SEO

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/articl...sOracle10g.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.

--
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

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/articl...sOracle10g.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?

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/articl...sOracle10g.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.
--
Daniel A. Morgan
http://www.psoug.org
damorgan@x.washington.edu
(replace x with u to respond)

"RollForward Wizard" <rollforward@rollforward.com> wrote in message
news:j98hf.10600$Ad5.5295@fe59.usenetserver.com...
> Obnoxio The Clown wrote:
>> RollForward Wizard said:

> 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?

I don't think many people will claim that Informix failed because its
technology wasn't the best, or up there with the best. The concensus is
that it failed because other products in its space were better advertised,
marketed or supported with application development features. Those of us
who like Informix were disappointed, I believe, that when it was acquired by
IBM its new owners chose not to use their enormous product promotion budgets
to revitalise the profile of Informix in its traditionally strong areas, but
to promote in its place a mainframe-native product (DB2) with little
presence in that market.

So it isn't a question of Informix having some inherent "right" to publicity
and promotion: it is (and remains) a great product in its space, but the
chance to consolidate and improve its position has been passed up in favour
of a wider strategy of publicising only one, flagship, DBMS.

The answer to your question: "What do IBM need to do with Informix ...?" was
actually answered quite well by Daniel Morgan.

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/articl...sOracle10g.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.
#revenue(eBusiness Suite + PeopleSoft + JDEdwards + Sievel) < #revenue(SAP)

#revenue(all of the above) << #revenue(ISV market).

I am not concerned for the future of DBMS in IBM due to shifts in apps.

Even if one were to believe that IBM's strategy were wrong and the DBMS
"war" is being decided by owning the global ISVs, then one also had to
believe that both the EU and US monopoly watchdogs didn't get it either.
I simply can't believe that so many folks whose business is to
understand market dynamics are wrong and only Larry is right.

Maybe it's time to build a calendar for your prophecies Nostradamus?

Cheers
Serge

--
Serge Rielau
DB2 SQL Compiler Development
IBM Toronto Lab

Comments in-line.

Serge Rielau wrote:

>> 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.
>
> #revenue(eBusiness Suite + PeopleSoft + JDEdwards + Sievel) < #revenue(SAP)

It isn't about application revenue. A $10,000 PeopleSoft install takes
just as much database as a $10,000,000 SAP install so this is a bit of
a red herring.

> I am not concerned for the future of DBMS in IBM due to shifts in apps.

You may not be. But the marketing folks at IBM are and for a very good
reason: It matters.

> Even if one were to believe that IBM's strategy were wrong and the DBMS
> "war" is being decided by owning the global ISVs, then one also had to
> believe that both the EU and US monopoly watchdogs didn't get it either.

And looking at how the regulators handled Microsoft convinces you they
are out there, night and day, protecting us from monopolies?

> I simply can't believe that so many folks whose business is to
> understand market dynamics are wrong and only Larry is right.

I'd be more than a bit hesitant to put my faith in the Gartner's of
the world ... opinions for sale to the highest bidder. Their track
record is abyssmal. Larry is not the only one that is right. He is
just one of many saying the same thing.
--
Daniel A. Morgan
http://www.psoug.org
damorgan@x.washington.edu
(replace x with u to respond)

M Segel wrote:

>>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?
>>
>
> You're kidding right?
> Why do you think that IBM is now positioning IDS as the OLTP engine of
> choice?
>
> ;-)

Not kidding. The reason for looking at the OLTP marketplace, take a
look at my list above, is that they are spinning the fact that they
have no chance in the apps market: They are ceding it.

>>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.
>
> Hmmm. I guess PT Barnum was right. There are suckers born every minute.

Did you ever doubt it?

Who truly believes Windows is better technically than Solaris or HP/UX
or AIX?

> With respect to Microsoft's SQLServer, here's a free clue.
> IBM screwed up when they put Cloudscape out to pasture under Apache's Open
> Source licensing.

In one sense I agree. But looking at what IBM has done with its
databases I'd say it is just an acknowledgement of the fact that the
game is over just as CA did with Ingres.

> The point is that on the low end of the scale, there are other products that
> will take out Microsoft and even MySQL.

