Van wrote:
>
> Michael Meltzer wrote:
> >
> > thought the list might want to know, this has been picked up by a trade
> > magazine, I got a copy of "interactive week" in sail mail today. (In my best
> I'd have never caught that but for the list. Thanks. Wonder what the audience
> for that site is. Also, was particularly intrigued by the "Portal out of the
-------------------
Just a few facts for the list drawn from my dusty memory...
1. Ziff-Davis is the largest technical publishing house
2. I think Iter@ctive Week started around 1994, and was
the first rag to really cover the Net explosion
3. In the first days of Unix on a PC, Progress was one
of the big four DB's, which were:
- Informix
- Empress
- Unify
- Progress
4. These RDB's were all ported from mini's, their
bread and butter were DEC/DG/Prime/Harris etc
Oracle was just getting started.
5. Informix won that niche quickly, as it had a very
good port to Xenix/286.
6. The only good Unix that ran well on the 286 was
Xenix. Some of you may be unaware that Microsoft
developed that Unix port, and Microsoft's ads
at the time read "Xenix is Unix, only better".
7. The only other DB's available at the time for PC's were
INGRES and Postgres (which was a different
animal then, research oriented) and these
were bears to get working. The poor man's
Unix at the time was from Microport, $99
on about 20 floppies
8. Progress "withdrew" to selling their engine to
third party developers, typically large
industrial programs, such as SiteLine,
that would control an entire industrial
manufacturing process.
9. Progress is a very good database, and I think
it is like UniVerse, non-first normal,
with multiple entry fields per record
(ARRAY things).
It is rank speculation upon my part, so do not take
as gospel, but it would seem to me that Progress needs
to have some kind of lighter-weight product. I have
a bit of experience with trying to use some data from
Progress across Net for web work along with MySQL, but Progress
is not "designed for the Web" where things like
connection build-up and tear-down are critical.
It is my belief that the Progress web interface tools
have not been too successful.
Given the above, I can see the needs and thinking of
Progress management wishing to have a relationship with
MySQL. Customers need industrial-strength features
such as row-locking before it can even be considered
for mission critical requirements. I think this is
what they wish to ultimately do, bring these extra
facilities to MySQL to make a robust product. As
much as I love MySQL, I would not step into an
X-ray scanner that had MySQL underneath. It just
isn't designed for that kind of thing. MySQL's
excellence is, for the moment, in other domains.
Making dynamic web sites is "easy" with MySQL,
but the nature of the Web itself is forgiving,
completely non-critical. I would speculate that
98 percent of the code written with MySQL does
not even check error returns and do something sensible
with it. It is just not necessary. for the web,
and sloppy coding is the "norm". I certainly do
it...
_jef
--
Justin Farnsworth
Eye Integrated Communications
321 South Evans - Suite 203
Greenville, NC 27858 | Tel: (252) 353-0722
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Before posting, please check:
http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual)
http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive)
To request this thread, e-mail <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To unsubscribe, e-mail <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
