Over the last 20 years, more or less, I have used R:Base from v2.11 through to v7.1.
For around the first 15 of those years I had a registered copy at my last place of work (v2.11-v4.5++ Dos) and for the last 15 years, a bit more maybe, I have also had my own personal copy (v3.1? Dos-v7.1 Windows). Recommending and using R:Base at work is pretty easy - it is, after all, generally somebody else's money that you're spending. Buying a copy and keeping it up to date just because it's a hobby with my own - taxed! - money is either stupid or some sort of endorsement. Of course there can be problems, of course improvements can be made... but that applies to almost everything. The R:Base engine has never let me down: we did a huge amount of Y2K changes at work using R:Base to alter data from other systems; we proved that a major accounting system package had an error using their data in R:Base; we got ad-hoc reports out in hours with R:Base where the main-frame would take days if not weeks - even if somebody could write the program! Before the days of the Internet we used to do a monthly update of a copy of a database in around 30 countries using floppy disks sent by post or courier - don't laugh, it worked well when there was no other way. All things being equal another 20 years is not out of the question. Regards, Alastair. > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "james hageman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "RBASE-L Mailing List" <[email protected]> > Sent: Thursday, May 19, 2005 2:09 PM > Subject: [RBASE-L] - Rbase v. Access > > > > I am finding myself being required to justify the use of Rbase instead > > of Access at this Univ. Apparently just saying it's way better, see for > > yourself doesn't cut it. > > > > I am looking for some help in examples of why Rbase is better and that > > is does use a real programming language and a list of major > > organizations that are using rbase. I know Razzak is doing work for the > > FBI and believe the US Navy. Others? > > > > Thanks much. > > >
