Prev: VODC - Conference on VO and Vulcan in Munich coming up
Next: send message to rs232
From: Patrick Mast on 23 Aug 2007 04:10
Hey Geoff,

> I'm not sure why you would feel that anyone should take offence unless
> you were feeling a little insecure about your approach <g>. However I
> don't think you really have an audience here. And I am not saying that
> to offend you but more to warn you that your reception here would be
> cool.

Its just.. I thought it would be nice to let those former Clipper heads
know that the Clipper language is still VERY alive!
Now, you are right, I don't expect tons of sales from current VO users.
But one is never enough informed about his options ;-)

> Why? Well three reasons. The first is easy. Coding language is like a
> religion to most. Once you have evolved your expertise in it (and
> probably got some commercial leverage with it), you defend it to death
> until you need to move on or forward. VO is like that and engenders
> serious loyalty amongst its adherents and given that Harbour simply
> cannot deliver anything that VO doesn't, why would a VO'er contemplate
> it?
>
> The second reason is just as obvious. VO already handles DBF as well as
> any DBF based development tool but I would politely suggest that its
> IDE, connection with SCC and its user base is a little more
> commercially mature than harbour. There really is no compelling reason
> to switch. VO also handles SQL as well as most other equivalent tools
> and SQL is where most development is heading. ...isn't it?
>
> But finally, the cruncher is this: VO is moving on into Dot Net in the
> form of Vulcan and also offers the technically mature option of going
> SQL. Perpetuating a product based on the ability to perpetuate an
> antiquated storage mechanism like DBF is just counter intuitive and
> counter productive. I think you should take a close look at SQL in
> general and perhaps VO specifically because you might find that this is
> a better way to go.

Ok, thank you for the info. I'm always open to learn more.

--
Sincerely,

Patrick Mast,
xHarbour.com Inc.
http://www.xHarbour.com

From: Geoff Schaller on 23 Aug 2007 04:28
...er, and the points in dispute being?

In any event, Patrick's main reason for the post was based on a mutual
desire to keep dbf alive. This was couched in terms of keeping an
'xbase' language alive. Do you think this is a good strategy?

Geoff


"Colin Haig" <colin(a)techdata.net.au> wrote in message
news:13cqauq49l3is4d(a)corp.supernews.com:

> Perhaps you should check your facts about xHarbour and SQL
>
> Colin

From: Geoff Schaller on 23 Aug 2007 04:46
Patrick,

> Its just.. I thought it would be nice to let those former Clipper heads
> know that the Clipper language is still VERY alive!

This is probably the aspect I find most disappointing.

> Now, you are right, I don't expect tons of sales from current VO users.
> But one is never enough informed about his options ;-)

The surprising thing that constantly amazes the Java and C folks is the
volume of clipper apps still out there. Poke behind people's cash
registers and you will still see tons of Fox and Clipper apps and in the
year 2007, it is a little bizarre. But they are static. The moment the
owning organisation realises they need to do any substantial
redevelopment (or are forced) it usually because a conversion process to
windows and most often, also a conversion to a DBMS of some flavour. The
clipper code is basically jettisoned.

You have a niche, no doubt, but I do doubt it would have any parallel
interest for the folks who habitate this forum.

Cheers.

Geoff



From: Colin Haig on 23 Aug 2007 08:26
From the Vulcan Website

"Vulcan.NET is the next generation of the xBase family of languages"

A Geoff Quote

>In any event, Patrick's main reason for the post was based on a mutual
>desire to keep dbf alive. This was couched in terms of keeping an 'xbase'
>language alive. Do you think this is a good strategy?

Another Geoff Quote

>But finally, the cruncher is this: VO is moving on into Dot Net in the form
>of Vulcan and also offers the technically mature option of going SQL.
>Perpetuating a product based on the ability to perpetuate an antiquated
>storage mechanism like DBF is just counter intuitive and counter
>productive. I think you should take a close look at SQL in general and
>perhaps VO specifically because you might find that this is a better way to
>go.

You sure got me confused about what strategy I should use.


Colin


From: Geoff Schaller on 23 Aug 2007 17:33
Colin,

I have got absolutely no idea what point you are trying to make whereas
I was quite clear. The era of xBase is over. Done with. And its
underlying data mechanism, the DBF, is going with it. Given the
difficulties Vulcan has getting to market and the fact it will not port
all my binary based code, I suspect we won't use it. Not fully certain
yet but as we move forward, more and more work now moves into C#.

For a VO'er who wishes to move on to Dot Net, Vulcan is an option.
Perhaps the description of 'next generation xBase' is therefor correct
because it still allows DBF use but with the Dot Net framework. Harbour,
on the other hand, is nothing but a step backwards in time and a step
down in terms of productivity and capability.

Cheers,

Geoff



"Colin Haig" <colin(a)techdata.net.au> wrote in message
news:13cqv6i67r707a7(a)corp.supernews.com:

> From the Vulcan Website
>
> "Vulcan.NET is the next generation of the xBase family of languages"
>
> A Geoff Quote
>
>
> >In any event, Patrick's main reason for the post was based on a mutual
> >desire to keep dbf alive. This was couched in terms of keeping an 'xbase'
> >language alive. Do you think this is a good strategy?
>
>
> Another Geoff Quote
>
>
> >But finally, the cruncher is this: VO is moving on into Dot Net in the form
> >of Vulcan and also offers the technically mature option of going SQL.
> >Perpetuating a product based on the ability to perpetuate an antiquated
> >storage mechanism like DBF is just counter intuitive and counter
> >productive. I think you should take a close look at SQL in general and
> >perhaps VO specifically because you might find that this is a better way to
> >go.
>
>
> You sure got me confused about what strategy I should use.
>
>
> Colin

First  |  Prev  | 
Pages: 1 2
Prev: VODC - Conference on VO and Vulcan in Munich coming up
Next: send message to rs232