SEO

Well, I have 6 customers here in the US that have moved to Oracle or Sequel
Server.

1 plans on moving to DB2 although that has not been cast in stone yet.

There are others that are loosely considering their options. Not one of them
has ever made mention of DB2. That is not to say they are not interested.
The predominant view in this group is to stay put for now because its
cheaper that way....for now.

Mark

----- Original Message -----
From: "Larry Edelstein" <lsedels@us.ibm.com>
To: <informix-list@iiug.org>
Sent: Saturday, September 20, 2003 12:37
Subject: Re: Company thought DB2 will be better than Oracle.


> There you go again, Daniel ... twisting things around to make it sound
like
> you're right.
>
> Here is Neil's statement:
>
> "... Furthermore, in my experience (please name one, someone, if anyone
knows of
> one) I know not of a single such defector who is moving to
> DB2. Oracle and SQL Server are the beneficiaries. So it doesn't really
matter
> what IBM *says*, the market perceives differently. And *that* is
> what counts."
>
> My statement back to Neil was:
>
> "I disagree with your statement on Oracle and SQLServer gaining the
Informix
> customers. Perhaps you are in the UK, where there might be more of that.
But I
> have at least two customers in the NYC area who are moving to DB2 instead
of
> Oracle from Informix (two out of two Informix customers that I have,
actually)."
>
> Another Daniel misrepresentation. Case closed.
>
> Larry Edelstein
>
> Daniel Morgan wrote:
>
> > Larry Edelstein wrote:
> >
> > ><snipped>
> > >
> > >I disagree with your statement on Oracle and SQLServer gaining the
Informix
> > >customers.
> > >
> > ><snipped>
> > >
> > >
> > I would be fascinated to know on what basis you disagree.
> >
> > Every student that applies to my class (and these are not 20 year olds
> > ... all have a minimum CS degree and almost all at
> > least 10 years industry experience) must submit a letter explaining why
> > they have registered for the class and a resume
> > with their background: Do you think almost 1/3 of them, this year, are
> > lying?
> >
> > You are welcome to disagree on subjective matters such as who was
> > better, Mozart of Bach. But on what basis do you
> > feel you can disagree on a matter where there is an answer that is
> > objectively correct?
> >
> > --
> > Daniel Morgan
> > http://www.outreach.washington.edu/e...ad/oad_crs.asp
> > http://www.outreach.washington.edu/e...oa/aoa_crs.asp
> > damorgan@x.washington.edu
> > (replace 'x' with a 'u' to reply)
>

sending to informix-list

Mark Denham wrote:

>Well, I have 6 customers here in the US that have moved to Oracle or Sequel
>Server.
>
>1 plans on moving to DB2 although that has not been cast in stone yet.
>
>There are others that are loosely considering their options. Not one of them
>has ever made mention of DB2. That is not to say they are not interested.
>The predominant view in this group is to stay put for now because its
>cheaper that way....for now.
>
>Mark
>
>
Have you noticed that it is the IBM employees that protest the loudest
when we put forth our real-world experiences?

I find it amazing when employees on the corporate payroll, persons that
likely would become unemployed if they agreed
with us ... try to tar the statements of people with no particular axe
to grind.

--
Daniel Morgan
http://www.outreach.washington.edu/e...ad/oad_crs.asp
http://www.outreach.washington.edu/e...oa/aoa_crs.asp
damorgan@x.washington.edu
(replace 'x' with a 'u' to reply)

Daniel Morgan wrote:

> Have you noticed that it is the IBM employees that protest the loudest
> when we put forth our real-world experiences?

Just like Oracle users like you protest the loudest when facts are presented
about TCO, which shows that Oracle is nothing but a white elephant.

rk-

rkusenet wrote:

>Daniel Morgan wrote:
>
>
>
>>Have you noticed that it is the IBM employees that protest the loudest
>>when we put forth our real-world experiences?
>>
>>
>
>Just like Oracle users like you protest the loudest when facts are presented
>about TCO, which shows that Oracle is nothing but a white elephant.
>
>rk-
>
>
You may know what I teach but haven't a clue what I use.

I'll be working at an Informix shop next week. Do you think I need wash my hands first? ;-)
--
Daniel Morgan
http://www.outreach.washington.edu/e...ad/oad_crs.asp
http://www.outreach.washington.edu/e...oa/aoa_crs.asp
damorgan@x.washington.edu
(replace 'x' with a 'u' to reply)

> Daniel Morgan wrote:
> You may know what I teach but haven't a clue what I use.
> I'll be working at an Informix shop next week. Do you think I need wash
> my hands first? ;-)

I am not interested at all in this stupid thread. But just to clarify.

You were sounding self-righteous when u were taking a jab at IBM employees.
From my experience, everyone puts his self interest first. I have no
more reasons to believe Oracle pimping by an Oracle user than DB2 pimping
by a DB2 user. Either both are self centered or both aren't.

