I’m afraid that I don’t hold
as much faith as you that Linux will become the “defacto standard”
toolset for all website servers. MS, despite its major shortcomings, is fairly
slow and steady when it comes to improvements to its OS. That said, Access is crap because no one uses it for what it was
built to be used for. And I would imagine that MS would rather spend their time/money
on SQL Server development. I agree with you that pgsql
needs a more powerful, GUI interface. The QBE interface in Access is nice. However,
I don’t agree that it is unimportant to have a Windows version. Point
being, that Linux users are used to – and sadly often expect – poor
interfaces with the programs they use. Windows users are far less forgiving. If,
what you are talking about, is truly wide spread use for PC’s and small-time
web-servers then a Windows interface is damn near necessary. Eric -----Original Message----- I'm pleased to see some renewed
interest in pg_access. It seems obvious to me that MS Access is not
currently...and probably never will be able to handle data in a robust and
reliable fashion. MS Access' apparent success is due to the user interface
quality and "ease of use" for "non-programmers". The
"Relationships View" window, for example, is one of the best and most
useful features ever invented for any database toolset. In reality PostGreSQL is in a
"strong position" to fill the "reliability void" left
by MS Access. However, the general public doesn't know much about
the short comings of Access, due to MS advertising and sales
efforts. It seems clear to me that the best way to "promote"
the use of PostGreSQL is to offer more "ease of use" GUI interfaces
for changing table structures, indexes, relationships, and upgrading older
versions of files. Although it would be nice to have a native Windows
version of PostGreSQL, as well as a Linux version, I expect Linux to replace
Windows on a large number of PCs in the near future. I think that
"having a Windows version" will not be a significant issue at that
point. However, GUI based "ease of use" features WILL be an
extremely important issue and will increase in importance for the rest of the
forseeable future. Using a "browser" to implement the GUI
toolset is a good start, but it probably won't support the same degree of user
friendliness that is seen in the "Relationships View" window of MS
Access, where a relationship can be instantly "drawn" with a mouse,
and fields added to the Table with a simple "right click" on the
Table header. If we do a good job of
providing GUI based tools, similar to MS Access, as well as conversion
tools from Access to PostGreSQL for existing data, then PostGreSQL and Linux
should quickly become the "defacto standard" toolset for all website
servers. It seems to me like PostGreSQL is already on this pathway,
"like it or not", and that focussing on the GUI toolset is essential
to maintaining a good relationship with those who are new to the Linux
world. Whether you realize it or not, there is a humongous tidal wave of
MS Access users currently gathering enough database theory expertise to
"realize" the MS "snow job" they've been given about its
reliability. They will be forced into finding another solution and
chances are VERY good they won't opt for MS SQL Server or Oracle. If
we are ready to give a solution to them...great....sorry MS, but they
seem to "like us better". If we are not ready, then our
future won't have anything to do with MS, only our own lack of vision. At our current level of GUI tools,
we can't expect any positive response even from fairly talented self taught
computer programmers who have been interested in Linux since 1998 or
later. Soon, there will be many Windows IT Specialists who will be
seriously investigating the Linux OS and the "best database tools"
available for it. Add to this list "end users" who are fed up
with daily Windows crashes and are experimenting with hosting their own DSL
based website servers....and well...there's your tidal wave! Ready or
not....the wave is directly behind us....time to "paddle" for all
we're worth! Sincerely, Arthur Baldwin |
- Re: [HACKERS] pg_access [EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Re: [HACKERS] pg_access Eric Redmond
- Re: [HACKERS] pg_access Michael J. Ditto
- Re: [HACKERS] pg_access [EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Re: [HACKERS] pg_access Eric Redmond
- Re: [HACKERS] pg_access Nicolas Bazin
- Re: [HACKERS] pg_access Christopher Kings-Lynne