RE: Informix Positive Post #2

> From: indeep@indeep.com> Subject: Re: Informix Positive Post #2> Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2008 22:57:34 -0700> To: informix-list@iiug.org> > > > Kevin Cherkauer wrote:> > <Begin Gumby>> > There seems to be a bit of a misunderstanding about IBM. IBM doesn't market > > individual products but they do market/advertise brands.> > So how do you market/advertise the Information Management Brand? That's > > going to be a bigger picture than just little ol IDS. Which is really a > > product line not an individual product. You know like advertising the > > P-Series of AIX servers or the I-Series. Both are individual product lines > > but *are* they a *brand*?> > <End Gumby>> > > > Since when is Information Management a brand? "Information Management" is an> idea but not a brand. A brand is identified by a product not an idea. When> you are selling a product, you typically sell a product within a concept that> tells the consumer this is the best choice amongst other products in the same> category of product. Selling products is not the same as selling ideas, because> ideas alone are not an offer that converts into a sale. Branding is the art of> selling a product, not an idea. Ideas are only convertable into cash if you are> willing enough to simply plop down money for the idea, which is not what databases> are about, and neither are applications. Applications and databases are products,> not ideas. People pay for products, with the promise that the product will deliver> some kind of value to the person paying for it. You buy databases because of what> they will do, not because they are an idea. The offer to provide you some kind> of benefit is embodied in the brand. But you can't brand ideas. Only products.> InDeep, You have to cut Kevin some slack. He's an engineer in Portland. Not in the thick of things when it comes to understanding the business side of the house. Because the product line grew from DB2 to DB2/Informix products, to DB2/Informix/Assntail products, you no longer had a clear DB2 brand. When you think DB2 as the brand and you think DB2 as a product, the outside world thought of them as a single product. So they changed the pillar's name to Information Management because that's what their product line did. Manage the information from creation/ETL to OLTP to Datawarehouse... And there are some marketable ideas that IBM IM could have taken on. But they didn't. You can create an Information Management as a brand, however then you need to know and be able to spell out your product line as a story. All brands have a story. But an IT Specialist who handles "distributed" databases doesn't know Ass-n-tail's product line. or the Content Management product line. Or the Z/OS product line. They are all disjoint and there is no story. -G _________________________________________________________________ Watch “Cause Effect,” a show about real people making a real difference. Learn more. http://im.live.com/Messenger/IM/MTV/?source=text_watchcause