Sybase NNTP forums - End Of Life (EOL)

The NNTP forums from Sybase - forums.sybase.com - are now closed.

All new questions should be directed to the appropriate forum at the SAP Community Network (SCN).

Individual products have links to the respective forums on SCN, or you can go to SCN and search for your product in the search box (upper right corner) to find your specific developer center.

ASE on IBM!?

4 posts in Product Futures Discussion Last posting was on 2004-12-15 08:00:11.0Z
Carl Kayser Posted on 2004-12-01 18:04:22.0Z
From: "Carl Kayser" <kayser_c@bls.gov>
Newsgroups: sybase.public.ase.product_futures_discussion
Subject: ASE on IBM!?
Lines: 14
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1409
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1409
NNTP-Posting-Host: 146.142.33.192
X-Original-NNTP-Posting-Host: 146.142.33.192
Message-ID: <41ae07a6$1@forums-1-dub>
Date: 1 Dec 2004 10:04:22 -0800
X-Trace: forums-1-dub 1101924262 146.142.33.192 (1 Dec 2004 10:04:22 -0800)
X-Original-Trace: 1 Dec 2004 10:04:22 -0800, 146.142.33.192
X-Authenticated-User: ase1251
Path: forums-1-dub!not-for-mail
Xref: forums-1-dub sybase.public.ase.product_futures_discussion:1661
Article PK: 96658

As I remember, one of the worst mistakes that Sybase made was to basically
sell their source code to Microsoft. (Not to mention that they forgot to
trademark "SQL Server"). Now I see this rather startling announcement on
two sites:

http://www.sybase.com/detail/1,6904,1033623,00.html

http://news.zdnet.com/2100-3513_22-5470813.html

I'm wondering if this should be good or bad? (I'm sure that there are
tradeoffs involved. But is it a net gain or loss? How negative are the
tradeoffs with Sun , HP, etc.?) Any marketing/sales geniuses out there?


Frank_Hamersley Posted on 2004-12-02 02:56:30.0Z
Reply-To: "Frank_Hamersley" <terabite@tat.bigpond.com>
From: "Frank_Hamersley" <terabite@tat.bigpond.com>
Newsgroups: sybase.public.ase.product_futures_discussion
References: <41ae07a6$1@forums-1-dub>
Subject: Re: ASE on IBM!?
Lines: 22
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1437
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1441
X-Original-NNTP-Posting-Host: ess-p-144-138-5-215.mega.tmns.net.au
Message-ID: <41ae845a$1@forums-2-dub>
X-Original-Trace: 1 Dec 2004 18:56:26 -0800, ess-p-144-138-5-215.mega.tmns.net.au
X-Original-NNTP-Posting-Host: forums-2-dub.sybase.com
X-Original-Trace: 1 Dec 2004 18:56:28 -0800, forums-2-dub.sybase.com
NNTP-Posting-Host: forums-master.sybase.com
X-Original-NNTP-Posting-Host: forums-master.sybase.com
Date: 1 Dec 2004 18:56:30 -0800
X-Trace: forums-1-dub 1101956190 10.22.108.75 (1 Dec 2004 18:56:30 -0800)
X-Original-Trace: 1 Dec 2004 18:56:30 -0800, forums-master.sybase.com
X-Authenticated-User: ngsysop
Path: forums-1-dub!not-for-mail
Xref: forums-1-dub sybase.public.ase.product_futures_discussion:1662
Article PK: 96656


"Carl Kayser" wrote
> I'm wondering if this should be good or bad? (I'm sure that there are
> tradeoffs involved. But is it a net gain or loss? How negative are the
> tradeoffs with Sun , HP, etc.?) Any marketing/sales geniuses out there?

Perhaps not material to HP which already has alternative/competing
architecture and db vendor associations.

However another nail in the SPARC coffin perhaps - but this seems to be the
trend anyway. They may dig themselves out of this but Sybase would be crazy
to bet the farm on that eventuality.

So it should be good for Sybase - they can't afford to be too sentimental
right now viz Sun - there is lots of pressure looming from open source
offerings as they mature and still the threats from above (Oracle/DB2) or
alongside (SQLSvr). However the PPC5 certainly looks the goods as the next
(non-Intel) architecture for the serious grunt department and having ASE
there has got to be +ve.

Cheers, Frank.


