William Hindman
wdhindman at bellsouth.net
Thu Jul 31 07:43:06 CDT 2003
...JC goes on vacation and Bruce decides to assume his mantle :)))) ...interesting rant btw :) William Hindman ...It's a proven fact that if you smoke a pack of cigarettes a day for 90 years, you'll live to a ripe old age. :))) ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bruce Bruen" <bbruen at bigpond.com> To: "'Access Developers discussion and problem solving'" <accessd at databaseadvisors.com> Sent: Wednesday, July 30, 2003 6:36 PM Subject: RE: [AccessD]OT: C# was no-ip.com > Well, > > Having had the winge, I suppose I'd better propose a desired solution. > > IMHO, what is needed is a truly lightweight application runtime that can > be installed on various desktops providing the basic infrastructure to > enable a tuple based information set to be displayed in a functional > format suitable for human user interfaces. That is, a runtime that > supports secure, structured, data-only transfer across TCP/IP and which > locally transforms that data into a dataset that can be displayed or > printed. For the sake of the argument, lets call the data transport > mechanism "XML". Instead of the runtime containing a heavy load of > (lets call it) "desktop database" functionality it would only contain > some sort of coded buiness logic (lets call it p-code), a high speed > interpreter and a set of <bold red italic 72 point> B A S I C > </emphasis> UI components. However, I note that the UI components > provided by HTML 3/4 do not cope well with tuple based data, they do > need to be extended. > > Application components (p-code) could be distributed on a download once > - use many basis. Including any necessary (so-called) web services. > The technology exists today to enable secure application loading, data > transfer and transactional control. We (developers) need a business > logic level development environment to enable delivery of business > benefit software. > > What I am talking about, of course, is an Access with the db part > stripped out and replaced with an easy to use XML based data transfer > bottom end. However, as I will shortly expand upon, I don't think > VB/VBA/VBS/ASP are the fruit of the true vine. > > I have recently looked (very briefly) at the ruby language. If it lives > up to all its claims, my golly gosh, it's a huge step out of the current > fight with the technical level application development problems that > plague us today. There is not one current manistream development > language that truly lives up to the promises of OODD. For example, VB > doesn't inherit; C++ does not protect or garbage collect properly, Java > has non-object typeing; etc. In short, these languages are still > leaving us with buggy applications that are difficult to support in > changing business environments. Developers have to spend too much time > looking at technical difficulties rather than business logic. Look at > AccessD mail lately, if I'm not reading it at too much of an angle, the > vast majority of questions handled by the list are technical - not > business logic level issues. Or is it that we, of AccessD, are so adept > at handling business logic problems that the only problems we have are > technical. Somehow I think not. > > Hence my short query re hta. I really thought this was a fantastic step > forward in net based application taming. A client stored page that ran > on a level of the IE intfrastructure that removed the www cr*p (the bits > unnecessary to a business application) and presented a clean, albeit > very standard, interface. And, while I'm on that soapbox, who in their > right minds needs half the UI noodledust that is floating around web > based apps today. My <insert deity of choice>! If I'm looking at a > couple of hundred, or even a couple of dozen, totally similar > transactions a day I DO NOT SEE ALL THE CR*P JUST THE DATA. And this > applies whether I'm using the data as an operator or an information > consumer... > > I went to the supermarket last week. The checkouts now have decent sized > customer facing screens that list each scanned item as it gets swiped. > SUPERB! I can now see when I'm not being charged the expected price. > BUT SOME IDIOT OF A MARKETER got SOME EVEN BIGGER IDIOT OF A DEVELOPER > to use 85% of the screen to show me, randomly, either a pretty picture > of a landscape, an advertisement for something that I'm not going back > into the store to buy, or a PICTURE OF THE ITEM THAT HAS JUST BEEN > SCANNED. I just cannot comprehend the mentality that decided that I > need a picture of some (digitally enhanced) carrots rather than the name > of the item, its unit price, the units scanned and the total price. > ESPECIALLY WHEN THERE ARE SOME REAL 3-D EXTREMELY CARROT LIKE OBJECTS ON > THE BENCH IN FRONT OF ME. I HAVEN'T FORGOTTEN WHAT CARROTS LOOK LIKE > BETWEEN THE GROCERY SECTION AND THE CHECKOUT. I just cant understand > how they can come up with these timewasting, moneywasting, ABSOLUTELY > USELESS pieces of, for want of a better word, functionality. > > My bank, after two years of market surveying customers, finally did what > they were asked and replaced a java based bill payment system that took > 5 web pages and had every damn bell and whistle that the stupid > programmer could think of - including animations for God's sake - with a > simple 2 page (entry and confirmation) app that now lets us pay bills in > 15 seconds not 2 minutes. The new page has labels, textboxes and combo > boxes, two buttons and that's all. It looks 10 times neater, runs 10 > times faster and guess what - it provides 100% of the functionality > required and 0% of the "functionality" not required. The ONLY image on > the page is the bank's logo, which I will excuse. There are NO > spinners, tabs, dancing buttons, or technicolour dreamcoat iconic > (moronic) buttons asking me whether I want to get done over again today. > > I don't know how much of the supermarket chain's network bandwidth is > being used up by the pictorical polution but I'd wager it's a > significant amount. > > When the hypertext paradigm was first expounded, there were only 4 or 5 > or so widgets. If we expand that set just a bit more to give us some > easy to use row handling widgets, for example a self-populating > multicolumn list that knew which row had just been clicked, or (bliss) a > self-populating treeview............................ > > Bruce > > -----Original Message----- > From: accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com > [mailto:accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com] On Behalf Of Jim Lawrence > (AccessD) > Sent: Wednesday, 30 July 2003 3:40 PM > To: Access Developers discussion and problem solving > Subject: RE: [AccessD]OT: C# was no-ip.com > > > Hi Bruce: > > You have made some excellent points. I am current working in an Oracle > product office. The DB is Oracle but the client end is distributed, to > intranet users through an installed component called jinitiator. This > component must be first installed on each station before the users can > access the database interface. The middle-tier is of course Java. > > In order for any user to access functionality beyond > DHTML/XML/CSS/JavaScript etc. other components must be installed at the > client's station. This is the position that Java now has and .Net > framework is working towards. > > <observation mode on> > The next versions of Windows will most assuredly have .Net Frame well > installed... a very tricky position to be in seeing the current > sensitivity of competing businesses and governments, all of which will > scream 'blue murder'. MS may be placed in the uncomfortable position of > delivering and assuring compatibility of a host of competitors products, > on to it's new desktops. <observation mode off> > > A product like PHP/Perl/ColdFusion etc. can provide no more > functionality to a user than can be delivered through the common Brower > interface. (Interesting aside; Perl can be installed on virtually any > computer and can give the functionality of a super 'Free' multi-user, > multi-tasking DOS on steroids. It's binary and all the bell and whistles > are about 50MB; small by today's standards. I have it running on my > Windows98 station and it is great > fun.) > > Jim > PS I am not a anti-MS person. I personally think .Net is great but I > have to be pragmatic. > > -----Original Message----- > From: accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com > [mailto:accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com]On Behalf Of Bruce Bruen > Sent: Tuesday, July 29, 2003 9:33 PM > To: 'Access Developers discussion and problem solving' > Subject: RE: [AccessD]OT: C# was no-ip.com > > > IMHO Probably the biggest PITA about pHP is its major strength - inline > coding. There are two views held, one that PHP is a scriptiong language > that appears in an HTML file and the other that PHP is a script that has > HTML constants in it. I think both views are valid. > > That said, and to get back to the point, the strength of ASP.net is the > separation of the code and the HTML/XML/XHTML/etc. At least within the > IDE. At the end of the day the product produced by the script is a > single instance of an http transmittable document. Therein lies the > lack of concern whether PHP is OO or not - if 98% of the output is > achieveable through non-OO coding and 98% of the output is a single > instance, and very temporal, document then why impose object mentality > on it. > > Sure and enough, the server side handling of data and particularly data > updates would benefit from a reusable object language - but there you > have PEAR, which I am reliably informed is very OO. > > Drew sometime commented that he uses dll objects extensively in building > web based front ends to dbs. Foine and dandy - the PHP proponents would > rather use scripted PHP/PEAR components to achieve the same result. > > Finally, don't forget PHP produces HTML documents - viewable on browsers > whether or not the client has PHP. I have a fear that a large part of > .net is going to require 5 terrabytes of M$ componentry installed on the > client side in order to view the built pages. I was extrememly P**SS*D > off to find out that the office web controls require so much crap loaded > on the client side that they may as well just use the application > locally. > > B > > -----Original Message----- > From: accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com > [mailto:accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com] On Behalf Of Haslett, > Andrew > Sent: Wednesday, 30 July 2003 1:40 PM > To: 'Access Developers discussion and problem solving' > Subject: RE: [AccessD]OT: C# was no-ip.com > > > Sure, its implementing a couple of OO concepts, but its still a Hybrid > language. > > It doesn't support the four 'biggies' of pure OO languages like Java and > the .Net breed and cannot be considered a pure OO language. > > That said, a large majority of web coders don't know or will never use > OO principals in their applications and wiwo viewsll stick to procedural > programming, so it won't matter! > > Cheers, > Andrew > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Jim Lawrence (AccessD) [mailto:accessd at shaw.ca] > Sent: Wednesday, 30 July 2003 12:57 PM > To: Access Developers discussion and problem solving > Subject: RE: [AccessD]OT: C# was no-ip.com > > > Andrew: > > You are partly right but the current version is Object-Oriented. See the > article: http://www.devx.com/webdev/Article/10007 written by the actual > developers of PHP. > > Jim > > -----Original Message----- > From: accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com > [mailto:accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com]On Behalf Of Haslett, > Andrew > Sent: Tuesday, July 29, 2003 7:49 PM > To: 'Access Developers discussion and problem solving' > Subject: RE: [AccessD]OT: C# was no-ip.com > > > PHP is not object orientated.. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Arthur Fuller [mailto:artful at rogers.com] > Sent: Wednesday, 30 July 2003 1:42 AM > To: 'Access Developers discussion and problem solving' > Subject: RE: [AccessD]OT: C# was no-ip.com > > > I'm pretty sure that is an accurate percentage. Why? Because far and > away the most popular web server on the market is Apache. No one else is > even close. Add to that the Linux factor (almost all large sites use > Linux not IIS), the ease of combining php and Linux (and MySQL, for > data-driven sites), and the cost factor, and it all adds up to a > formidable combination. Notice that Dreamweaver MX added support for > php+mySQL in the latest rev. Php is easy to learn and is object > oriented. There are free on-line courses and stuff available, too. > > Not that I have any current clients who use this combination. Most are > small businesses and are afraid to go Linux, or even to combine Oses. > But at home I have one Linux-dedicated box and another Win2K Advanced > Server that houses an instance of both MySQL and SQL 2K, so I can run > .NET from one workstation and Apache/php/mySQL from another. > > A. > > -----Original Message----- > From: accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com > [mailto:accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com] On Behalf Of Jim Lawrence > (AccessD) > Sent: July 29, 2003 1:18 AM > To: Access Developers discussion and problem solving > Subject: RE: [AccessD]OT: C# was no-ip.com > > > Hi All: > > I have seen a recent claim, have no way to validate it but the assertion > goes as follows: PHP as a server based web language now has almost forty > percent of the general market... > > This claim seems outrageous but that would leave PHP holding the largest > single market share of that genre of products. > > Jim > > -----Original Message----- > From: accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com > [mailto:accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com]On Behalf Of Marcus, Scott > (GEAE, Contractor) > Sent: Monday, July 28, 2003 10:00 AM > To: 'Access Developers discussion and problem solving' > Subject: RE: [AccessD]OT: C# was no-ip.com > > > John, > > Thanks for your optimism on .Net. All I ever here are negative things > about MS products (which I make my living with). It is a good point you > make about being on the leading edge. I think the same way. I just get > discouraged cause very few tend to agree with that statement. It seems > that most think that software development will eventually be all off > shore. I say that moving off shore totally won't happen (small business > needs physical presence). JM2C > > Scott > > -----Original Message----- > From: jcolby at colbyconsulting.com [mailto:jcolby at colbyconsulting.com] > Sent: Monday, July 28, 2003 12:49 PM > To: Access Developers discussion and problem solving > Subject: RE: [AccessD]OT: C# was no-ip.com > > > Scott, > > >My only doubts about .Net is that I'm not seeing very many job postings > > >for > .Net developers (but allot more than Access development). > > I am seeing more and more .net openings, at least more and more "ya need > the kitchen sink and oh, by the way, ya need .net too" ads. I get the > feeling that not many companies really understand it yet - momentum. > However my feelings are that MS has spent a TON of money on developing > the concept, and are pushing .net big time. If they put their muscle > behind it, it won't be long till it's a "requirement" to get a job and I > want to be on the leading edge of this one. PLUS, the .net framework is > truly impressive in the capability it gives me "out of the box". > > >You must have read the same article as me (actually editors comments). > >I'm > leaning VB.Net first and then adding C# to my skills. Seems silly to me > that C# pulls in more money. > > Yea, it is silly considering the reality of the new .net environment. > I'm betting that it won't be long before managers start to listen to M$ > saying that any language is equally capable and stop paying more for C#. > There are still a very small handful of indirection capabilities that C# > has that VB doesn't, and if you need them then fine, go there. Otherwise > VB is probably faster to get something up and running in. > > And finally, no, my framework has no equivalents in .net for the simple > reason that my framework is about making form development in Access > easier (even more RAD). Since .net is so very different from Access, > much of what I do simply doesn't even make sense in .net. For example, > I have a function in my framework that keeps a record selector combo > synced to the form > (bound) and the form synced to the combo. It turns out that in .net if > you set the form (or a data grid) and a combo to the same dataset, > selecting a record in the combo will just cause the two things to stay > in sync (be on the same record). AFAICT, that is because the combo > actually sets a "current record" property in the dataset object. > > Another example, in my framework I want to prevent the user from moving > into a subform if the main form goes to the new record. .Net doesn't > even HAVE subforms. > > Things like that. > > I am in the process of rewriting something that would "make sense" to > port - my Sysvars. Assuming that I leave my error handlers in place, > that port is really fairly straightforward. However I don't really have > much hope of "just porting" my framework. In the end though, there is > enough work to be done making .net as "database friendly" as Access that > I am sure I will have plenty of similar projects. > > John W. Colby > www.colbyconsulting.com > > -----Original Message----- > From: accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com > [mailto:accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com]On Behalf Of Marcus, Scott > (GEAE, Contractor) > Sent: Monday, July 28, 2003 12:03 PM > To: 'Access Developers discussion and problem solving' > Subject: RE: [AccessD]OT: C# was no-ip.com > > > John, > > You must have read the same article as me (actually editors comments). > I'm leaning VB.Net first and then adding C# to my skills. Seems silly to > me that C# pulls in more money. Like you, that is why I'm going to learn > it also. Have you seen any silly job postings like "C# developer with 5 > years experience..."