Re: So what's null then if it's not nothing?

michael_at_preece.net wrote:
> Frank Hamersley wrote:

>>michael_at_preece.net wrote:
[..]
>>What's ridiculous is citing a limitation in the number of atoms within >>the known universe to invalidate a model you prefer not to accept.

No comment?

>><OT>Please humour me - if Pick is so much better please explain why in
>>30 years it hasn't smashed all competing products to oblivion?
>>
>>In doing so I suggest you don't rely on the "inadequate funds for
>>marketing" or other circumstance arguments.  Surely its superior
>>handling of NULL (as one of the major bones of contention in the common
>>SQL offerings) is so compelling that in the years it has had plenty of
>>opportunity to dominate.  To my knowledge it hasn't - at best it appears
>>to be an "also ran".
>>
>>Why is that?
>>
>>Cheers, Frank.

I don't think it is crap at all. Like any tool in a competent persons hands it can no doubt be deployed to solve any problem you might care to throw at it. That said it is also my opinion that it is not any better by any stretch than the many competing "products" in the marketplace! I will admit a degree of bias against it due to its highly flexible nature in the same vein as my bias against VB and other "soft" tools. It will come as no surprise that I teach my sons to use the correct size ring spanner or open ender (when available) rather than the shifting spanner as the first resort!

> Of course - there is
> the possibility that it hasn't had the attention it deserves.
> "Circumstance argument!!!" I hear you cry. Nevertheless, I guess the
> fact that it hasn't been taught in many schools or universities could
> have something to do with it too. The local library and bookstore are
> unlikely to have many books on the subject for you to read - not that
> you'd want to read or buy them if they were there of course. Oh - and
> then, there is the fact that people behave a bit like sheep sometimes
> and tend to consider it safe, and "a good career move", to go with
> something that has wider acceptance, regardless of whether it is a
> better product or technology - which is, of course, self-pertetuating.
> Then again, there is also the fact that some "flavours" of Pick have
> tried to hide the fact that they're in any way connected with Pick. I
> could go on - but I won't. Do you sometimes wonder, though, why it is
> that there are people that pop up here and elsewhere from time to time
> that *really* like it? why they tend to "sing its praises" when they
> have nothing at all to gain? or why the reports of its demise have, for
> decades, been somewhat premature? or why, in all likelihood, your bank
> uses it (check for Globus)? or your car dealer? or many small to medium
> businesses in your town/city with no, or next to no, IT department? No?

Regardless - in the free market it surely has had the time to overcome these forces, if it has a compelling case. It hasn't so I infer it doesn't and I will keep looking for the Grail :-)

> OK. Never mind.

The Mahatma would be proud.

Cheers,
Frank. Received on Mon Nov 28 2005 - 05:19:20 CET