• Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
  • Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!
Collapse

You are not logged in or you do not have permission to access this page. This could be due to one of several reasons:

  • You are not logged in. If you are already registered, fill in the form below to log in, or follow the "Sign Up" link to register a new account.
  • You may not have sufficient privileges to access this page. Are you trying to edit someone else's post, access administrative features or some other privileged system?
  • If you are trying to post, the administrator may have disabled your account, or it may be awaiting activation.

Previously on "What's up with the perl market?"

Collapse

  • Euro-commuter
    replied
    Originally posted by threaded
    And didn't it first come out as dBase II, there never actually ever being a dBase I?
    Correct. They thought it would sound more advanced if it was taken to be the second version.

    Leave a comment:


  • AtW
    replied
    Originally posted by zeitghost
    I remember dBase II...
    Yes, me too - in USSR they ripped it off and used in Unis as "Rebus" - the interesting thing about dBase ][ is that there was no dBase I - the guy who made it thought it would be good marketing trick to pretend it is 2nd version of the product and thus it is more reliable: no wonder Microsoft switched to versions like Windows 2000!

    Originally posted by threaded
    Made quite a bit of easy money going around and increasing the number of handles in the DOS system.ini, IIRC.
    You mean config.sys!

    Leave a comment:


  • threaded
    replied
    Originally posted by zeitghost
    It was better when it was still called Vulcan...
    And didn't it first come out as dBase II, there never actually ever being a dBase I?

    Leave a comment:


  • VectraMan
    replied
    Originally posted by Vito
    Real men don't have a clue what the heck this thread is talking about!!
    Real men wouldn't have bothered with an off the shelf solution and just implemented their own in assembler.

    Leave a comment:


  • Vito
    replied
    Originally posted by darmstadt
    Real men run DB2 UDB

    Real men don't have a clue what the heck this thread is talking about!!

    Leave a comment:


  • Euro-commuter
    replied
    Originally posted by threaded
    I remember dBase as a rip of of Retreive. Made quite a bit of easy money going around and increasing the number of handles in the DOS system.ini, IIRC. It was one of the things that taught me just how fscking useless most of these people who play at programming on PCs really are. Yet took me quite a while to realise the whole of the IT market was going to head that way: people coding stuff up without a clue to what is actually going off under the hood.
    My God, I had forgotten that. Good thing you don't have to do anything like that with Windows, it just works straight out of the box (c) Dim Prawn.

    Leave a comment:


  • Euro-commuter
    replied
    Originally posted by Board Game Geek
    Anyone remember DataEase? Or Fox Pro with it's Mount Rushmore goodness ?
    Yeah! I remember DEASE.

    Leave a comment:


  • threaded
    replied
    I remember dBase as a rip of of Retreive. Made quite a bit of easy money going around and increasing the number of handles in the DOS system.ini, IIRC. It was one of the things that taught me just how fscking useless most of these people who play at programming on PCs really are. Yet took me quite a while to realise the whole of the IT market was going to head that way: people coding stuff up without a clue to what is actually going off under the hood.

    Leave a comment:


  • Board Game Geek
    replied
    Anyone remember DataEase? Or Fox Pro with it's Mount Rushmore goodness ?

    Leave a comment:


  • thunderlizard
    replied
    My experience is limited, but I've never seen a perl scripter actually finish a project. They just kind of continue to exist in a state of fluctuting perl-scriptiness. Maybe that's why they just want permanent perl people.

    Leave a comment:


  • PRC1964
    replied
    You should go for PICK the multi-valued database that beat them all.

    Well maybe 20 years ago.

    Leave a comment:


  • AtW
    replied
    DB2 is sh1t too - IBM support is pretty much useless and you can't really do much yourself as otherwise you might invalidate their support contract: a con designed to rip you off of course.

    What really FKING pissed me off about DB2 is that stored procedures support was sh1t comparing to Sybase/MS SQL: of all the databases T-SQL is really the best, and Sybase is really gold standard of databases, pity they are going down now - just proves that being the best does not always mean being successful

    Leave a comment:


  • darmstadt
    replied
    Real men run DB2 UDB

    Leave a comment:


  • AtW
    replied
    I run Postgres for about 2 years and was deeply disappointed - it is a pile of sh1t that is extremely slow, and worst of all it requires fking vacuum to run regularly otherwise database slows down to crawl - I am not too fussy about speed, but Postgres turned out to be a crock and I used very small database with very few updates, it was practically read only, yet Postgres was getting slower and slower: ffs, it was better to reload database from scratch than to vacuum it.

    As soon as I swiched to MS SQL server all problems went way - no wonder it is based on good Sybase code, banks in the city used it a lot, not sure if they still do, but they did and there was good reason for that.

    Leave a comment:


  • portseven
    replied
    Originally posted by AtW
    Postgres is the biggest crock out there - replaced it with MS SQL server and never looked back.
    Really? Thought it was the opposite, have a few mates who really rate Postgres, lots of 'enterprise' features apparently.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X