Re: pg_access

Ahh and let us not forget that postgresql runs beautifully (so far as I can
tell) under Mac OS X, an operating system whose user base demands
easy-to-use GUI software.

Pgaccess is a different story however-- I haven't gotten it to work yet
because tcl/tk is not quite working... Haven't had any time to look at it
yet.

Best regards,
Michael Ditto

On 7/9/02 4:14 PM, "Eric Redmond" <redmonde(at)purdue(dot)edu> wrote:

> I¹m afraid that I don¹t hold as much faith as you that Linux will become the
> ³defacto standard² toolset for all website servers. MS, despite its major
> shortcomings, is fairly slow and steady when it comes to improvements to its
> OS. That said, Access is crap because no one uses it for what it was built to
> be used for. And I would imagine that MS would rather spend their time/money
> on SQL Server development. I agree with you that pgsql needs a more powerful,
> GUI interface. The QBE interface in Access is nice. However, I don¹t agree
> that it is unimportant to have a Windows version. Point being, that Linux
> users are used to ­ and sadly often expect ­ poor interfaces with the programs
> they use. Windows users are far less forgiving. If, what you are talking
> about, is truly wide spread use for PC¹s and small-time web-servers then a
> Windows interface is damn near necessary.
>
>
>
> Eric
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: pgsql-hackers-owner(at)postgresql(dot)org
> [mailto:pgsql-hackers-owner(at)postgresql(dot)org] On Behalf Of Arthur(at)LinkLine(dot)com
> Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 4:05 PM
> To: PostGreSQL Hackers
> Subject: Re: [HACKERS] pg_access
>
>
>
> I'm pleased to see some renewed interest in pg_access. It seems obvious to me
> that MS Access is not currently...and probably never will be able to handle
> data in a robust and reliable fashion. MS Access' apparent success is due to
> the user interface quality and "ease of use" for "non-programmers". The
> "Relationships View" window, for example, is one of the best and most useful
> features ever invented for any database toolset.
>
>
>
> In reality PostGreSQL is in a "strong position" to fill the "reliability void"
> left by MS Access. However, the general public doesn't know much about the
> short comings of Access, due to MS advertising and sales efforts. It seems
> clear to me that the best way to "promote" the use of PostGreSQL is to offer
> more "ease of use" GUI interfaces for changing table structures, indexes,
> relationships, and upgrading older versions of files. Although it would be
> nice to have a native Windows version of PostGreSQL, as well as a Linux
> version, I expect Linux to replace Windows on a large number of PCs in the
> near future. I think that "having a Windows version" will not be a
> significant issue at that point. However, GUI based "ease of use" features
> WILL be an extremely important issue and will increase in importance for the
> rest of the forseeable future. Using a "browser" to implement the GUI toolset
> is a good start, but it probably won't support the same degree of user
> friendliness that is seen in the "Relationships View" window of MS Access,
> where a relationship can be instantly "drawn" with a mouse, and fields added
> to the Table with a simple "right click" on the Table header.
>
>
>
> If we do a good job of providing GUI based tools, similar to MS Access, as
> well as conversion tools from Access to PostGreSQL for existing data, then
> PostGreSQL and Linux should quickly become the "defacto standard" toolset for
> all website servers. It seems to me like PostGreSQL is already on this
> pathway, "like it or not", and that focussing on the GUI toolset is essential
> to maintaining a good relationship with those who are new to the Linux world.
> Whether you realize it or not, there is a humongous tidal wave of MS Access
> users currently gathering enough database theory expertise to "realize" the MS
> "snow job" they've been given about its reliability. They will be forced into
> finding another solution and chances are VERY good they won't opt for MS SQL
> Server or Oracle. If we are ready to give a solution to them...great....sorry
> MS, but they seem to "like us better". If we are not ready, then our future
> won't have anything to do with MS, only our own lack of vision.
>
>
>
> At our current level of GUI tools, we can't expect any positive response even
> from fairly talented self taught computer programmers who have been interested
> in Linux since 1998 or later. Soon, there will be many Windows IT Specialists
> who will be seriously investigating the Linux OS and the "best database tools"
> available for it. Add to this list "end users" who are fed up with daily
> Windows crashes and are experimenting with hosting their own DSL based website
> servers....and well...there's your tidal wave! Ready or not....the wave is
> directly behind us....time to "paddle" for all we're worth!
>
>
>
> Sincerely,
>
>
>
> Arthur Baldwin
>