Re: [OT] Re: GUI from Mv code Re: Crystal Reports
Nah, rented it. I drive a 12 year old truck. Even it has the stupid windows with a mind of their own, though. Charlie [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: And it was YOU that bought it! m coffee... need more.. Les :-) -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 19 April 2004 11:12 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [OT] Re: GUI from Mv code Re: Crystal Reports Well, let's see... the new car automatically unlocks all the doors when I get in (my wife thinks the carjackers'll love that one), I have to stand on the brake pedal to get it to start, the window decides for itself to go all the way down when I just want it down a crack, and the turning radius sucks. But, hey, that's progress. It's new and improved. Anyway, ignore this as the grumblings of an old codger whose coffee hasn't overcome the arthritis yet this morning. ;^) Regards, Charlie Noah -- u2-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: GUI from Mv code Re: Crystal Reports
Which is precisely why I ALWAYS do a project with both ends of the sprectrum being in on the decision process (Management & IT). What good is a system that you bring in house only to have it a technical OR Business Solution misfit? BTW...although sometime the shoe fits...but why is management ALWAYS made out to be technical morons? Why is IT ALWAYS painted out to have the one and only solution that will sustain the company into the years ahead? Face it...sometimes IT is left in the dark concerning 5-10 year plans so the technology can accomodate it, and guess what...IT becomes simply a service function when it cannot deliver insightful solutions while taking progress and yes, whimsical desires sometimes, into consideration. You become the cog in the wheel who simply balks at change, (and funny to find when complaining how clerical staff can't stand anything new) the immovable hulk with nary a fresh idea. You have to be able to play together in order have the the type of smooth interaction and discussion. The moment either IT or Management takes sides...and refuses to budge..it's dead - and THAT is usually when they bring in the dreaded outside IT Director who knows squat and tries to replicate where he came from (and with bringing along anyone from the old company they can) Management works for the Board, you work for Management..find a solution where all the people in the sandbox are happy.. -- Debster > In a message dated 4/19/2004 12:51:50 AM Eastern Daylight Time, > [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > > > In truth I have found the fear to be more in the hearts of the IT > > person who has tweaked the system over the past 15+ years and is insulted > > that their masterpiece is being considered a dinosaur ready for replacement. > > How dare they! You don't think that way when you replace your car now do > > you? You generally move into a newer improved model that outperforms the > > car you left behind. It may react a little differently, > > but overall the > > performance is better. > > But Deb I fear your alternative is a pretty lemon. > I don't want to trade up my Jeep with cruise control, automatic headlights and > anti-lock brakes for a porsche with a stick shift do I? > > IT needs to be on-board with any management decisions and then at the meetings > they can ask pertinent questions like "Can you show us where the Audit logs are > kept and can we modify that process to our needs?" "Can you show us how easy it > is for a user to customize one of these reports you have?" "If I have a > customer who wants 100 units allocation to them on a continuous basis, how do we > set that up in your inventory system?" > > If IT is relegated to a service function, not a decision function or worse, if a > "new" IT manager who "didn't do it that way where I came from" appears than > you're screwed. Excuse my French. > Will > -- > u2-users mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users -- u2-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: Drilling cubes was Re: Crystal Reports
In a message dated 4/19/2004 1:34:50 AM Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > Now, would anyone care to post any experiences on performance of > implementing a star schema in a set of normalized U2 files and doing > drill down and roll up strictly with LIST, SORT, and its > options? Post > numbers, not guesses. Oooo I feel dirty just reading that. Why would you normalize U2 files if you're going to use LIST and SORT ? Isn't that the whole beauty of mv that we don't HAVE To normalize ? Yes I wrote a system where I could do what Pick historically called "cruising" and "double-clutching" ... that is link to another record, and "drill down" into details without much effort. Of course, looking back at my collection of 500 useless utilities, I was the only one who figured out how to use it well. I tried to teach my programmers, but, well So you pull up a list of say ORDERS, you select a link field say PART 110192-5 and it allows you to see the details of that PART record which then links to SALES.HIST or BILL.OF.MATERIAL or VENDOR or whatever. So you can go down, sideways, backup, go over there, jump here, and return to where you started, still in the original list you started with. The concepts are not horribly trickly, but the implementation is a "rhymes with switch". And you have to ensure that your linking fields are all built so the system can understand how to get the foreign record from the foreigh key i.e. your Tfile translates or TRANS functions have to be present. Will -- u2-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: GUI from Mv code Re: Crystal Reports
In a message dated 4/19/2004 12:51:50 AM Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > In truth I have found the fear to be more in the hearts of the IT > person who has tweaked the system over the past 15+ years and is insulted > that their masterpiece is being considered a dinosaur ready for replacement. > How dare they! You don't think that way when you replace your car now do > you? You generally move into a newer improved model that outperforms the > car you left behind. It may react a little differently, > but overall the > performance is better. But Deb I fear your alternative is a pretty lemon. I don't want to trade up my Jeep with cruise control, automatic headlights and anti-lock brakes for a porsche with a stick shift do I? IT needs to be on-board with any management decisions and then at the meetings they can ask pertinent questions like "Can you show us where the Audit logs are kept and can we modify that process to our needs?" "Can you show us how easy it is for a user to customize one of these reports you have?" "If I have a customer who wants 100 units allocation to them on a continuous basis, how do we set that up in your inventory system?" If IT is relegated to a service function, not a decision function or worse, if a "new" IT manager who "didn't do it that way where I came from" appears than you're screwed. Excuse my French. Will -- u2-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: GUI from Mv code Re: Crystal Reports
In a message dated 4/19/2004 12:31:56 AM Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > The reason why you need that special view (20L vs 12L) is because you are > constrained by your 132 column printer (or 240 cols). > > As a cube uses the screen as it's canvas, which has a scroll bar, you can just > SCROLL across or simply "shrink" the column display width (just like in Excel) > > This also avoids having dictionaries "cluttered" with (what > I would call) redundant definitions > > Ross Ferris > Stamina Software > Visage â an Evolution in Software Development My green screen doesn't have a scroll bar! And my Accuterm screen seems to want either 80 or 132 display mode Also I just can't get my customers used to scrolling right and left, they want to see things on one screen. And since they pay the bills. Will -- u2-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: can we stop with the pointless displays? was Re: Crystal Reports
I believe I added this option years ago... try using DET.SUP or DET-SUPP. At 06:29 PM 4/17/2004, you wrote: In a message dated 4/17/2004 7:35:30 AM Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > and had to watch the compiler meticulously display those line-by > line asterisks during compiling. O speaking of that, thank you that reminds me. When doing BUILD-INDEX is it really necessary to display an asterisk with every ten items indexed? That is consuming more CPU time that doing the index! [IMHO] Get rid of it! Out! Vamoosh! Be gone with your evil self! I don't find value-added to displaying asterisks. If you must display anything, display a counter every thousand 1000 , 2000, 3000 or something or base the display on the apparent speed of the processing. Like every 5 seconds display the current count. That would help and it should be a very trivial fix. Do we have a fix it list yet up on the web site? Or can we start one? Or what? Will -- u2-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users -- u2-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: GUI from Mv code Re: Crystal Reports
Brian, As a graphical programmer, I couldn't agree with you more. As an MV programmer, I couldn't agree with you more. GUI has its place, especially with infrequent users. Green screen has its place, especially with heads-down users. -- Sincerely, Charles Barouch www.KeyAlly.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] Brian Leach wrote: When we advise clients on GUI, we always advise a divide and conquer approach. It is amazing just how small a percentage of a system actually needs to be GUItized, once you have partitioned out the business rules, report and (strange) user menus, admin facilities etc. Desiging an effective GUI is a skill that takes time to learn - like any other computing skill. Brian -- u2-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
RE: [OT] Re: GUI from Mv code Re: Crystal Reports
And the mirror is designed to detach safely to avoid damage - except putting it back after it's detached itself is one of the easiest ways to break it ... Been there, done that, £30 repair bill coming up to fix my wife's mirror that I walked into by mistake ... And my daughter's car had that fault when we bought it - another £30 repair bill coming up :-( Cheers, Wol -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 19 April 2004 11:12 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [OT] Re: GUI from Mv code Re: Crystal Reports Well, let's see... the new car automatically unlocks all the doors when I get in (my wife thinks the carjackers'll love that one), I have to stand on the brake pedal to get it to start, the window decides for itself to go all the way down when I just want it down a crack, and the turning radius sucks. But, hey, that's progress. It's new and improved. Anyway, ignore this as the grumblings of an old codger whose coffee hasn't overcome the arthritis yet this morning. ;^) Regards, Charlie Noah [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Change to the process flow is many times the impetus to replace a module or application in the first place. Change is not always terrible, although feared. In truth I have found the fear to be more in the hearts of the IT person who has tweaked the system over the past 15+ years and is insulted that their masterpiece is being considered a dinosaur ready for replacement. How dare they! You don't think that way when you replace your car now do you? You generally move into a newer improved model that outperforms the car you left behind. It may react a little differently, but overall the performance is better. -- u2-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users This transmission is intended for the named recipient only. It may contain private and confidential information. If this has come to you in error you must not act on anything disclosed in it, nor must you copy it, modify it, disseminate it in any way, or show it to anyone. Please e-mail the sender to inform us of the transmission error or telephone ECA International immediately and delete the e-mail from your information system. Telephone numbers for ECA International offices are: Sydney +61 (0)2 9911 7799, Hong Kong + 852 2121 2388, London +44 (0)20 7351 5000 and New York +1 212 582 2333. -- u2-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
RE: [OT] Re: GUI from Mv code Re: Crystal Reports
And it was YOU that bought it! m coffee... need more.. Les :-) -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 19 April 2004 11:12 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [OT] Re: GUI from Mv code Re: Crystal Reports Well, let's see... the new car automatically unlocks all the doors when I get in (my wife thinks the carjackers'll love that one), I have to stand on the brake pedal to get it to start, the window decides for itself to go all the way down when I just want it down a crack, and the turning radius sucks. But, hey, that's progress. It's new and improved. Anyway, ignore this as the grumblings of an old codger whose coffee hasn't overcome the arthritis yet this morning. ;^) Regards, Charlie Noah [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Change to the process flow is many times the impetus to replace a module or application in the first place. Change is not always terrible, although feared. In truth I have found the fear to be more in the hearts of the IT person who has tweaked the system over the past 15+ years and is insulted that their masterpiece is being considered a dinosaur ready for replacement. How dare they! You don't think that way when you replace your car now do you? You generally move into a newer improved model that outperforms the car you left behind. It may react a little differently, but overall the performance is better. -- u2-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users This e-mail and any attachments are confidential and intended solely for the use of the addressee only. If you have received this message in error, you must not copy, distribute or disclose the contents; please notify the sender immediately and delete the message. This message is attributed to the sender and may not necessarily reflect the view of Travis Perkins plc or its subsidiaries (Travis Perkins). Agreements binding Travis Perkins may not be concluded by means of e-mail communication. E-mail transmissions are not secure and Travis Perkins accepts no responsibility for changes made to this message after it was sent. Whilst steps have been taken to ensure that this message is virus free, Travis Perkins accepts no liability for infection and recommends that you scan this e-mail and any attachments. Part of Travis Perkins plc. Registered Office: Lodge Way House, Lodge Way, Harlestone Road, Northampton, NN5 7UG. -- u2-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
[OT] Re: GUI from Mv code Re: Crystal Reports
Well, let's see... the new car automatically unlocks all the doors when I get in (my wife thinks the carjackers'll love that one), I have to stand on the brake pedal to get it to start, the window decides for itself to go all the way down when I just want it down a crack, and the turning radius sucks. But, hey, that's progress. It's new and improved. Anyway, ignore this as the grumblings of an old codger whose coffee hasn't overcome the arthritis yet this morning. ;^) Regards, Charlie Noah [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Change to the process flow is many times the impetus to replace a module or application in the first place. Change is not always terrible, although feared. In truth I have found the fear to be more in the hearts of the IT person who has tweaked the system over the past 15+ years and is insulted that their masterpiece is being considered a dinosaur ready for replacement. How dare they! You don't think that way when you replace your car now do you? You generally move into a newer improved model that outperforms the car you left behind. It may react a little differently, but overall the performance is better. -- u2-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
RE: GUI from Mv code Re: Crystal Reports
When we advise clients on GUI, we always advise a divide and conquer approach. It is amazing just how small a percentage of a system actually needs to be GUItized, once you have partitioned out the business rules, report and (strange) user menus, admin facilities etc. Use a regular report designer [AD - mvQuery] to handle the reporting. Keep the admin stuff on the green screen. Turn business rules into subroutines and test then from the green screen first. Then look at what is left, and employ someone who understands GUI to create the new front end. You might be surprised how little is left to be reworked, if you use the right tools. We use uvCase, but we don't sell that outside the UK so that won't help you! But there are plenty tools around that can. Sticking a few text and combo boxes on a screen is not a GUI. It's a form with a few text/combo boxes. Desiging an effective GUI is a skill that takes time to learn - like any other computing skill. Do employ someone to help you do it. Some lateral thinking can help too: One of my favourite demos for mvQuery involves running a Command Before to capture an existing BASIC print job. I have a simple 300 line BASIC program that executes a print job to &HOLD&, uses a definition record to strip data from the job by locating recognized headings/subheadings and stripping text out at relative x and y offsets, and uses that data to write a number of records into a work file. I can then use mvQuery to select the work file and design e.g. a modern looking PDF or an export. None of that is rocket science, and I can use that technique to redesign a quite number of existing reports in a matter of minutes - without having to analyze how the original report was created! You can do similar things with other tools: it's just takes a little bit of thinking around the issue. Brian This email was checked on leaving Microgen for viruses, similar malicious code and inappropriate content by MessageLabs SkyScan. DISCLAIMER This email and any attachments are confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the named recipient, please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the contents to any other person, use it for any purpose, or store or copy the information. In the event of any technical difficulty with this email, please contact the sender or [EMAIL PROTECTED] Microgen Information Management Solutions http://www.microgen.co.uk -- u2-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: GUI from Mv code Re: Crystal Reports
Yeah. Then I'd be accused of shooting the baby with a wet silver bullet. Seriously folks, this is a good discussion, but it getting a bit off topic at times. I would suggest doing what Ross did a few posts ago. Rather than go into a long discussion about "is a star schema a cube or a representation of an n-dimensional super-duper-hyper-pterodactyl cube," post some links to areas where those interested in the not-necessarily-U2 topic can find further info. And to ALL the vendors, please remember that if you mention your product in the post, you really ought to put [AD] in the subject line. Now, would anyone care to post any experiences on performance of implementing a star schema in a set of normalized U2 files and doing drill down and roll up strictly with LIST, SORT, and its options? Post numbers, not guesses. -- Regards, Clif On Apr 18, 2004, at 21:52, Ross Ferris wrote: You are right - there are no silver bullets, you don't throw the baby out with the bath water [I will not go into the sordid history of this one], and some degree of effort is required to embrace anything that is new [and I'll exit the thread there before I get spanked by Clif :-] -- u2-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
RE: GUI from Mv code Re: Crystal Reports
You are right - there are no silver bullets, you don't throw the baby out with the bath water [I will not go into the sordid history of this one], and some degree of effort is required to embrace anything that is new [and I'll exit the thread there before I get spanked by Clif :-] Ross Ferris Stamina Software Visage – an Evolution in Software Development >-Original Message- >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On >Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Sent: Monday, 19 April 2004 1:57 PM >To: U2 Users Discussion List >Subject: Re: GUI from Mv code Re: Crystal Reports > >In a message dated 4/18/2004 9:46:12 PM Eastern Daylight Time, >[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > >> So YOU, as a developer, would construct a cube with the 6 "key" fields >that the user is interested in. You also get to do things like define an >"opening" view of the information - AND also the query that is used to >generate the cube (BTW, did >> I mention that Visage has a drag'n'drop query facility :-) > >I don't think you understood me. There isn't "the user" and there isn't "6 >key fields". There are 500 reports, some have three fields, some have >twelve fields. The entire data set of reports in total utilizes 50 >different numeric or date fields. > >So no I wouldn't create a cube with 6 fields. I would create a cube with >50 fields and create 500 views into it.. or your software would have to >allow users to easily create and save their own views. > >The point being that it's not a magic bullet. I or they STILL have to >create those 500 views ... >Will >-- >u2-users mailing list >[EMAIL PROTECTED] >http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users > --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.659 / Virus Database: 423 - Release Date: 15/04/2004 -- u2-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
RE: GUI from Mv code Re: Crystal Reports
When a decision is made to replace a module, or an entire application I have
found it IMPOSSIBLE to get a Green Screen Ap even through the door for a
demo. Business Rules are extremely important, but the wealth of GUI or GUI
like applications on the market make it easy to find one that fits the bill,
or very close to it. Forget about just plain GUI, browser based is more
often on the hit list. Oftentimes management and users have become so
ingrained in their thinking as to how the business process flow must be,
that they are blind to see an alternate route to the same end result. How
often have you heard that an application is to be replaced, but they want
the same exact reports that they have been receiving for the past 10 years?
