RE: ODBC (was RE: Green screen - it's time is over )

["Joe Pluta" <joepluta@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Brad Jensen

I say:
> The code that defines the ODBC connector is on the client.  The
> code for the server is on the host.

You say:
> Well if you database connection is on the web server, and the
> client is a web browser, your problem is gone.

But in your next email you say:
> ODBC is client/server.  Without client/server, there is no use for
> ODBC.

You are now just arguing to make sure you don't agree with me.  This
conversation seems to be reaching the conclusion of its usefulness.


> Well, actually the impression you are giving me is that you are
> attacking straw dogs trying to get us to ask what your wonderful
> answer to all this is.

Did that at the beginning.  In fact, did it years ago.  It's called
message-based client/server code.  Nothing to sell.  I actually do this out
of the kindness of my heart, hard to believe as that may be.


> > over 85% of the application code WOULD NOT
> > HAVE REQUIRED A SINGLE CHANGE.
>
> Sure, and all the date calculatiosn would have worked fine.... I
> don't think so.

You're past the point of rational discussion, and now you're just going to
disagree with every point, right?  I said 85%.  Do you think more than 15%
of programs had date calculations?  What would your estimate be?  Actually,
far less than 15% had date calculations - more had date COMPARISONS rather
than date calculations, but even so those were less than 15%.  How do I
know?  My product, Focus/2000, was used to convert hundreds of systems
worldwide.


> > In a server environment, you could simply change the server.  It
> would
> > perform the totalling internally, put the total quantity shipped
> in the
> > original field of the message, AND NO APPLICATION PROGRAM WOULD
> CHANGE.
>
> OH MY GOODNESS.
>
> Only people are already doing that by putting the logic at the web
> server level, so what's the big deal?

Yeah, you're past the point of discussion.  End of conversation.


> Okay, please tell us about your wonderful solution. I thought it
> wasn't a server , I thought it was middleware on Intel between an
> AS/400 server and a client. Not so?

Final point: I don't have a client/server product, Brad.  I just design
architecture, and try to make sure people don't do stupid things when
designing systems.