Re: "The Problem with Informix" Article by Philip Howarth, Bloor Research

Posted in 2004

Bernard Dhooghe — 21 Oct 2004 03:28:42 -0700 — source: Usenet: comp.databases.informix

Suppose I'm a hospital director and need new software because the existing one can not scale. An application vendor proposes a solution based on Informix. One of the question I would ask him is: will the Informix database have an eternal life? What will be the answer? What will the competitors in the application space say, if their product is based on Oracle or SQL Server or DB2 or ... Bernard Dhooghe christopher.coleman@mediware.com (Christopher) wrote in message news:<a727ee4f.0410190603.501e3d1e@posting.google.com>... > The Register has an article by Philip Howarth of Bloor Research which > fairly clearly describes IBM's problem with Informix marketing: > > http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/10/19/ibm_informix_db2/ > 'IBM has a problem with Informix. It is one of those problems that is > actually a good problem, but that doesn't mean that it doesn't cause > headaches... > > So, there are circumstances when it makes sense for IBM to promote the > use of Informix as opposed to DB2. But, and here is the nub, it cannot > be seen to be promoting anything other than DB2, since the company has > put all of its database eggs into the DB2 basket... > > In other words, there is some seriously bad branding and marketing > going on here...' > > Sincerely, > > Christopher Coleman > > Acting President > Kansas City Informix Users Group > www.iiug.org/kciug > > Database Analyst > Pharmacy Division > Mediware Information Systems, Inc.

↪ replying to Bernard Dhooghe

Data Goob — Thu, 21 Oct 2004 06:52:40 -0400 — source: Usenet: comp.databases.informix

Good point(s). I recently had a discussion with a client who uses an application that runs on an HP3000. This customer is as passionate about the HP3000 as many Informixites are about Informix. He told me his HP3000 server just runs and runs and runs, compared to what he has had to go through with his other platforms. Personally I view the HP3000 as quite retarded, but it doesn't matter, it's all about the application. He delivers real business value back to his company and produces results. This guy couldn't care less what he uses, his management loves the results. He's got SQL-Server, and Oracle as well. Like a lot of companies, the IT department is application-focused, not religious about anything they use. Much of your choice should have less to do with what database, and more to do with the application, and can it deliver business value back to the business. If it's running Informix behind the scenes, what will be the business value if you can't support it? That would be my biggest concern. I would make sure if they're running Informix behind the scenes that they include the support for you irrespective of the region or market you work in, and provide an exit strategy / migration path to another DB if the situation mitigates the need to migrate. -DG- Bernard Dhooghe wrote: > Suppose I'm a hospital director and need new software because the > existing one can not scale. > > An application vendor proposes a solution based on Informix. > > One of the question I would ask him is: will the Informix database > have an eternal life? > > What will be the answer? > > What will the competitors in the application space say, if their > product is based on Oracle or SQL Server or DB2 or ... > > Bernard Dhooghe > > christopher.coleman@mediware.com (Christopher) wrote in message news:<a727ee4f.0410190603.501e3d1e@posting.google.com>... > >>The Register has an article by Philip Howarth of Bloor Research which >>fairly clearly describes IBM's problem with Informix marketing: >> >>http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/10/19/ibm_informix_db2/ >>'IBM has a problem with Informix. It is one of those problems that is >>actually a good problem, but that doesn't mean that it doesn't cause >>headaches... >> >>So, there are circumstances when it makes sense for IBM to promote the >>use of Informix as opposed to DB2. But, and here is the nub, it cannot >>be seen to be promoting anything other than DB2, since the company has >>put all of its database eggs into the DB2 basket... >> >>In other words, there is some seriously bad branding and marketing >>going on here...' >> >>Sincerely, >> >>Christopher Coleman >> >>Acting President >>Kansas City Informix Users Group >>www.iiug.org/kciug >> >>Database Analyst >>Pharmacy Division >>Mediware Information Systems, Inc.

↪ replying to Data Goob

nobody — Thu, 21 Oct 2004 08:57:34 -0500 — source: Usenet: comp.databases.informix

Data Goob wrote: > Good point(s). > [SNIP] > Much of your choice should have less to do with what database, > and more to do with the application, and can it deliver business > value back to the business. If it's running Informix behind the > scenes, what will be the business value if you can't support it? > That would be my biggest concern. I would make sure if they're > running Informix behind the scenes that they include the support > for you irrespective of the region or market you work in, and > provide an exit strategy / migration path to another DB if the > situation mitigates the need to migrate. > > -DG- > [SNIP] Now that funny. On one hand you say Informix is dead because you can't find anyone using it. On the other hand, IBM is saying Informix is alive and well and has a planned life. Eventually IDS and DB2 will have the same features and APIs so that migration would be fairly painless. Informix support is not going away. Application vendors, outside of IBM's control are starting not to support Informix. This is due to the pure economic costs associated with supporting a platform. The numbers (new customer revenue vs cost of maintaining a platform) don't make sense. So you limit the platforms to which you feel there will be customer demand. But if you're an OEM customer, Informix is still a very viable option. Speaking of which, what's happening on the Cloudscape front these days?