|Subject:||Re: End of Year random thoughts
|Date:||Wed, 24 May 2017 16:01:07 -0700
|From:||Kevin Ring <kevin@DESPAMULATIONafice.org>
I'm jumping on here late, but thanks for all this, Bernie. It's useful.
I think Paradox for DOS would've enjoyed a much longer life had Borland
made an effort to keep it running under Windows command boxes. While a
GUI can help present data in ways that a character-based interface
cannot, there is nothing inherent in a GUI that is necessary for a
database to function.
And as I have yet to find the time and/or money to move to a different
platform, I'm still using it on a limited basis for several tasks at my
So again, thanks!
On 12/29/2016 10:21 PM, Bernie van't Hof wrote:
> A common theme among us (presumptive) fossils seems to be that PDOXDOS
> is remembered fondly.
> As I look back over years of reported difficulties like on the site it
> appears most related to operating system issues, table corruption,
> locked files, bde etc.
> It seems there were very few criticisms of the actual underlying product
> itself, the language and what it could achieve with relative simplicity.
> PDOXDOS stopped being used because the greater powers turned their back
> after being unable to bring it into the new age of windows. If it had
> been allowed to continue, perhaps even enhanced - would it have enjoyed
> a longer life?
> Should I remove the rose-colored-glasses?
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.