RE: ODBC (was RE: Green screen - it's time is over )

Joe,

'Scuse me for butting into this discussion.

But you wrote "Nothing to sell.  I actually do this out of the kindness of
my heart, hard to believe as that may be."

You have a sharp "tongue" in some of your replies, but I've seen posts that
have been a lot harsher, too.

But I don't think anyone's gonna disagree if I "categorically state" you
gotta heart like Rocky.  Never seen anyone imply otherwise...

jt


> -----Original Message-----
> From: midrange-l-admin@midrange.com
> [mailto:midrange-l-admin@midrange.com]On Behalf Of Joe Pluta
> Sent: Sunday, November 18, 2001 4:39 AM
> To: midrange-l@midrange.com
> Subject: RE: ODBC (was RE: Green screen - it's time is over )
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Brad Jensen
>
> I say:
> > The code that defines the ODBC connector is on the client.  The
> > code for the server is on the host.
>
> You say:
> > Well if you database connection is on the web server, and the
> > client is a web browser, your problem is gone.
>
> But in your next email you say:
> > ODBC is client/server.  Without client/server, there is no use for
> > ODBC.
>
> You are now just arguing to make sure you don't agree with me.  This
> conversation seems to be reaching the conclusion of its usefulness.
>
>
> > Well, actually the impression you are giving me is that you are
> > attacking straw dogs trying to get us to ask what your wonderful
> > answer to all this is.
>
> Did that at the beginning.  In fact, did it years ago.  It's called
> message-based client/server code.  Nothing to sell.  I actually
> do this out
> of the kindness of my heart, hard to believe as that may be.
>
>
> > > over 85% of the application code WOULD NOT
> > > HAVE REQUIRED A SINGLE CHANGE.
> >
> > Sure, and all the date calculatiosn would have worked fine.... I
> > don't think so.
>
> You're past the point of rational discussion, and now you're just going to
> disagree with every point, right?  I said 85%.  Do you think more than 15%
> of programs had date calculations?  What would your estimate be?
> Actually,
> far less than 15% had date calculations - more had date COMPARISONS rather
> than date calculations, but even so those were less than 15%.  How do I
> know?  My product, Focus/2000, was used to convert hundreds of systems
> worldwide.
>
>
> > > In a server environment, you could simply change the server.  It
> > would
> > > perform the totalling internally, put the total quantity shipped
> > in the
> > > original field of the message, AND NO APPLICATION PROGRAM WOULD
> > CHANGE.
> >
> > OH MY GOODNESS.
> >
> > Only people are already doing that by putting the logic at the web
> > server level, so what's the big deal?
>
> Yeah, you're past the point of discussion.  End of conversation.
>
>
> > Okay, please tell us about your wonderful solution. I thought it
> > wasn't a server , I thought it was middleware on Intel between an
> > AS/400 server and a client. Not so?
>
> Final point: I don't have a client/server product, Brad.  I just design
> architecture, and try to make sure people don't do stupid things when
> designing systems.
>
> _______________________________________________
> This is the Midrange Systems Technical Discussion (MIDRANGE-L)
> mailing list
> To post a message email: MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
> visit: http://lists.midrange.com/cgi-bin/listinfo/midrange-l
> or email: MIDRANGE-L-request@midrange.com
> Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
> at http://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l.
>