Change to the process flow is many times the impetus to replace a module or
application in the first place. Change is not always terrible, although
feared. In truth I have found the fear to be more in the hearts of the IT
person who has tweaked the system over the past 15+ years and is insulted
that their masterpiece is being considered a dinosaur ready for replacement.
How dare they! You don't think that way when you replace your car now do
you? You generally move into a newer improved model that outperforms the
car you left behind. It may react a little differently, but overall the
performance is better.
The one thing about GUI that management often overlooks is speed entry and
the need for many areas of repetitious to be designed for speed and
utilizing keyboard rather than mouse entry. Clerical staff on the other
hand accustomed to green screen entry are often afraid that GUI MUST be
slower. It all depends on the design.
You can hit the bottom line by making it efficient, making it fast,
eliminate keystrokes, and address the business issues. It's up to a
creative techie to find the warm and fuzzy comfortable spot with whatever
tools, not be afraid to spread their wings a bit to learn something new, and
expand the horizons of a company by taking them to another level.
Afterall, management may move ahead without the programmer who insists that
green screen is where a system should stay...
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Behalf Of Tony Gravagno
Sent: Saturday, April 17, 2004 7:15 PM
To: 'U2 Users Discussion List'
Subject: RE: GUI from Mv code Re: Crystal Reports
Tough to find a good place for these comments. There are some interesting
observations to make on the mentality of IT people, business management,
etc..
First, on the concept of "if we're going to add a GUI we might as well get
an entirely new app": The business rules and UI should be considered as
entirely separate entities. Getting a new app with a GUI does not imply
that you're going to get equal or better business rules. This concept is
exemplified by Mark's GP client and dozens more like them. Management must
be educated to separate the idea of the UI from the business rules.
Second, I wince in pain at the concept of IT people looking at a Character
UI and deciding it's deficient, based solely on the asthetic value. How can
someone decide by the UI whether an app suits business needs? How does the
simple fact that an app has a Graphical UI make it any more functional than
a Character UI? What is the trigger in the mind of IT people that leads
from "I see a GUI" to "it must be capable of running our business" or "all
we need to do is add a couple business rules to this GUI and it will work
for us"? I really think this GUI mentality comes in part from the video
game generation where graphical games are perceived as better than the old
Pong, StarTrek, Zork, Wumpus, and Adventure games ("plugh" or "xyzzy" ring
any bells here?) In all of the rhetoric about separating the UI from the
business rules, somewhere in the minds of IT people is the idea that a
Graphical UI implies better business rules - and graphical database
management tools somehow imply a more sophisticated database. So while
people sing the praises of Object Orientation and n-tier architectures, in
the big picture they still don't really "get it".
Third, and all of this is really related, what confuses me about all of
these failed migrations is that intelligent professionals keep missing
obvious factors of migration, like feature comparisions, business needs
assessments, training, and documentation. And why do we seldom see basic
auditing to identify problems and keep a project on track - or to put a halt
to migration when critical (and I really mean critical) issues are
identified? In every one of these failed migrations there is one or more
persons in management pushing forward with some underlying business agenda,
no one wants to openly state that the plans aren't sound, the systems aren't
ready, or that the whole idea is foolhardy - and somehow hundred
RE: GUI from Mv code Re: Crystal Reports
>-Original Message- >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On >Behalf Of Mark Johnson >Sent: Monday, 19 April 2004 2:07 PM >To: U2 Users Discussion List >Subject: Re: GUI from Mv code Re: Crystal Reports > >Thanks Dawn! You have enlightened me in quite a few ways. > > >BTW, the most extreme example of a multi-part primary key that I've ever >seen was for a security monitoring client. It looked like this: > >ACCOUNT-RECEIVER-DATE-TIME-ZONE-SIGNAL-INCIDENTNUMBER > This key then corresponds to 7 dimensions, and the overall approach is classified as "ROLAP" (see http://searchdatabase.techtarget.com/sDefinition/0,,sid13_gci214582,00.html) The "fun" starts with ROLAP when you need a query that was, say, ACCOUNT-RECEIVER-ZONE-DATE-TIME-SIGNAL-INCIDENTNUMBER or DATE-TIME-ZONE-SIGNAL-INCIDENTNUMBER-ACCOUNT-RECEIVER, as these would correspond to different key structures. If my math memory serves me correctly, for you to be able to keep EVERY possible combination you need to have 2^7 = 128 'summary' records for each source transaction. Increase your dimensions to 14, and you end up with 16,384 - you had better have lots of storage & time on your hands. Short of reducing the number of dimensions to a subset of pre-defined views, one solution to this problem is MOLAP (http://searchdatabase.techtarget.com/sDefinition/0,,sid13_gci882493,00.html) but I fear I'm getting WAY to far OT here --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.659 / Virus Database: 423 - Release Date: 15/04/2004 -- u2-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
RE: GUI from Mv code Re: Crystal Reports
The reason why you need that special view (20L vs 12L) is because you are constrained by your 132 column printer (or 240 cols). As a cube uses the screen as it's canvas, which has a scroll bar, you can just SCROLL across or simply "shrink" the column display width (just like in Excel) This also avoids having dictionaries "cluttered" with (what I would call) redundant definitions Ross Ferris Stamina Software Visage – an Evolution in Software Development >-Original Message- >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On >Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Sent: Monday, 19 April 2004 2:00 PM >To: U2 Users Discussion List >Subject: Re: GUI from Mv code Re: Crystal Reports > >In a message dated 4/18/2004 9:46:12 PM Eastern Daylight Time, >[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > >> Neither you, nor the user, need to worry about "format" statements, as >this information will come directly from your dictionary (though there is >an API that you can use if your database does "naughty" [with the benefit >of historical >> hindsight] things). > >Ross c'mon :) >Do you really believe that a mature application uses one field in exactly >ONE format? I have report sets that use a single field with five different >formats. So being an old-school kind of person, I create five different >DICT items. Nowadays people might use FORMAT statements on the command >line but hey different strokes. > >The point being that a single cube cannot know every possible format that a >single piece of data needs. Unless you want to sit down and reformat a >report that is utilizing every possible character on a 132 char wide >printout so it can use the 20L justification instead of the 13L "short >description" field I had to create... then no. > >I Still have to create a special view. >Will >-- >u2-users mailing list >[EMAIL PROTECTED] >http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users > > >--- >Incoming mail is certified Virus Free. >Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). >Version: 6.0.659 / Virus Database: 423 - Release Date: 15/04/2004 > --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.659 / Virus Database: 423 - Release Date: 15/04/2004 -- u2-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
RE: GUI from Mv code Re: Crystal Reports
What you could do is create a 7-sided cube... No, hang on, cubes have 4 sides. Well, you could make a cube with 3 points per side and 1 base and... hang on, no ...that's a pyramid. Okay, then you could create a circle and generate a curve inside it, with two spots and smaller circle. No, that's not right; that's a smiley face. :o) Oh, I don't know. ...I'll just delete this email by clicking the ...whoops... sorry, that'd be the Send button. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, 19 April 2004 13:57 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: GUI from Mv code Re: Crystal Reports In a message dated 4/18/2004 9:46:12 PM Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > So YOU, as a developer, would construct a cube with the 6 "key" fields that the user is interested in. You also get to do things like define an "opening" view of the information - AND also the query that is used to generate the cube (BTW, did > I mention that Visage has a drag'n'drop query facility :-) I don't think you understood me. There isn't "the user" and there isn't "6 key fields". There are 500 reports, some have three fields, some have twelve fields. The entire data set of reports in total utilizes 50 different numeric or date fields. So no I wouldn't create a cube with 6 fields. I would create a cube with 50 fields and create 500 views into it.. or your software would have to allow users to easily create and save their own views. The point being that it's not a magic bullet. I or they STILL have to create those 500 views ... Will -- u2-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users Disclaimer Notice This message contains privileged and confidential information intended only for the use of the addressee named above. If you are not the intended recipient of this message you are hereby notified that you must not disseminate, copy or take any action or place any reliance on it. If you have received this message in error please notify Ultradata immediately on +61 3 9291 1600. Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender, except where the sender specifically states them to be the views of Ultradata Australia Pty. Ltd. To unsubscribe from receiving commercial electronic messages from Ultradata Australia please email [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the subject heading "Unsubscribe". -- u2-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: GUI from Mv code Re: Crystal Reports
Thanks Dawn! You have enlightened me in quite a few ways. First, If this Cube concept is today's latest buzz word, then I'm gonna run with it for my GP client I'e been whining about on this forum. As I was singing the praises of the Results system, It contains 4-5 sales history files that exactly match your definition of a cube. One of these files, called CUST-PROD sales is a 108 field multiple year file representing month by month sales, ext price, budgets and gross margin. This single file is the basis of over 90% of the customized sales reports I've added in the last 6 years. I've always liked this file and duplicated it on other MV clients that didn't have it. Given the perpetual collection of transactions in an INVOICE-HISTORY file and the significant fields in each record (CUSTNO, PRODUCTS, SHIPTOS, SALESMAN, PRODUCT families, DATES etc) these CUST-PROD and other sales accumulations (cubes) make for quick reports and inquiries. Also, they don't take away from the lessor fields being attacked with the transaction file. BTW, the most extreme example of a multi-part primary key that I've ever seen was for a security monitoring client. It looked like this: ACCOUNT-RECEIVER-DATE-TIME-ZONE-SIGNAL-INCIDENTNUMBER and oddly enough, this file contained no data fields. Just the primary key. thanks. - Original Message - From: "Dawn M. Wolthuis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "'U2 Users Discussion List'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, April 18, 2004 4:49 PM Subject: RE: GUI from Mv code Re: Crystal Reports Cube summary: In an MV implementation, a cube might be a file with a multipart key and each part of the key being a foreign key to another file. Additionally, instead of virtual fields for summing such numbers as total-sales-per-salesperson-per-quarter, the cube might actually store these sums just in case someone wants to see them then they do their online analytical processing (OLAP), for example. The most important aspects of a cube are the FACT table (that's the one with the multipart key), the DIMENSION tables (the ones the foreign keys point to) and the MEASURES (the values to be summed, counted, etc when slicing and dicing the data). RDBMS users often rehost their data in a data mart or warehouse using a "star schema" (the name for a fact and dimension table design) so they can report against the data. [And as an aside, PICK folks sometimes also port their data to a relational database so they can then make stars and put in an OLAP cube so they can then report against it as if it were multivalued data. We end up doing that due to a lack of standard reporting solutions other than the character-based MV query tools. That's why I promote such tools as Informer at www.entrinsik.com -- we could bypass a lot of steps if we don't buy into the relational mistakes -- couldn't resist the soapbox opportunity, sorry]. --dawn Dawn M. Wolthuis Tincat Group, Inc. www.tincat-group.com Take and give some delight today. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mark Johnson Sent: Sunday, April 18, 2004 2:49 PM To: U2 Users Discussion List Subject: Re: GUI from Mv code Re: Crystal Reports Not to be out of touch, but what is a Sales Cube. I saw Swordfish and I hope that itn't it. Thanks. - Original Message - From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "U2 Users Discussion List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, April 18, 2004 3:20 PM Subject: Re: GUI from Mv code Re: Crystal Reports > In a message dated 4/18/2004 10:18:11 AM Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > > > For example, aligning this back to the original post, rather than attempting to use CR for reporting, I'd simply create a Viságe.BIT cube to give the users free-form enquiry and data exploration facilities into their UV database. In our case we have replaced >300 sales analysis reports currently provided in our R5 system with a single Sales Cube - and this is one of the facilities that makes Viságe "better" than > > AccuTerm ! > > Warning! Salesman quote! > C'mon Ross :) A dataset that includes 50 fields and I only want to see 6 on my report. So you replace that report with a cube where I (the user) have to figure out exactly what I want to see, build the proper query statement, format statement, display statement etc and then figure out how to tell the system to remember my statement so next time I don't have to THAT all again. > > You replaced the 300 reports, with one huge cube where you STILL have users recreating (or trying to) their original 300 reports... >Users don't want to see 50 fields, they want to see the 6 fields they've been analyzing for the past 3 years ... > Will > -- > u2-users mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://www.
