracle 17,861 46.7% >> SQL Server 14,171 37.0% >> Sybase 2,355 6.2% >> ========================= >> >> If these aren't the numbers you're looking at you aren't paying >> attention to putting the kids through college and your retirement. > > > Are these market share figures? > > Shouldn't people consider things like performance, cost of maintenance, > etc... if they want to put their kids through college? > > I notice that Anheisur-Busch has the lion's (clydesdale) share of the > beer market here in the US. > > I don't particularly like any of their beers - should I drink them > anyway just because their popular? Before anyone flames me, I meant "they're", not "their". I only made that mistake because I'm drinking some non-AB beer right now. > >> Small comfort to remember your product loyalty to a particular brand >> when living off your Social Security check.

Mark Townsend said: > > > I believe this is a troll and should be treated as such Who, Mr Spang? -- 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.

DA Morgan said: > But for those who have to pay their mortgage and feed their families > the only metrics that matter are those that can be found at: www.dice.com. Daniel, you keep on banging on about dice.com. I beg to differ. Most of those Oracle DBA jobs are highly likely to take a walk over to India at some point, because they're bodyshopping jobs. Personally, I don't think that Oracle is any more secure a career platform than any other database. -- 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.

Tool said: > You see MySQL being recommended too, because developers love it. But developers nowadays know fuck all about databases, Tool. It's like me recommending tampons. I know they exist and what their basic purpose is, but I'm hardly qualified to compare or rate them, am I? And because they're forever in the way of me getting my red wings, I'm inclined to say that they're an unnecessary irrelevance, just like developers say when having to choose a database. They want the one that lets them get away with all their stupid programming habits. http://www.grumpycunt.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=6534 (I suspect the comments apply equally to any other flavour of developer, like Java, PHP, etc.) -- 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.

DA Morgan wrote: > Data Cruncher wrote: >> http://www.physorg.com/news97246418.html >> >> Officials at IBM are throwing verbal haymakers at Oracle as Big Blue >> touts its successes in the database market. >> >> >> >> The two database heavyweights alternated between offensive and >> defensive postures recently after IBM questioned Oracle's claims of >> database dominance. >> >> "The rapid adoption of DB2 9 would seem to call their claims into >> question and analysts are starting to question their numbers as well," >> said Bernie Spang, director of IBM data servers. >> >> He cited commentary by Philip Howard of UK-based Bloor Research, who >> noted that when reporting Oracle's results for the third quarter of >> fiscal year 2007, CEO Larry Ellison said new license revenues for the >> database and middleware division grew 17 percent. >> >> However, Ellison also noted the middleware portion had grown roughly >> 80 percent, which Howard argued indicates a slow down in the growth of >> Oracle's database portfolio. >> >> In an interview with eWEEK, Howard said increased competition not just >> from IBM but from a number of vendors, has affected sales of 10g. >> >> "11g may make a difference compared to DB2 but probably not versus SQL >> Server, Netezza and EnterpriseDB - as these all compete as much on >> lower TCO and reduced administration as on features and performance," >> Howard said. >> >> But for Oracle's part, company officials are not breaking much of a >> sweat, and are convinced the company's hold on the database market is >> not slipping. >> >> "There's no doubt about that," said Willie Hardie, Oracle vice >> president of database product marketing. >> >> Hardie pointed to a study by IDC that included estimated 2006 revenue >> totals from the five biggest relational database management system >> providers and had Oracle in the top spot with a 44.4 percent of the >> market. IBM was second with 21.2 percent. >> >> According to IDC, those figures represent a growth of 14.7 and 11.9 >> percent between 2005 and 2006 for Oracle and IBM, respectively. >> >> "There's always going to be competitors in the market," Hardie said. >> "An organization like Oracle continues to do business with its >> extensive install-base." >> >> The IDC study did not include features sold by vendors as separation >> options and did not break out subscription and maintenance revenue, >> which can obscure the true growth rate of a vendor's database license >> sales. >> >> IBM's Spang said the $4.3 billion in revenue earned by the company's >> software segment in the first quarter of fiscal 2007 was driven >> largely by sales of the DB2 9 Viper data server. >> >> "The volume of new DB2 customers since we launched DB2 9 last July has >> exceeded all expectations," he said. "We have seen literally thousands >> of new customers in that timeframe - and a large percentage of those >> are migrations from Oracle." >> >> However, Forrester Research analyst Noel Yuhanna disputed IBM's claims >> of how aggressively the market is adopting DB2. >> >> "I think we have seen less aggressive movement with IBM DB2," he said, >> adding that he thinks IBM has not aggressively marketed DB2. "Oracle >> still rules the world." >> >> Spang strongly disagreed. >> >> "I would also say that the large numbers of new customers - backed up >> by our earnings - support the claims that our marketing strategy has >> been right on target," he said. > > In other words ... we don't know anything more than we did before we > read this. > > But for those who have to pay their mortgage and feed their families > the only metrics that matter are those that can be found at: www.dice.com. > > As of 6 May, 2007: > ========================= > DB2 3,419 8.9% > Informix 452 1.2% > Oracle 17,861 46.7% > SQL Server 14,171 37.0% > Sybase 2,355 6.2% > ========================= > > If these aren't the numbers you're looking at you aren't paying > attention to putting the kids through college and your retirement. > Small comfort to remember your product loyalty to a particular brand > when living off your Social Security check. Following that logic we should be working for WalMart to get your kids safely through college .... lotsa greeters needed - always. Cheers Serge -- Serge Rielau DB2 Solutions Development IBM Toronto Lab

