Hello marketing folks, Check out this list of 15 NoSQL databases to watch, posted by the Cloudant Twitter account:
http://www.informationweek.com/big-data/big-data-analytics/16-nosql-newsql-databases-to-watch/d/d-id/1269559?image_number=1 It actually took me several minutes to spot that Cloudant was in that list. I had a draft tweet reply asking why it wasn't mentioned before I spotted it. The logo is about 66% the IBM logo, then 33% the Cloudant logo. Which is a bit weird, if you ask me. But there you go. That's Cloudant's issue, not ours. What I do take issue with is that in a list of 15 top NoSQL databases, CouchDB doesn't get a mention, but a company that packages up (admittedly, a fork of, at this point) CouchDB does. And it is Cloudant's name that gets press. We have: - MongoDB - Riak - Apache HBase - Cassandra - Cloudant One of those is not like the others. Anyone else see the problem with this? What can we do about it? The author of the article posted this tweet about it: https://twitter.com/DHenschen/status/477089827981377536 I replied with two tweets: > @DHenschen thanks for the coverage of Cloudant, a CouchDB provider! Just > wondering why you don’t mention CouchDB specifically? https://twitter.com/nslater/status/477104465976512512 > @DHenschen I imagine that if you were covering Hadoop, you’d mention Hadoop > specifically, and not Cloudera or Hortonworks. https://twitter.com/nslater/status/477104509513396224 I spoke to Jan about this before sending. Jan mentions that this is probably the result of Cloudant having a strong PR/AR game. We don't engage PR/AR at all. I'm wondering what we can do to change this. Because this article (while cool for Cloudant) makes me very sad. Sally, is there anything you can do to help us avoid this sort of situation in the future? I brand has really taken a beating in recent years, and stuff like this really does not help us at all. Thanks, -- Noah Slater https://twitter.com/nslater
