DSA vs Online Workgroup

I recently saw a brief demo of Online Workgroup. I was duly impressed, but wondered at the future of both DSA and SE. From the questions I asked, it seemed that Online Workgroup had all the DB Engine features of DSA (in fact, we were told that essentially it *was* the DSA engine). Given that, what possible reason is there for recommending (and purchasing) DSA? Online Workgroup is priced below DSA and has an apparently full feature set. In my mind, a new installation would have great difficulty choosing DSA over Online Workgroup. A few reasons that DSA might be considered; 1) Online Workgroup is not ported to Unix - but will be soon, so that will go away in the short term. 2) Site still has terminal only access. This may be valid, but if we are talking "new" installation, it's unlikely. 3) Existing applications using DSA (or SE). Again, there may be an administrative plus to using the existing infrastructure, but connectivity tools can minimise the risk and Online Workgroup could still be a better alternative ($$$ could go either way in this instance.) Not great arguments you'll agree. Informix has even tried to differentiate the products by imposing the artificial constraint of a ceiling on the hardware for Online Workgroup. This is the dual (or was it quad) processor maximum on which Online Workgroup can be installed. The "Intel only" part is just a matter of the initial port, but the processor maximum is surely cosmetic. Assuming there is no technical reason for the restriction, is it Informix's way of squeezing the last breath from DSA (and certainly SE) before other ports of Online Workgroup are available? Should we all be putting our DSA/SE manuals on the bottom shelf of the bookcase (the one where most of the collective dust is kept) and enrolling in Online Workgroup courses? No critism of Informix intended here, just an interesting (I think) point of discussion. Bryan Tonnet batonnet@zeta.org.au