Abbreviation List Tables Design, aka OTLT

#91

Jeff Caspari wrote:

Quote:

I'm not attached at the hip to the MV data model, but I like it better
than alternatives I've seen. I will certainly let people know if and
when I think there is something better. I'm hoping that at least one
of the MV players steps up to the plate and knocks one out of the park.
U2? They have resources and might have new flexibility under new
senior IBM management. OpenQM? They have an open source offering and
seem very responsive to customers. Revelation? They seem smart and
likable. jBASE? Might have lost its momentum, but could return.
Cache'? MUMPS might overshadow MV there, but if not, they could
improve the direct visibility of PICK within the industry. (I have
less hope for D3 because the vendor doesn't seem to really care that
they have the product; Reality because there don't seem to be
cross-platform third parties who include Reality as an option; or
UniVision, because I don't even notice them marketing anymore in the US
since Bob C left)

First, there is nothing wrong with toiling in obscurity, a relative term.
It certainly depends on your personality but I do not need to feel accepted
and am quite confident that my track record affirms my technology.

Survival is, of course, important. I also feel quite confident that MV will
outlast me. So will other competing DBMS technologies.

Agreed.

Quote:

There is much to be said on this, but little that hasn't been said before.

The differences today being in the almost certain move of the industry
away from SQL being the only game in cross-db-platform tools. That has
been a very tough landscape for MV to thrive, even if it has survived.
That which will follow SQL is likely to be much more MV-friendly. Even
if that is not required for survival, it could improve the value of
your software assets.

But, yes, we have covered much of this territory already in this forum.
That doesn't keep everyone (OK, me at least) from thinking outloud
anyway. smiles. --dawn

#92

Well, maybe I had my pessimistic hat on during a rare morbid session I was
experiencing in my previousl post....

Of course, MV will "survive" for the next few years, no matter what - there
are too many applications based on the MV model for it to "die"... However,
I would rather it thrived and expanded rather than just died a slow and
angonising "death" as the applications that it relies on as an income stream
gradually migrate away or become end of life...

Regards
Simon
"dawn" <dawnwolthuis (AT) gmail (DOT) com> wrote

Quote:

Jeff Caspari wrote:
I'm not attached at the hip to the MV data model, but I like it better
than alternatives I've seen. I will certainly let people know if and
when I think there is something better. I'm hoping that at least one
of the MV players steps up to the plate and knocks one out of the park.
U2? They have resources and might have new flexibility under new
senior IBM management. OpenQM? They have an open source offering and
seem very responsive to customers. Revelation? They seem smart and
likable. jBASE? Might have lost its momentum, but could return.
Cache'? MUMPS might overshadow MV there, but if not, they could
improve the direct visibility of PICK within the industry. (I have
less hope for D3 because the vendor doesn't seem to really care that
they have the product; Reality because there don't seem to be
cross-platform third parties who include Reality as an option; or
UniVision, because I don't even notice them marketing anymore in the US
since Bob C left)

First, there is nothing wrong with toiling in obscurity, a relative term.
It certainly depends on your personality but I do not need to feel
accepted
and am quite confident that my track record affirms my technology.

Survival is, of course, important. I also feel quite confident that MV
will
outlast me. So will other competing DBMS technologies.

Agreed.

There is much to be said on this, but little that hasn't been said
before.

The differences today being in the almost certain move of the industry
away from SQL being the only game in cross-db-platform tools. That has
been a very tough landscape for MV to thrive, even if it has survived.
That which will follow SQL is likely to be much more MV-friendly. Even
if that is not required for survival, it could improve the value of
your software assets.

But, yes, we have covered much of this territory already in this forum.
That doesn't keep everyone (OK, me at least) from thinking outloud
anyway. smiles. --dawn

#93

Quote:

However, I would rather it thrived and expanded rather than just died a
slow and
angonising "death" as the applications that it relies on as an income
stream
gradually migrate away or become end of life...

Regards
Simon

We all feel that way. However, the only ones that can effectively do
anything about it are the DBMS vendors. They would have to pour all of
their cash into marketing, alliances and education. None have chosen to do
so.

