Re: informix market share

"rkusenet" <rkusenet_at_yahoo.com> wrote in message news:2dnif.1163$wf2.60245_at_news20.bellglobal.com...
> "Bob Jones" <email_at_me.not> wrote in message
> news:RLmif.34038$6e1.27895_at_newssvr14.news.prodigy.com...
>
>> Ok, let's just talk about LUW then. The market share for Informix was
>> about 5% in 2004, down 1% from 2003. That just doesn't make me feel any
>> better. Keep in mind, IBM bought Informix to increase its database share
>> on UNIX. So far I am not seeing it happening. If Informix sales continue
>> to dwindle, customers will be forced to migrate soon.
>
> of course true. When did I ever dispute this? All I said was that 1.4% is
> on
> all platforms, not on LUW.
>

I did not say you did. I was simply answering your question. IBM folks always like to include mainframe when they talk about maket shares. I was just trying to be consistent.

> IBM did not buy Informix to increase. It bought Informix for following
> reasons:-
>
> - to assuage concerns of big Informix customers like Wal-Mart. It is
> strongly
> rumored that IBM bought Informix upon advise from Wal-Mart. One thing is
> sure. With IBM as its new owner, Informix can never go bankrupt, leaving
> its customer high and dry.
>
> - to bring much needed high end technology to DB2 UDB. Notice that Db2 is
> rapidly incorporating Informix technology. Like HADR. Version 9.0 of Db2,
> known as Viper is out on beta now. It has table partitioning. I am pretty
> sure
> that Informix's proven and stable fragmentation technology is behind it.
>

If not to improve the market share of its databases, what do you think the ultimate goal of these 2 actions are? In fact, I could care less about what IBM's real motive was, the only thing matters is the bottom line outcome.

Hmmm, I did not know table partitioning is so new to DB2.

> I was genuinely surprised to see the features in Informix's latest version
> 10.
> IBM has added lot of new exciting features. If they were interested in
> killing it,
> why bother keeping Informix up-to-date. This doesn't make sense.
>

I don't think IBM wants to kill it quickly. Quite the contrary, they want to give it life-support for as long as possible.

> Informix is still toast bcos of FUD. What I think is going to happen is
> that
> in another 1/2 yrs DB2 will match Informix in features and performance
> and at that time many of Informix customer will migrate to DB2. Add to it
> that no one wants to learn Informix skills, the demise will be further
> accelerated.
>

Yes, but they could migrate to other databases as well.

> Oracle has more to worry in about a year when IBM will start poaching
> Oracle customers with a version of DB2 which can stand up to Oracle,
> if not already. IBM has deep pockets and is into many things. Imagine
> when they tell customers "get a hardware from us and you will get DB2
> free. Why are u paying Oracle so much".

Why isn't IBM doing this now?

> BTW given the predatory tactics of Larry Ellison, why didn't he buy
> Informix
> in 2001. He would have easily killed it by now. Was that a big mistake by
> him. Is that a reason why he does not want to repeat the mistake with
> Peoplesoft and Siebel.
>

Why do you think Oracle would want to buy Informix and then kill it? It would not have done any good. Received on Sun Nov 27 2005 - 15:07:02 CST