Comments on: Vertica update http://www.dbms2.com/2008/05/08/vertica-update-3/ Choices in data management and analysis Wed, 08 Feb 2012 22:51:14 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.3 By: Curt Monash http://www.dbms2.com/2008/05/08/vertica-update-3/#comment-93357 Curt Monash Sat, 09 Aug 2008 03:43:24 +0000 http://www.dbms2.com/?p=417#comment-93357 Cognos vs. Business Objects is a great example, because it didn't affect customers. SAP vs. Oracle has nothing to do with patents. Lotus/Borland over QuattroPro did affect customers, but also wasn't a matter of patents. I haven't detected any effect of Informatica/Business Objects on customers. CAM Cognos vs. Business Objects is a great example, because it didn’t affect customers.

SAP vs. Oracle has nothing to do with patents.

Lotus/Borland over QuattroPro did affect customers, but also wasn’t a matter of patents.

I haven’t detected any effect of Informatica/Business Objects on customers.

CAM

]]> By: Bill Walters http://www.dbms2.com/2008/05/08/vertica-update-3/#comment-93352 Bill Walters Sat, 09 Aug 2008 01:20:08 +0000 http://www.dbms2.com/?p=417#comment-93352 Bill, Selectica customers were adversely effected by the Trilogy lawsuit as new releases were delayed to compensate for the potential outcome of the suit. Many millions were spent defending the company that may have been used to improve the product or beef up support. Strategic planning for new releases was effected as product managers anticipated the outcome. Cognos vs Business Objects, SAP vs Oracle, should I go on. Lawsuits that challenge the underlying technology of the offering impact the customer by creating uncertainty that effects product planning and investment Bill, Selectica customers were adversely effected by the Trilogy lawsuit as new releases were delayed to compensate for the potential outcome of the suit. Many millions were spent defending the company that may have been used to improve the product or beef up support. Strategic planning for new releases was effected as product managers anticipated the outcome. Cognos vs Business Objects, SAP vs Oracle, should I go on. Lawsuits that challenge the underlying technology of the offering impact the customer by creating uncertainty that effects product planning and investment

]]> By: Curt Monash http://www.dbms2.com/2008/05/08/vertica-update-3/#comment-90301 Curt Monash Thu, 10 Jul 2008 12:37:06 +0000 http://www.dbms2.com/?p=417#comment-90301 Bill, I've covered the DBMS industry for over 26 years. I do not recall a single instance of a patent problem being big enough to affect customers. Also, you are wasting my time with your deceptive actions -- fake URLs, breathless misinterpretations of patent law, and so on, not to mention your sheer spam. Start behaving responsibly and I may take you and your cause more seriously. Have a great day. CAM Bill,

I’ve covered the DBMS industry for over 26 years. I do not recall a single instance of a patent problem being big enough to affect customers.

Also, you are wasting my time with your deceptive actions — fake URLs, breathless misinterpretations of patent law, and so on, not to mention your sheer spam. Start behaving responsibly and I may take you and your cause more seriously.

Have a great day.

CAM

]]> By: Bill Walters http://www.dbms2.com/2008/05/08/vertica-update-3/#comment-90298 Bill Walters Thu, 10 Jul 2008 12:27:42 +0000 http://www.dbms2.com/?p=417#comment-90298 Curt, What's your agenda of refusing to even acknowledge the situation?. It is a major development that will have a significant impact on Vertica and perhaps all vendors that sell columnar technology. Take a moment to review Sybase's patent. It is well written and very specific and then provide your expert opinion. Curt,

What’s your agenda of refusing to even acknowledge the situation?.

It is a major development that will have a significant impact on Vertica and perhaps all vendors that sell columnar technology. Take a moment to review Sybase’s patent. It is well written and very specific and then provide your expert opinion.

]]> By: Curt Monash http://www.dbms2.com/2008/05/08/vertica-update-3/#comment-90068 Curt Monash Tue, 08 Jul 2008 03:28:26 +0000 http://www.dbms2.com/?p=417#comment-90068 Bill, What's your agenda in spamming my blog with dozens of comments about that lawsuit? CAM Bill,

What’s your agenda in spamming my blog with dozens of comments about that lawsuit?

CAM

]]> By: Bill Walters http://www.dbms2.com/2008/05/08/vertica-update-3/#comment-90045 Bill Walters Mon, 07 Jul 2008 22:02:46 +0000 http://www.dbms2.com/?p=417#comment-90045 When will this blog investigate and report on the effect of the Sybase lawsuit against Vertica? The suit filed in Texas Federal court says that Vertica "willfully" violated Sybase's 10 year old patent on the orgainzation of a columnar database to support decision support. When will this blog investigate and report on the effect of the Sybase lawsuit against Vertica? The suit filed in Texas Federal court says that Vertica “willfully” violated Sybase’s 10 year old patent on the orgainzation of a columnar database to support decision support.

]]> By: Curt Monash http://www.dbms2.com/2008/05/08/vertica-update-3/#comment-84486 Curt Monash Fri, 09 May 2008 10:56:50 +0000 http://www.dbms2.com/?p=417#comment-84486 A few of the hardware-independent vendors offered subscription pricing in their beta phase, and technically probably still do. I'm sure Greenplum is in that set; I vaguely remember that ParAccel might be as well. Vertica was pretty much pre-revenue a year ago; I wouldn't pay too much attention now to whatever their pricing was then. That said -- thank you very much for sharing! And yes, this is license fee, presumably with standard annual maintenance pricing percentages. Best, CAM A few of the hardware-independent vendors offered subscription pricing in their beta phase, and technically probably still do. I’m sure Greenplum is in that set; I vaguely remember that ParAccel might be as well.

Vertica was pretty much pre-revenue a year ago; I wouldn’t pay too much attention now to whatever their pricing was then.

That said — thank you very much for sharing! And yes, this is license fee, presumably with standard annual maintenance pricing percentages.

Best,

CAM

]]> By: Tipoff http://www.dbms2.com/2008/05/08/vertica-update-3/#comment-84472 Tipoff Fri, 09 May 2008 08:26:11 +0000 http://www.dbms2.com/?p=417#comment-84472 Around a year ago I spoke to Vertica hn behalf of a telco looking for a CDR warehouse. The pricing given then was subscription based - $20k/TB/year, again user-data not compressed. Is this new pricing a one-off cost plus maintenance on top? Around a year ago I spoke to Vertica hn behalf of a telco looking for a CDR warehouse. The pricing given then was subscription based – $20k/TB/year, again user-data not compressed. Is this new pricing a one-off cost plus maintenance on top?

]]> By: Curt Monash http://www.dbms2.com/2008/05/08/vertica-update-3/#comment-84441 Curt Monash Fri, 09 May 2008 02:58:02 +0000 http://www.dbms2.com/?p=417#comment-84441 Nope. It's definitely raw data. CAM Nope. It’s definitely raw data.

CAM

]]> By: Jim http://www.dbms2.com/2008/05/08/vertica-update-3/#comment-84395 Jim Thu, 08 May 2008 19:36:55 +0000 http://www.dbms2.com/?p=417#comment-84395 So you think they mean $150K / TB <i>compressed</i> user data? So assuming 10:1 compression, that would be more like $15K / TB user data? So you think they mean $150K / TB compressed user data? So assuming 10:1 compression, that would be more like $15K / TB user data?

]]>