By modern, do mean a brand new technology? Or something that is evolving? The U2 products have evolved tremondously over time (I started on Prime INFORMATION in 1985). If you mean a completely new database concept, then no, it isn't. But then, neither is SQL. It's origins go back to the early '70's.
I've programmed in a variety of languages, and with a couple different databases. One thing I can say about the U2 databases, they are very, VERY good at database manipulation. But, it's going to take time to learn. I've seen good programmers who've never understood the Pick-database style. Didn't mean they were bad, it's just a different style of database.
If you have no code to look at, and no one to show you examples of good programming/database development within the environment, you do have a steep curve.
Ask questions, there are a lot of experienced people on this list, who will be happy to show you 50 ways to code a process efficiently.
Drew
Allen E. Elwood wrote:
Hey John,
I have programmed in COBOL, Fortran 4, TAC Business basic, Assembly on the IBM 370, Assembly on the 8086x, native Pick, MS QuickBasic, (did some goofing around with VB), SQL, HTML, Java and most extensively with Unidata. It is by far superior in dev time ONCE YOU KNOW what you're doing. (I have 31 years of programming behind my belt).
Most of the "Manage-2000" systems that are sold (written in Unidata) get sold to companies without programmers, and they grab a secretary and tell them they are promoted to SysAdmin. Seriously!
As far as Modern? Moving data from one spot to another and doing calc's is the name of the game. Single line in RDBMS requiring a program in u2? Example please. I'm sure someone one the list will be able to point you in the correct direction so that you're learning curve will not be so frustrating.
We're here to help and make your learning fun.
Allen
-----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Aherne, John Sent: Thursday, February 17, 2005 11:31 To: [email protected] Subject: RE: [U2] uv pe
Ease of development? Very little support required? I have just started to use UD, and development is horrific, it take 10 times longer to do things that can be accomplished by a single line query in an RDBMS'. Our system requires constant attention, more attention than even MS Sql server on a bad week.
But the thing that annoys me most is the poor support from IBM. I cannot get access to some of their tech docs because our UD license is held by our VAR (Don't ask). What kind of policy is that? For any other DBMS I can get access to vast amounts of information, and I don't even need to have seen the software, nevermind have a license.
I looked forward to working with UD when I found out I would be developing on it, I have never used an mvdbms before, and the concept intrigued me. But so far, I do not see any benefit to using UD for anything what-so-ever, and nothing IBM or our VAR has provided has even hinted that UD, and UV are anything but an archaic relic of times gone by, like COBOL. Why else would a company make it so difficult for someone to learn about development on their software, if not because they didn't really have any interest in supporting it, and believe that you should have upgraded to more modern technology already?
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Drew Henderson 110 Ginger Hall
Dir. for Computer Center Operations Morehead State University
[EMAIL PROTECTED] Morehead, kY 40351
(606) 783-2445
----------------------------------------------------------------------
-------
u2-users mailing list
[email protected]
To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/
