Re: Oracle sucks on NT, was Re: 8.5 OPINION

From: Robin Quasebarth <robinq_at_data-pointnospam.com>
Date: 1998/12/12
Message-ID: <3672B70C.5313AE9E_at_data-pointnospam.com>#1/1


Eugene Fan wrote:

> Robin Quasebarth wrote:
> >
> > Hmmm, so you don't like anything that you have used. I have developed some
> > incredible things with Dev2k. Wonder why you aren't getting rave results?
>
> Perhaps you're overstating your accomplishments? :)

Nope....damn, I'm good! (I take after my son. That is his line!)!

> > I have had success with "quick and dirty" as well a 'complex and clean.'
>
> Want to move to the Washington DC area and come work for us? :)

[Quoted] Nope, I am a California girl through and through.

> > However, my users have not had problems using the .fmx
> > files and FRUN. I do remember not being able to open multilple apps (Oracle or
> > not) well on the AST when it was Windows 3.1 even though it had plenty of RAM until
> > someone did some high-mem dinking. Then it was amazing. I wonder why you are
> > having so many problems and I am not.
>
> Selective memory?
>
> > I now have an HP Kayak with 256 RAM.
>
> Is that all you need for a Oracle development PC?
> Gee, what were we thinking with only 64?

Don't need that much. That is just how the Kayak came. The PO required 128 of RAM. I still have to fire up the AST (which not has 90 mgs of RAM) and it works just fine. I don't think I would trust 64 since the OS is such a pig. Have you ever compared how little RAM a Mac OS takes and it is so much more elegant and graceful?

> > But some of my users have only 32.
>
> Just 32? I remember in the early years of our project when we
> were still using Forms 4.0 and our app had to run on a 386 with
> 8MB RAM and Win 3.1. That was not a pretty sight. Fortunately,
> our clients upgraded their hardware along with the rest of the
> world, so that requirement became moot.

Rememeber the OS RAM reqs and that my users usually have Word, Excel and possibly 3-4 other apps running at any given time. I usually have about 6-10 apps running when I work.

> > > >While NT deserves blame for not being robust enough to completely
> > > >contain Oracle's memory hogging and leaking habits, that
> > > >does not exonerate Oracle from committing those sins in the first.
> >
> > Oracle could smooth out the edges a bit but Dev2k is a very powerful tool if you
> > have powerful ideas. rq
>
> "Smooth out the edges a bit"? That's an understatement.
> In our recent Developer 2K, Release 2.1, I can recount off the
> top of my head:
>
> Forms Builder 5.0
> a. Menu option to search and replace text in all PL/SQL program
> units causes GPF. It has NEVER done anything else for me.
> Does the same to everyone else in our workgroup.

I use it all the time with no GPFs.

> Reports 3.0
> .rep's generated against one database instance does not run
> against a different instance having the identical table schema.
> This problem was corrected by applying the August Dev 2K patch.

I do that too, all the time with no problem. My Dev and Prod have identical table schema.

> I'm convinced Dev 2K R 2.1 is NOT a quality release, that it's rushed
> to market like too many other software titles these days.

I agree that Oracle never quite finished the tool before releasing but I still love it. You should have seen the power of moving my app to the web using forms I developed several years ago. I was amazed and had to give Oracle a few points to offset my complaints. With that, we are finally able to positively justify getting rig of lots of VB crap around here cost so much to develop correctly when hitting on an Oracle db in order to handle all the stuff Dev2k does automatically.

> But it's apparent from our exchange that we won't change each other's
> minds. But if you judged Windows with same lattitude you show to
> Dev 2K, then Windows isn't so bad, is it? What's an occasional
> BSOD or a little memory mismanagement between friends, right?
> Just a few edges to be smoothed out by Micro$oft, right?

Except that Windows is supposed to be the OS....the foundation of it all. The OS should be the strongest feature to support the structure. rq Received on Sat Dec 12 1998 - 00:00:00 CET

Original text of this message