Re: Market Share

->From: Jack Parker <jparker@hpbs2561.boi.hp.com> ->Subject: Market Share ->To: informix-list@rmy.emory.edu (Informix Users Net) ->Date: Tue, 25 May 93 11:27:31 MDT -> ->Ok, we've seen all this stuff about who has what share of the market... -> ->a) Is there an obective source for this data. Datapro, Computerworld, etc., aren't too bad. ->b) If not, then what is included in each companies share (Engines vs front -> end tools, versions of engines (e.g. SE/Online), different types of -> front end tools (Forms vs 4gl lang vs isql interface vs report writer) The objective sources usually count server licenses. DBMS companies normally do also. Revenues usually count everything: server, client, tools, comm. products, etc. licenses. Thus, the "size" of the server licenses is indicated in part by revenues; i.e., 64 user licenses cost more than 32 user which cost more than 16 user, etc., and it is assumed that you buy an appropriate number of client licenses, based on the size of server license. You might not "fill" the full user capability, or you might buy twice the number of client licenses, based on each being connected only half the time. They assume the last two cases average out. What I *WOULD* like to see in future is this info in a table like this: Company % licenses % revenues price factor ------- ---------- ---------- ------------ Informix 37% 17% 1.0 (or 40) Oracle 14% 34% 2.5 (or 100) etc. The key addition is the price factor column, quoted either as multiples of the least expensive or as percent of the most expensive. This would allow for the fact that Informix costs approximately 40% of Oracle for an x-user license on representative systems A, B, and C. With the price factor normalizing things, you can tell whether Oracle makes more money by selling on bigger, more expensive systems, or it just charges more for selling on the same systems. (BTW, both of these are true for Oracle vs. Informix.) ->c) why do we care? Conservative companies and purchasing agents ("Nobody ever got fired for buying IBM.") like to buy from one of the [pick a number] top vendors in a field. This assumes that the "market leaders" are less likely to go out of business, leaving users holding the bag. ->It sounds to me like another Meaningless Indicator of Perfomance generated ->by marketing types to convince unwary buyers that their product is better ->than anybody else's. This is largely, but not entirely, true. ->j. -> ->_____________________________________________________________________________ ->Jack Parker - Contractor | ->Hewlett Packard, BSMC Boise, Idaho, USA| If you keep staring at it like that, ->jparker@hpbs2561.boi.hp.com | your nose is going to grow ->(208) 396-5388 (W) (208) 384-1623 (H) | into the bark. ->_____________________________________________________________________________ Regards, Alan +------------------------------+---------------------------------------+ | R. Alan Popiel | Internet: alan@den.mmc.com | | Martin Marietta, LSC | ( Please note: My opinions do not ) | | P.O. Box 179, M/S 5422 | ( represent official Martin policy. ) | | Denver, Colorado 80201-0179 | Voice: 303-977-9998 | +------------------------------+---------------------------------------+