Mark Townsend wrote: > > > I believe this is a troll and should be treated as such Yeah. It's surprising why anyone still jumps for that... -- Knut Stolze DB2 z/OS Utilities Development IBM Germany

On May 7, 5:30 am, DA Morgan <damor...@psoug.org> wrote: > Data Cruncher wrote: > >http://www.physorg.com/news97246418.html > > > Officials at IBM are throwing verbal haymakers at Oracle as Big Blue touts > > its successes in the database market. > > > The two database heavyweights alternated between offensive and defensive > > postures recently after IBM questioned Oracle's claims of database > > dominance. > > > "The rapid adoption of DB2 9 would seem to call their claims into question > > and analysts are starting to question their numbers as well," said Bernie > > Spang, director of IBM data servers. > > > He cited commentary by Philip Howard of UK-based Bloor Research, who noted > > that when reporting Oracle's results for the third quarter of fiscal year > > 2007, CEO Larry Ellison said new license revenues for the database and > > middleware division grew 17 percent. > > > However, Ellison also noted the middleware portion had grown roughly 80 > > percent, which Howard argued indicates a slow down in the growth of Oracle's > > database portfolio. > > > In an interview with eWEEK, Howard said increased competition not just from > > IBM but from a number of vendors, has affected sales of 10g. > > > "11g may make a difference compared to DB2 but probably not versus SQL > > Server, Netezza and EnterpriseDB - as these all compete as much on lower TCO > > and reduced administration as on features and performance," Howard said. > > > But for Oracle's part, company officials are not breaking much of a sweat, > > and are convinced the company's hold on the database market is not slipping. > > > "There's no doubt about that," said Willie Hardie, Oracle vice president of > > database product marketing. > > > Hardie pointed to a study by IDC that included estimated 2006 revenue totals > > from the five biggest relational database management system providers and > > had Oracle in the top spot with a 44.4 percent of the market. IBM was second > > with 21.2 percent. > > > According to IDC, those figures represent a growth of 14.7 and 11.9 percent > > between 2005 and 2006 for Oracle and IBM, respectively. > > > "There's always going to be competitors in the market," Hardie said. "An > > organization like Oracle continues to do business with its extensive > > install-base." > > > The IDC study did not include features sold by vendors as separation options > > and did not break out subscription and maintenance revenue, which can > > obscure the true growth rate of a vendor's database license sales. > > > IBM's Spang said the $4.3 billion in revenue earned by the company's > > software segment in the first quarter of fiscal 2007 was driven largely by > > sales of the DB2 9 Viper data server. > > > "The volume of new DB2 customers since we launched DB2 9 last July has > > exceeded all expectations," he said. "We have seen literally thousands of > > new customers in that timeframe - and a large percentage of those are > > migrations from Oracle." > > > However, Forrester Research analyst Noel Yuhanna disputed IBM's claims of > > how aggressively the market is adopting DB2. > > > "I think we have seen less aggressive movement with IBM DB2," he said, > > adding that he thinks IBM has not aggressively marketed DB2. "Oracle still > > rules the world." > > > Spang strongly disagreed. > > > "I would also say that the large numbers of new customers - backed up by our > > earnings - support the claims that our marketing strategy has been right on > > target," he said. > > In other words ... we don't know anything more than we did before we > read this. > > But for those who have to pay their mortgage and feed their families > the only metrics that matter are those that can be found at:www.dice.com. > > As of 6 May, 2007: > ========================= > DB2 3,419 8.9% > Informix 452 1.2% > Oracle 17,861 46.7% > SQL Server 14,171 37.0% > Sybase 2,355 6.2% > ========================= > > If these aren't the numbers you're looking at you aren't paying > attention to putting the kids through college and your retirement. > Small comfort to remember your product loyalty to a particular brand > when living off your Social Security check. 1. Why would I need to look at a US-based job site? 2. Get yourself a course in statistics and how to apply them: a) Your search for 'oracle' (or the other search-keys) isn't limited to searches on job title only, so it will also include advertisements for MySQL DBA's to administer db's that have been migrated from Oracle to MySQL. b) Your search for 'oracle' isn't limited to Oracle DB, it also includes jobs for Oracle Apps. I've done a search on 'oracle', limited to job titles. Result: 3500 jobs (still including Oracle Apps) At the left of the search screen several refinements of the search results have been made, one of them based on 'skills'. Of those 3500 jobs, only 1546 require 'SQL' for skill. Remarkebly, only 3011 require 'Oracle' for skill, so even someone thinking Oracle is just a myth from Delphi, is able to apply with > 10% chance of getting hired... ;-) My conclusion: your posting is as much of a troll as the OP, given that it doesn't give any insight at all at the database market. Not that I need one, I'm most happy administering both DB2 and Oracle. -- Jeroen