Jeff Tallman Posted on 2004-12-02 11:36:05.0Z
From: Jeff Tallman <tallman@sybase.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.8 (Windows/20040913)
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: sybase.public.ase.product_futures_discussion
Subject: Re: ASE on IBM!?
References: <41ae07a6$1@forums-1-dub>
In-Reply-To: <41ae07a6$1@forums-1-dub>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Original-NNTP-Posting-Host: tallmanw2k.sybase.com
Message-ID: <41aefe21$1@forums-2-dub>
X-Original-Trace: 2 Dec 2004 03:36:01 -0800, tallmanw2k.sybase.com
Lines: 28
X-Original-NNTP-Posting-Host: forums-2-dub.sybase.com
X-Original-Trace: 2 Dec 2004 03:36:02 -0800, forums-2-dub.sybase.com
NNTP-Posting-Host: forums-master.sybase.com
X-Original-NNTP-Posting-Host: forums-master.sybase.com
Date: 2 Dec 2004 03:36:05 -0800
X-Trace: forums-1-dub 1101987365 10.22.108.75 (2 Dec 2004 03:36:05 -0800)
X-Original-Trace: 2 Dec 2004 03:36:05 -0800, forums-master.sybase.com
X-Authenticated-User: ngsysop
Path: forums-1-dub!not-for-mail
Xref: forums-1-dub sybase.public.ase.product_futures_discussion:1663
Article PK: 96657

Actually, the terms "SQL Server" and "Transact SQL" are both *still*
trademarks of Sybase. In the agreement with MicroSoft, they are allowed
to use the terms, however, Sybase has retained the rights. Microsoft
products typically incorporate many different trademarks, copyrights,
etc. (in fact, I think the spell checker in Word isn't even theirs).
Their license agreements and other legalese simply state that Microsoft
either owns the trademarks or has licensed it from others.

I don't know if selling it was a mistake, necessarily, ....maybe the
payment form was ('course not knowing the details, I could be wrong here
too)....a more royalty based sale would have been good for the company.

Carl Kayser wrote:
> As I remember, one of the worst mistakes that Sybase made was to basically
> sell their source code to Microsoft. (Not to mention that they forgot to
> trademark "SQL Server"). Now I see this rather startling announcement on
> two sites:
>
> http://www.sybase.com/detail/1,6904,1033623,00.html
>
> http://news.zdnet.com/2100-3513_22-5470813.html
>
> I'm wondering if this should be good or bad? (I'm sure that there are
> tradeoffs involved. But is it a net gain or loss? How negative are the
> tradeoffs with Sun , HP, etc.?) Any marketing/sales geniuses out there?
>
>


Jason L. Froebe [Team Sybase] Posted on 2004-12-15 08:00:11.0Z
From: "Jason L. Froebe [Team Sybase]" <jfroebe@froebe.net>
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.9 (Windows/20041103)
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: sybase.public.ase.product_futures_discussion
Subject: Re: ASE on IBM!?
References: <41ae07a6$1@forums-1-dub> <41aefe21$1@forums-2-dub>
In-Reply-To: <41aefe21$1@forums-2-dub>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
NNTP-Posting-Host: dsl017-022-063.chi1.dsl.speakeasy.net
X-Original-NNTP-Posting-Host: dsl017-022-063.chi1.dsl.speakeasy.net
Message-ID: <41bfef0b@forums-1-dub>
Date: 15 Dec 2004 00:00:11 -0800
X-Trace: forums-1-dub 1103097611 69.17.22.63 (15 Dec 2004 00:00:11 -0800)
X-Original-Trace: 15 Dec 2004 00:00:11 -0800, dsl017-022-063.chi1.dsl.speakeasy.net
Lines: 34
X-Authenticated-User: TeamSybase
Path: forums-1-dub!not-for-mail
Xref: forums-1-dub sybase.public.ase.product_futures_discussion:1665
Article PK: 96663


Jeff Tallman wrote:
>
> Actually, the terms "SQL Server" and "Transact SQL" are both *still*
> trademarks of Sybase. In the agreement with MicroSoft, they are allowed
> to use the terms, however, Sybase has retained the rights. Microsoft
> products typically incorporate many different trademarks, copyrights,
> etc. (in fact, I think the spell checker in Word isn't even theirs).
> Their license agreements and other legalese simply state that Microsoft
> either owns the trademarks or has licensed it from others.
>
> I don't know if selling it was a mistake, necessarily, ....maybe the
> payment form was ('course not knowing the details, I could be wrong here
> too)....a more royalty based sale would have been good for the company.

If I remember correctly, there was a royalty for a specified timeframe
as long as MS SQL Server was using Sybase code.

In truth, Sybase was a unix shop that needed a Windows NT (v3 server to
show how old this is) version of Sybase SQL Server. Sybase did not have
the expertise at the time so leased the code to Microsoft. It was a
good thing at the time but many decisions seem like a good thing "at the
time" (just think of any thing you did that your significant other
thought you did an 'idiot' action.. which you though was pretty smart
'at the time')

I actually have mixed feelings on the matter. Remember that Sybase was
the king of the databases back then and was a bit arrogant like other
'kings'. Like other companies, once it reached the top, it stopped
looking at the competitors as rabid animals... this is where Microsoft
has shined: it always looks at the competitors as rabid animals... The
'rabid' penguin has been a very elusive animal for Microsoft to
understand let alone fight but that's for another day

Jason L. Froebe