> > Why do write that FB/IB has a market share of only 2% ??
>
> It was a figure that I saw mentioned/referred
> to on a site - my apologies I can't
> remember or find the URL. That would be share
> of the *_commerical_* database market - i.e.
> compared to the likes of Oracle, M$, IBM, Sybase,
> Informix and others. It was something to
> do with Interbase - as distinct from FB.

The rdbms market is about $14 billion. 2% makes $240 million. This is
more than the whole turnover of Borland, I think. The opens source DB
market is estimated at $120-150 mln. MySQL does about 40, Sleepy Cat
about 20.

> I'm sorry, but where the hell is PostgreSQL?

The PostgreSQL community is large and vibrant, but actual deployments
seem to be quite limited. The highest estimate I heard was 300K
installations (with most estimates being around 100K). Not having a
windows version until recently has not helped them in the mid-market
(say 100 to 1000 employees, very often windows shops).

> Informix?

Rapidly shifted into DB2. Best current estimate around 100K. The rest
helped boost DB2 from ~700K to ~1 mln installed base.

> Solid?

No clue. What is your best estimate ??

> You're trying to tell me that 28% of
> software developers use Firebird. Sorry, but
> that just won't wash. Quite frankly, I would
> be surprised if 28% of software developers
> had even *_heard_* of Firebird.

This is a survey of a fixed pool of 400 US based developers.
Considering that Evans does/did a lot of work for Borland, the
selection may be skewed. On the other hand, the vast majority of
Firebird usage is outside the english speaking world, skewing it the
other way.

> Let's boil the problem down. How the hell do we know
> this? Oracle, IBM and MS are at least publically
> quoted companies who have a legal obligation
> to provide honest (at least as far as
> accountants are concerned) reports to the
> SEC (or whatever it's called in Merka). Mind
> you, so does Borland, and try guessing IB figures
> from their filings.

True, how do we know? How does MySQL know? Did you ever notice that
unit installed base is a closely guarded secret? One reason is that
huge sales shares often translate into small unit shares.

> One can then glean from such figures (perhaps)
> an *_idea_* of how many deployments of x,
> y and z they have - does MS split its revenue
> figures for Widoze, SQL Server and Office?

Actually, they do. Operating systems, Knowledge worker, Enterprise
Systems, etc. or whatever the divisions are called. Windows and
Office is where all the money is, the rest is loss-making.

> Does Borland split Delphi, IB and JBuilder? Don't think so!

No, they don't.

> > A recent survey by Carlos Cantu et al. covered
> > 100,000 installations.
>
> Give me an URL and a reference as to how they
> got these "100.000" sites together. How
> much self-selection goes on? "Oh yes, I'll
> answer your survey, and pass it to my
> colleague..."

The URL is:
http://www.firebase.com.br/fb/imgdocs/FB_Survey_2005.pdf
Sure, this is a self selected survey and should be interpreted that
way.

> Take a look at www.dice.com, which AIUI, is
> an American job search site - search for
>
> Oracle 12951
> Sybase 2067
> Interbase 3
> Firebird 9
>
> Sorry, but those figures are telling me
> something about installed base and
> importance and market share of product.
> And it doesn't all have to do with
> difficulty of admin either.

DICE is aimed at the USA market. Firebird is small in the US. It is
small in countries with English as a native language. Talk about
bias...

> Sorry, take a look at the numbers - real
> ones, not from vague "internet surveys".

Okay: I am looking forward to your best estimates of unit installed
base of the various databases. Real numbers, not vague proxies.

> Oh, and BTW, if IB (and I mean IB *_before_*
> the birth of FB) was doing even moderately
> well, what prompted Borland to Open Source
> it, in particular?

I am told that Borland wanted to do a CA job on Interbase and the
whole team resigned. Faced with customer fury they paniced and open
sourced Interbase. When they calmed down they reversed the decision.

> Having said that, I think (or at least get
> the feeling) that IB lost clients over the
> OS issue - before, they would have no
> problem quoting high (or relatively high)
> profile clients (some American tank,
> a Stock Exchange or two) - I have tried
> to get similar info in the recent past
> and failed. One would have thought that
> they would have been only too glad to
> funish high profile client details.

Perhaps those high profile wins are Firebird now? SAS? FrontRange?
German Press Agency? Compiere?