Serge,
I think you managed to sum it up pretty well. As you say, there wasn't
really much more except ranting about how Informix is better than DB2 -
which this group knows anyway. I also don't think that this group helps
IBM by keep telling each other that users are migrating away. An IT
manager who knows little about the technicalities would read this thread
and conclude that as everybody else is leaving Informix for Orrible and
Squeal they might as well follow suit. As a group we need to be careful
what we say about migration. I know of at least two sites who have
decided to leave Informix based on what they have read here - and they
didn't even look at DB2.

But there is a serious concern among the Informix professionals in this
group that they will have difficulty finding work when the Informix
product is replaced by DB2++. This concern needs to be presented to IBM
management. It's one thing incorporating Informix into the DB2 product,
it's another challenge to get Informix customers to migrate in that
direction, but it is an even bigger problem to convert those many of us
who have pledged our careers to Informix over the last 15 or more years.

Regards

Malcolm

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-informix-list@iiug.org [mailtowner-informix-list@iiug.org]
On Behalf Of Serge Rielau
Sent: 06 February 2004 14:18
To: informix-list@iiug.org
Subject: Re: These crazy emails about IDS to DB2 conversion


Dirk Moolman wrote:
> Man, I hope IBM is following this thread ...
Here is what I have passed on so far out of this thread:
"IBM needs to get more references of DB2 migrations out to disprove the
perception that the base is mostly leaving to the competition."

Given that the situation is rather ticklish it would be unreasonable to
excpect IBM to aggressively push those references, but they ought to be
available on the web.
I'm sure folks here can follow if I say that anything aggresive would be

seen as the final nail in the coffin of Informix by many customers.

Honestly, was there anything more in this thread once all the ranting is

cut out? I would love to have a serious discussion, offline would be
just as fine. I don't mind email.

I don't think anyone can expect IBM to publish the names of every
Informix developer working on DB2 and transfering technology to prove
it's indeed happening.
Equally there is a fine line to be walked on when to tell which features

are available if for nothing else than legal purposes.
(Not even mentioning that I know that Mark T. watches my every
keystroke)

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

sending to informix-list

"malcolm weallans" <malcolm.iiug@btopenworld.com> wrote in message
news:c00g07$3dn$1@terabinaries.xmission.com...
>
> Serge,
> I think you managed to sum it up pretty well. As you say, there wasn't
> really much more except ranting about how Informix is better than DB2 -
> which this group knows anyway.

Gosh, I didn't see it that way. I thought there was a lot of constructive
criticism ("promote the product please"), and some explanations as to why
that wasn't happening. Also some tangiable suggestions as to the sort of
technical features we want to see in DB2 and its migration tools. So I
don't agree with you (or Serge) that the debate lacks merit.

> I also don't think that this group helps
> IBM by keep telling each other that users are migrating away. ... I know
of at least two sites who have
> decided to leave Informix based on what they have read here - and they
> didn't even look at DB2.

And there you go, Malcolm, doing *exactly* what you're pulling others up on!
I too know of lots of sites where Informix is being replaced, and not by
DB2. Usually this is either because of third-party pressure, or because of
a perception that Informix is dying. Maybe the cdi debate contributes to
this peerception, but other factors - the lack of product advertising for
example - are much bigger ones.

Just because the voicing of an opinion that IBM's policy towards Informix is
contributing to the product's demise may itself contribute towards a
negative impression, does that mean everyone should keep quiet and not point
out that policy's flaw? Have you read "The Emperor's New Clothes"?

> But there is a serious concern among the Informix professionals in this
> group that they will have difficulty finding work when the Informix
> product is replaced by DB2++. This concern needs to be presented to IBM
> management.

Again, I don't agree with you. I have huge sympathy with those, like me
probably, whose employment prospects are dented by Informix's decline: but
I'm not even sure if IBM has a moral responsibility to these people and even
if it does I think it is naive to expect that to figure highly in the
thinking of *any* big business.

Neil Truby wrote:

> "malcolm weallans" <malcolm.iiug@btopenworld.com> wrote in message
> news:c00g07$3dn$1@terabinaries.xmission.com...
>
>>Serge,
>>I think you managed to sum it up pretty well. As you say, there wasn't
>>really much more except ranting about how Informix is better than DB2 -
>>which this group knows anyway.
>
>
> Gosh, I didn't see it that way. I thought there was a lot of constructive
> criticism ("promote the product please"), and some explanations as to why
> that wasn't happening. Also some tangiable suggestions as to the sort of
> technical features we want to see in DB2 and its migration tools. So I
> don't agree with you (or Serge) that the debate lacks merit.
>
>
>> I also don't think that this group helps
>>IBM by keep telling each other that users are migrating away. ... I know
>
> of at least two sites who have
>
>>decided to leave Informix based on what they have read here - and they
>>didn't even look at DB2.
>
>
> And there you go, Malcolm, doing *exactly* what you're pulling others up on!
> I too know of lots of sites where Informix is being replaced, and not by
> DB2. Usually this is either because of third-party pressure, or because of
> a perception that Informix is dying. Maybe the cdi debate contributes to
> this peerception, but other factors - the lack of product advertising for
> example - are much bigger ones.
>
> Just because the voicing of an opinion that IBM's policy towards Informix is
> contributing to the product's demise may itself contribute towards a
> negative impression, does that mean everyone should keep quiet and not point
> out that policy's flaw? Have you read "The Emperor's New Clothes"?
>
>
>>But there is a serious concern among the Informix professionals in this
>>group that they will have difficulty finding work when the Informix
>>product is replaced by DB2++. This concern needs to be presented to IBM
>>management.
>
>
> Again, I don't agree with you. I have huge sympathy with those, like me
> probably, whose employment prospects are dented by Informix's decline: but
> I'm not even sure if IBM has a moral responsibility to these people and even
> if it does I think it is naive to expect that to figure highly in the
> thinking of *any* big business.
>
>
OK, so promoting the product is an issue. It certainly is a known one.
So reporting up that it is an issue will not do much good.
How would you promote Informix _if_you_were_in_IBM's_shoes_ ?
Let's stay reasonable, though. DB2 is and will be the flagship brand.
When negotiating you have to acknowledge unnegotiable points.

As a company IBM's interest in the Informix install base is to generate
revenue.
This can be either done by keeping the base where it is, or by
converting the base to DB2. To convert the base there must be a value
proposition for customers. To keep it customers must be happy enough
with it that they don't see a value proposition in the competition and
they don't feel they have to jump due to an end-of-service event by
either the DBMS or their ISVs.
Informix itself realized that independent products cost R&D efficiency.
It makes no sense to do the same work in Redbrick, XPS, IDS 7, IDS 9 and
DB2.
DB2 has somewhat of an excuse for three codebases due to plaform
integration. For Unix at all you can't sell that to analysts as little
as to shareholders.
Informix went to work on Arrowhead....

What should IBM do?
Cheers
Serge

PS: I am applying logic, not IBM policy. I cannot speak for IBM.
--
Serge Rielau
DB2 SQL Compiler Development
IBM Toronto Lab

"Serge Rielau" <srielau@ca.eye-be-em.com> wrote in message
news:c00t97$16a$1@hanover.torolab.ibm.com...
> Neil Truby wrote:

> OK, so promoting the product is an issue. It certainly is a known one.
> So reporting up that it is an issue will not do much good.
> How would you promote Informix _if_you_were_in_IBM's_shoes_ ?

I'd promote it as an IBM UNIX/Linux/NT database of choice, alongside DB2 if
they wish. Arguably technically superior to DB2 UDB. And unencumbered by
the general perception of DB2 as a mainframe product.

> Let's stay reasonable, though. DB2 is and will be the flagship brand.
> When negotiating you have to acknowledge unnegotiable points.

Well, to be accurate, DB2 is the brand, and DB2 is the flagship product.
But, you're right, and I accept that it's non-negotiable. IBM execs have an
unshakeable belief in DB2, the product. Even I can see that isn't going to
change. That's why I said in an earlier post that the IIUG's aims should be
to advocate to IBM make DB2 the best possible conversion for Informix users.
But I *know* from my own experience that IBM has very badly miscalculated in
its attitude to Informix. Is it wrong to point this out?

> What should IBM do?

In my humble opinion? Promote Informix as a product in its own right.
Ignore the analysts. Try to sell it to new customers. Destroy the
impression that its actions are giving that Informix is dead.
And not just because I want Informix to be preserved (although I do). But
because they are haemoragging customers to the competition. Informix users
are showing by deed and in their droves that they do not want to migrate to
DB2.

Neil Truby wrote:
> "Serge Rielau" <srielau@ca.eye-be-em.com> wrote in message
> news:c00t97$16a$1@hanover.torolab.ibm.com...
>
>>Neil Truby wrote:
>
>
>>OK, so promoting the product is an issue. It certainly is a known one.
>>So reporting up that it is an issue will not do much good.
>>How would you promote Informix _if_you_were_in_IBM's_shoes_ ?
>
>
> I'd promote it as an IBM UNIX/Linux/NT database of choice, alongside DB2 if
> they wish. Arguably technically superior to DB2 UDB. And unencumbered by
> the general perception of DB2 as a mainframe product.
And that would be true for IDS 7, IDS 9 and XPS and Redbrick?
Or would you focus on IDS 9 only?
Where would you draw the line? In which cases should IBM push IDS and in
which case DB2?
Using Redbrick as an example: Redbrick is great w.r.t. embeddability,
but it's not so well rounded.
So it's rather easy to draw a line there.

