Re: Should we be using NewEra

David W Chan wrote: > = > "Alan M Cook" <alancook@global.co.za> wrote: > = > >We have to develop a mayor application, which will take several years,= and > >we need a reliable supported development tool which will be maintained= and > >enhanced for a number of years. We are not in the research business. = Our > >vendor must safe guard our investment by providing transition paths fo= r new > >emerging technologies. Peace of mind is very essential part of the de= al. > >For us using the best database without a proper toolkit is like eating= > >gourmet soup without a spoon =96 not enjoyable! > = > >I am afraid that we might have reach the end of a road. Am I overreac= ting, > >or is it time to change vendors before investing more money in a mayor= > >project which can potentially affect the life of many people? > = > Despite what Informix say, I think NewEra is not the right product to > use. If you want to stick to Informix products then have a look at > Data Director for Java which is effectively NewEra for Java. It uses > the same Window Painter and editor (Codewright) as NE v3. Even the > Visual Class Library is similar. And it costs a lot less than NewEra. > = Hmmm, I would tend to disagree. You already have a sunk cost in to N.E. = (If I remember the original post.) While I am not a fan of N.E, its mainly due to the braindead class = libraries, not the language per se. The problem is that there is already a pool of expertise in N.E = which would have to relearn OO technologies when going to Java. Plus, there are some things that Java is too immature for. (Read: Java is not a proven technology.) =46rom the poster's comment, I don't think that they will be happy with any tools currently on the market. Perhaps I am reading too much in to the comments, but it appears that there are other issues which are driving the decision to question N.E. I would hazzard a guess that there are management issues which are not being stated. First and formost, one must get over the idea that there is this magical OO tool which can be bought for $5.00 and do everything including slice bread. This is the issue of cost. I mean, in the real world, UNIX, vi is free. (It comes standard with UNIX.) = Do you know how many times I have heard developers slamming = vi? But hey, you get what you pay for, and it does its job well. (Beats the hell out of ed or cat ;-) My point is that there are low cost options in tools, however, don't bitch when they don't do everything and their limitations may have serious drawbacks! > But if you go down the Java route, you should investigate all the > major development environments. I think that Java is mature enough to > use now. Have a look at www.eaglestardirect.co.uk. This is a Java > applet which does online motor insurance quotes and allows you to buy > it online as well. > = There are a lot of Java stuff around. The problem is that most tools and programmers still view Java in terms of applets. There is much more to Java and its potential. However, Java still lacks in certain areas which are critical in speed and distributed objects. > We have built a couple of large NewEra systems but we now use Forte > and Java. Forte is expensive but the distributed object aspects of > the product are way ahead of the others and if you need that > capability then Forte is cheaper than writing it yourself. If Java or > Forte are not what you want then you should probably use Delphi. > = Well, maybe. Truth be told, the most mature, stable, OO product is = Openstep. We are talking 12 years of OO development. Strong object hierarchy, and does a lot of things right. While cost may be an issue, in the larger = scheme of things, its a minor point. As far as being way ahead on distributed objects, they wrote the book. :-) Again all the tool recommendations you have mention, lock you in to a Microsloth solution, and do not allow for fast reliable server side or distributed objects. Sorry to get on my soapbox, but I just spent 2.5 hours with a group of people who = were looking at OO tools and development. I had to agree with their choice of = Openstep. Its Mach/NT/Solaris/HP-UX based now, and Corba Complient. Also = did I mention that its a key feature of Rhapsody? Now you are talking = platform independence unlike a Redmond. WA. Company would want you to believe their product is! ;-) Please also keep in mind that the Financial Industry has embraced Openstep/Web Objects. Why? Because it does the job, does it well, and the costs can be justified. (If only Informix would have the same attitude towards doing a Linux port :-) Just a few rants and raves from your favorite, albeit excentric Uncle! = -Mikey -- = #include <std_disclaimer.h> /* Mike Segel (MS385) */ #include <No_Spam.h> #ifdef OFFENDED_BY_CONTENT The author takes no responsibility for this post. = Any resembalence to a coherent rational thought is purely coincidence. -The Management. #endif ***************************** Due to AGIS's Refusal to Act Responsibly = We are blocking all of their domains at the packet level. This block will exist until AGIS modifies their policies to = conform to existing RFCs and net community standards. We encourage all ISPs and domain holders to do the same. *****************************