Did you happen to notice the new Express Edition of Oracle?
http://www.oracle.com/technology/pro.../xe/index.html
Free of all licensing.
How about Oracle's recent purchase of Innobase OY?
http://www.computerworld.com/databas...105245,00.html
Oracle is already moving to blunt their inroads.

> Leisure Suit Larry must be a major hero to the outsourcers in India.

Just as one of our friends here in a c.d. usenet group is currently in
China doing the same on behalf of IBM.

> With Informix, you only need two reliable DBAs. And the reason you need the
> second one is in case of a "Hit by Truck" incident where you lose your
> first one.

The same is true of all current RDBMS implementations from all vendors.
You should not make assumptions based on old unsupported product
versions from anyone.

> But hey, what do I know?

Seems like a lot.

> I've worked with *all* of the major players and hands down Informix blows
> away the competition. Especially Oracle. Granted I only worked with 8i, but
> that was enough. (Along with their arrogant support staff that was
> clueless.)

8i is an unsupported dinosaur that bears almost no relationship to the
company's current offerings. Rollback segments? Gone. Internal? Gone.
Rule Based Optimizer? Gone. Dictionary managed tablespaces? Gone. etc.
You might want to look again. The technololgy you remember was
introduced in 1999: A very long time ago in databases.
--
Daniel A. Morgan
http://www.psoug.org
damorgan@x.washington.edu
(replace x with u to respond)

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/articl...sOracle10g.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?

Applications are the key. I recently downloaded some kind of Java
application, and it automagically installed Cloudscape, and Apache
to make it work. The application was the center of attention not
the database. It often gets into commodity reasoning, similar to
tape backup software when considering databases these days. But in
the high-performance space this is where the database becomes the
application and in that context a meaningful, something-remembered
discussion can happen if this-or-that database is said to be better
or worse. But when in an application mindset, where the database is
not the center of attention, you, just like a manager, couldn't care
less where the database comes from, as long as the application runs,
and doesn't fall down.

Is there some kind of meaningful application that has to use Informix
or its features where Informix is the preferred choice? It would appear
that this could be the starting point, rather than just huffing and
puffing about how great Informix is. Without some kind of meaningful
application context to showcase Informix it has no relevance. 4GL was
one of the propellants that really made Informix relevant, but today
there is not a single application of any prominence that needs
Informix more than any other database to work. Unless Informix has a
point, there is nothing to market it, no propellant. A "4GL" won't
work today, there are already too many languages, and application
environments with momentum, what Informix needs is that one killer
app, and then the world will be right once again. Sales people
need something to sell, give them something.

RollForward Wizard wrote:

> Is there some kind of meaningful application that has to use Informix
> or its features where Informix is the preferred choice?

Not to beat a dead horse here but the question I would ask is.

Take the number of companies offering products built on SQL Server or
Oracle currently building versions that run on Informix.

.... and compare it with ...

The number of companies offering products built on Informix that are
currently building versions that run on SQL Server or Oracle?

My guess is that the first number will be very small compared with
the second. And that difference defines the future.

It has absolutely nothing to do with the quality of the product itself.
--
Daniel A. Morgan
http://www.psoug.org
damorgan@x.washington.edu
(replace x with u to respond)

DA Morgan wrote:
> M Segel wrote:
...
>> Leisure Suit Larry must be a major hero to the outsourcers in India.
>
>
> Just as one of our friends here in a c.d. usenet group is currently in
> China doing the same on behalf of IBM.
No need to hold back. My being in China is not confidential. ;-)
And no, I'm not involved in outsourcing.
I'm doing primarily skills transfer for IBM China Employees servicing
IBM China customers. Just like American customers take issue when their
contacts don't speak their language, Chinese customers do the same.
Growing an international company outside of their American home base is
very different from outsourcing.
No future or current job at IBM in Toronto, Lenexa, Portland, Santa
Teresa, Menlo Park, ... is threatend. I sleep well :-)

That I'm also visiting big Asian ISVs who are porting/migrating from
Oracle may cause others to sleep less well, of course. ;-)

Cheers
Serge
--
Serge Rielau
DB2 SQL Compiler Development
IBM Toronto Lab