Re: GUI from Mv code Re: Crystal Reports
In a message dated 4/18/2004 9:46:12 PM Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > Neither you, nor the user, need to worry about "format" statements, as this > information will come directly from your dictionary (though there is an API that you > can use if your database does "naughty" [with the benefit of historical > hindsight] things). Ross c'mon :) Do you really believe that a mature application uses one field in exactly ONE format? I have report sets that use a single field with five different formats. So being an old-school kind of person, I create five different DICT items. Nowadays people might use FORMAT statements on the command line but hey different strokes. The point being that a single cube cannot know every possible format that a single piece of data needs. Unless you want to sit down and reformat a report that is utilizing every possible character on a 132 char wide printout so it can use the 20L justification instead of the 13L "short description" field I had to create... then no. I Still have to create a special view. Will -- u2-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: GUI from Mv code Re: Crystal Reports
In a message dated 4/18/2004 9:46:12 PM Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > So YOU, as a developer, would construct a cube with the 6 "key" fields that the user > is interested in. You also get to do things like define an "opening" view of the > information - AND also the query that is used to generate the cube (BTW, did > I mention that Visage has a drag'n'drop query facility :-) I don't think you understood me. There isn't "the user" and there isn't "6 key fields". There are 500 reports, some have three fields, some have twelve fields. The entire data set of reports in total utilizes 50 different numeric or date fields. So no I wouldn't create a cube with 6 fields. I would create a cube with 50 fields and create 500 views into it.. or your software would have to allow users to easily create and save their own views. The point being that it's not a magic bullet. I or they STILL have to create those 500 views ... Will -- u2-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: GUI from Mv code Re: Crystal Reports
In a message dated 4/18/2004 6:08:53 PM Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > Sorry, I'm not going to publish the code here :-) suffice to say that > BECAUSE we have had the luxury of time to develop Viságe, we have overcome MANY > problems that face this type of technology - and this isn't even the most difficult > ! There's a big difference between "publish the code" and "explain how you do this". So are you also not willing to explain how you do this? Will -- u2-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
RE: GUI from Mv code Re: Crystal Reports
Note quite ! I still believe that there are 10 types of people in the world - users and developers ! So YOU, as a developer, would construct a cube with the 6 "key" fields that the user is interested in. You also get to do things like define an "opening" view of the information - AND also the query that is used to generate the cube (BTW, did I mention that Visage has a drag'n'drop query facility :-) A single cube design can be used with multiple queries - you save each of these as a combination, which REALLY defines the cube - so you don't have to "remember" your queries. Neither you, nor the user, need to worry about "format" statements, as this information will come directly from your dictionary (though there is an API that you can use if your database does "naughty" [with the benefit of historical hindsight] things). Just as each of your existing reports was stored as a "program" which you only wrote once (and modified/enhanced many times!), so with a data warehouse product (any/all of them) you only have to define these things once, and you can make enhancements as needed Obviously YMMV, and OLAP/DW/BI cubes will not solve EVERY problem - but our experience has been that they can certainly greatly enhance the user experience with what happens next ! (If you are interested, point your browser @ http://www.stamina.com.au/Products/Visage/Visage_BIT.htm, download the whitepaper & then "play" with the live demo. Left click on the "Department" at the top of the cube and drag it to the right of "Expense" - you now have expenses by department. Left click on "Department" again and drop on the left of "Expense" [near the margin] - you now have a departmental expense analysis, and not a "query" in sight. It is this "interactive" nature of a "cube" that adds value to the equation) Ross Ferris Stamina Software Visage - an Evolution in Software Development >-Original Message- >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On >Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Sent: Monday, 19 April 2004 5:20 AM >To: U2 Users Discussion List >Subject: Re: GUI from Mv code Re: Crystal Reports > >In a message dated 4/18/2004 10:18:11 AM Eastern Daylight Time, >[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > >> For example, aligning this back to the original post, rather than >attempting to use CR for reporting, I'd simply create a Viságe.BIT cube to >give the users free-form enquiry and data exploration facilities into their >UV database. In our case we have replaced >300 sales analysis reports >currently provided in our R5 system with a single Sales Cube - and this >is one of the facilities that makes Viságe "better" than >> AccuTerm ! > >Warning! Salesman quote! >C'mon Ross :) A dataset that includes 50 fields and I only want to see 6 on >my report. So you replace that report with a cube where I (the user) have >to figure out exactly what I want to see, build the proper query statement, >format statement, display statement etc and then figure out how to tell the >system to remember my statement so next time I don't have to THAT all >again. > >You replaced the 300 reports, with one huge cube where you STILL have users >recreating (or trying to) their original 300 reports... > Users don't want to see 50 fields, they want to see the 6 fields they've >been analyzing for the past 3 years ... >Will >-- >u2-users mailing list >[EMAIL PROTECTED] >http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users > > >--- >Incoming mail is certified Virus Free. >Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). >Version: 6.0.659 / Virus Database: 423 - Release Date: 15/04/2004 > --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.659 / Virus Database: 423 - Release Date: 15/04/2004 -- u2-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
RE: GUI from Mv code Re: Crystal Reports
Will, Yes, we DO persist record locks, so a Visage application can happily co-exist with its green screen cohorts. I know that "everyone" says that this is impossible with a non-persistent application they are wrong ! Sorry, I'm not going to publish the code here :-) suffice to say that BECAUSE we have had the luxury of time to develop Viságe, we have overcome MANY problems that face this type of technology - and this isn't even the most difficult ! Many of our "competitors" have inherent problems with their approaches that I don't think even THEY know they have yet (sorry, I'm not going to give THEM a heads up either :-). One day they will go SPLAT, and find that they are going to have to take more than a few steps backwards (been there, done that), if not a TOTAL system re-tool 'tis the nature of the beast. As our "sales spiel" goes, one of the biggest advantages you get with Viságe is all of the mistakes we have made along the way. You are left with a "distillate" that is very "pure", efficient, and potent :-) Ross Ferris Stamina Software Visage - an Evolution in Software Development >-Original Message- >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On >Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Sent: Monday, 19 April 2004 5:22 AM >To: U2 Users Discussion List >Subject: Re: GUI from Mv code Re: Crystal Reports > >In a message dated 4/18/2004 11:23:25 AM Eastern Daylight Time, >[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > >> That would certainly be the case, especially when you also take into >account the REDUCTION of DB licences required to support your user >population ! (or for existing sites the ability to increase the effective >user population, without a corresponding increase in DB licences). >> >> This is because Viságe uses web technology for data transport, and >operates with a non-persistent connection model, so you are only >"connected" to the backend database to do things >> like reading records, and executing server code. > >Hold on here amigo. >Are you saying you do not persist record locks? >You know what I mean. >Explain how you do this. >Will >-- >u2-users mailing list >[EMAIL PROTECTED] >http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users > > >--- >Incoming mail is certified Virus Free. >Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). >Version: 6.0.659 / Virus Database: 423 - Release Date: 15/04/2004 > --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.659 / Virus Database: 423 - Release Date: 15/04/2004 -- u2-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
RE: GUI from Mv code Re: Crystal Reports
A data warehouse of sales information, presented as a multiple-dimensional cube structure - there is a related viewer component (part of the standard Viságe.Designer) that enables you to interact with this cube. In our case we have 14 "dimensions", or things we are interested in relating to a sale - these things include "dimensions" for Salesman, Region, Customer & 8 levels of Product Categorization, as well as a dimension for "time". These dimensions can then be arranged (with a simple drag & drop operation) into ANY arbitrary order (some products require that you pre-define specific views of you cube, to minimise the resource requirement - but as soon as you want something "outside the square", you go SPLAT! Ross Ferris Stamina Software Visage - an Evolution in Software Development >-Original Message- >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On >Behalf Of Mark Johnson >Sent: Monday, 19 April 2004 5:49 AM >To: U2 Users Discussion List >Subject: Re: GUI from Mv code Re: Crystal Reports > >Not to be out of touch, but what is a Sales Cube. I saw Swordfish and I >hope >that itn't it. > >Thanks. > >- Original Message - >From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >To: "U2 Users Discussion List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Sent: Sunday, April 18, 2004 3:20 PM >Subject: Re: GUI from Mv code Re: Crystal Reports > > >> In a message dated 4/18/2004 10:18:11 AM Eastern Daylight Time, >[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: >> >> > For example, aligning this back to the original post, rather than >attempting to use CR for reporting, I'd simply create a Viságe.BIT cube to >give the users free-form enquiry and data exploration facilities into their >UV database. In our case we have replaced >300 sales analysis reports >currently provided in our R5 system with a single Sales Cube - and this >is >one of the facilities that makes Viságe "better" than >> > AccuTerm ! >> >> Warning! Salesman quote! >> C'mon Ross :) A dataset that includes 50 fields and I only want to see 6 >on my report. So you replace that report with a cube where I (the user) >have to figure out exactly what I want to see, build the proper query >statement, format statement, display statement etc and then figure out how >to tell the system to remember my statement so next time I don't have to >THAT all again. >> >> You replaced the 300 reports, with one huge cube where you STILL have >users recreating (or trying to) their original 300 reports... >>Users don't want to see 50 fields, they want to see the 6 fields >they've been analyzing for the past 3 years ... >> Will >> -- >> u2-users mailing list >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users > >-- >u2-users mailing list >[EMAIL PROTECTED] >http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users > > >--- >Incoming mail is certified Virus Free. >Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). >Version: 6.0.659 / Virus Database: 423 - Release Date: 15/04/2004 > --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.659 / Virus Database: 423 - Release Date: 15/04/2004 -- u2-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
RE: GUI from Mv code Re: Crystal Reports
[hacked quotes from Ross] >Viságe is NOT a terminal emulator on steroids - it is a >complete application development framework, That is a fundamental point which most people miss. AccuTerm is not an application development environment along the lines of Viságe, and I will include Nucleus and DesignBAIS in this class. This is EXTREMELY important. - If you already have an app (and you wouldn't be in this forum unless you do), and you'd like to add a consistent overall look and feel, then these tools are great. Existing apps like this require the modularization that we've been discussing here, but much more than that, a RAD (Rapid Application Development) tool will require consistency to be applied to modules across the program set. - Other tools like Coyote, FlashCONNECT, or the ATGUI are more tactical than strategic. In other words, they allow you to GUItize specific parts of your application, and it's up to you to provide the look and feel. A more wholistic approach requires a consistency in design and/or a RAD to help. Comparing AccuTerm to a RAD is apples to oranges - there are few valid comparisons. But every one of these tools requires code modularization as we've been discussing in this sub-thread. There is one product which is enjoying a Phoenix-like rebirth: Symbion is a RAD built on the AT GUI. Like some other products, building a GUI in Symbion also builds a CUI with zero additional effort, which is highly valuable - because as we all know, the GUI sells the app but real work is done with the CUI. :) I was _very_ impressed with the data entry and inquiry screens, and reports generated in this environment. I don't know if there is a U2 port yet. Contact Gary Huffer [EMAIL PROTECTED] for info, tell him Tony sent ya. :) >However, if you are looking at doing something MORE than just >firing off a windows EXE, like "enriching" the user experience >when interacting with your multi-valued data (read GUI)... I think AccuTerm should be given more credit. I have to admit that I didn't think the ATGUI was very full featured when it first came out, but I've re-evaluated that early impression and I think others should too. ATGUI allows an MV developer to build a rich VB-looking GUI with no VB code in a reasonable amount of time - and with no firing off of a Windows EXE. Seeing Symbion in action was proof to me that ATGUI can build everything an end-user needs. >For example, aligning this back to the original post, rather >than attempting to use CR for reporting, I'd simply create a >Viságe.BIT cube to give the users free-form enquiry and data >exploration facilities into their UV database. In our case we >have replaced >300 sales analysis reports currently provided >in our R5 system with a single Sales Cube - and this is one >of the facilities that makes Viságe "better" than AccuTerm ! Ross, tone it down a little bud, the salesman in you is inhibiting an objective technical assessment. - First, as stated above, AccuTerm isn't designed for doing these functions, so claiming to be "better" isn't a valid comptetive analysis. - Second, Viságe and Viságe.BIT are two different products geared at different audiences. Please don't confuse them as one product to give the impression that Viságe does it all. - Third, the pricing for a Viságe package compared to AccuTerm is vastly different. For US$100 we can get a single-user seat of AT with ATGUI to do what it does, or for a few thousand dollars we can get Viságe products to do much more expanded functions. Viságe no doubt provides value in what it does, with a good ROI for sites that can use the functions, etc. But eagerness to seize a marketing opportunity in forum threads should be tempered with some perspective of what it is that you're trying to compete against and what the market is willing to pay for those features. - Fourth, please, you may have created a data cube to provide data to 300 reports, but the functional reports themselves still need definition and formatting. So you still have to work with 300 reports, there's no magic there, and it's not valid to imply otherwise, especially when AccuTerm isn't designed to be a report generation environment. I'm impressed with Viságe.BIT and I'm a fan of MITS as well, but neither product provides the formatting which is the specialty of CR. Again, apples to apples and horses for courses are in order. Always interested in your comments, always aware of the fluff. :) Tony -- u2-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
RE: GUI from Mv code Re: Crystal Reports
