The L.A Fox Developer Newsletter

June 1994

XPro User Group News (Con't from Page 4)

promote convergence of Xbase dialects and to

lend credibility to Xbase and those who use it.

The following messages give an idea as to the

confusion that surrounds what Xbase is and isn’t:

Fm: Tom Meeks

To: Randy Unruh

>>A language is a language... more to it than

that<<

You’re right. The thing I appreciate most about the

xBase environment is the super interactivity of the

‘command box’ approach and the ability to easily

deal at the individual record.

Tom

Fm: Randy Unruh

To: Tom Meeks

Tom,

.Xbase. . .command box.. .interactive<<

Well, actually, strictly speaking, that isn’t Xbase.

That’s technically the dBASE model. Remember

Clipper? No command box. Xbase is the _lan-

guage_.

OTOH, inherently dealing at the record level _is_

Xbase, which BASIC ain’t.

SAY IT AIN’T SO, MSFT!!!

On the subject of rumours that Microsoft was

considering abandoning FoxPro, the following

messages were passed back and forth:

Fm: Randy Unruh

To: Tom Rettig

Tom,

Just on the basis of what I can surmise about

where development efforts are headed, I agree

that it doesn’t make sense for MSFT to kill FoxPro

To wit:

As an example, dBASE for Windows actually looks

better, in some ways, as a client/server front-end

than the corporate favorite, PowerBuilder. It has a

better object model, very nice development tools

and interface, plus the Xbase language (which is

demonstrably better at record handling than BA-

SIC) with additional object syntax. It also has some

potentially nice, and transparent to Xbase, connec-

tivity options.

FoxPro 3.0 is rumoured to be much the same, _plus_

it will have a data dictionary for its robust and super-

fast local database engine.

Now, with an arsenal like that, it would be senseless

for MSFT to junk a product which may have the poten-

tial to become the corporate favorite for client/server

front-ends.

Randy Unruh

P.S. And, for a definitive defenition of what the term

client/server is used for by the marketing slim, here’s

an Unruhism:

Client/Server is whatever can be served to the client.

Fm: Tom Rettig

To: Randy Unruh

Hi Randy,

>> FoxPro 3.0 is rumoured to be much the same,

_plus_ it will have a data >> dictionary for its robust

and superfast local database engine.<<

You mean DBW _doesn’t_ have a local data dictio-

nary??? <ROF,L>

>>

Client/Server is whatever can be served to the

client.

Another <ROF,L>, thanks!

Best,

Tom

Fm: Tom Schiff

To: Randy Unruh

Well to all of you doubters. Let me stir up things a bit.

1. MSFT is smart enough to put their advertising

dollars where it will do some good. For now FP doesn’t

have any credible competition. Those who are going

to develop in xBase are using FP. Advertising FP

would produce very little return.

2. Access is a new product that in many respects goes

after the traditional Paradox market. Hard marketing

can bring some real returns here. It is a sensible and

prudent place to put some advertising dollars. Also my

guess is that the people who are potential Access

(Con't, Page 6)

Page 5