Re: Big Forms 4.5 Projects?

From: kpatel <kpatel_at_gmu.edu>
Date: 1995/08/21
Message-ID: <41aqmu$dtl_at_portal.gmu.edu>#1/1


Rob Ryan <rryan_at_interramp.com> wrote:
>
> Having seen Forms 4.0 projects in operation, I'm a little
> concerned about a client who is potentially embarking upon a
> Forms 4.5 (Developer/2000) project. Yes, I've heard that Forms
> 4.5 is much better, but I'd really appreciate hearing from
> someone on a large 4.5 project that Forms stands up to
> enterprise projects. Anyone out there who can provide Forms 4.5
> success stories or horror stories?
>
> -- Rob
>

Hi,
  You can consider our project a fairly big one. We are implementing all ORACLE solutions for NIH. The current converted data from the legacy system approches to 8GB, with some more data to be converted. The table sizes run into millions of records.

  We are using Des2K, Dev2K, Graphics, Browser etc. Eventully this project will support more than 2000 users. My project (First business area in the overall project) will be in production very soon.

  We are in Beta program, so we used beta version of the products for development in the beggining. Even the initial production releases of the products were loaded with bugs. But with Dev2k release it is much more stable. Dev2k release 1.1 is available, and it has lot of bug fixes.

  For enterprise wide tools you look for qualities like, scalability code management, application partitioning etc. In my opiniion the tools do an excellent job at this. We were not able to take full advantage of the code generation of Des2k, because the tool was not available on time.

  I think these tools minus bugs can be very valuable set for the enterprise wide developement.

  Contact me if you need any more info.

Kalpesh S. Patel

kpatel_at_row-HQ_at_smtpgtwy.row.com

R.O.W. Sciences, Inc.

301-294-5590 (T)
301-294-5401 (F)

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Standard Disclaimer apply.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Received on Mon Aug 21 1995 - 00:00:00 CEST

Original text of this message