? > > Have you found that your Access framework already has equivalents in > .Net framework? > > I'm not far enough into .Net to have an opinion yet. I can say that if > it is similar to how Java works, I won't like it. I hear that C# is very > close to Java. > > What I've learned in VB.Net so far seems pretty straight forward. > > My only doubts about .Net is that I'm not seeing very many job postings > for .Net developers (but allot more than Access development). > > Scott > > -----Original Message----- > From: jcolby at colbyconsulting.com [mailto:jcolby at colbyconsulting.com] > Sent: Monday, July 28, 2003 11:47 AM > To: Access Developers discussion and problem solving > Subject: RE: [AccessD]OT: C# was no-ip.com > > > Scott, > > Not yet, though I think I will end up there. I'm thinking that learning > VB.Net and more importantly the .net framework FIRST will be most useful > to me. The framework is massive and being comfortable with that is a > requirement regardless of the language you then use for your > programming. > > Once that is done I will probably move to C# for the simple reason that > the polls indicate C# programmers get better money. I did a controller > project down in Mexico in a custom 'C' language so it isn't totally > foreign. > > Again though, the whole point of the .Net concept is that the framework > really provides about 90% of the functionality and it is used EXACTLY > the same regardless of the language you use. The language itself is > really a thin veneer over the top of the framework. Even things like > variables are framework objects so that any .net language can literally > pass their variables back and forth without the silly problems like you > see with VB and C not treating strings the same way. > > John W. Colby > www.colbyconsulting.com > > _______________________________________________ > AccessD mailing list > AccessD at databaseadvisors.com > http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd > Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com > > > _______________________________________________ > AccessD mailing list > AccessD at databaseadvisors.com > http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd > Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com > _______________________________________________ > AccessD mailing list > AccessD at databaseadvisors.com > http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd > Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com > > _______________________________________________ > AccessD mailing list > AccessD at databaseadvisors.com > http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd > Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com > > _______________________________________________ > AccessD mailing list > AccessD at databaseadvisors.com > http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd > Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com > > IMPORTANT - PLEASE READ ******************** > This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and may > contain information protected by law from disclosure. If you have > received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately and > delete this email from your system. No warranty is given that this email > or files, if attached to this email, are free from computer viruses or > other defects. They are provided on the basis the user assumes all > responsibility for loss, damage or consequence resulting directly or > indirectly from their use, whether caused by the negligence of the > sender or not. _______________________________________________ > AccessD mailing list > AccessD at databaseadvisors.com > http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd > Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com > > _______________________________________________ > AccessD mailing list > AccessD at databaseadvisors.com > http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd > Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com > > IMPORTANT - PLEASE READ ******************** > This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and may > contain information protected by law from disclosure. If you have > received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately and > delete this email from your system. No warranty is given that this email > or files, if attached to this email, are free from computer viruses or > other defects. They are provided on the basis the user assumes all > responsibility for loss, damage or consequence resulting directly or > indirectly from their use, whether caused by the negligence of the > sender or not. _______________________________________________ > AccessD mailing list > AccessD at databaseadvisors.com > http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd > Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com > > _______________________________________________ > AccessD mailing list > AccessD at databaseadvisors.com > http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd > Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com > > _______________________________________________ > AccessD mailing list > AccessD at databaseadvisors.com > http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd > Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com > > _______________________________________________ > AccessD mailing list > AccessD at databaseadvisors.com > http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd > Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com