snip Just to add for long term use - I've been using R:base for 20 years in a manufacturing environment As the base operating systems have changed, all of the R:Base code has continued to work with only minor tweeks. We currently run R:Base for DOS on DOS, OS/2, Windows 2000 Professional & Windows XP. We were originally on a Novell 3.12 Network, and still use the same use network, but as MARS emulation on a Linux server.
In terms of day to day support - I'ts easy to write code, and the basic system just plain works > >Sent my reply to the wrong list! > >-----Forwarded by Chuck Finley/SKJTECH/SKJ on 05/19/2005 10:20PM ----- > >To: [email protected] >From: Chuck Finley/SKJTECH/SKJ >Date: 05/19/2005 10:20PM >Subject: Re: [RBASE-L] - Rbase v. Access > >[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ----- > >To: [email protected] (RBASE-L Mailing List) >From: james hageman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Sent by: [email protected] >Date: 05/19/2005 03:09PM >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. > > >Along with the other great points, how about upgrade / version flexibility >and leveraging of legacy code (sooner or later todays code will be legacy). >We are still using Rbase DOS code I wrote 10 years ago! Every time I walk >past one of our computers that still runs Rbase for DOS (like the one in >the warehouse that is only used to scan incoming inventory), I'm amazed >that we can run a DOS version 6.5 Dos and two windows versions 6.5++ and >7.1 on the same database. > >Although I suspect that you won't be coding in Rbase for DOS anytime soon, >if you haven't noticed, we may finally be able to start using those 64 bit >processors as 64 bit pretty soon. If past history is any indication, (and >it usually is) there will be no obsolescence of your code and you will only >need to upgrade stations that need the new functionality provided in the >new version. > >Doing substantial business in educational institutions, we have found that >in today's do more with less environment (less staff, less funds, less >time), that predictable costs are close to as important as actual capital >outlay. You don't want to find out in six months that you MUST upgrade >because Microsoft has dropped support for the product. We have many clients >that are experiencing problems with Windows 98 going away and the related >add on products (like Anti Virus). A perfectly good Windows 98 station is >rendered useless if you can't get a 'dat' update for your antivirus. Now >it's the cost of the operating system and the new anti virus and other >applications times 10K seats (and were still on an old machines). These >expenditures blow out the budget to stay even, not to move forward. > >Look at compatibility of 6.x to 7.x and how many years we have been able to >leverage those legacy data bases. Being able to run mixed versions on the >same database allows you to migrate to a new version (if needed) on a per >station basis. Hope his helps. > > joe karpen karpen steel custom doors & frames 181 reems creek rd weaverville nc 28787 tel:828-645-4821 fax: 828-645-3230
