Re: Informix running on Linux
On Tue, 29 Apr 1997, Tim Schaefer wrote: > I could care less how much money Informix makes. Why? Because they > have abandoned ALL the small-time/small-business developers. They are > now getting a good dose of what the market is thinking: Your products > are great, but who cares. We can get Oracle and/or Microsoft products > in here and not see much difference. In recent product satisfaction > surveys, Informix did not have much significance over any of the > others. The technology aside, Informix has lost the most important > pieces of the computer business: DEVELOPERS and CUSTOMERS. So, to > worry about NT is a red herring. [Grin] I guess you're not a stockholder, then. Seriously, Informix's decisions /have/ to be based, at least partially, on what's profitable. It could make us all really happy and then go out of business -- that wouldn't help anyone. Now, personally I don't think that a FreeUNIX port would do this, but they have to think of the bottom line. > Right now, if I were to recommend a UNIX solution for client/server, on > the small to mid-size end, I'm probably stuck with HP, IBM, or Solaris > or maybe SCO, depending on the client, and their ability to pay. I know > damn good and well I'd be laughed at to even suggest NT at many sites as > a viable SERVER for Informix. If they use NT, SQLServer is probably > already there. So, that's an uphill battle I don't even want to think about. Sure. Bear in mind that SCO is now free for evaluation and personal use during this debate. > I'd rather they buy an HP K-series or T-series server, and then connect > across the pipe with Windows PCs. This method has the highest success rate, > and is probably dare I say the most popular. But to go to a lesser > platform for smaller business, the cost is too high. They roll over > to MS. Although a decent x86 based mission critical server runs about the same. [Sigh] Getting people to believe that, though... but that's another debate. > As to Linux's viability in the market: It persists. Anybody who > knows the small potatos markets will see that if ONE major player > in the data base market goes to Linux, NT doesn't really stand a > chance. There's no need for it. The whole point to NT was to > provide replacement business for UNIX. Plain and simple. But > because Gates doesn't understand the UNIX market he's missed the > boat. Now he's using NT to grind on Novell. What a pitiful > waste. The OS has not progressed, but the overall cost has. Wrong. Plain and simple. Say I'm a medium-sized company, trying to save money but not afraid to spend on commercial products (like an RDBMS) to get results. I'll probably not set up a mission-critical server on Linux for one simple reason -- no support. Say that Informix does a port to Linux, and one of the (many, but minor) Linux updates comes along. Maybe it fixes a security hole or something. This update contains a bug that causes intermittent failures in Online. Once Informix finds this out -- what do they do? Tell users (users, NOT os developers, mind you) to put in an OS fix? Tell them to contact their OS vendor (oh, you don't have one? Hrm...). And who takes the blame? Informix. This is the hardest part of the port -- after the sale support. > And the other small potato UNIX players don't understand that > developers and small businesses are STUCK with NT or overpriced > x86 UNIXes that perform poorly. So between MS missing UNIX and > UNIX missing UNIX, there's Linux. It's a great product, and > right for the time. > I refuse to suck up to Informix. I've endorsed their products whole > heartedly up until New Era, and continue to endorse them, in spite > of their continued arrogance. They should not be coddled to or > rewarded for poor performance. They need a swift kick in the ass > and come play with the rest of the kids. They think they're too > good to market to small business which got them where they are, and > they've walked away from the core principles driving this current > market. Their stock price proves it. And they're doing a lot of internal restructuriung and undoing because of it. Hey, I'm even getting my favorite rep back (Hi, Jim!). This doesn't mean that a port is the best reaction to an unstable situation. > What do I have to do for the future? Go get work with a data blade > developer? These people made their money elsewhere first, and now > are suddenly Informix's friends, while the rest of us out here are > not good enough to even rate a phone call. And now we have to compete > with their consultants. They're competing against the very people > who built the business. Now you sound like an embittered ex-spouse. Seriously though, I don't know how you're having to compete with their consultants, but I do know that they /will/ listen to their partners. We've actually been talking more with Informix in the last 3 months or so than ever before, it seems. > And now we see press releases where Informix is putting up Universal > Server sites, to prove that it works. They want to force consensus > from the top down, rather than letting us developers get our hands > on it. Oracle figured this one out a while back, I can't figure > out why Informix remains so arrogant. Nah. This one I figure is marketing their shiny new product, pure and simple. And I will admit, its slick. Just got some email from Randall the other day on the geospatial datablade that I need to read -- if it lives up to, oh, 60% or more of its hype it'll save us a lot of work. > > I will grant you one thing about NT in this connection: If it's too > > expensive or otherwise not interesting for a significant part of the > > market it's another argument why Informix should also do a Linux port. Assuming that its the same market. > They may soon have no choice but to do some revolutionary things. Novell > and Digital found out the hard way, Informix can too. Oracle is eating > Informix for breakfast, and laughing all the way. The latest ads in > Computerworld are a new low for Oracle, but they are enjoying it. Nope, haven't seen 'em. I will admit that I just /love/ Oracle's logo for the Informix datablade (disk platters onna stick, er, dagger) though. Makes me wish Informix would use it too. > > Your basic argument seems to be that they could gain new users that > > wouldn't be covered by an NT port (or any of the other ports they now > > have). I think you are right on this, but it could have been stated > > much simpler without making NT look all bad. Remember who you are > > talking to and their very legitimate interests in earning money for > > Informix by selling on the platforms where they can do just that. > > Again I say, I don't care about how much money they make, or how bad NT > looks. Informix has waltzed around like a bunch of Las Vegas gangsters, > strutting Universal Server as if everybody is just going to drop what > they have, and buy it, at the inflated prices they want. They made a > little over a billion dollars last year, and can afford to invest in > their customers. This is what it's really all about. Especially in > light of the latest lawsuits. I have to cajole and plead to get a > d