Re: Odd question

From: Mark C. Stock <mcstockX_at_Xenquery>
Date: Fri, 7 Jul 2006 15:54:32 -0400
Message-ID: <asOdnQJhEOtlJjPZnZ2dnUVZ_tSdnZ2d@comcast.com>

"Frank van Bortel" <frank.van.bortel_at_gmail.com> wrote in message news:e8mcbv$tgf$2_at_news6.zwoll1.ov.home.nl...
: sybrandb schreef:
: > sigdock wrote:
: >> sybrandb wrote:
: >> Just for fun.... I've got Oracle 4 already working... :-)))
: >>
: You cheat - it's a downloadable VMware image.
:
: >> Really? Forms 2.0 can work with Oracle10g ???
: >>
: >>> --
: >>> Sybrand Bakker
: >>> Senior Oracle DBA
: >
: >
: > Geez, Forms 2.0 wasn't application, that was a nightmare. Even Forms
: > 2.3 was still a nightmare.
: >
: >
: As was 3.0, 4.0, 5.0, 6.0 and 9i Release 1.
: 2.4 was reasonable, as was 4.5
:
: --
: Regards,
: Frank van Bortel
:
: Top-posting is one way to shut me up...

4.5?!?!?!???!?!??!????!??!?!?!

Wasn't that their first attempt at a GUMMY -- er, I mean GUI? IIRC, that's that one that caused me to actually use MS-Access for a front end.

3.0 was actually my favorite as far as productivity (INP files and spread-tables in the designer), 5.0+ became reasonable but the switch to property-sheet was a real pain

++ mcs

++ mcs Received on Fri Jul 07 2006 - 14:54:32 CDT