> From: Bill Haskett > Ouch! And we moved over to U2 for the IBM name.
That's not a trivial point. Of the companies who have bought into U2 or stuck with the databases through their adventuresome history, I'd say a significant percentage have this platform rather than an MV competitor's because of the branding rather than the feature set. I'm sure most companies will stick with the platform to avoid the pain of migration, but some soul searching is in order for those who like to associate themselves with large and stable names. I've always felt the perception of the significance of IBM branding has been much higher than the actual benefits derived. That is - it would have been nice if IBM were as good a business partner to U2 VARs and end-users as they are to their DB2 channel. It seems U2 vendors (and end-user IT people who have to sell their technology choices to their upper management) have continued to play the Big Blue card, even though at times it seems IBM Corporate was unaware that these databases even existed. This could be an opportunity for some market expansion with a more flexible and nurturing vendor/partner. But I'll say up front that the profile of Rocket Software fits the "acquire and sustain" model more than it does the "enhance and expand" model. It'll probably be at least a couple years before we get a good picture of how this might play out. All that said, I think Susie Siegesmund and her team have done a great job within the IBM machine to preserve the platforms and keep them moving forward. My reservations have always been about what IBM wasn't doing for the platform, which isn't related to what it looks like the U2 team have done and have been trying to do. Good luck to everyone on the U2 team making the move. Tony Gravagno Nebula Research and Development TG@ remove.pleaseNebula-RnD.com remove.pleaseNebula-RnD.com/blog Visit PickWiki.com! Contribute! _______________________________________________ U2-Users mailing list [email protected] http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