Cube summary: In an MV implementation, a cube might be a file with a multipart key and each part of the key being a foreign key to another file. Additionally, instead of virtual fields for summing such numbers as total-sales-per-salesperson-per-quarter, the cube might actually store these sums just in case someone wants to see them then they do their online analytical processing (OLAP), for example. The most important aspects of a cube are the FACT table (that's the one with the multipart key), the DIMENSION tables (the ones the foreign keys point to) and the MEASURES (the values to be summed, counted, etc when slicing and dicing the data). RDBMS users often rehost their data in a data mart or warehouse using a "star schema" (the name for a fact and dimension table design) so they can report against the data. [And as an aside, PICK folks sometimes also port their data to a relational database so they can then make stars and put in an OLAP cube so they can then report against it as if it were multivalued data. We end up doing that due to a lack of standard reporting solutions other than the character-based MV query tools. That's why I promote such tools as Informer at www.entrinsik.com -- we could bypass a lot of steps if we don't buy into the relational mistakes -- couldn't resist the soapbox opportunity, sorry]. --dawn Dawn M. Wolthuis Tincat Group, Inc. www.tincat-group.com Take and give some delight today. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mark Johnson Sent: Sunday, April 18, 2004 2:49 PM To: U2 Users Discussion List Subject: Re: GUI from Mv code Re: Crystal Reports Not to be out of touch, but what is a Sales Cube. I saw Swordfish and I hope that itn't it. Thanks. - Original Message - From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "U2 Users Discussion List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, April 18, 2004 3:20 PM Subject: Re: GUI from Mv code Re: Crystal Reports > In a message dated 4/18/2004 10:18:11 AM Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > > > For example, aligning this back to the original post, rather than attempting to use CR for reporting, I'd simply create a Viságe.BIT cube to give the users free-form enquiry and data exploration facilities into their UV database. In our case we have replaced >300 sales analysis reports currently provided in our R5 system with a single Sales Cube - and this is one of the facilities that makes Viságe "better" than > > AccuTerm ! > > Warning! Salesman quote! > C'mon Ross :) A dataset that includes 50 fields and I only want to see 6 on my report. So you replace that report with a cube where I (the user) have to figure out exactly what I want to see, build the proper query statement, format statement, display statement etc and then figure out how to tell the system to remember my statement so next time I don't have to THAT all again. > > You replaced the 300 reports, with one huge cube where you STILL have users recreating (or trying to) their original 300 reports... >Users don't want to see 50 fields, they want to see the 6 fields they've been analyzing for the past 3 years ... > Will > -- > u2-users mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users -- u2-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users -- u2-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
RE: GUI from Mv code Re: Crystal Reports
[I went on and on and then said] >>As an aside, pardon me for being so bold, but it's amazing that the >>providers of these GUI products aren't jumping to pay people >like me to >>help developers become viable candidates for their products. There's >>no guarantee that any given site will adopt any given GUI product, if >>any, but unless there are prospects there can be no new >customers. It >>seems to me it's worth it to "someone" to foster redevelopment like >>this. Well, that's the MV market for ya... >> >>Tony >[Ross Ferris] >?? >Please refer to your email of March 23rd - If things have >changed I'll get the guys from ACTi to give you a call :-) My above quote doesn't mean that I necessarily want to do this sort of work. There are lots of talented people in our market who could use work and it seems a natural fit to tool providers to contract with third-parties to facilitate app migration for a host of applications. Personally, I prefer to write communications tools and do other high-end tech stuff for MV - if I never see another line of application code I'll be happy. However, there is something cool and rewarding about modularizing old code that will become the back-end to a GUI thick client, web client, Web Service or Smart Phone. I'll consider opportunities for myself and other Nebula R&D associates as they present themselves, but I'm not going to "gear up" to provide modularization services if the MV market isn't interested. "Fostering redevelopment" means someone must fund projects like this, if not the VAD then perhaps tool developers who have something to gain from the efforts of the VAD. (Really OT here, more for CDP than this forum, sorry.) Tony -- u2-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: GUI from Mv code Re: Crystal Reports
Mark, Cubes are a way of displaying data. All those "1NF is the only way" people discovered that flat data makes doesn't server whole categories of users. So they invented cross-linked (usually browser viewable) report format where for example: SALES OVERHEAD 01/01/04 $1,000,000$657,823 Would be displayed and you can click on the dollar amounts to 'drill down' into the details. On that page, you should be able to drill down through a detail like 'expenses' to see the details of that value, and so on. - Charles "CB3" Barouch Mark Johnson wrote: Not to be out of touch, but what is a Sales Cube. I saw Swordfish and I hope that itn't it. Thanks. - Original Message - From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "U2 Users Discussion List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, April 18, 2004 3:20 PM Subject: Re: GUI from Mv code Re: Crystal Reports In a message dated 4/18/2004 10:18:11 AM Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: For example, aligning this back to the original post, rather than attempting to use CR for reporting, I'd simply create a Viságe.BIT cube to give the users free-form enquiry and data exploration facilities into their UV database. In our case we have replaced >300 sales analysis reports currently provided in our R5 system with a single Sales Cube - and this is one of the facilities that makes Viságe "better" than AccuTerm ! Warning! Salesman quote! C'mon Ross :) A dataset that includes 50 fields and I only want to see 6 on my report. So you replace that report with a cube where I (the user) have to figure out exactly what I want to see, build the proper query statement, format statement, display statement etc and then figure out how to tell the system to remember my statement so next time I don't have to THAT all again. You replaced the 300 reports, with one huge cube where you STILL have users recreating (or trying to) their original 300 reports... Users don't want to see 50 fields, they want to see the 6 fields they've been analyzing for the past 3 years ... Will -- u2-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users -- Sincerely, Charles Barouch www.KeyAlly.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- u2-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: GUI from Mv code Re: Crystal Reports
Not to be out of touch, but what is a Sales Cube. I saw Swordfish and I hope that itn't it. Thanks. - Original Message - From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "U2 Users Discussion List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, April 18, 2004 3:20 PM Subject: Re: GUI from Mv code Re: Crystal Reports > In a message dated 4/18/2004 10:18:11 AM Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > > > For example, aligning this back to the original post, rather than attempting to use CR for reporting, I'd simply create a Viságe.BIT cube to give the users free-form enquiry and data exploration facilities into their UV database. In our case we have replaced >300 sales analysis reports currently provided in our R5 system with a single Sales Cube - and this is one of the facilities that makes Viságe "better" than > > AccuTerm ! > > Warning! Salesman quote! > C'mon Ross :) A dataset that includes 50 fields and I only want to see 6 on my report. So you replace that report with a cube where I (the user) have to figure out exactly what I want to see, build the proper query statement, format statement, display statement etc and then figure out how to tell the system to remember my statement so next time I don't have to THAT all again. > > You replaced the 300 reports, with one huge cube where you STILL have users recreating (or trying to) their original 300 reports... >Users don't want to see 50 fields, they want to see the 6 fields they've been analyzing for the past 3 years ... > Will > -- > u2-users mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users -- u2-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: GUI from Mv code Re: Crystal Reports
In a message dated 4/18/2004 11:23:25 AM Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > That would certainly be the case, especially when you also take into account the > REDUCTION of DB licences required to support your user population ! (or for existing > sites the ability to increase the effective user population, without a corresponding > increase in DB licences). > > This is because Viságe uses web technology for data transport, and operates with a > non-persistent connection model, so you are only "connected" to the backend database > to do things > like reading records, and executing server code. Hold on here amigo. Are you saying you do not persist record locks? You know what I mean. Explain how you do this. Will -- u2-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: GUI from Mv code Re: Crystal Reports
In a message dated 4/18/2004 10:18:11 AM Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > For example, aligning this back to the original post, rather than attempting to use > CR for reporting, I'd simply create a Viságe.BIT cube to give the users free-form > enquiry and data exploration facilities into their UV database. In our case we have > replaced >300 sales analysis reports currently provided in our R5 system with a > single Sales Cube - and this is one of the facilities that makes Viságe "better" > than > AccuTerm ! Warning! Salesman quote! C'mon Ross :) A dataset that includes 50 fields and I only want to see 6 on my report. So you replace that report with a cube where I (the user) have to figure out exactly what I want to see, build the proper query statement, format statement, display statement etc and then figure out how to tell the system to remember my statement so next time I don't have to THAT all again. You replaced the 300 reports, with one huge cube where you STILL have users recreating (or trying to) their original 300 reports... Users don't want to see 50 fields, they want to see the 6 fields they've been analyzing for the past 3 years ... Will -- u2-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
RE: GUI from Mv code Re: Crystal Reports
>-Original Message- >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On >Behalf Of Tony Gravagno >Sent: Sunday, 18 April 2004 2:45 PM >To: 'U2 Users Discussion List' >Subject: RE: GUI from Mv code Re: Crystal Reports > >As an aside, pardon me for being so bold, but it's amazing that the >providers of these GUI products aren't jumping to pay people like me to >help >developers become viable candidates for their products. There's no >guarantee that any given site will adopt any given GUI product, if any, but >unless there are prospects there can be no new customers. It seems to me >it's worth it to "someone" to foster redevelopment like this. Well, that's >the MV market for ya... > >Tony [Ross Ferris] ?? Please refer to your email of March 23rd - If things have changed I'll get the guys from ACTi to give you a call :-) --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.659 / Virus Database: 423 - Release Date: 15/04/2004 -- u2-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
RE: GUI from Mv code Re: Crystal Reports
>-Original Message- >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On >Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Sent: Sunday, 18 April 2004 10:18 AM >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: Re: GUI from Mv code Re: Crystal Reports > > Then some of the validation (two field >interactions) should be relegated to the On.SUBMIT part of the program, >etc. FWIW you do NOT want to wait until SUBMIT ! In Visage, as soon as you have "all of the parts" of a multi-part key validation (2 or more) the validation is performed - and of course you don't have to write ANY code for this to happen (all part of our active code reduction technology :-) Likewise if you have cascading relationships like : Pick a Country & the State Box re-populates Pick a state and the Town Box re-populates Change the country & the State & Town boxes clear Are achieved without code . did I mention that we "extended" the dictionary structure, so that this sort of relationship is "visible" ? --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.659 / Virus Database: 423 - Release Date: 15/04/2004 -- u2-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
RE: GUI from Mv code Re: Crystal Reports
Embedded responses to (hopefully) add contextual reference >-Original Message- >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On >Behalf Of Bruce Nichol >Sent: Sunday, 18 April 2004 3:20 PM >To: U2 Users Discussion List >Subject: Re: GUI from Mv code Re: Crystal Reports > >Goo'day, > >At 10:17 18/04/04, Will replied to: > >>In a message dated 4/17/2004 4:16:06 PM Pacific Daylight Time, >>[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: >> >> >> > A key factor that makes CUI non-portable >> > to GUI is the embedded Input and Print statements in the code. >> >>I respectfully disagree that this is key. > >Aren't we forgetting what Ross (and others) offer in Visage (and >whatever)? AFIK, "Visage" offers users a GUI in a TOTAL WINDOWS LOOK AND >FEEL/BROWSER environment, without having to do a "total rewrite", but a >"rewrite" none the less, re-using some portions, perhaps, of existing >code. "Visage" seems to be more than a user interface. It's also >supposedly (sorry, Ross, I've got no experience in "Visage") a much less >involved NEW development environment [Ross Ferris] Coming FROM an mv environment, with an existing DB design and application code, I think you are right in saying that Viságe is "less involved", and simpler than people expect. As you would expect (hope?), it is ALL of the things that you DON'T HAVE TO DO that make developing in Viságe "fun", and easy - whole swags of code that you don't have to write (or copy) to extract information from related files, or to correctly update all of the multi-valued items in an association (including the new dict item you added 5 minutes ago) ... they not only add up, they MULTIPLY the benefits! > >Other MV so-called "GUI" approaches, (AccuTerm and wIntegrate scripts, for >example) are offering the user a GUI with an almost-modern Windows look and >feel, but without the bells and whistles, and are offering a GUI by >applying Band-Aids to existing code. I really don't think that's a >"development environment".I don't think "new development" is covered by >this approach. > >If we were all developing "new" applications, and we could afford it, I >reckon we would all jump at "Visage"... Or some such. > [Ross Ferris] Please line up & take a number :-) The key here may be can you afford NOT to use a tool like Visage ! We try & spin EVERY new development request into Viságe these days from our green screen client base - 1 less program we need to convert later, we end up with a nicer "look", and the customer likes what he sees so much, he is willing to fund conversion of existing screens, so the exercise is not only self funding, but profitable ! >I'd hazard a guess that the cost of "new" development in "Visage", together >with the cost of "Visage", would come out less (Ross??) than the cost of >the same level of development to the same level of "total" user interface >in our known MV Terminal Emulation environs. The per-user outgoing cost >of a MV TE capable of supporting the TE scripts (as opposed to the cost of >IE6!!) is, IMHO, the crippling factor, here. Especially in the larger >sites where everybody would be forced into using the "GUI-able" TE instead >of the lower-cost/freebie ones. [Ross Ferris] That would certainly be the case, especially when you also take into account the REDUCTION of DB licences required to support your user population ! (or for existing sites the ability to increase the effective user population, without a corresponding increase in DB licences). This is because Viságe uses web technology for data transport, and operates with a non-persistent connection model, so you are only "connected" to the backend database to do things like reading records, and executing server code. Our active dictionary & code reduction techniques mean that you can churn out programs in record time. Most people have their first GUI screens operating in under an hour (that includes product installation - most of this time is spent setting up dictionaries!) > >What we're all (all of us software developers, that is) trying to do is >maintain a "public acceptance" for our EXISTING software. Sales = Public >Acceptance.Ross is out in front with "Visage", right up there with >"Windows products", because he's been able to absorb the costs of >development over a period of time, developing "Visage" and >developing/redeveloping his applications using it as he goes. OK, he's >paid more for his version of "Visage" bu
