it comes down to how much change you want to go through now. You have
years to get off the 3000, so if you are going to rewrite or migrate your
apps, then you would likely want to look at something other than
Eloquence. I'd personally recommend looking at something like PostgreSQL
which isn't going to cost you anything, is really robust, scales like
crazy, runs on almost anything and likely won't die because it isn't being
built or promoted by financial interests.
At 04:59 PM 7/23/2002, [log in to unmask] wrote:
>I think I do understand the genesiss of this product. I also feel that
>the selection of your database is the most important decision in any
>migration or application design, you can make.
>
>If you are dealing with a mission critical application that you want to
>last x years, x > 10. You want to be sure that the most critical of the
>software is going to be around for future years. So it is important to
>take a look at the economic viability of the solution.
>
>Eloquence will be a small player in the database marketplace that is
>dominated by IBM, ORACLE, and Microsoft. After those three there are some
>second tier players and some free databases. You could include CISAM as
>second tier player. Typically the second tier player competes on price
>and Eloqence is going to compete on price and a unique API.
>
>As Gavin said it is not bad that the user base is going to increase. I
>agree. But somehow you want to avoid 10 years later that the database is
>no longer a economically viable product. Who would have thought that 10
>years ago in 1992, IMAGE was no longer an economically viable product? It
>had a larger user base and a large company backing it and it had been
>around 10+ years.
>
>Look at this product, its user base is 1/10th of the HP3000, it has been
>around for 10 years, and it is a smaller company than HP.
>
>So for one of the most critical pieces of software how is that the product
>is economically feasible. It looks to me that its path will be of growth
>due the HP3000, then little growth and then slow decline.
>
>In comparison, it harder to beleive that Microsoft, Oracle or IBM
>databases will have such an economic path. I think today HP spent a lot
>of time promoting Eloquence as a solution, But I also think it is a
>second rate solution and certainly one that needs a greater discussion on
>why Elogquenc makes good business sense.
>
>Duane has indicated that his company felt that Eloquence was a good long
>term choice. I would like to hear the reasoning behind that including any
>other users that have said that it was a good choice.
>
>I have admitted many times that I am wrong and have no problem admitting
>it again.
>
>Thanks,
>
>Terry Warns
>
>
>
>n a message dated Tue, 23 Jul 2002 6:38:59 PM Eastern Standard Time,
>[log in to unmask] writes:
>
> >
> >
> > John Burke wrote:
> >
> > >I don't know for sure if any of the smaller HP 3000 ISVs are
> > >considering HP Eloquence, but I see no reason not to. CSY has endorsed it
> > >for the small to medium sized user. It is both the easiest and least
> > expensive
> > >way to migrate to another platform.
> >
> > QSS/CPI is migrating its Speedware based Vista product to hp-ux with
> > HP Eloquence.
> >
> > We have no concerns about the long-term viability of this product.
> >
> > duane percox
> >
> > * To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
> > * etc., please visit
> > http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *
>
>* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
>* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *
Regards,
Shawn Gordon
President
theKompany.com
www.thekompany.com
949-713-3276
* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *
|
