Re: As the markets tank... Some Benchmark Stuff to distract you
In article <48eb9a69$0$5192$6c36adad@news.usenetserver.com>, InDeep says... >So... how do you know for fact that IDS 'is' making money, >'is' growing. It is important to be able to back up what >you're saying. I'd love to believe you, but unless you or >IBM can substantiate "IDS is growing and making money" I >think this is pure speculation on your part, and something >you can't believe, even to the extent of saying you're under >NDA, or it's a secret you can't talk about. IBM has put far more features in Informix from 2001-2008 than Informix corp was doing from 1995-2001. It is difficult to believe that they would be doing this to a product *not* making any money or very little money.
dcruncher4@aim.com wrote: > In article <48eb9a69$0$5192$6c36adad@news.usenetserver.com>, InDeep says... > >> So... how do you know for fact that IDS 'is' making money, >> 'is' growing. It is important to be able to back up what >> you're saying. I'd love to believe you, but unless you or >> IBM can substantiate "IDS is growing and making money" I >> think this is pure speculation on your part, and something >> you can't believe, even to the extent of saying you're under >> NDA, or it's a secret you can't talk about. > > IBM has put far more features in Informix from 2001-2008 > than Informix corp was doing from 1995-2001. It is difficult > to believe that they would be doing this to a product *not* > making any money or very little money. More features does not mean it is making more money. It may mean it is not and they want to change that situation. It might also mean that the IDS development team is struggling to keep from being moved to DB2 or out the door. This discussion is as fact-based as a lawyer's summation. -- Daniel A. Morgan
>More features does not mean it is making more money. It may mean >it is not and they want to change that situation. I note that you mentioned 'may'. One surest way to let a product die is to do nothing. Like what happened to VAX RDB , Ingres when they were acquired. Sure it did look like that Informix will meet the same fate circa 2001-2004 before IDS 10 changed the perception. > It might also >mean that the IDS development team is struggling to keep from >being moved to DB2 or out the door. 'might' is the key word. I am an ex-informix employee and I still have contacts with some who work there. Contrary to what you say, IDS development team was slowly getting pushed to DB2 circa 2001-2004 before they started coming back to it. When IBM does not release sales figure of DB2 itself, why is it a surprise if IDS also meets the same fate. BTW when in Jun 2001 you mentioned that in 5 years informix would be deprecated there was no 'may' or 'might'. You were so cock sure.