Re: IDS Next Version - features wanted.

On Wed, 01 Jun 2005 07:56:00 -0400, Data Goob <datagoob@netscape.net> wrote: >Neil Truby wrote: >> "Data Goob" <datagoob@netscape.net> wrote in message >> news:VCane.1068$rQ2.794@fe61.usenetserver.com... >> >> >>> And now >>>you pass off your wisdom in a box. Think outside your Informix >>>box. The world is passing you by, and doesn't give a hoot >>>about Informix until and when it says to the world that it IS >>>important, that it IS the best. This message has to be said, >>>or nobody will ever hear it. Get it? And you can't shout it >>>in a newsgroup, or a blog, you have to shout it in advertising >>>and more than one ad, and really say the words that are not >>>wimpy and vague. Until that happens, all the nice new features >>>are just great technology rotting on the vine. Great stuff >>>that nobody cares about, and nobody is going to use. Forgotten. >> >> >> Your analysis is spot on, but you draw the wrong conclusion. As Paul Mosser >> said, if the people at or near the top have no perception of Informix it >> won't get selected. That's where the (unfortunately chimeric) advertising >> should be aimed ... >> >> >Like I said, take a look at what has worked for the past 20 years. >Microsoft, Oracle, MySQL, and even Postgres. Most are marketed >FIRST TO DEVELOPERS then to executive management. And don't forget >what I said about who corporate management is. It's kids with MBAs >and such that grew up on WINDOWS. Sure there's a few white hairs >making the decision, but it's now all the bedhead haircut crowd >moving into management with WINDOWS on their minds, not UNIX. If there >is a *NIX involved, it'll probably be "Linux in da house, ya'll". Those >managers, like years gone by took their cues from developers and the DBAs >to make a decision. I can't count the number of times it was asked >"So what do you think?" which tipped it to Informix. Now it's >tipped to anything else. So if you think IBM is going to give Informix >a "campaign" to both execs and techs, dream on. I think the most if >anything you're ever going to get is a token ad in one magazine, and >it will say little if anything to anyone, exec or tech. A total waste. > Probably true . . . but then again, weren't DB2 users complaining not too long ago where they were upset about a lack of marketing with DB2?? >Whatever conclusions you people come to here don't really matter, even >my opinion doesn't really matter, except to say what a f***ing tragedy >Informix has been. It would be a nice quiet death if the product was >total shit, but it's a good product, that's the tragedy. > Then why bother to post here, Goob, if your opinions don't matter? >By the way, table-level memory management is pretty cool, I'd like >to see Informix shift away from a global memory scheme or at least >allow "buffer pools" with IDS the way DB2 does. That would be very >nice. > Version 10?? >But today I see no compelling reason to use or recommend Informix. >It has no market presence, most of the people that I know that ever >heard of it know that somebody bought it or it's dead, and it's on >to the next topic of conversation. I can tell the difference between >DB2, Informix, Sybase, SQL-Server, MySQL, Oracle, and Informix looks >like a lot of trouble compared to these other products for a lot of >reasons. Give the market the big reason Informix is important and >why people should use Informix instead of the others, and you will >no longer have these kinds of discussions--especially with me ;-). Bye.