On 4 Aug 2010, at 19:39, "Tony Gravagno" <3xk547...@sneakemail.com> wrote:
>> Lots of stuff... You clearly know mv.NET but do not know U2.NET or IBM.NET yet that doesn't stop you from leaping in and making lots of negative comparisons about them. U2.NET is a product whose source code was originally bought by IBM from Bluefinitiy. IBM/Rocket then took that code and worked on it to produce U2.NET, as I said a lot of the work was on installation and performance. It is not a crippled version of mv.NET nor is it 'frozen in time'. The main thing that has gone is cross platform support, but does that really matter? Obviously for Bluefinity, although they are a sister company to jbase, the jbase community isn't going to be large enough for them - if they are going to have a viable product in the mv space it has to work with U2. But for Rocket why would they support anything but U2? The competition to U2 is not D3 or jbase, it's SQL Server and Oracle. By abandoning cross platform support they can make a product that is optimised for U2. The work that has already been done is around installation and performance on U2. This lack of cross platform support seems to matter to you, but it is of absolutely no interest to me nor, I suspect to most other people likely to use it. I'm not going to port my application to jbase or D3. Whether you want to use mv.NET or U2.NET or anything else is entirely your choice, if you want to comment on the product you know then I have no problem with that either. But I see no reason for you to denigrate a product that you obviously don't know, you don't know what Rocket have done to it, you don't know what they are planning to do with it yet you describe it as 'frozen in time'. Please stick to telling us about what you know and not being negative about competing products that you don't know. George Land APT Solutions Ltd U2 UK Distributor _______________________________________________ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
