Re: Why you can't trust IBM when it comes to committing to Informix.

<dcruncher4@aim.com> wrote in message news:fs2ut1013m8@drn.newsguy.com... > Neil Truby says... > >>The reason why the messages about IDS >>continues to lack clarity stems from IBM's reluctance to diminish DB2, and >>this presumably comes from at or near the top. > > > Pop quiz: Name one software company which markets/promotes two > products doing the same thing. Well, there are literally hundreds. Outside IT, Diaego promotes mutiple brands of wine, beer and spirits in every category without apparent discomfort. Record labels promote multiple artists without evidently suffering guilt pangs about having to choose one over another. Within IT, how about Verisign, who offer both their own and their (cheaper) subsiduary Thawte's SSL certificates? But the premise of your question is wrong in any case because, as Eric points out, ""IDS neither competes with nor represents an alternative to DB2. Rather, IDS represents an embeddable transaction-oriented RDBMS featuring valuable capabilities that distinguish it from DB2 in a significant way." ! Eric's other idea, bringing up direct questions to the senior IBM execs about "Which is your premier OLTP database product", would be a waste of time. These people are far too smart to fall into the trap of giving a direct answer to suchg a question. There seems to be a feeling abroad on this newsgroup that IBM execs are stupid and are somehow missing the glaringly obvious. Nothing could be futher from ther truth.