Brian, I respect your disagreement, and - to a point - disagree with it. You are correct we have a plethora of connectivity options, but I disagree that UO is the best connector bar none. You are coming from Universe, I am coming from Unidata, and from Unidata, UO has historically been a mess, especially the delay on first connect issue. Maybe these issues are being corrected/updated/improved, but I haven't seen it yet. And perhaps UV works better with UO than Unidata?
Regarding the XML tools in Unidata, again, it's a mess - at least in terms of the XDom. You can force it to work by horking up the namespaces in the XML, but even following the examples in the documentation results in utter failure a lot of times. Much attention is given to the dot-net crowd, and I don't disparage that in the least but what about us in the PHP and Python camp? Whether the vendors wish to admit it or not, there is an ever expanding world beyond the walls of Microsoft wrecknologies, or even Java for that matter. So yes, our future is largely the product of our ambition, but I disagree that we have the best connectors available. -K On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 2:38 PM, Brian Leach <br...@brianleach.co.uk> wrote: > Kevin > > >The only thing that > >I see holding us back is the maturity of our connectivity options > > It's not often I disagree with you, but here I must.. > > We don't lack mature interfaces. We have UO.Net; UOJ; web services - now > both XML and JSON; WebDE - not to mention third party alternatives. Without > even mentioning OleDb, ODBC, JDBC, ADO.Net .. > > I've been programming Windows since before Microsoft bought VB, most of my > work is in Windows or Web and I earn my crust on both U2 and SQL Server. In > my limited time I've used VB, Delphi, C#, PHP, ASP, ASP.NET and even java > - > urgh - all with U2. > > With that in mind I have to say that UniObjects is the best API I have ever > worked with, bar none. It offers a clean, fast interface that other models > just can't compete with and for any business logic the U2 subroutine is > king. Give me U2 basic and UO or WebDE over the likes of ADO.NET and SQL > any > day, however you dress it up. > > There is no reason other than lack of ambition for U2 applications to look > old. The technology is there, and has been there for a decade. Let's stop > talking it down. > > Brian > > > > _______________________________________________ > U2-Users mailing list > U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org > http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users > -- -Kevin http://www.PrecisOnline.com _______________________________________________ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
