In our environment we don't use QU1 at all, we use the green screen
based SEQUEL product in a limited manner and we use SPSS (Showcase)
across the board. Early on I had concerns with SEQUEL client
functionality and pricing. Not sure about the functionality today (I'm
sure it is a very functional product - it just is no longer on our
radar) but am definitely more concerned about the pricing since it was
acquired.

We allow users to hit the production data but we emphasize the data
warehouse tremendously. Joinless queries. And now over time some of
our query process is going to canned queries in our portal environment.

I would say we went to an environment where the users created and ran
most thing and that over time that has become somewhat centralized.
Enterprise reporting - one app, one run time, distribute results to
multiple end users and customers. Portal - one app, run on demand,
results shown to a specific user.

In the end I think we will end up with a blend and that seems to be a
good fit for our customers. The biggest functional change we now want
is to not require a client product. Create, run, and output to the
browser is the way for us.

Michael Crump

Manager, Computing Services
Saint-Gobain Containers, Inc.
1509 S. Macedonia Ave.
Muncie, IN 47302
765.741.7696
765.741.7012 f

Make it too tough for the enemy to get in and you can't get out.
This email and its attachments may be confidential and are intended
solely for the use of the individual to whom it is addressed. Any views
or opinions expressed are solely those of the author and do not
necessarily represent those of Saint-Gobain. If it did, it would be
folded, mutilated, watered down, politically corrected, and would show
up a week later if at all. If you are not the intended recipient of
this email and its attachments, you must take no action based upon them,
nor must you copy or show them to anyone.
Please contact the sender if you believe you have received this email in
error.

-----Original Message-----
From: midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Paul Nelson
Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2007 8:45 AM
To: 'Midrange Systems Technical Discussion'
Subject: RE: IBM Commitment (was: Q/400 to Web Query)

Yes, with the caveat that that there are limitations to the tool, and
that
their queries will not be allowed to eat the system. In most cases,
they've
come back to my original suggestion that I can build them a "data
warehouse"
and they can run queries to their heart's desire over that.

SEQUEL has a function that will permit a user to build templates for
later
use.

Paul Nelson
Cell 708-670-6978
Office 512-392-2577
nelsonp@xxxxxxxxxxxxx


-----Original Message-----
From: midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of rob@xxxxxxxxx
Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2007 7:33 AM
To: Midrange Systems Technical Discussion
Subject: RE: IBM Commitment (was: Q/400 to Web Query)

Have to understand your frame of mind Paul. Would you let users, or
even
a power user, use Query/400? Some IT staff won't for a number of
reasons:
- Explaining to the users that you have to join this file to that file
and
add this field to that field, etc is too time consuming and IT refuses
to
build a decent view or join logical. (Though the same IT staff would
think nothing of preloading "metadata" into a GUI tool - go figure.)
- The users should use the existing programs or request new ones.
They've
seen users make faulty business decisions based on query results that
the
programs wouldn't have led them to do.


Rob Berendt

This thread ...

Replies:

Follow On AppleNews
Return to Archive home page | Return to MIDRANGE.COM home page

This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2019 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].