I think Daniel wanted to ask if there were aditional explanation from PCWorld, and if not then he was ranting that PCWorld didn't provide a sound evaluation to back up their statements. -- Alexandro Colorado Co-Leader of OpenOffice.org Spanish http://es.openoffice.org/
Mensaje citado por bealach <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Daniel Carrera wrote: > > bealach wrote: > > > > > >>However if the PC World review of Oo2 beta is right the database is very > >>much like M$ Access which PC World claims is not very good and users > >>don't like it very much. > > > > > > This is very vague. Can you elaborate on exactly what is wrong with it and > > what should be different? > > > > Suppose for example that you are making a software product. Someone comes > > in and says "your product is not very good, can you make it better?". Now, > > how would you respond to this person?1 > > I was only reporting what PC World said, wasn't I? > > Better not ask me what I'd say -- I'd say "Sorry, will try and do better > next time". > > > I thought OOoBase was much superior to MS Access. For example, OOo Base > > has the ability to connect to 12 different databases out of the box (e.g. > > MySQL, Oracle) and many more thorugh other interfaces. By comparison MS > > Access is just one database. We do have a database engine called HSQLDB > > which provides a fuctionality vs ease of use tradeoff that is comparable > > to that of Access.... > > Good then! PC World was unfair then, or didn't look into the matter very > much. > > Cheers, > > bealach > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
