Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!netsys!jsheese!jeffery
From: jeffery@jsheese.FIDONET.ORG (Jeff Sheese)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc
Subject: Advice needed on data bases
Keywords: databases
Message-ID: <111.2475C032@jsheese.FIDONET.ORG>
Date: 20 May 89 19:11:18 GMT
References: <31715@sri-unix.SRI.COM>
Reply-To: jeffery@jsheese.Fidonet.ORG
Followup-To: comp.sys.ibm.pc
Organization: JStek Enterprises - Frederick, MD
Lines: 25

In an article of <20 May 89 03:44:59 GMT>, markd@hpcupt1.HP.COM (Mark  
Diekhans) writes:

 >I am helping some friends improve the data management on a 286 system.
 >They current are using Q&A as a data base, it is friendly and easy for 
 >them to use, but we run into a lot of problems because Q&A does not
 >have a programming language.  So its time to look at other data bases.
 >I don't spend much time working with PC, so I really don't have a got
 >idea of whats what in PC data bases.  Can anyone give some input on 
 >alternatives, such as DBASE III or IV, RBASE, etc.

[opinion mode on]
If you want a powerful programming language, use DBASE 3+.  If you want an  
easy user interface, use RBASE for DOS.  When the final code is compiled for  
each, using the supplied compilers and application generators, there's not  
that much difference.  If you might want to modify the code generated and  
recompile the source, DBASE language is better structured.
[opinion mode off]
 
--  
Jeff Sheese - via FidoNet node 1:109/116
UUCP: ...!netsys!jsheese!jeffery
ARPA: jeffery@jsheese.FIDONET.ORG
(I am sole owner.  My opinions represent my company.)
(Send all flames to null@jsheese.Fidonet.ORG)