Not only was the U2 name coined when
"Universe and Unidata products, very different and
former rivals, were brought under common management."
as Tony says, but I think it was coined by the users on this list, concerned that the new
company Ardent was more interested in promoting their O2 object-oriented database than
the universe/unidata products. O2 evaporated, but U2 remained, and the name has stuck
through the products' obscurity within Informix and Ibm. Maybe it's time to shed this
"slave name".
What Rocket bought is really 3 different products: Universe and Unidata, which
don't have that much in common beyond the multivalue data model (and are as
different from each other as they are different from the other multivalued
databases, qm, d3, reality, jbase, mvbase, revelation, and cache. Besides
ownership, the biggest thing universe and unidata have in common is this u2
users geoup), and a set of client utilities that work as front ends to universe
and unidata. I guess you could also count SB+ as a fourth product, because
(correct me if I'm wrong) this still works with some other databases besides
universe and unidata.
"Tony Gravagno wrote:
From: BraDav
Actually, I like U2. It short, to the point, and easy
to remember. And it's got a popular association.
However, if there is a name change, it would have to
be a great alternative.
I don't see anything wrong with maintaining the U2 brand as-is.
One could say there is no U2 brand, so no need for an
alternative.
There will certainly be some disagreement but I think technically
there is no such thing as "U2". This was a term that was only
coined when the Universe and Unidata products, very different and
former rivals, were brought under common management. While there
are many add-ons that work similarly for both platforms, these
products haven't really evolved into a single platform, and I
don't expect they will. So rather than changing a name from U2,
and perpetuating a common reference for disparate products, the
new owners may decide to position these products as completely
separate offerings.
On the other side of this, "U2" isn't just a popular association,
it's a marketing mechanism that allows the two platforms to
benefit from one another, creating a perceived common user base
which is Much larger than either of them. U2 only carries weight
as a brand within the MV market, so changing the name may be a
large and unjustifiable expense. The names U2, Universe, and
Unidata equally mean nothing to the mainstream
relationally-oriented market, so changing the names of any of
these products seems equally unwarranted for that audience as
well.
Given these dynamics, I don't think we'll see any name changes.
Tony Gravagno
Nebula Research and Development
TG@ remove.pleaseNebula-RnD.com
NEW: Follow TonyGravagno on Twitter
remove.pleaseNebula-RnD.com/blog
Visit PickWiki.com! Contribute!
_______________________________________________
U2-Users mailing list
[email protected]
http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
_______________________________________________
U2-Users mailing list
[email protected]
http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
