Re: Informix and Lawson Software

Neil Truby wrote: > > Did he say anything about bitterness? There's a lot of it floating around. Just read between the lines. Maybe HE didn't, but I'm gettin' used to seeing it. > Far safer to go for the market leader. Many would call IBM a kind of global-domination market leader. Of all the products that should not go under (barring massive high level corporate incompetence on a scale of ..... an american airline?) I'd say that anything from IBM is always going to be available. Massive corporate incompetence could just as easily bring down Oracle or even Microsoft (we can only pray) > I truly believe that this is the flaw in the great IBM plan. Why > *should* people move from IDS to DB2 just because IBM wishes it? The > migration path is no easier than for Oracle or SQL Server. It's not > a market leader or obviously technologically superior. Deals are > avaiable from all the competitors. I know that porting to Oracle even with the help of 4JS ODI was not pretty. MS would have been (and generally was) easier apart from SERIAL and ROWID issues. Haven't done DB2 yet but there's no reason to think it's migration will be any worse. It might even be easier; like I said, MS was. If people are using 3rd party products like Lawson, and Lawson supports all engines, and Lawson can export and re-import your data into DB2 or Oracle, then as far as the Lawson user is concerned, ease of porting is totally not an issue apart from any local 4GL code they might have. > Any company worth its salt will consider all the options when > deciding which database to choose. And I see no compelling reasons > to choose DB2 .... Or any of them for that matter. If your application supplier kicks you off Informix, then you'd better make a choice. I'd let Lawson make the recommendation? And from reading that PDF, seems they are nudging people towards DB2. I hope that's not merely because of emotional reasons, but for valid technical and financial reasons.

"Andrew Hamm" <ahamm@mail.com> wrote in message news:bg74tb$lj9b9$1@ID-79573.news.uni-berlin.de... > Neil Truby wrote: > > > > Far safer to go for the market leader. > > Many would call IBM a kind of global-domination market leader. Of all the > products that should not go under (barring massive high level corporate > incompetence on a scale of ..... an american airline?) I'd say that anything > from IBM is always going to be available. Massive corporate incompetence > could just as easily bring down Oracle or even Microsoft (we can only pray) I wasn't talking about the company, I was talking about the database technology. And IBM doesn't have a market-leading, or even market-credible, database in Informix's space ... other than Informix! Yet IBM just will not acknowledge this, and are already losing out as a result. Yes, the Oracle or (highly unlikely) MS companies could go under, but such is the market penetration of the Oracle and SQL Server databases that someone would inevitably pick up the pieces. As for "anything from IBM is always going to be available": let's all think for a minute if we can think of a database product from IBM that *won't* at this rate be around in 10 years ...... > Or any of them for that matter. If your application supplier kicks you off > Informix, then you'd better make a choice. I'd let Lawson make the > recommendation? And from reading that PDF, seems they are nudging people > towards DB2. I hope that's not merely because of emotional reasons, but for > valid technical and financial reasons. Ha, ha-ha, ha-ha! I've not met many naive Aussies .....! You can bet your life that it's for financial reasons that they're saying that!