someone@microsoft.com
-
must have a weird sense of humour. Why on earth are they shipping yet another major release of Visual FoxPro - the worlds most retarded DBMS/Toolkit ever!? Nobody in their right mind begins a new project based on DBF-databases. There are relational databases out there which are as fast as FoxPro or can be tuned to be nearly as fast. Come one Microsoft, this joke aint funny anymore... ok? Dump the FoxPro team and put them on something useful instead like MSSQL. -- standing so tall, the ground behind no trespassers, on every floor a garden swing, and another door she makes it clear, that everything is hers A place of abode, not far from here, Ms. Van de Veer
-
must have a weird sense of humour. Why on earth are they shipping yet another major release of Visual FoxPro - the worlds most retarded DBMS/Toolkit ever!? Nobody in their right mind begins a new project based on DBF-databases. There are relational databases out there which are as fast as FoxPro or can be tuned to be nearly as fast. Come one Microsoft, this joke aint funny anymore... ok? Dump the FoxPro team and put them on something useful instead like MSSQL. -- standing so tall, the ground behind no trespassers, on every floor a garden swing, and another door she makes it clear, that everything is hers A place of abode, not far from here, Ms. Van de Veer
Jörgen Sigvardsson wrote: yet another major release of Visual FoxPro - the worlds most retarded DBMS/Toolkit ever!? Well, as an ex-FoxPro programmer (MSDOS versions only) all I can say is that "back in the day" FoxPro rocked!!!! It blew the doors off dBase and Paradox! FoxPro's "Rushmore technology" is still used today on some much bigger databases as far as I know. Sure, by today's standards it has certainly lost it's luster, but I'll never forget writing a query on a Foxpro app that ran almost 200 times faster on a little 80386 than a similar query on our big iron. Ahhh.... the memories!! ;) Mike Mullikin :beer:
Well, I'm sure I'd feel much worse if I weren't under such heavy sedation. - David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap
-
Jörgen Sigvardsson wrote: yet another major release of Visual FoxPro - the worlds most retarded DBMS/Toolkit ever!? Well, as an ex-FoxPro programmer (MSDOS versions only) all I can say is that "back in the day" FoxPro rocked!!!! It blew the doors off dBase and Paradox! FoxPro's "Rushmore technology" is still used today on some much bigger databases as far as I know. Sure, by today's standards it has certainly lost it's luster, but I'll never forget writing a query on a Foxpro app that ran almost 200 times faster on a little 80386 than a similar query on our big iron. Ahhh.... the memories!! ;) Mike Mullikin :beer:
Well, I'm sure I'd feel much worse if I weren't under such heavy sedation. - David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap
Well back in the days of MSDOS and 80386, FoxPro was great, I'm sure. But comparing it to todays standards it's laughable. I mean, the indexes in FoxPro is horrible! Sure, it's fast, but programming it is just annoying. And the language actually makes VB look like a programming language. I'm not putting down FoxPro as hard as it sounds. It did serve a purpose way back. But why continue it today? There are older versions of FoxPro which can be used if there's a sudden need for targetting old MSDOS systems. It does not make sense, to me at least, to put money onto something like that. -- standing so tall, the ground behind no trespassers, on every floor a garden swing, and another door she makes it clear, that everything is hers A place of abode, not far from here, Ms. Van de Veer
-
must have a weird sense of humour. Why on earth are they shipping yet another major release of Visual FoxPro - the worlds most retarded DBMS/Toolkit ever!? Nobody in their right mind begins a new project based on DBF-databases. There are relational databases out there which are as fast as FoxPro or can be tuned to be nearly as fast. Come one Microsoft, this joke aint funny anymore... ok? Dump the FoxPro team and put them on something useful instead like MSSQL. -- standing so tall, the ground behind no trespassers, on every floor a garden swing, and another door she makes it clear, that everything is hers A place of abode, not far from here, Ms. Van de Veer
A couple of questions for you: 1. How much hard disk space does an MSSQL installation take versus FoxPro? 2. How much memory does MSSQL use compared to FoxPro? 3. How big are the respective database files of MSSQL and FoxPro? 4. How long does it take to download a program using an MSSQL database versus FoxPro? (Assume user does not have either database software installed so you must provide it.) 5. Compare and contrast the costs of an application based on MSSQL and FoxPro. Assume user does not own either database.
-
A couple of questions for you: 1. How much hard disk space does an MSSQL installation take versus FoxPro? 2. How much memory does MSSQL use compared to FoxPro? 3. How big are the respective database files of MSSQL and FoxPro? 4. How long does it take to download a program using an MSSQL database versus FoxPro? (Assume user does not have either database software installed so you must provide it.) 5. Compare and contrast the costs of an application based on MSSQL and FoxPro. Assume user does not own either database.
Ed Gadziemski wrote: 1. How much hard disk space does an MSSQL installation take versus FoxPro? Lots more Ed Gadziemski wrote: 2. How much memory does MSSQL use compared to FoxPro? Lots more Ed Gadziemski wrote: 3. How big are the respective database files of MSSQL and FoxPro? There's probably a near-constant ratio between the two. Don't know what the ratio is, though. Ed Gadziemski wrote: 4. How long does it take to download a program using an MSSQL database versus FoxPro? (Assume user does not have either database software installed so you must provide it.) Well, MSDE could be deployed instead of MSSQL. It would still be a bit bigger though. Ed Gadziemski wrote: 5. Compare and contrast the costs of an application based on MSSQL and FoxPro. Assume user does not own either database. MSSQL app would be more expensive. Look, I didn't say that one should exchange FoxPro for MSSQL. I just said the FoxPro developers (those who develop the product FoxPro), could be relocated to something useful within Microsoft - such as MSSQL. For a desktop application today, I would much rather recommend using Jet/Access - either as a VB/Office-app or VB/MFC/ATL app using the ADO/OLEDB drivers. FoxPro is not productive anymore for anything other than simple guestbooks on a website (personal oppinion). If you still want a low footprint for embedded systems for example, then there are better alternatives such as CodeBase - http://www.sequiter.com/[^]. It handles most dBase-formats (including FoxPro) and is quite fast. I've worked with dBase-style databases for a year and my personal belief is that it's utter crap and belongs in the past. But that's just my personal oppinion. :) -- standing so tall, the ground behind no trespassers, on every floor a garden swing, and another door she makes it clear, that everything is hers A place of abode, not far from here, Ms. Van de Veer
-
must have a weird sense of humour. Why on earth are they shipping yet another major release of Visual FoxPro - the worlds most retarded DBMS/Toolkit ever!? Nobody in their right mind begins a new project based on DBF-databases. There are relational databases out there which are as fast as FoxPro or can be tuned to be nearly as fast. Come one Microsoft, this joke aint funny anymore... ok? Dump the FoxPro team and put them on something useful instead like MSSQL. -- standing so tall, the ground behind no trespassers, on every floor a garden swing, and another door she makes it clear, that everything is hers A place of abode, not far from here, Ms. Van de Veer
Didn't Microsoft buy FoxPro to kill it so Access could take over the world ? I suspect the fact that it was not in .NET means they wanted to kill it and are now pressured to do it. There are still FoxPro jobs out there.... Christian No offense, but I don't really want to encourage the creation of another VB developer. - Larry Antram 22 Oct 2002 Hey, at least Logo had, at it's inception, a mechanical turtle. VB has always lacked even that... - Shog9 04-09-2002 Again, you can screw up a C/C++ program just as easily as a VB program. OK, maybe not as easily, but it's certainly doable. - Jamie Nordmeyer - 15-Nov-2002