Sbould IBM invest in benchmarks such as TPC-C and app vendors?
Note though that these high-end benchmarks can cost a ton of money and
resources.

>>Let's stay reasonable, though. DB2 is and will be the flagship brand.
>>When negotiating you have to acknowledge unnegotiable points.
>
>
> Well, to be accurate, DB2 is the brand, and DB2 is the flagship product.
> But, you're right, and I accept that it's non-negotiable. IBM execs have an
> unshakeable belief in DB2, the product. Even I can see that isn't going to
> change.
Correct, there is no reason for execs to think otherwise.
DB2 rules z/Series, is on par with IDS on Unix and is expected to become
#2 on Windows very soon. For being the new kid on the block on Unix and
Windows that is a decent track record.
>That's why I said in an earlier post that the IIUG's aims should be
> to advocate to IBM make DB2 the best possible conversion for Informix users.
> But I *know* from my own experience that IBM has very badly miscalculated in
> its attitude to Informix. Is it wrong to point this out?
I'd prefer constructive criticism. I can tell you first hand that a good
chunk of the resources is aimed at making DB2 the best product to
migrate to. Does IBM need to publicize this more?
I have talked at WAIUG about impassionate comparison of DB2 with IDS.
Would it be an helpful to send out well known Informix and DB2
developers to local meetings to talk about what they do for DB2 Vnext?
I.e. Putting faces to the effort; make it tangible.
I think it would be OK to talk about HDR, range partitioning and some of
the other efforts which were publicized as being targets or which are
ripe enough to be put in the open. (Not to mention that I like traveling)

>>What should IBM do?
> In my humble opinion? Promote Informix as a product in its own right.
> Ignore the analysts. Try to sell it to new customers. Destroy the
> impression that its actions are giving that Informix is dead.
> And not just because I want Informix to be preserved (although I do). But
> because they are haemoragging customers to the competition. Informix users
> are showing by deed and in their droves that they do not want to migrate to
> DB2.
It is very hard to ignore analysts. As Informix customers know first
hand it is not technology alone that sells. A marketing dollar spent in
an anlyst meeting is a lot more effective than one spend in more direct
means.
It is a fact that Informix was haemoragging before the acquisition. The
question is: "Has this accelerated or been reduced?"
It's a question I ask every Informix saleperson when I meet them. The
answer from them is: Much reduced.
Many of the big customers are reportedly relieved to have IBM behind the
name now.
The question is: How to reconcile these news with what is voiced here?
Are those posting here representing smaller customers which are not
"touched" by a salesperson and hence fall through the cracks. Or is the
group that speaks up here not representative - just rather noisy?

More food for thought.
Serge
--
Serge Rielau
DB2 SQL Compiler Development
IBM Toronto Lab

"Serge Rielau" <srielau@ca.eye-be-em.com> wrote in message
news:c013kp$2gf$1@hanover.torolab.ibm.com...
> Neil Truby wrote:
> > "Serge Rielau" <srielau@ca.eye-be-em.com> wrote in message
> > news:c00t97$16a$1@hanover.torolab.ibm.com...
> >

I was going to post a point-by-point reply until I realised that it would be
futile.
The difference between us is not about technology.

You believe that IBM is well-placed to claim a significant proportion of
Informix customers as and when they migrate.
You infer that this justifies IBM's policy towards Informix.

My observation is that I see many defectors, and none of them are going to
DB2.
I infer from this that IBM has seriously miscalculated.

But we live in different parts of the world, do different jobs and, maybe
you are correct, see different-sized companies.
My experiences may be atypical. But I can only call it as I see it ....

Have a good weekend.

Neil Truby wrote:

> "Serge Rielau" <srielau@ca.eye-be-em.com> wrote in message
> news:c013kp$2gf$1@hanover.torolab.ibm.com...
>
>>Neil Truby wrote:
>>
>>>"Serge Rielau" <srielau@ca.eye-be-em.com> wrote in message
>>>news:c00t97$16a$1@hanover.torolab.ibm.com...
>>>
>
>
> I was going to post a point-by-point reply until I realised that it would be
> futile.
> The difference between us is not about technology.
>
> You believe that IBM is well-placed to claim a significant proportion of
> Informix customers as and when they migrate.
> You infer that this justifies IBM's policy towards Informix.
>
> My observation is that I see many defectors, and none of them are going to
> DB2.
> I infer from this that IBM has seriously miscalculated.
>
> But we live in different parts of the world, do different jobs and, maybe
> you are correct, see different-sized companies.
> My experiences may be atypical. But I can only call it as I see it ....
>
> Have a good weekend.
>
>
Neil, You may have misread my post. I seriously wanted input. All I'm
stating is that what I see is not the same you 9an dother here) see.
Presuming both of us see some form of reality it should be possible to
reconcile them.
What about the proposals I made? Are they missing the point? Are they
worth pursuing?

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