"Mark A" <nobody_at_nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:Vv6dnQhh1IZYzRfeRVn-qA_at_comcast.com...
> "Jim Kennedy" <kennedy-downwithspammersfamily_at_attbi.net> wrote in message
>
> Serge,
> > You can attempt to spin it anyway you want but clearly both you and Mark
> > A.
> > are saying that DB2 is a very different beast depending upon what
platform
> > it runs on. (Market share is irrelevant a true nonsequitor) Sure one
> > could
> > count up all the features DB2 has and decide which features are the
same
> > regardless of platform and which aren't. I am sure that well over the
> > majority of features are the same across platforms. (I'll accept that
as
> > a
> > fact.) However, some deeply fundamental and core features are not the
> > same
> > and don't work the same. That smacks of the poor coordination and
design.
> > Not something one would usually expect from IBM.
> > Jim
> >
> I don't work for IBM, and I am not a marketing rep. I am a DBA.
>
> I do know how the two products started out on different tracks, but I
don't
> think it was "poor coordination and design". DB2 for z/OS development was
> originally part of the Mainframe Division, and DB2 for LUW was originally
> developed by the Personal Systems Division (OS/2). So it is not that there
> was "poor coordination," there was NO coordination.
>
> In the late 1980's, IBM ran its divisions completely separately in
> anticipation of splitting the companies into different pieces to settle an
> on-going anti-trust lawsuit by the US government. The US government
> eventually dropped the 10-year long lawsuit, and DB2 for all platforms was
> put under a single management structure in the early 1990's, but it was a
> little late by then, since each product had to maintain compatibility with
> earlier releases.
>
> Nevertheless, the differences between DB2 for z/OS and DB2 LUW are
miniscule
> compared to the differences between Oracle and any other database product.
> So I don't think it is that big of a deal.
>
>
>
No coordination is worse than poor coordination. Not being able to resolve
differences after a decade just goes further to prove my point. (since you
bought up the lack of consistency within the DB2 "family").
Again you further interject more nonsequitors. We aren't comparing Oracle
with any other database product we are comparing DB2 with itself. My
suggestion is to stop digging.
Jim
Received on Sun Nov 27 2005 - 19:39:36 CST