Dawn will certainly be able to bring attention to the merits of MV and be
inspirational to many. However, the shift you fantasize about would require
something none of us can control.

OpenQM is fantastic! It has tremendous potential in the right hands (IMHO).
Jeff

#94

I think that all of the MV databases bar D3 have potential... It's whether
they ever fall into the hands of people who are willing to realise that
potential..

Personally, I believe that it needs more consolidation in the marketplace,
to give more income to a smaller no of vendors, for them to "invest" in the
merketing and development efforts required to achieve this...

So, ironically, in order to "save" the MV marketplace as a whole, I'm
actually hoping that some of the vendors die... they will be "benefactors"
for the remainder!

Regards
Simon
"Jeff Caspari" <FDFDFDFD (AT) sneakernet (DOT) com.invalid> wrote

Quote:

However, I would rather it thrived and expanded rather than just died a
slow and
angonising "death" as the applications that it relies on as an income
stream
gradually migrate away or become end of life...

Regards
Simon

We all feel that way. However, the only ones that can effectively do
anything about it are the DBMS vendors. They would have to pour all of
their cash into marketing, alliances and education. None have chosen to
do
so.

Dawn will certainly be able to bring attention to the merits of MV and be
inspirational to many. However, the shift you fantasize about would
require
something none of us can control.

OpenQM is fantastic! It has tremendous potential in the right hands
(IMHO).
Jeff

#95

Simon Verona wrote:

Quote:

I think that all of the MV databases bar D3 have potential...

I think that D3 plus some vision and marketing could have potential
too. RD seems to be struggling with that.

Quote:

It's whether
they ever fall into the hands of people who are willing to realise that
potential..

Yup. Willing and able. I feel pretty good about at least the IBM,
Revelation, and Ladybridge teams at this point.

Quote:

Personally, I believe that it needs more consolidation in the marketplace,
to give more income to a smaller no of vendors, for them to "invest" in the
merketing and development efforts required to achieve this...

What Intersystems did for MUMPs could be a good thing as long as Open
Source and other players stay in the mix. You don't want a monopoly.

Quote:

So, ironically, in order to "save" the MV marketplace as a whole, I'm
actually hoping that some of the vendors die... they will be "benefactors"
for the remainder!

I don't see much consolidation on the horizon from where I sit. What
did you have in mind? --dawn

#96

I don't have anything specifically in mind..

I doubt that any further consolidation will be through "takeover" - I don't
think that anybody bar IBM is that agressive (though I'm always pleased to
be proved wrong)... more either the purchase of a company going bust, or
the "cheap" sale of an "end of line" MV database management system...

We will see...

Simon
"dawn" <dawnwolthuis (AT) gmail (DOT) com> wrote

Quote:

Simon Verona wrote:
I think that all of the MV databases bar D3 have potential...

I think that D3 plus some vision and marketing could have potential
too. RD seems to be struggling with that.

It's whether
they ever fall into the hands of people who are willing to realise that
potential..

Yup. Willing and able. I feel pretty good about at least the IBM,
Revelation, and Ladybridge teams at this point.

Personally, I believe that it needs more consolidation in the
marketplace,
to give more income to a smaller no of vendors, for them to "invest" in
the
merketing and development efforts required to achieve this...

What Intersystems did for MUMPs could be a good thing as long as Open
Source and other players stay in the mix. You don't want a monopoly.

So, ironically, in order to "save" the MV marketplace as a whole, I'm
actually hoping that some of the vendors die... they will be
"benefactors"
for the remainder!

I don't see much consolidation on the horizon from where I sit. What
did you have in mind? --dawn

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Abbreviation List Tables Design, aka OTLT

comp.databases.pick comp.databases.pick

Re: Now about MV - 01-30-2006 , 03:41 PM

Re: Now about MV - 01-30-2006 , 03:50 PM

Re: Now about MV - 01-30-2006 , 04:15 PM

Re: Now about MV - 01-30-2006 , 04:20 PM

Re: Now about MV - 01-31-2006 , 04:19 PM

Re: Now about MV - 02-01-2006 , 02:32 AM