Seriously, because it is a far better embedded, reliable database than SQL Server or MSDE. It requires no DBA (and we have a NZ customer with thousands of untrained users of it that proves this really, really well) and very little maintenance for departmental style applications.
It certainly isn't the best for everything, but if you have IB, you have to have pretty good reasons to move. Paul's company has a good reason - their customers need much better BI tools than are available for InterBase, but any database movement is painful. Just like you shouldn't move the other way in that case we talked about before. But one of the main criteria I will be promoting when I go properly to DevCo will be just that - reliable, low maintenance, embedded for departmental style databases. There are certainly things that I would say InterBase doesn't do very well, and I know of at least two cases where using IB has caused great pain and problems for the customer, but I also plan to be working with customers of IB to promote "why IB" to their customer base. And also educating them in knowing when IB is a good choice and when it isn't. As you say, memory footprint is pretty much irrelevant these days :-) Richard --- Richard Vowles, Solutions Architect, Borland New Zealand email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] phone: +64-9-9184573 cell: +64-21-467747 other: MSN [EMAIL PROTECTED], skype: rvowles blog: http://www.usergroup.org.nz/blogs/selectBlog.html?id=39769 -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Neven MacEwan Sent: Wednesday, 31 May 2006 11:00 a.m. To: NZ Borland Developers Group - Delphi List Subject: Re: [DUG] Migration from IBX to Interbase to SQL-Server 2005 Richard Why would anyone use interbase/firebird? (and if you give me the small footprint dogma I'll come over and shut down your browser, which at this time is using more memory) _______________________________________________ Delphi mailing list [email protected] http://ns3.123.co.nz/mailman/listinfo/delphi