RE: GUI from Mv code Re: Crystal Reports
Will, You are right ! With a product like AccuTerm you can run ANY windows command (within your security constraints), fire off & control any OLE/ActiveX application/control, and on this level Viságe is on a par with AccuTerm et al. If you are ONLY looking at being able to fire off Windows applications, then the reality is that there is little to differentiate the products ... as you point out, they all have a scripting language with automation capabilities, and so could be seen as "equal". However, if you are looking at doing something MORE than just firing off a windows EXE, like "enriching" the user experience when interacting with your multi-valued data (read GUI), actively reducing the amount of code required to perform a specific task, or even something as basic as tidying up your dictionaries, the divergence becomes more marked. Viságe is NOT a terminal emulator on steroids - it is a complete application development framework, designed specifically for multi-value databases. Rather than recoiling from the mv data model, we embrace it wholeheartedly and have done our best to enhance it. Viságe can radically reduce your development times for any new developments, and can leverage your existing assets (Basic Code, Database Designs, Queries etc) to re-invigorate (and add an appealing new face to) your existing applications in a startlingly short period of time - and it has a feature set that simply isn't provided by any other tool in this market place. For example, aligning this back to the original post, rather than attempting to use CR for reporting, I'd simply create a Viságe.BIT cube to give the users free-form enquiry and data exploration facilities into their UV database. In our case we have replaced >300 sales analysis reports currently provided in our R5 system with a single Sales Cube - and this is one of the facilities that makes Viságe "better" than AccuTerm ! Ross Ferris Stamina Software Visage - an Evolution in Software Development (Footnote: Viságe started life as a "smart" Terminal Emulator MANY moons ago, and we still use & promote AccuTerm with our R5 application suite. >-Original Message- >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On >Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Sent: Sunday, 18 April 2004 3:58 PM >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: Re: GUI from Mv code Re: Crystal Reports > >In a message dated 4/17/2004 10:21:26 PM Pacific Daylight Time, >[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > > >> AFIK, "Visage" offers users a GUI in a TOTAL WINDOWS LOOK AND >> FEEL/BROWSER environment, without having to do a "total rewrite", but a >> "rewrite" none the less, re-using some portions, perhaps, of existing >> code. "Visage" seems to be more than a user interface. It's also >> supposedly (sorry, Ross, I've got no experience in "Visage") a much less >> involved NEW development environment >> >> Other MV so-called "GUI" approaches, (AccuTerm and wIntegrate scripts, >for >> example) are offering the user a GUI with an almost-modern Windows look >and >> feel, but without the bells and whistles, and are offering a GUI by >> applying Band-Aids to existing code. I really don't think that's a >> "development environment".I don't think "new development" is covered >by >> this approach. > >What? How exactly do you get this? >A script is not an "almost modern Windows look and feel"... it is the look >and feel. >The script calls windows exectuables underneath it, thats how it works. >If a programmer chooses not to utilize all the various objects and methods >etc that Accuterm reveals, thats their own choice, not the fault of the >product. > >I'm not sure exactly how Visage is that much better than Accuterm in that >regard. >Are you? >Will >-- >u2-users mailing list >[EMAIL PROTECTED] >http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users > > >--- >Incoming mail is certified Virus Free. >Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). >Version: 6.0.659 / Virus Database: 423 - Release Date: 15/04/2004 > --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.659 / Virus Database: 423 - Release Date: 15/04/2004 -- u2-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: GUI from Mv code Re: Crystal Reports
In a message dated 4/17/2004 10:21:26 PM Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > AFIK, "Visage" offers users a GUI in a TOTAL WINDOWS LOOK AND > FEEL/BROWSER environment, without having to do a "total rewrite", but a > "rewrite" none the less, re-using some portions, perhaps, of existing > code. "Visage" seems to be more than a user interface. It's also > supposedly (sorry, Ross, I've got no experience in "Visage") a much less > involved NEW development environment > > Other MV so-called "GUI" approaches, (AccuTerm and wIntegrate scripts, for > example) are offering the user a GUI with an almost-modern Windows look and > feel, but without the bells and whistles, and are offering a GUI by > applying Band-Aids to existing code. I really don't think that's a > "development environment".I don't think "new development" is covered by > this approach. What? How exactly do you get this? A script is not an "almost modern Windows look and feel"... it is the look and feel. The script calls windows exectuables underneath it, thats how it works. If a programmer chooses not to utilize all the various objects and methods etc that Accuterm reveals, thats their own choice, not the fault of the product. I'm not sure exactly how Visage is that much better than Accuterm in that regard. Are you? Will -- u2-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: GUI from Mv code Re: Crystal Reports
Goo'day, At 10:17 18/04/04, Will replied to: In a message dated 4/17/2004 4:16:06 PM Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > A key factor that makes CUI non-portable > to GUI is the embedded Input and Print statements in the code. I respectfully disagree that this is key. Aren't we forgetting what Ross (and others) offer in Visage (and whatever)? AFIK, "Visage" offers users a GUI in a TOTAL WINDOWS LOOK AND FEEL/BROWSER environment, without having to do a "total rewrite", but a "rewrite" none the less, re-using some portions, perhaps, of existing code. "Visage" seems to be more than a user interface. It's also supposedly (sorry, Ross, I've got no experience in "Visage") a much less involved NEW development environment Other MV so-called "GUI" approaches, (AccuTerm and wIntegrate scripts, for example) are offering the user a GUI with an almost-modern Windows look and feel, but without the bells and whistles, and are offering a GUI by applying Band-Aids to existing code. I really don't think that's a "development environment".I don't think "new development" is covered by this approach. If we were all developing "new" applications, and we could afford it, I reckon we would all jump at "Visage"... Or some such. I'd hazard a guess that the cost of "new" development in "Visage", together with the cost of "Visage", would come out less (Ross??) than the cost of the same level of development to the same level of "total" user interface in our known MV Terminal Emulation environs. The per-user outgoing cost of a MV TE capable of supporting the TE scripts (as opposed to the cost of IE6!!) is, IMHO, the crippling factor, here. Especially in the larger sites where everybody would be forced into using the "GUI-able" TE instead of the lower-cost/freebie ones. What we're all (all of us software developers, that is) trying to do is maintain a "public acceptance" for our EXISTING software. Sales = Public Acceptance.Ross is out in front with "Visage", right up there with "Windows products", because he's been able to absorb the costs of development over a period of time, developing "Visage" and developing/redeveloping his applications using it as he goes. OK, he's paid more for his version of "Visage" but he got his version earlier than the rest of us; he and his people have far more experience with it than the rest of us; it was written for their express requirements; they know what its' capabilities are; they know its' shortcomings; they know what's planned for its' future, and he's selling licences to it to help in recovering his outlay. Most of the rest of us are looking at it, at its cost, at the cost of "redeveloping" using it, and going with it, or hoping that the lower initial outlay of providing TE scripts will suffice, or .. At our level of the market, a Windows-driven "shareware" TE such as NetTerm - which offers "mouse awareness"and "hot-spots" (a "constant mouse position" for "Y" or "N" outside the TE "screen", etc) amongst other useable things, coupled with a "lightly-rewritten" development (basically now offering "lists" of acceptable input for user acceptance, where applicable - reducing the "guess work") of our existing applications to provide a "mouse aware" "shrink-wrapped" version in direct competition to the MYOBs,"Business Manager", Quicken's, etc, (5 to 20 users) at those sort of costs, is where we perceive our future.We don't want to sell millions of seats, but, rather, provide a "quality" "easy to use" "easy to understand" product that we can support from wherever we choose to be - and make a quid! OK, we don't have the banks clamouring to provide or accept detail in our "native" file format, but they *do* provide and accept .csv and .txt formats, and we have OPENSEQ with READSEQ/WRITESEQ in our quiver, so we're competitive Our biggest problem in the market is the discipline we insist on at input. Not the sequence of input, mind you, but not allowing users to "short cut", or ignore proper "audit" procedures. After all, we're throwing ourselves squarely at the "Mums and Dads" "I only want to do.." commercial market If we can just convince a few of them that they can use the mouse to "point at" a selection, or use "arrow" keys to transverse a list of options, or even, at worst, use a keyboard to enter something (remapping
RE: GUI from Mv code Re: Crystal Reports
Will wrote: >> A key factor that makes CUI non-portable >> to GUI is the embedded Input and Print statements in the code. > >I respectfully disagree that this is key. >After all event oriented apps also have input statements >I think you mean the key factor is that the programs are not >event oriented. Mike Randall said: >I think the point Tony was making was the splitting of the >program logic from the actual screen formatting. > ... >You do bring up a valid point regarding event driven apps with >the concept of submitting an entire form. You're both right. Note that my quote was "_A_ key factor", not "_The_ key factor". In my mind I assume that event orientation is possible once code is modularized, Input statements are replaced with passed-in values, and Print statements are replaced with returned messages and status data. You can have event oriented code with Print/Input statements, which isn't desirable, at least in MV code destined for a GUI. You can also have monolithic procedural code without the Print/Input statements, which could be the case with screen-at-a-time (3270 style) code. The bottom line is that a fundamental shift needs to be made in most MV code before it can be moved to GUI. Contrary to popular belief this shift doesn't need to be made all at once. I have a VAR/client with a 20 year old app that is being refitted over time to be more modular. They started their conscious shift about a year ago and they're now finding all sorts of benefits to modularization. They're now at a point where they can start looking at various GUI-enablement products in our market space. As an aside, pardon me for being so bold, but it's amazing that the providers of these GUI products aren't jumping to pay people like me to help developers become viable candidates for their products. There's no guarantee that any given site will adopt any given GUI product, if any, but unless there are prospects there can be no new customers. It seems to me it's worth it to "someone" to foster redevelopment like this. Well, that's the MV market for ya... Tony -- u2-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
RE: GUI from Mv code Re: Crystal Reports
I think the point Tony was making was the splitting of the program logic from the actual screen formatting. One of the most arduous tasks in converting to a GUI is the splitting of the screen layout (print statements) from the business logic in programs. If your programs have the somewhat typical [EMAIL PROTECTED] SOMETHING WITH INPUT format, the PRINT@ part has to be removed as it will be replaced by the GUI. Applications that have some type of screen processor are way ahead of the game. In that scenario, your code is mostly logic and much easier to link a GUI. You do bring up a valid point regarding event driven apps with the concept of submitting an entire form. IMO, that depends on the platform and design choices made by the developer. For example, using Redback with ASP or ASP. Net, you can pretty much mimic the field by field validations and processing of CUI programs (one of the greatest features of .Net is the auto postback). Of course there are performance considerations/penalties for doing it but you can do it. On the flip side, you could also take all the input and submit it to a server process once. More efficient but trade-offs in functionality. Mike R. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, April 17, 2004 8:18 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: GUI from Mv code Re: Crystal Reports In a message dated 4/17/2004 4:16:06 PM Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > A key factor that makes CUI non-portable > to GUI is the embedded Input and Print statements in the code. I respectfully disagree that this is key. After all event oriented apps also have input statements I think you mean the key factor is that the programs are not event oriented. That is, on a typical GUI form I can click and fill in any field in any order, and then I submit the entire form. In a typical mv app, most programmers would write it so the inputs happen in a definite order and there is no way to change that order, on the fly. If programs were rewriten so that the inputs were all seperated from each other logically, and could be entered in any order. (Tab forward, tab back between fields, or point and click since mouse clicks are captured by accuterm and wintegrate among others). Then some of the validation (two field interactions) should be relegated to the On.SUBMIT part of the program, etc. If we could code in this fashion, then any app can be GUIized with less effort. Will -- u2-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users -- u2-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: GUI from Mv code Re: Crystal Reports
In a message dated 4/17/2004 4:16:06 PM Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > A key factor that makes CUI non-portable > to GUI is the embedded Input and Print statements in the code. I respectfully disagree that this is key. After all event oriented apps also have input statements I think you mean the key factor is that the programs are not event oriented. That is, on a typical GUI form I can click and fill in any field in any order, and then I submit the entire form. In a typical mv app, most programmers would write it so the inputs happen in a definite order and there is no way to change that order, on the fly. If programs were rewriten so that the inputs were all seperated from each other logically, and could be entered in any order. (Tab forward, tab back between fields, or point and click since mouse clicks are captured by accuterm and wintegrate among others). Then some of the validation (two field interactions) should be relegated to the On.SUBMIT part of the program, etc. If we could code in this fashion, then any app can be GUIized with less effort. Will -- u2-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
RE: GUI from Mv code Re: Crystal Reports
Tough to find a good place for these comments. There are some interesting
observations to make on the mentality of IT people, business management,
etc..
