Re: No future for DB2

Peter Nolan wrote:
> Hi rkusenet,
> I saw the same article.........and there seems to have been a great
> deal of emotional response here.....
>
> My opinion is the author is pretty much on track....
>
> My understanding/opinion for what it is worth.
>
> 1. IMS and DB2 reign supreme on mainframe technology. Oracle is pretty
> much non-existant on MF and DB2 on MF earns IBM a tidy sum.
>
> 2. DB2 is the only real database on AS400 or eSeries as they now seem
> to be called. And the AS400 remains the most successful computer system
> ever launched. So DB2 on AS400 also earns IBM a tidy sum too.
>
> 3. DB2 on all versions unix....well....not that much presence as a
> percentage.....
>
> However, this was no fault of the database (my opinion)......if anyone
> was at fault my opinion would be 'Janet Perna'. Janet has run the DB2
> program for many years at IBM and as late as 1993 (when I was still at
> IBM doing Data Warehousing no less) the line was 'there is no future in
> RDBMS on unix'. So IBM did not even announce a product until late 1993
> and when they did it was DB2PE running on SP2 nodes which was something
> of a poor combination. It came out in 1994 and was more than a little
> difficult to make work.
>
> Sadly a research project for DB2/MVS to compete with Teradata at that
> time was dropped in favour of DB2PE on SP2s.
>
> Janet has announced her retirement recently. Who knows if the next
> person will push DB2 on unix?
>
>
> 4. DB2 on windows? Well DB2 came out on OS/2 and it was pretty good.
> But we all know what happened to OS/2. It was some years before it came
> out on Windows and I don't believe it's share is so great.
>
> So, the future of DB2?
>
> Well, on AS400 and z/OS/MF it's as bright as it has ever been. It will
> be around forever. Indeed, no reasonable competitor exists for DB2 on
> MF/AS400 (that I am aware of.)
>
>
> On unix? My opinion is IBM is not much interested in DB2 on unix.
>
> The revenues available are relatively small. I can't see why they would
> bother pushing it that hard.
>
> Oracle won that battle before IBM even got out of the blocks. There
> seems no doubt that Oracle will reign supreme on all things unix for
> some years to come.
>
> And why would IBM bother spending a lot of time and effort displacing
> or competing for database licenses on unix?
>
> IBM is going to do things more like team up with SAP to have DB2 be the
> underlying RDBMS when a new instance of SAP is sold...and I am sure SAP
> is running around it's Oracle RDBMS clients and trying to get them off
> Oracle RDBMS. And I am just as sure the Oracle reps will be in those
> same SAP shops touting the benefits of Oracle ERP rather than SAP on
> Oracle RDBMS... ;-)
>
> And given the relationship between SAP/Oracle over the last 10 years I
> would imagine there are a few ISVs who will want to make sure they have
> a second database they can switch to in case Oracle move into the
> software direction they are currently in. The same as ISVs who develop
> on SQL server would like a second database in case MSFT move in their
> direction.
>
> Today, IBM is the only one of the three that has promised not to get
> into the application development business. Indeed, IBM has sold off
> pretty much all it's application development business over the last few
> years.....so DB2 is an appealing database to have as the 'second'
> database on both unix and Windows for ISVs. And IBM can get those
> licenses for 'free'.
>
>
> On windows? MSFT is going to take the majority share of RDBMS on
> Windows.....And again, I can't see IBM bothering to spend a lot of time
> and effort trying to get new licenses there.
>
> The bottom line, my opinion.
>
> IBM is still far and away the second largest software company in the
> world turning over around USD15B in software licenses/maintenance a
> year. DB2 on mainframe contributes its share and it's a cash cow. So it
> will be around for a long long time. DB2 on other platforms will remain
> around but I can't see IBM really having anything of a go at that
> market except thru ISVs and the like. (I could be wrong ;-) ).
>
> IBM is concentrating on services....not hardware, not software.
>
> >From pretty much zero 12 years ago, IBM Global Services now makes more
> revenue than Microsoft (though are much lower margins). That is an
> unbelivable achievement. I worked in IBM in the services area in the
> early 90s and most of it was a complete 'basket case'.
>
> I am sure IBM Global Services are just as happy to look after an Oracle
> database as a DB2 database as an abacus if they can earn their hourly
> fee for doing so... (LOL)!!
>
> Best Regards
>
> Peter Nolan
> www.peternolan.com

Thanks Peter your analysis seems to be complete and right on target.

Way too much angst and indignation in this thread along with a lot of flag waving! Received on Wed Aug 03 2005 - 11:52:26 CDT