Re: Informix 10 vs Oracle 10g

RollForward Wizard said: > > Obnoxio The Clown wrote: >> RollForward Wizard said: >>> DA Morgan wrote: >>>> RollForward Wizard wrote: >>>>> Obnoxio The Clown wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> RollForward Wizard said: >>>>>> >>>>>>> This is awesome work. I think it touches on some very salient >>>>>>> points, >>>>>>> especially regarding virtual processors and threading. It is >>>>>>> amazing >>>>>>> that Oracle technology could have gone so wrong despite the amount >>>>>>> of >>>>>>> money they have as a company, and how they could not come up with a >>>>>>> better engine--or why haven't they dumped the current engine and >>>>>>> made >>>>>>> a >>>>>>> new one that is actually better than any other product. Simply >>>>>>> amazing. >>>>>>> All that money and they can't find anyone to make their technology >>>>>>> better >>>>>>> than it is. They must have their priorities wrong, spending so >>>>>>> much >>>>>>> money >>>>>>> on sales and marketing. :-) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> RE: http://www.IIUG.org/resources/articles/IDS10vsOracle10g.pdf >>>>>> >>>>>> You're pushing on an open door, trust me. I don't think there's a >>>>>> single >>>>>> person who uses Informix who doesn't wish that Informix and IBM were >>>>>> as >>>>>> effective at creating brand awareness for Informix as Oracle is. >>>>>> >>>>>> And then you'll find plenty of people who say Oracle don't spend >>>>>> ENOUGH on >>>>>> sales and marketing. >>>>>> >>>>> If you're IBM or any company, you have to have something to sell, and >>>>> a market >>>>> that likes what you sell. If there isn't a market for Informix, no >>>>> matter how >>>>> great it is, you are not going to sell Informix to anyone. IBM, >>>>> Oracle, and >>>>> Microsoft all sell a lot of software, some products more than others. >>>>> At the >>>>> end of the day, they look at what they sell, and make decisions, just >>>>> like any >>>>> business would. If it doesn't make money, why would they continue to >>>>> push it? >>>>> >>>>> Oracle and Microsoft by the way do an excellent job of putting some >>>>> pretty wrapping >>>>> around all their products, something that is instructive for all of >>>>> us. >>>>> >>>>> What does IBM need to do specifically to sell more Informix? Or is >>>>> it >>>>> less about >>>>> "selling" Informix, and just making it more prominent, or visible, or >>>>> legit, or ??? >>>>> >>>>> What do IBM need to do with Informix that gives the product its' >>>>> proper place? >>>>> >>>>> New books? >>>>> >>>>> New co-op developer programs? ( IBM DB2 and Zend PHP Core for >>>>> example >>>>> ) >>>>> >>>>> New promotions? >>>>> >>>>> New advertising? >>>>> >>>>> New Web Seminars? >>>>> >>>>> Road shows? >>>>> >>>>> More White Papers? >>>>> >>>>> An Informix Magazine? >>>>> >>>>> Bumper Stickers? >>>>> >>>>> Kiosk/Appliance PCs with Informix pre-installed? >>>>> >>>>> Redbooks? >>>>> >>>>> Boat Races? >>>>> >>>>> Press Releases? >>>> Convince C-level management that it isn't a path without a future. >>>> Right now it is impossible to view it as more viable than Sybase. >>>> Most business owners are looking at the list of major app vendors >>>> ... SAP ... Ok, eBusiness Suite (Oracle), PeopleSoft (Oracle), >>>> JD Edwards (Oracle), Siebel (Oracle), and thinking ... why? >>>> >>>> And Informix is not the only product where the question is asked. >>>> I think if one approaches it objectively, dispassionately, one >>>> can reasonably conclude that it is too late. A world in which the >>>> market is split between Oracle and Microsoft is not that hard to >>>> envision. >>> In it's best of times did Informix ever hit past %5 of the market? >> >> In its best of times, Informix was as big as Oracle. >> > Maybe on some levels, like sales, for what, maybe 1 year. Most of the 1980's. Much longer than a year. > The biggest marketing opportunity ever for > Informix, the Linux market, was squandered by people who didn't > even know their own product line. You are Tim Schaefer and I claim my #5. -- Bye now, Obnoxio "C'est pas parce qu'on n'a rien ` dire qu'il faut fermer sa gueule" - Coluche did i mention i like nulls? heck, i even go so far as to say that all columns in a table except the primary key could/should be nullable. this has certain advantages, for example, if you need to insert a child record and you don't have a parent row for it, just do an insert into the parent table with the primary key value (everything else null), and voila, relational integrity is preserved. but this is, admittedly, a bit controversial among modellers. --r937, dbforums.com sending to informix-list