First, on the concept of "if we're going to add a GUI we might as well get
an entirely new app": The business rules and UI should be considered as
entirely separate entities. Getting a new app with a GUI does not imply
that you're going to get equal or better business rules. This concept is
exemplified by Mark's GP client and dozens more like them. Management must
be educated to separate the idea of the UI from the business rules.
Second, I wince in pain at the concept of IT people looking at a Character
UI and deciding it's deficient, based solely on the asthetic value. How can
someone decide by the UI whether an app suits business needs? How does the
simple fact that an app has a Graphical UI make it any more functional than
a Character UI? What is the trigger in the mind of IT people that leads
from "I see a GUI" to "it must be capable of running our business" or "all
we need to do is add a couple business rules to this GUI and it will work
for us"? I really think this GUI mentality comes in part from the video
game generation where graphical games are perceived as better than the old
Pong, StarTrek, Zork, Wumpus, and Adventure games ("plugh" or "xyzzy" ring
any bells here?) In all of the rhetoric about separating the UI from the
business rules, somewhere in the minds of IT people is the idea that a
Graphical UI implies better business rules - and graphical database
management tools somehow imply a more sophisticated database. So while
people sing the praises of Object Orientation and n-tier architectures, in
the big picture they still don't really "get it".
Third, and all of this is really related, what confuses me about all of
these failed migrations is that intelligent professionals keep missing
obvious factors of migration, like feature comparisions, business needs
assessments, training, and documentation. And why do we seldom see basic
auditing to identify problems and keep a project on track - or to put a halt
to migration when critical (and I really mean critical) issues are
identified? In every one of these failed migrations there is one or more
persons in management pushing forward with some underlying business agenda,
no one wants to openly state that the plans aren't sound, the systems aren't
ready, or that the whole idea is foolhardy - and somehow hundreds of
thousands of dollars get thrown into projects like this with no one in IT to
pull in the reins and say "enough is enough, this is FUBAR".
There are answers:
- Upper management should openly listen, if not directly or immediately
heed, the advice of everyone affected by a migration, from end-users to IT
to trading partners and perhaps even stockholders.
- Upper management must insist on detailed advance planning from IT, and get
everyone to try to poke holes in the plan. Hire a consultant to poke holes
in the plan (similar to hiring a hacker to test your network security). If
the plan doesn't work, at least everyone had their input. This is far
better than post-failure finger pointing and "I coulda told them it was a
stupid plan" comments. (Yes, that will happen anyway if people ignore the
opportunity to speak up. Small people love to bask in the failure of
others.)
- Someone needs to be accountable. It seems the people who drive projects
like this into the ground have the least to lose and many people under them
to blame.
Finally, and back to the topic, about Results and the magic silver bullet
which will lead from CUI to GUI: It seems we have years to add
functionality to these CUI applications, but no time to prepare them for the
almost inevitable GUI challenge. A key factor that makes CUI non-portable
to GUI is the embedded Input and Print statements in the code. Don't wait
for tools to go GUI, prepare your app properly and you'll find many tools
that can then be used to add the GUI. If developers would take some time to
modularize their code, then migration to GUI using any number of tools can
be a relatively simple, painless, and inexpensive process, compared to
migration from linear/procedural/non-event-oriented "spaghetti" code.
Pre-emptive modularization may eliminate the need for migration, saving
months to years of aggravation and tens to hundreds of thousands of dollars
in non-recoverable expenses. And IF migration is to occur, modularization
now can facilitate the process later, allowing a company a smoother exit
strategy rather than a cold-turkey cutoff. Unfortunately these concepts
have been well known for over a decade but we continue to hear stories where
the code can't be GUItized so management decides to toss the app.
Getting management to buy-in on the time/cost of modularizing an app is
tough. The value is only perceived when the expense of a GUI or migration
is considered, and that's usually too late. I think it's important for IT
pe
Re: can we stop with the pointless displays? was Re: Crystal Reports
In a message dated 4/17/2004 7:35:30 AM Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > and had to watch the compiler meticulously display those line-by > line asterisks during compiling. O speaking of that, thank you that reminds me. When doing BUILD-INDEX is it really necessary to display an asterisk with every ten items indexed? That is consuming more CPU time that doing the index! [IMHO] Get rid of it! Out! Vamoosh! Be gone with your evil self! I don't find value-added to displaying asterisks. If you must display anything, display a counter every thousand 1000 , 2000, 3000 or something or base the display on the apparent speed of the processing. Like every 5 seconds display the current count. That would help and it should be a very trivial fix. Do we have a fix it list yet up on the web site? Or can we start one? Or what? Will -- u2-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
RE: GUI from Mv code Re: Crystal Reports
In a message dated 4/17/2004 9:10:12 AM Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > The tools are there to produce applications on par with anything on the > market. Web interfaces via tools like Redback. UOJ, .Net PDP, or the java > interfaces are all there to produce great solutions for U2. And I would like to mention Accuterm. I have built several scripts in Accuterm that do Gui like functions, and are launced from inside the mv Code. Accuterm has the ability to watch for a command that is directed at it and then take actions in Windoze. So for example, one client, has an application where they have to pull up a record in an mv screen and then listen to a person speaking (off a MP3 file) and then process the record based on that speech. So my solution was to write an accuterm script that launches Windows Media Player to the location specified from the mv code. Another script launches web requests from inside mv code, scraps the contents, and presents partial information within an mv application. All in basically a green-screen format, inside an Accuterm window. But I digress. My main point was, that the tools are here. Are you ready to learn how to use them? That's the sticking point. Will Johnson Fast Forward Technologies -- u2-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: Crystal Reports
Maybe I'm not strong enough to convince my clients to begin to integrate GUI based entities to their MV systems. I have had these discussions with each of them and I often get the "We like things the way they are". 2 of my clients have had their order entry software from around 1977. One in particular had it initially developed by an outside company and then the 2 owners have been tweaking it until the mid 1990's when i got involved. They are both a little stubborn for new ideas (which actually is kinda good, MV wise) so I just keep adding features within the same looking environment. I even have to follow house rules for the symantics for saving records, leaving programs etc. I've added regular and email blasts to their system, automatic faxing, automatic FTPing, web exporting and a few other modern tricks to their system. When we upgraded, it had to be on a W2K box to keep the PC familiarity instead of unix. I know that many of my clients are at a crossroads that if I were to suggest some major spending on GUI-for-MV products that the implied new expense may make a replacement system a little more appealing. If they're going to spend $10 to $20K on something, why not throw out MV. It's a hard place to be. Personally, I'm committed to helping them get the best out of their MV system. I also feel that it's in its twilight and I'm taking some other routes for revenue generation. I wish I were either at a VAR or at one end-user so I could plant my feet and really invest for their (our) future. But being independent, that's probably the way the ball bounces. Thanks. - Original Message - From: "Mike Randall" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "'U2 Users Discussion List'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Saturday, April 17, 2004 12:08 PM Subject: RE: Crystal Reports > Mark, > > I think you've hit it right on the head regarding the dilemma surrounding > MV. The visual aspect KILLS us. The MV solutions out there are many and > very good at what they do. The problem is that most of them look ancient > and lack the GUI glitz and integration ability. > > The REAL shame is that the technology to develop full GUI products in our > environment is here. The story you mentioned of clients migrating to some > other GUI solution only to find it less capable than the MV system is a > recurring nightmare. I think the solution lies in the hands of the > developers like yourself and the MV organizations that provide solutions. > > The tools are there to produce applications on par with anything on the > market. Web interfaces via tools like Redback. UOJ, .Net PDP, or the java > interfaces are all there to produce great solutions for U2. There are host > of 4GL tools for our environment like SB+, Visage, Nucleus and others > (apologies for any omissions). I think the developers, consultants and > solution providers almost have to embrace "something" other than delivering > character based apps. If you don't, then get used to clients leaving. > > Personally, I came to this crossroads in the late 90s and decided to learn > the web technologies. My company is a consulting group specializing in web > development for MV via Redback and now Raining Data's Data Provider. It > sounds cruel, but it's a case of switch to something or be eaten. > > Mike R. > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of Mark Johnson > Sent: Saturday, April 17, 2004 10:34 AM > To: U2 Users Discussion List > Subject: Re: Crystal Reports > > Ross: > > Your square peg, round hole analogy is pretty accurate. GP seems to be the > next step for quickbooks users. > > The package that they're migrating from is Results from Microdata from the > early 1980's. I still have 4 other clients using Results as well as a > mixture of other Order entry packages/homegrown. > > While I can itemize a few shortcomings of Results, it has stood the test of > time because it's still being used. Each of my 4 other Results clients have > taken their copy and evolved it in their own localized versions. > > What absolutely impresses me is that none of these 4.5 clients have used > *all* of the originally installed features of Results. They use many and > have added many of their own. But the core design of Results remains true > and someone got it very correct back during its rollout. Add to the fact > that the developers didn't have a 4GL to think of, had 50MB 64K 1Mhz > machines and had to watch the compiler meticulously display those line-by > line asterisks during compiling. Plus, those programs were pretty long as > well, didn't have INCLUDES and didn't have the open CALL concept that > every
RE: Crystal Reports
Mark, I think you've hit it right on the head regarding the dilemma surrounding MV. The visual aspect KILLS us. The MV solutions out there are many and very good at what they do. The problem is that most of them look ancient and lack the GUI glitz and integration ability. The REAL shame is that the technology to develop full GUI products in our environment is here. The story you mentioned of clients migrating to some other GUI solution only to find it less capable than the MV system is a recurring nightmare. I think the solution lies in the hands of the developers like yourself and the MV organizations that provide solutions. The tools are there to produce applications on par with anything on the market. Web interfaces via tools like Redback. UOJ, .Net PDP, or the java interfaces are all there to produce great solutions for U2. There are host of 4GL tools for our environment like SB+, Visage, Nucleus and others (apologies for any omissions). I think the developers, consultants and solution providers almost have to embrace "something" other than delivering character based apps. If you don't, then get used to clients leaving. Personally, I came to this crossroads in the late 90s and decided to learn the web technologies. My company is a consulting group specializing in web development for MV via Redback and now Raining Data's Data Provider. It sounds cruel, but it's a case of switch to something or be eaten. Mike R. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mark Johnson Sent: Saturday, April 17, 2004 10:34 AM To: U2 Users Discussion List Subject: Re: Crystal Reports Ross: Your square peg, round hole analogy is pretty accurate. GP seems to be the next step for quickbooks users. The package that they're migrating from is Results from Microdata from the early 1980's. I still have 4 other clients using Results as well as a mixture of other Order entry packages/homegrown. While I can itemize a few shortcomings of Results, it has stood the test of time because it's still being used. Each of my 4 other Results clients have taken their copy and evolved it in their own localized versions. What absolutely impresses me is that none of these 4.5 clients have used *all* of the originally installed features of Results. They use many and have added many of their own. But the core design of Results remains true and someone got it very correct back during its rollout. Add to the fact that the developers didn't have a 4GL to think of, had 50MB 64K 1Mhz machines and had to watch the compiler meticulously display those line-by line asterisks during compiling. Plus, those programs were pretty long as well, didn't have INCLUDES and didn't have the open CALL concept that everyone else has. Not to mention the original 32 K record (program) size file structure. Only 1 of my Results clients remains on the older MCD box and oddly enough, he has the 2nd most sophisticated deviations of my 4.5 clients. The others are either on R90 or UD. I think the greatest oversight in all of MV is the inability to re-compile the existing source code to a GUI equivilent. I'm smart enough to realize how tremendously difficult that would be. But I know that a major reason for my current dilema with this UD/Results guy going to Great Plains is the visual aspect of it. People taste with their eyes and most IT 20-something guys have never seen anything decent on a character-based screen so they relegate it to the sophistication of command-line DOS. While they have made an incorrect conclusion, their voices speak loudest. And since they hold the keys to the contemporary services: email, web sites, network admin etc, their opinions may carry more weight. One of my other clients is bouncing back and forth with a proposal of mine for a $10K new module and the concept of ROI comes into play. How in the world could this MV-to-GP client justify the ROI on all the extra time and expense to shift to GP. Mark Johnson - Original Message - From: "Ross Ferris" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "U2 Users Discussion List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Saturday, April 17, 2004 9:31 AM Subject: RE: Crystal Reports H, We spent 3 years developing a product (CrystalLynx) that allowed us to work with Crystal - it automatically "normalized" the data for you, so I think it would be fair to say that "we used it for a while" - and you are right, I don't want to go back (to Crystal). Typical square peg/round hole stuff, because it DIDN'T understand mv all that well - or maybe it was just us ! and I surely didn't like ODBC performance (and reliability on D3 platforms). CR is obviously a good product - #1 in it's field, but these days there ARE products available that work with mv data in a native format, and give CR a good run for it's money ! Ross Ferris