Do u think it is just a coincidence that out of last 10 quarters, Oracle
has seen a declining license revenue in 9 quarters.

rk-

rkusenet wrote:

>>Daniel Morgan wrote:
>>You may know what I teach but haven't a clue what I use.
>>I'll be working at an Informix shop next week. Do you think I need wash
>>my hands first? ;-)
>>
>>
>
>I am not interested at all in this stupid thread. But just to clarify.
>
>You were sounding self-righteous when u were taking a jab at IBM employees.
>From my experience, everyone puts his self interest first. I have no
>more reasons to believe Oracle pimping by an Oracle user than DB2 pimping
>by a DB2 user. Either both are self centered or both aren't.
>
>Do u think it is just a coincidence that out of last 10 quarters, Oracle
>has seen a declining license revenue in 9 quarters.
>
>rk-
>
>
I think marketing, advertising, and hyperbole are irrelevant to a usenet
group. A bunch of employees
crowing about the fact that the company that pays their salary is better
than the company that doesn't
it not something I have to go to the internet to read. I've no doubt the
people that are paid to do marketing
for Coca Cola can quote equally valid statistics about those "Pepsi
Users". Me? I just walk up to the machine,
put in my quarters and take whatever comes out. It's all brown fizzy
water to me.
--

Daniel Morgan
http://www.outreach.washington.edu/e...ad/oad_crs.asp
http://www.outreach.washington.edu/e...oa/aoa_crs.asp
damorgan@x.washington.edu
(replace 'x' with a 'u' to reply)

Daniel Morgan wrote:

>I think marketing, advertising, and hyperbole are irrelevant to a usenet group.
>A bunch of employees crowing about the fact that the company that pays their
>salary is better than the company that doesn't it not something I have to go to the
> internet to read.

Why restrict to only those who are employees of company that makes a product.
In what way an Oracle user, specially DBAs, who uses Oracle for his living,
will be any less biased than an employee of Oracle Corp like Mark Townsend.
Of course the same applies to Informix DBAs too.

> I've no doubt the people that are paid to do marketing
> for Coca Cola can quote equally valid statistics about those
>"Pepsi Users". Me? I just walk up to the machine,
> put in my quarters and take whatever comes out. It's all brown fizzy water to me.

the only difference is that coke/pepsi isn't about my job/career. Sure u and I
will be unbiased when it comes to coke vs pepsi or Honda vs Toyota, since it
is not about our job. But Oracle vs DB2/Informix is a different beast altogether.

That's why I take ur statements defending Oracle's TCO with a handful of the needful.

rk-

Comments interspersed.

rkusenet wrote:

>Daniel Morgan wrote:
>
>
>>I think marketing, advertising, and hyperbole are irrelevant to a usenet group.
>>A bunch of employees crowing about the fact that the company that pays their
>>salary is better than the company that doesn't it not something I have to go to the
>>internet to read.
>>
>>
>
>Why restrict to only those who are employees of company that makes a product.
>In what way an Oracle user, specially DBAs, who uses Oracle for his living,
>will be any less biased than an employee of Oracle Corp like Mark Townsend.
>Of course the same applies to Informix DBAs too.
>
I expect Mark Townsend to be as objective as the IBM employees. Not one
bit more. Not one bit less. Though
he does seem a bit less paranoiac about it all but I assume that is
personal trait rather than something related to his
employer and their product.

I make my living teaching two company's products and in my consulting
life make income from all of them. Which I
guess makes me a traitor to everyone that thinks software is a religion.

>I've no doubt the people that are paid to do marketing
>for Coca Cola can quote equally valid statistics about those
>"Pepsi Users". Me? I just walk up to the machine,
>put in my quarters and take whatever comes out. It's all brown fizzy water to me.
>
>
>
>the only difference is that coke/pepsi isn't about my job/career. Sure u and I
>will be unbiased when it comes to coke vs pepsi or Honda vs Toyota, since it
>is not about our job. But Oracle vs DB2/Informix is a different beast altogether.
>
>That's why I take ur statements defending Oracle's TCO with a handful of the needful.
>
>rk-
>
>
There isn't a single person in any of these usenet groups that has any
first hand knowledge of the TCO for any of
these products. Oh we can all quote this study or that purchased by this
company or that to support some proposition.
But no two compies are buying the same hardware, operating system,
network routers, databases, applications, employees,
etc. so costs vary by definition. TCO is something invented by people in
marketing and advertising departments just like
benchmarks. It is a mechanism for selling products to those that don't
or won't do their own math and testing.

Assume that The Boeing Company, AT&T Wireless and Amazon.com buy the
exact same product and put it on the
exact same hardware. What are the chances that their MBAs will determine
a similar TCO? Zero. Ask me how I know.

--
Daniel Morgan
http://www.outreach.washington.edu/e...ad/oad_crs.asp
http://www.outreach.washington.edu/e...oa/aoa_crs.asp
damorgan@x.washington.edu
(replace 'x' with a 'u' to reply)

"Daniel Morgan" <damorgan@x.washington.edu> wrote:-

> There isn't a single person in any of these usenet groups that has
> any first hand knowledge of the TCO for any of these products.
> Oh we can all quote this study or that purchased by this company or
> that to support some proposition.
> But no two compies are buying the same hardware, operating system,
> network routers, databases, applications, employees,
> etc. so costs vary by definition. TCO is something invented by people
> in marketing and advertising departments just like
> benchmarks. It is a mechanism for selling products to those that
> don't or won't do their own math and testing.

I have seen IDC report comparing the TCO of Oracle/SQLSERVER/DB2 and it
shows Oracle to be the most expensive significantly.

For my company, I have also seen quotations for the above three which shows
Oracle to be the most expensive by a clear margin. Had it not been for NDA,
I would have quoted the figure here. This is just the price of license
and maintenance.

Oracle's price may not be an issue to big corporations, not for small
companies.

rk-

Daniel Morgan wrote:

> he does seem a bit less paranoiac about it all but I assume that is
> personal trait rather than something related to his

remembering to take his medication ?

Yours,
Comfortably Numb