Re: database market share 2003

Noons wrote:
> Thank you for admitting IBM is NOT being honest.
> WTF doesn't IBM do it?

Well, Blair commented on the language, so I shall refrain from that.

Either way: IBM does NOT know how many customers use which parts of the i/Series's operation system.
What you refer to as DB2 is a surpringly small SQL interface to OS/400. Customers choose to work with OS/400 filesystem or the SQL interface. Either way they may or may not use triggers, concurrency control etc, etc. i/Series is a DBMS with a capital S for SYSTEM. It is what Microsoft wants to have. One big "magic box" (remember the commercial?). It is IMPOSSIBLE to separate DB2 function from OS/400 function. I'm on the phone with these guys once a week and more often, than not when we discuss new "DB2" features I get: "Oh we do this through the filesystem interface like that since n-years". If a customers use OS/400 but not the SQL Interface, are they not using DB2? If customers are using Oracle through XQuery are they not using Oracle the database system? Should they not be counted? Does Oracle know? Brace yourself, because that whole "relational" DBMS categorization is going to get pretty meaningless anyway as MS, Oracle and IBM bury XML deep into their "engines" and Information Integration and Content Management gets bigger and bigger.
It's all data. Your favorite email repository, text, image, XML, network router for crying out lout.

Cheers
Serge

-- 
Serge Rielau
DB2 SQL Compiler Development
IBM Toronto Lab