Guys,
I don't think it does any good for this newsgroup to be pessimistic when
discussing the futures for Informix products. It merely serves to continue
the doubts that many organisations have about the future of the products. I
have recently spoken to a number of companies who are migrating away from
Informix as they consider it to be dying. When I ask them why they cite
lack of marketing and the uncertainty in this newgroup on the future. So,
if we want the product to die then we should carry on telling the public
that it will. By my reckoning Informix has a lifespan planned of about 5
years. And who can see further than that? 6 years ago we were all saying
the 4GL was going to die - but then came D4GL and the product was
reinvigorated.

Just my tuppenceworth

Malcolm

----- Original Message -----
From: "Mark D. Stock" <mdstock (AT) mydassolutions (DOT) com>
To: "Jonathan Leffler" <jleffler (AT) earthlink (DOT) net>
Cc: <informix-list (AT) iiug (DOT) org>
Sent: Wednesday, August 20, 2003 9:45 AM
Subject: Re: Clarification please


sending to informix-list

malcolm.iiug wrote:
Don't you do smilies any more? Get with the program (or thread) Malcolm!
We were all having a laugh about a post in another news group (not
stated) by someone (not stated) who posted a response saying:
"
yes, there will be 9.50 and 9.60 and then Informix ends.
"

You get shot for not having a road map, and you get shot for having one
that only looks forward x years. :-)

There are companies migrating away from Informix for various reasons:

They think Informix is a dead product
They think they will be forced to migrate to DB2
They don't want to deal with IBM at all
They prefer Microsoft licensing fees
They believe the FUD
:

On this list we tend to deal in reality, and they only had to ask here,
to get the real story.

Any uncertainty in this news group will be from the certainty that
people will not bet their jobs on using Informix products in new IT
projects.

Cheers,
--
Mark.

+----------------------------------------------------------+-----------+

sending to informix-list

On Wed, 20 Aug 2003 12:47:41 +0100, "malcolm.iiug"
<malcolm.iiug (AT) btopenworld (DOT) com> wrote:

I agree . . . hence my original post. I saw what was apparently
inaccurate information, and I wanted someone to provide accurate
information. That someone (who shall go nameless) did so, very
clearly.

Lack of marketing is still an issue with me, but it's outside my
scope, so to speak. Then again, I remember Serge's comment concerning
marketing for DB2 . . . .8-) Lack of marketing is one thing that we
as techies are not really able to control, as corporate decisions are
made at a higher level than we are. Just remember, if there's doubt
concerning the future of the products, whose responsibility is it?

4GL dying 6 years ago? Glad it didn't, as we use it quite a bit here
.. . . . didn't hear that one . . . . now we get to hear about EGL . .

My US$0.02.

"malcolm.iiug" <malcolm.iiug (AT) btopenworld (DOT) com> wrote

Bollocks!

Is it the fault of the newsgroup contributors that Informix is viewed as
yesterday's product?
No.
It's a result of the aforementioned lack of marketing, and the impression
that this about how much IBM really cares for Informix.

rkusenet made the point about the recent report from Gartner entitled
"Informix: The Twilight Years".
Barely a peep has been uttered by IBM in the form of a rebuttal.
Does anyone really believe that IBM would have let that passed unchallenged
had it been entitled "DB2 UDB: The Twilight Years"?

Why should we lie about it?

malcolm.iiug wrote:

Errrr,...Malcolm? I think that was a joke. It had a smiley and everything.

Guys,
I was not saying who is right or wrong, merely that some managers I had
spoken to recently gave as their reasons for migration away from Informix
the lack of marketing and the negative messages they see in this newsgroup.
I am merely the messenger. Many of us rely on the success of Informix for
our careers. If we keep highlighting the negative stories then we can
expect managers - many of whom don't know how to smile - to make the wrong
decisions.
Maybe we need to have a separate mailing list for the "funnies".

Malcolm
----- Original Message -----
From: "Obnoxio The Clown" <obnoxio (AT) hotmail (DOT) com>
To: <informix-list (AT) iiug (DOT) org>
Sent: Wednesday, August 20, 2003 8:11 PM
Subject: Re: Crying Wolf - was Re: Clarification please


sending to informix-list

Jean Sagi wrote:

10 years? Jeez, in 1985 there was Standard Engine. Who could have foreseen
IDS 9.1 10 years from that? (My dates might not be absolutely correct, but
I hope my point stands... )

Jean Sagi wrote:
So who was it who had a go at me for claiming there's too much emotional
nonsense going on?

Informix is developing faster than ever under IBM. If and when IDS and DB/2
are merged you can bet your bottom dollar that it will be as close as
possible - probably from both directions. If you've got problems with any
feature or mis-feature of DB/2, don't you think the huge input from the IDS
techies right now is going to show them a thing or two?

Why can't people realise that IBM won't spend 1 billion dollars on a Dodo?
They bought it because they want the technology and the people, not to shut
down a frikken competitor.

Pull your heads out of your collective arses and pay attention!

Just for not saying anything it means not that it won't happen...

I will consider myself enligthed if someone at IBM reveal plans for IDS
10 or 11, even better 12 or 13...

Meanwhile: To me Informix is already death.

Chucho!

malcolm.iiug wrote:
--


Atte,


Jesús Antonio Santos Giraldo
jeansagi (AT) myrealbox (DOT) com
jeansagi (AT) netscape (DOT) net

sending to informix-list

Time will tell.

Chucho

Andrew Hamm wrote:
--


Atte,


Jesús Antonio Santos Giraldo
jeansagi (AT) myrealbox (DOT) com
jeansagi (AT) netscape (DOT) net


sending to informix-list