Re: Informix conference
Not a technical support thread: it starts with news that a UK "Information on Demand/Infobahn" event on Informix 10 was postponed (reportedly because key customers and US speakers couldn't attend), and the poster complains that UK Informix conference dates and speakers are constantly changed, discouraging registration. The discussion then drifts into joking offers to speak, mention of a 10.00.UC5 release and Baan benchmark optimisations in a "Chat with the Labs" session, and gripes about quality/QA regressions in IDS 10 xC3/xC4 versus DB2. No resolution or fix is recorded.
Auto-generated by DrWatson from the posts below — may be imperfect; read the full thread.
breaking News - the Information on Demand - Infobahn - on version 10 - has been postponed. I have just been informed of this by OpenPSL who were sponsoring the event so I suppose that they should know. The reasons given are that few important customers could not attend at short notice - so aren't the rest of us important? and some of the important visitors from the USA couldn't be here. So - what's new? Everytime that a conference is organised in the UK the dates get changed - the publicised speakers get changed. Is it any wonder that user will not register for conferences when they are treated like this? Malcolm
mweallans@panacea.co.uk wrote: > breaking News - the Information on Demand - Infobahn - on version 10 - > has been postponed. > > I have just been informed of this by OpenPSL who were sponsoring the > event so I suppose that they should know. > > The reasons given are that few important customers could not attend at > short notice - so aren't the rest of us important? and some of the > important visitors from the USA couldn't be here. So - what's new? > Everytime that a conference is organised in the UK the dates get > changed - the publicised speakers get changed. > > Is it any wonder that user will not register for conferences when they > are treated like this? > > Malcolm > I think David is available to speak.
"I think David is available to speak. " Yes I am ..hell I could do the whole day's talk myself. It might come to that... PS Check the latest "Chat with that Labs" talk. It mentions 10.00.UC5 - yes UC5 and 3 slides of optimizations done for the recent Bann benchmark. F**k me IBM are benchmarking and improving the product. Now if they can just get the bugs out. I have been hit by the last 2 Tech Flashs and 3 more bugs as well recently. When the DB2 DBAs who have encountered no bugs ask why Informix is so unreliable what do I say?
When the DB2 DBAs who have encountered no bugs ask why Informix is so unreliable what do I say? Hmmmm. Tell them that they are not using the 'advanced' features of DB2 so have not encountered them yet. _______________________________________________ Informix-list mailing list Informix-list@iiug.org http://www.iiug.org/mailman/listinfo/informix-list
On 18 May 2006 18:36:49 -0700, david@smooth1.co.uk wrote: > >"I think David is available to speak. " > >Yes I am ..hell I could do the whole day's talk myself. > >It might come to that... > >PS Check the latest "Chat with that Labs" talk. It mentions 10.00.UC5 - >yes UC5 and 3 slides of optimizations done >for the recent Bann benchmark. F**k me IBM are benchmarking and >improving the product. Now if they can just >get the bugs out. I have been hit by the last 2 Tech Flashs and 3 more >bugs as well recently. And do a *real* benchmark . . . . . > >When the DB2 DBAs who have encountered no bugs ask why Informix is so >unreliable what do I say? That you don't believe them? No bugs? JWC
david@smooth1.co.uk wrote: > "I think David is available to speak. " > > Yes I am ..hell I could do the whole day's talk myself. > > It might come to that... > > PS Check the latest "Chat with that Labs" talk. It mentions 10.00.UC5 - > yes UC5 and 3 slides of optimizations done > for the recent Bann benchmark. F**k me IBM are benchmarking and > improving the product. Now if they can just > get the bugs out. I have been hit by the last 2 Tech Flashs and 3 more > bugs as well recently. > > When the DB2 DBAs who have encountered no bugs ask why Informix is so > unreliable what do I say? > Tell them you are available to speak at the next conference on why you think Informix is better than DB2. If you want to play to win do it by the numbers.
"John Carlson" <jwcarlson1@yahoo.com.invalid> wrote in message news:049q6295o7ue1qvlqqh955hbk24ohpjiff@4ax.com... > On 18 May 2006 18:36:49 -0700, david@smooth1.co.uk wrote: > > Now if they can just >>get the bugs out. I have been hit by the last 2 Tech Flashs and 3 more >>bugs as well recently. > > And do a *real* benchmark . . . . . > >> >>When the DB2 DBAs who have encountered no bugs ask why Informix is so >>unreliable what do I say? > > That you don't believe them? No bugs? Of course all software has bugs. But successive versions of IDS 10, certainly xC3 and xC4, have had some howlers. xC4 has re-introduced some old errors, and there are definitely QA issues that need to be ironed out.
david@smooth1.co.uk said: > > When the DB2 DBAs who have encountered no bugs ask why Informix is so > unreliable what do I say? Ask them if they have actually unwrapped the shelfware. -- Bye now, Obnoxio Information within this post contains forward looking statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933 and Section 21B of the S E C Act of 1934. Statements that involve discussions with respect to projections of future events are not statements of historical fact and may be forward looking statements. Don't rely on them to make a decision. The poster is not a reporting company registered under the Exchange Act of 1934. I have received a life peerage from Her Majesty, who is not an officer, minister or affiliate Labour party member. I intend to recover my loan now, which could cause the parliamentary majority to go down, resulting in losses for you. Today's Labour party has: an accumulated deficit and a reliance on loans from officers and affiliates to pay expenses. It is not an operating political party. The party is going to need financing to continue as a going concern. A failure to finance could cause the party to go out of business. This report shall not be construed as any kind of investment advice or solicitation. You can lose all your money by investing in this party.