RE: Crystal Reports
The "Re-compile to GUI" silver bullet just will not come - if for no other reason than the fact that "GUI" sits in front of an "event model", and your green screen code doesn't cater for any event other than the enter button ! There are many paths to the "Nirvana" of GUI (obviously I think - KNOW - that Viságe is the best, but I'll refrain from further direct reference), but they all take time, effort and money. This investment can be greatly reduced by your ability to re-use what you already have in place, most notably that "smart" database design that works so well, and large chunks of code that do smart things. However, I doubt that you OR your 4.5 customers have the time or money to commit to such a project (maybe getting them all to fund development of a single core --> but ) - they may "think" moving to GP (or equivalent) will save them, but the client you are loosing may actually provide you with a real, live example of why your remaining customers should NOT embark on this path. If it is eye candy you are after, why not give it to them ? For example, have you considered adding BI/DW facilities using products like MITS or Viságe.BIT (the latter would also give you the infrastructure to start to develop GUI screens for other key areas) so that your clients get better visibility of WHERE their sales are coming from ? You mentioned email - there are numerous tools available to enable you to email documents like Invoices, Quotes & Statements, and produce these with images, mixed font etc (download a free eval of our WordLynx, FaxLynx & MailLynx products if you get stuck :-) It is up to YOU to update these people to the latest mv technology - no-one else is interested in doing this EXCEPT YOU ! Everyone else out there wants to sell them Great Plains !! so unless YOU start to get them to embrace what is possible, working from their rich mv heritage, the only thing I CAN tell you with certainty is that next you will have 3.5 clients, then 2.5, then ... We all TRIED to ignore Windows & GUI - it didn't go away ! We all waited for the miracle/no pain GUI conversion tool - no joy ! Just remember, your FAILURE to act IS an action ! and I don't think you will like the consequences ! (I don't mean to single you out - you are not alone ! and whilst you may think my comments are harsh, I fear they could be a portent for the future) Ross Ferris Stamina Software Visage - an Evolution in Software Development >-Original Message- >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On >Behalf Of Mark Johnson >Sent: Sunday, 18 April 2004 12:34 AM >To: U2 Users Discussion List >Subject: Re: Crystal Reports > > >I think the greatest oversight in all of MV is the inability to re-compile >the existing source code to a GUI equivilent. I'm smart enough to realize >how tremendously difficult that would be. But I know that a major reason >for >my current dilema with this UD/Results guy going to Great Plains is the >visual aspect of it. People taste with their eyes and most IT 20-something >guys have never seen anything decent on a character-based screen so they >relegate it to the sophistication of command-line DOS. While they have made >an incorrect conclusion, their voices speak loudest. And since they hold >the >keys to the contemporary services: email, web sites, network admin etc, >their opinions may carry more weight. > --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.658 / Virus Database: 421 - Release Date: 9/04/2004 -- u2-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: Crystal Reports
Ross: Your square peg, round hole analogy is pretty accurate. GP seems to be the next step for quickbooks users. The package that they're migrating from is Results from Microdata from the early 1980's. I still have 4 other clients using Results as well as a mixture of other Order entry packages/homegrown. While I can itemize a few shortcomings of Results, it has stood the test of time because it's still being used. Each of my 4 other Results clients have taken their copy and evolved it in their own localized versions. What absolutely impresses me is that none of these 4.5 clients have used *all* of the originally installed features of Results. They use many and have added many of their own. But the core design of Results remains true and someone got it very correct back during its rollout. Add to the fact that the developers didn't have a 4GL to think of, had 50MB 64K 1Mhz machines and had to watch the compiler meticulously display those line-by line asterisks during compiling. Plus, those programs were pretty long as well, didn't have INCLUDES and didn't have the open CALL concept that everyone else has. Not to mention the original 32 K record (program) size file structure. Only 1 of my Results clients remains on the older MCD box and oddly enough, he has the 2nd most sophisticated deviations of my 4.5 clients. The others are either on R90 or UD. I think the greatest oversight in all of MV is the inability to re-compile the existing source code to a GUI equivilent. I'm smart enough to realize how tremendously difficult that would be. But I know that a major reason for my current dilema with this UD/Results guy going to Great Plains is the visual aspect of it. People taste with their eyes and most IT 20-something guys have never seen anything decent on a character-based screen so they relegate it to the sophistication of command-line DOS. While they have made an incorrect conclusion, their voices speak loudest. And since they hold the keys to the contemporary services: email, web sites, network admin etc, their opinions may carry more weight. One of my other clients is bouncing back and forth with a proposal of mine for a $10K new module and the concept of ROI comes into play. How in the world could this MV-to-GP client justify the ROI on all the extra time and expense to shift to GP. Mark Johnson - Original Message - From: "Ross Ferris" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "U2 Users Discussion List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Saturday, April 17, 2004 9:31 AM Subject: RE: Crystal Reports H, We spent 3 years developing a product (CrystalLynx) that allowed us to work with Crystal - it automatically "normalized" the data for you, so I think it would be fair to say that "we used it for a while" - and you are right, I don't want to go back (to Crystal). Typical square peg/round hole stuff, because it DIDN'T understand mv all that well - or maybe it was just us ! and I surely didn't like ODBC performance (and reliability on D3 platforms). CR is obviously a good product - #1 in it's field, but these days there ARE products available that work with mv data in a native format, and give CR a good run for it's money ! Ross Ferris Stamina Software Visage – an Evolution in Software Development >-Original Message- >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On >Behalf Of Mike Randall >Sent: Saturday, 17 April 2004 5:41 AM >To: 'U2 Users Discussion List' >Subject: RE: Crystal Reports > >Crystal is indeed a very fine product. It is a banded report writer with a >multitude of programmability. Multivalued data is indeed a pain in the >neck. Normalize the data 1st and you'll find Crystal a joy to use with >output, features and polish that MV can't come close to. The 'problems' >that your users are facing can be addressed with Crystal code (VB syntax or >Crystal's scripting syntax). After using it a while, you'll never want to >go back... > >Mike R. > >-Original Message- >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On >Behalf Of Mark Johnson >Sent: Friday, April 16, 2004 2:51 PM >To: U2 Users Discussion List >Subject: Crystal Reports > >One of my clients wants to connect Crystal Reports to their UD database to >apparently give greater access to the data that they sometimes deem as >hidden and only accessable through me. > >This client converted to Great Plains 6 weeks ago (SQL based) and their CR >experts were struggling with duplicating some of the more mundane reports >that already exist in UD. A monthly sales tax summary (by jurisdiction) >took >the GP guy 3 days futzing with CR using GP's data. > >How much trouble are they going to get in trying to use MV'd data from the >UD system (ODBC) if they hav
RE: Crystal Reports
H, We spent 3 years developing a product (CrystalLynx) that allowed us to work with Crystal - it automatically "normalized" the data for you, so I think it would be fair to say that "we used it for a while" - and you are right, I don't want to go back (to Crystal). Typical square peg/round hole stuff, because it DIDN'T understand mv all that well - or maybe it was just us ! and I surely didn't like ODBC performance (and reliability on D3 platforms). CR is obviously a good product - #1 in it's field, but these days there ARE products available that work with mv data in a native format, and give CR a good run for it's money ! Ross Ferris Stamina Software Visage – an Evolution in Software Development >-Original Message- >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On >Behalf Of Mike Randall >Sent: Saturday, 17 April 2004 5:41 AM >To: 'U2 Users Discussion List' >Subject: RE: Crystal Reports > >Crystal is indeed a very fine product. It is a banded report writer with a >multitude of programmability. Multivalued data is indeed a pain in the >neck. Normalize the data 1st and you'll find Crystal a joy to use with >output, features and polish that MV can't come close to. The 'problems' >that your users are facing can be addressed with Crystal code (VB syntax or >Crystal's scripting syntax). After using it a while, you'll never want to >go back... > >Mike R. > >-Original Message- >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On >Behalf Of Mark Johnson >Sent: Friday, April 16, 2004 2:51 PM >To: U2 Users Discussion List >Subject: Crystal Reports > >One of my clients wants to connect Crystal Reports to their UD database to >apparently give greater access to the data that they sometimes deem as >hidden and only accessable through me. > >This client converted to Great Plains 6 weeks ago (SQL based) and their CR >experts were struggling with duplicating some of the more mundane reports >that already exist in UD. A monthly sales tax summary (by jurisdiction) >took >the GP guy 3 days futzing with CR using GP's data. > >How much trouble are they going to get in trying to use MV'd data from the >UD system (ODBC) if they have so much trouble with more 'normalized' data. >Everyone seems to think that CR is a magic pill and once attached to a SQL >database, the sophisticated reports simply roll off. > >I'm trying to strongly propose a data warehouse concept whereby the day's >sales data gets exported and updated into their prior application for the >sake of the multitude of existing, proven reports in MV. If these guys took >3 days for a simple tax report, how can CR fabricate temporary tables for >the sake of these consolidated sophisticated MV reports? > >I'm just interested in hearing of some experiences. This client is too >stubborn to go back from GP and may even disregard their entire MV system >completely. I really have nothing to lose if I insult them. > >Thanks in advance. > >-- >u2-users mailing list >[EMAIL PROTECTED] >http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users > >-- >u2-users mailing list >[EMAIL PROTECTED] >http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users > > >--- >Incoming mail is certified Virus Free. >Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). >Version: 6.0.658 / Virus Database: 421 - Release Date: 9/04/2004 > --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.658 / Virus Database: 421 - Release Date: 9/04/2004 -- u2-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
RE: Crystal Reports
>I'm trying to strongly propose a data warehouse concept whereby the day's >sales data gets exported and updated into their prior application for the >sake of the multitude of existing, proven reports in MV. If these guys took >3 days for a simple tax report, how can CR fabricate temporary tables for >the sake of these consolidated sophisticated MV reports? > >I'm just interested in hearing of some experiences. This client is too >stubborn to go back from GP and may even disregard their entire MV system >completely. I really have nothing to lose if I insult them. Don't hold your breath --> keeping UD going would be an indictment on the people that made the decision in the first place - and they still sign the checks, right ? I do feel your pain though . I've seen companies that wouldn't spend $10K on modifications jump to what they perceive as a "better/mainstream" product, and proceed to spend $500K to try to make it work . and 3 years down the track they still have a mess ! Ross Ferris Stamina Software Visage – an Evolution in Software Development >-Original Message- >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On >Behalf Of Mark Johnson >Sent: Saturday, 17 April 2004 4:51 AM >To: U2 Users Discussion List >Subject: Crystal Reports > --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.658 / Virus Database: 421 - Release Date: 9/04/2004 -- u2-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
RE: Crystal Reports
Take the Lead If they have SQL Server already, build a mini datawarehouse that you populate Daily, and then set up the new Report Services of SQL Server which is a free add on to SQL Server 2000. In somes ways it has some better features than Crystal reports. It gives your system a fresh face for little work and will keep the MV system in the organisation. Crystal Reports is a good tool, but when it comes to complex reports, I can quicker write a Basic Program to achieve the result than a good Crystal Reports programmer will achieve the results. The big thing for you is the user just wants to feel in control of data access and this can be achieved in a number of ways even if it is a perception. Regards David Jordan -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mark Johnson Sent: Saturday, 17 April 2004 4:51 AM To: U2 Users Discussion List Subject: Crystal Reports One of my clients wants to connect Crystal Reports to their UD database to apparently give greater access to the data that they sometimes deem as hidden and only accessable through me. This client converted to Great Plains 6 weeks ago (SQL based) and their CR experts were struggling with duplicating some of the more mundane reports that already exist in UD. A monthly sales tax summary (by jurisdiction) took the GP guy 3 days futzing with CR using GP's data. How much trouble are they going to get in trying to use MV'd data from the UD system (ODBC) if they have so much trouble with more 'normalized' data. Everyone seems to think that CR is a magic pill and once attached to a SQL database, the sophisticated reports simply roll off. I'm trying to strongly propose a data warehouse concept whereby the day's sales data gets exported and updated into their prior application for the sake of the multitude of existing, proven reports in MV. If these guys took 3 days for a simple tax report, how can CR fabricate temporary tables for the sake of these consolidated sophisticated MV reports? I'm just interested in hearing of some experiences. This client is too stubborn to go back from GP and may even disregard their entire MV system completely. I really have nothing to lose if I insult them. Thanks in advance. -- u2-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users -- u2-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
