Re: Just one more anecdote

"Bill H" <notme_at_bogus.com> wrote in message news:w6edndWb3oKcLWDfRVn-ig_at_comcast.com...
> Dawn:
>
> I'm thinking it's not just the dbms. The hypothesis that the complex,
> tiered, development model is the culprit here is an excellent fit for the
> facts in this case. In addition, it is an excellent predictor of future
> complex, tiered, development projects in the future.
>
> A RDBMS has its limitations but I don't think it's fatal. True, one of
the
> more flexible DBMS models will make the development less costly (easier)
and
> thus more successful, but not for the suspected reasons. I believe the
> reason is because the flexible DBMS models incorporate tiers and simplify
> the development process.
>
> A person who is completely familiar with payroll will develop a far more
> stable, flexible, and cost effective payroll package given the appropriate
> tools than a technologist who can manipulate tools that have no
relationship
> to the payroll development environment. The flexible DBMS models contain
a
> large amount of development tools and simplicity into their model.
>
> Developing a computing solution is really a 95% solution...each component
> performs optimally 95% of the time. The more components used to build a
> solution the less stable it becomes. The R&R software writeoff is a prime
> example of this business and computing dilema.
>
> It is a far better thing to consolidate development environments to make
> them manageable, and useful, to business people familiar with business
> problems than to break the development process into multiple tiers and
> components so the development process becomes a nightmare of competing
skill
> sets, DBMS components that need specialty administrators, set theory
> extrapolation, network specialists that can barely keep the computing
> environment communicating, etc, etc, etc. :-)
>
> Bill
>

Very well put, Bill.

The hypothesis that you set forth has more going for it, given the facts of the case, than the hypothesis that the nasty old RDBMS led otherwise competent IT professionals down the wide road that leads to hell. I've been following this newsgroup for a couple of years now, and it's always the same drumbeat: IMS was ok, but DB2 was horrible. Pick was real good, but Oracle was horrible. MUMPS was good, but Rdb/VMS was horrible.

Dawn is just going to have to get used to the fact that Codd and Date didn't pull a gigantic hoax on the IT industry over a thirty five year time span. She can't learn what's good about the RDM from this group, but that doesn't mean that the RDM isn't good. Received on Sat Aug 13 2005 - 18:05:26 CEST