Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!lll-winken!xanth!aiko From: aiko@cs.odu.edu (John K Hayes) Newsgroups: comp.databases Subject: dBASE IV again - a reply to a response Message-ID: <9467@xanth.cs.odu.edu> Date: 11 Jul 89 15:32:42 GMT Reply-To: aiko@cs.odu.edu (John K Hayes) Organization: Old Dominion University; Norfolk, Virginia USA Lines: 62 The following is a reply to Kieth Broussard who responded in defense of Ashton Tate to a previous posting of mine about the flaws of dBASE IV. To: Keith Broussard Subject: Re: Re^2: dBASE IV - is this for real? I think you're a little confused. I am not some person who has just started using dBASE last week, decided it was garbage and then went on a WARNING SPREE. I have been been using dBASE since '85. I started with dBASE II. This was a very annoying thing to program in because of its severe limitations as far as programming go. It did take care of a whole lot of things to do with database file management, however, that I then did not have to concern myself with. So I put up with the limitations. Then came dBASE III+. This was a vast improvement over dBASE II. Most of the limitations of dBASE II were eliminated or at least expanded upon. I was very pleased with the upgrade from dBASE II to III+. Then I began using Clipper which expands a bit on III+ and speeds things up immensely (plus I'm actually using a bonafide REAL compiler - you see, I spent 5 years in school getting a degree which is mostly concerned with programming using compilers). Then, not too long ago, along comes dBASE IV. After seeing the vast i improvements III+ made over II, I was excited about it. Someone upstairs had a copy of it so I went up and had a look. It LOOKED very nice. As it is very hard to get a complete feel for a new package until you actually start using it for a while, all I saw was this superficial improvements to the way it LOOKED and I did not notice that it was actually a slowed down heap of garbage - so I went ahead and bought it. Instead of making vast improvements over III+, it seems that with IV Ashton-Tate has taken a package that ran very well, reasonably efficient for an interpreted system but one that left a little to be desired as far as asthetics, and totally transformed it into a package that IS more asthetically pleasing to the eye but is NOT EFFICIENT. This is clearly MIND-BOGGLING. How could they be serious????? I am not saying that there are bugs in the system (although there may be few - I have seen none). I am saying that the system itself is flawed and they knew this when they released it. It is flawed in that it is a step BACKWARD from III+, not in that it does not work. That is why for me, already having III+, IV is totally worthless. The screens are very pretty, but waiting SO LONG for EVERY LITTLE THING makes me want to smash the thing to little bits and burn the documentation. And that logo screen and license agreement is just too much. I go into and out of dBASE all day long - I really don't have time to look at that idiotic crap. This may sound trivial to you - but I do not have 20-30 seconds to stare at that BS every time I want to go into dBASE. It makes me lose my train of thought and it's just goddamned irritating. Can you tell me this - can you name ONE IMPROVEMENT IV made over III+???? -- ---{john hayes} Old Dominion University; Norfolk, Virginia USA internet: aiko@cs.odu.edu Home: (804) 622-8348 Work: (804) 460-2241 ext 134 <++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++> Are you a Have or a Have_Not? Because if you're a Have_Not, you've probably had it; whereas, if you're a Have, you've probably got it and are going to give it away at some point in the future! --- The Clash <++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++>