Peter Machell wrote:
I don't think it's up to the user to dictate the database engine, but
I do think that a clever house will produce a structure that isn't
tied to a single engine. MS has them by the balls - if they want to
move to the next DB they probably need to pay a small fortune for the
next version of Visual Mouse Programming Studio for Dummies.
Just like the OS - if it was actually a good product there wouldn't be
the need for all these wholesale changes causing mass disruption.
Look how far OS/X has come since 2000 - we're about to see the sixth
major release, each of which you can install in a lunch hour with
compatibility issues being extremely rare.
Chose platforms and programmes with a solid base, and your
improvements can come in small steps, not giant leaps of faith.
Peter,
If a company has on its website "....... is designed to run in a 32 bit
Windows environment and uses SQL.", then I think they have only a
limited period of time to release a version of their product that runs
on the the most reason release of Windows, before they will attract
criticism. A user has already posted to the HCN forum "When will HCN
approve their products for VISTA? - as most retail outlets now only
provide vista workstations." Whether it is deserved or not, I think a
user who buys a new computer, with Vista preinstalled, is going to be
unhappy when they find they have limited use for it.
I am surprised you use the OS/X example. The move from OS 9 to OS/X, I
thought, was pretty dramatic. Years later, when it appears agreed that
XP is a long way behind current releases of the MAC and Linux OS's, it
appears Microsoft have to do a dramatic rewrite in the hope of capturing
lost ground. Time will tell whether Vista has been worth the wait. I am
however not going to criticise OS/X. Having committed to an iMAC I will
soon find out if it can coexist with Windows, Mediagate OS and a
couple of Strong PVR's.
I agree with your assertion about choosing platforms and programs with a
solid base. Questions of cost, support and pre existing experience are
also relevant. I am told that the program I use, has been written using
generic SQL statements " BP has been written using *generic* *SQL*
*statements* that should be interpreted identically by other database
engines. The only MS *SQL* Server specific code is in the functions for
detecting the presence of the server and for backup and restore.
This was deliberately done so that other database engines could possibly
be used in future. This is not likely to happen in the short term
though, as we have work still to do on the current product. Whether we
ever do it will depend on whether there is sufficient demand for it to
warrant diverting time away from enhancing the Windows version."
Gary
_______________________________________________
Gpcg_talk mailing list
[email protected]
http://ozdocit.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpcg_talk