RE: Crystal Reports
Mark, it's interesting to see this project unfold, please do keep us up on events there. (Ready for some acronym soup?) Crystal Reports is heavily tied to .NET these days. Microsoft has selected CR for integration with Great Plains, so there is a high level of commitment to the CR/GP/.NET links. It shouldn't be a problem to create a middle-tier which interfaces data from both GP and UD into CR via ADO.NET.ADO.NET is _not_ ADO, which was basically supposed to be an upgrade to ODBC. In addition to other things, ADO.NET is really a data hub which allows you to create a source-independent set of tables and relations. The end result is that CR doesn't know or care where the data is coming from, it comes from an ADO.NET data model. How you get the data into ADO.NET is up to you. My recommendation is to take a look at the Pick Data Provider .NET from Raining Data, another product which has endorsement from Microsoft. Pricing is very reasonable, it's stable, well documented and supported. Since there are questions about other interfaces working with U2 from .NET, like RBO's, UniObjects, UniODBC, etc, it seems reasonable to choose a connectivity module that was written for the purpose. Using technology that is endorsed by Microsoft from end to end should give you some political leverage as well, since that seems to be a priority with management there. [Ad] Here at Nebula R&D, we can prototype a report on a T&M basis, even going all the way back and forth between GP, MV, and CR. I honestly have no idea how long it would take without looking at this closer, but the tools are available, we have everything here, it's just a matter of connecting the dots. (Nebula R&D is an authorized Raining Data reseller and MSDN Universal Developer.) If you'd like to contract for more specific work, we now have highly qualified people available to do this sort of work (MS MVP/MSDE trainer/developers), and we'll be happy to take a back seat and let you get the glory as projects are completed. Good luck. Tony [EMAIL PROTECTED] 949-380-1668 >-Original Message- >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mark Johnson >Sent: Friday, April 16, 2004 11:51 AM >To: U2 Users Discussion List >Subject: Crystal Reports > > >One of my clients wants to connect Crystal Reports to their UD >database to apparently give greater access to the data that >they sometimes deem as hidden and only accessable through me. > >This client converted to Great Plains 6 weeks ago (SQL based) >and their CR experts were struggling with duplicating some of >the more mundane reports that already exist in UD. A monthly >sales tax summary (by jurisdiction) took the GP guy 3 days >futzing with CR using GP's data. > >How much trouble are they going to get in trying to use MV'd >data from the UD system (ODBC) if they have so much trouble >with more 'normalized' data. Everyone seems to think that CR >is a magic pill and once attached to a SQL database, the >sophisticated reports simply roll off. > >I'm trying to strongly propose a data warehouse concept >whereby the day's sales data gets exported and updated into >their prior application for the sake of the multitude of >existing, proven reports in MV. If these guys took 3 days for >a simple tax report, how can CR fabricate temporary tables for >the sake of these consolidated sophisticated MV reports? > >I'm just interested in hearing of some experiences. This >client is too stubborn to go back from GP and may even >disregard their entire MV system completely. I really have >nothing to lose if I insult them. > >Thanks in advance. > >-- >u2-users mailing list >[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users > -- u2-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
RE: Crystal Reports
We spent a fair bit of time building our schema so that the data appears to be in 1nf for Crystal to understand it. We've made some reports out of it that are pretty impressive and would have required a number of basic routines and some "work" files to create. They will be able to get the reports out of Crystal. Perhaps you need different experts. Depending on how much work it is to import the data back into UD that may be a very good (but likely interim) fix. It would allow them to get the reports they are used to relatively quickly and allow them time to build the reports in Crystal using the "live" data. remind them over how long you've been building and tweaking those reports and they may start to understand that it will take a while to get them done in Crystal. The one thing that you can do with the ODBC "view" is build a lot of "virtual" dicts. For example you can have a "CLIENT_NAME" field in your INVOICE table that actually pulls the name using the CLIENT_ID from the CLIENT file so you don't need to setup the joins for the report. Good luck -- Colin Alfke Calgary, Alberta Canada "Just because something isn't broken doesn't mean that you can't fix it" Stu Pickles >-Original Message- >From: Mark Johnson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >Sent: Friday, April 16, 2004 12:51 PM >To: U2 Users Discussion List >Subject: Crystal Reports > > >One of my clients wants to connect Crystal Reports to their UD >database to apparently give greater access to the data that >they sometimes deem as hidden and only accessable through me. > >This client converted to Great Plains 6 weeks ago (SQL based) >and their CR experts were struggling with duplicating some of >the more mundane reports that already exist in UD. A monthly >sales tax summary (by jurisdiction) took the GP guy 3 days >futzing with CR using GP's data. > >How much trouble are they going to get in trying to use MV'd >data from the UD system (ODBC) if they have so much trouble >with more 'normalized' data. Everyone seems to think that CR >is a magic pill and once attached to a SQL database, the >sophisticated reports simply roll off. > >I'm trying to strongly propose a data warehouse concept >whereby the day's sales data gets exported and updated into >their prior application for the sake of the multitude of >existing, proven reports in MV. If these guys took 3 days for >a simple tax report, how can CR fabricate temporary tables for >the sake of these consolidated sophisticated MV reports? > >I'm just interested in hearing of some experiences. This >client is too stubborn to go back from GP and may even >disregard their entire MV system completely. I really have >nothing to lose if I insult them. > >Thanks in advance. -- u2-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
RE: Crystal Reports
Crystal is indeed a very fine product. It is a banded report writer with a multitude of programmability. Multivalued data is indeed a pain in the neck. Normalize the data 1st and you'll find Crystal a joy to use with output, features and polish that MV can't come close to. The 'problems' that your users are facing can be addressed with Crystal code (VB syntax or Crystal's scripting syntax). After using it a while, you'll never want to go back... Mike R. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mark Johnson Sent: Friday, April 16, 2004 2:51 PM To: U2 Users Discussion List Subject: Crystal Reports One of my clients wants to connect Crystal Reports to their UD database to apparently give greater access to the data that they sometimes deem as hidden and only accessable through me. This client converted to Great Plains 6 weeks ago (SQL based) and their CR experts were struggling with duplicating some of the more mundane reports that already exist in UD. A monthly sales tax summary (by jurisdiction) took the GP guy 3 days futzing with CR using GP's data. How much trouble are they going to get in trying to use MV'd data from the UD system (ODBC) if they have so much trouble with more 'normalized' data. Everyone seems to think that CR is a magic pill and once attached to a SQL database, the sophisticated reports simply roll off. I'm trying to strongly propose a data warehouse concept whereby the day's sales data gets exported and updated into their prior application for the sake of the multitude of existing, proven reports in MV. If these guys took 3 days for a simple tax report, how can CR fabricate temporary tables for the sake of these consolidated sophisticated MV reports? I'm just interested in hearing of some experiences. This client is too stubborn to go back from GP and may even disregard their entire MV system completely. I really have nothing to lose if I insult them. Thanks in advance. -- u2-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users -- u2-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Crystal Reports
One of my clients wants to connect Crystal Reports to their UD database to apparently give greater access to the data that they sometimes deem as hidden and only accessable through me. This client converted to Great Plains 6 weeks ago (SQL based) and their CR experts were struggling with duplicating some of the more mundane reports that already exist in UD. A monthly sales tax summary (by jurisdiction) took the GP guy 3 days futzing with CR using GP's data. How much trouble are they going to get in trying to use MV'd data from the UD system (ODBC) if they have so much trouble with more 'normalized' data. Everyone seems to think that CR is a magic pill and once attached to a SQL database, the sophisticated reports simply roll off. I'm trying to strongly propose a data warehouse concept whereby the day's sales data gets exported and updated into their prior application for the sake of the multitude of existing, proven reports in MV. If these guys took 3 days for a simple tax report, how can CR fabricate temporary tables for the sake of these consolidated sophisticated MV reports? I'm just interested in hearing of some experiences. This client is too stubborn to go back from GP and may even disregard their entire MV system completely. I really have nothing to lose if I insult them. Thanks in advance. -- u2-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: SQL Server and Crystal Reports
Recent projects (not related to migrating away from U2, fortunately) have landed two of these on my desk: "Mastering Crystal Reports 9" by Cate McCoy and Gord Maric "SQL Server 7: A Beginner's Guide" by Dusan Petkovic The CR manual is pretty sharp -- I only ran into trouble when trying to develop custom VB and web interfaces, and then only because of some less-documented "features" that a lot of other people on the community site ran into. If you want things like that solved quickly, be prepared to pay for support. (Note: CR version 10 was released just last month, and this book was published before CR 9 was available.) I can also offer VB source code for a standalone viewer. The SQL manual steps fairly lightly, introducing basics before going into details, and it covers the various parts of SQL Server pretty well. I've had to use trial and error to make some fairly basic relational tables with useful constraints, but having a decent client like SQLExecMS (www.laplas-soft.com) is a tremendous help. You might want another book that focuses on Transact-SQL to flesh this one out. Just an observation: I was really disappointed that with version 9 CR has completely abandoned the standalone report viewer as a means of distribution. I'm sure doing so simplifies their support, shows their ability to support web interfaces, and generates better licensing revenue, but I didn't appreciate all the extra work it took to distribute a few reports to just a handful of users. HTH, David Beahm Mark Johnson wrote: I would like to know the best beginning books for either of these two topics. I don't yet want a reference, rather to know if 'Dummies' Books are appropriate or if anyone else has better beginning selections. My UD client migrating to these wants to keep me and this is the environment. thanks. -- u2-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: SQL Server and Crystal Reports
Mark, I don't know about SQL books, but I have found the Crystal manuals to be all that I needed to customize forms for our clients who have used Crystal Reports. The manuals are pretty good - they included enough examples to get me going! Susan M. Lynch F.W. Davison & Company, Inc. - Original Message - From: "Mark Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, February 11, 2004 7:16 AM Subject: SQL Server and Crystal Reports I would like to know the best beginning books for either of these two topics. I don't yet want a reference, rather to know if 'Dummies' Books are appropriate or if anyone else has better beginning selections. My UD client migrating to these wants to keep me and this is the environment. thanks. -- u2-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users -- u2-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
RE: SQL Server and Crystal Reports
Mark, Not quite an answer to your question, but the first thing I would do would be to get your client to set up an MSDN subscription. The library will help you loads once you get past the initial learning curve and need to see how to do things, and has sample applications to check out. Remember that if you want to 'play', you can load a copy of the MSDE (Microsoft Data Engine) which is fully SQL server compatible (available with professional versions of Office, Visual Studio 6 and .Net) but has a smaller footprint and no licence requirements. As well as SQL Server, (SQL and TransactSQL) you will probably need to know about the various interfaces, so the MSDN is a good choice for reference materials on subjects such as OleDB (ADO). I don't know what the various editions cost - we get the Enterprise edition which is pricey, but not for what you get, and includes a 10 user SQL server licence as well as licences for all the MS platforms, office versions, development tools etc. If your client wants to retain you this could be a very good investment on their part. Regards, Brian Leach -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mark Johnson Sent: 11 February 2004 12:17 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: SQL Server and Crystal Reports I would like to know the best beginning books for either of these two topics. I don't yet want a reference, rather to know if 'Dummies' Books are appropriate or if anyone else has better beginning selections. My UD client migrating to these wants to keep me and this is the environment. thanks. -- u2-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users This email was checked by MessageLabs SkyScan before entering Microgen. This email was checked on leaving Microgen for viruses, similar malicious code and inappropriate content by MessageLabs SkyScan. DISCLAIMER This email and any attachments are confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the named recipient, please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the contents to any other person, use it for any purpose, or store or copy the information. In the event of any technical difficulty with this email, please contact the sender or [EMAIL PROTECTED] Microgen Information Management Solutions http://www.microgen.co.uk -- u2-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
SQL Server and Crystal Reports
I would like to know the best beginning books for either of these two topics. I don't yet want a reference, rather to know if 'Dummies' Books are appropriate or if anyone else has better beginning selections. My UD client migrating to these wants to keep me and this is the environment. thanks. -- u2-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
