PFC as a framework has outlived its live, we need new FRAMEWORK reengineered from what we have, give a new life to it.

I want to create ONE framework binary & want to reuse it every where.

But, the limitations of PB being able to use the PBD as a library file has 
been a problem.
Only in PB10.5 that they have removed this issue completely in fact forced 
because of the proxy objects.

The project painter should automatically have in the library list checked or 
the PBD should be like resource library & not included in the list of 
libraries be generated (if i include the PBD in the exe especially the proxy 
objects the proxy objects don't work).

The PBDs should work the same way I do libary list in JAVA or .NET (i.e C 
flavors).

When that works PB can market this as a REAL FRAMEWORK.

Provide project line for all the FRAMEWORK it wants to add-on.

Come up with some conference options.


Having said that, it should start using it internally.


Let the PB IDE designers use PB IDE for designing its features.

Add those features that are not there in PB IDE & exists in VStudio & C# & 
C++.
You get your market base increased.

There is a  big customer base for PB IDE in Sybase that is not used 
potentially.

Yes you might be competing against VStudio & Eclipse. But you have to. Face 
the reality. Otherwise PB IDE will not be an IDE it will be a plugin & may 
be nothing very soon. Providing plugin have provided some avenue for the 
customers to use it. But if you want the IDE to generate revenue then 
extending these IDE & framework will be the wise move.

Open Sourcing was a good decision. But then Sybase NOT putting any 
involvement to bring in the energy & participation of the developer 
community like creating new projects and providing inputs.
These are lacking.

VSV



0
vsv
5/24/2006 6:57:11 PM
sybase.powerbuilder.futures 2315 articles. 0 followers. Follow

57 Replies
853 Views

Similar Articles

[PageSpeed] 25

"vsv" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message news:4474ac1b$1@forums-2-dub...
>I want to create ONE framework binary & want to reuse it every where.

This was already done by someone with infinitely greater resources then you 
or Sybase has.
It is called Microsoft.NET framework 


0
Philip
5/25/2006 12:03:40 AM
I wonder then what is the benefit of the IDE itself.
I could as well use VStudio too.

Anyways, then we should reengineer the LIST FUNCTIONALITIES & others that 
are in PFC to use .NET list functionalities.
It should use those functionalities as the framework rather the one in PFC.


vsv

"Philip Salgannik" <philemaxNOSPAM@comcast.net> wrote in message 
news:4474f3f3$1@forums-2-dub...
>
> "vsv" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message news:4474ac1b$1@forums-2-dub...
>>I want to create ONE framework binary & want to reuse it every where.
>
> This was already done by someone with infinitely greater resources then 
> you or Sybase has.
> It is called Microsoft.NET framework
> 


0
vsv
5/26/2006 2:18:49 PM
 Its available ... PB9 => 10.5, PocketBuilder 1 => 2.0.4, EAServer 4.2.2 =>
5.3 (6.0 beta available), ASP, ASP.net or JSP projects (and I have a PB
11.Net beta ready too): http://www.sybase.com/developer/codexchange => STD
Foundation Classes!

Free too <lol>!

Regards ... Chris
PS: note - Many Canadian Government projects are using the FC's!



"vsv" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message news:4474ac1b$1@forums-2-dub...
> I want to create ONE framework binary & want to reuse it every where.
>
> But, the limitations of PB being able to use the PBD as a library file has
> been a problem.
> Only in PB10.5 that they have removed this issue completely in fact forced
> because of the proxy objects.
>
> The project painter should automatically have in the library list checked
or
> the PBD should be like resource library & not included in the list of
> libraries be generated (if i include the PBD in the exe especially the
proxy
> objects the proxy objects don't work).
>
> The PBDs should work the same way I do libary list in JAVA or .NET (i.e C
> flavors).
>
> When that works PB can market this as a REAL FRAMEWORK.
>
> Provide project line for all the FRAMEWORK it wants to add-on.
>
> Come up with some conference options.
>
>
> Having said that, it should start using it internally.
>
>
> Let the PB IDE designers use PB IDE for designing its features.
>
> Add those features that are not there in PB IDE & exists in VStudio & C# &
> C++.
> You get your market base increased.
>
> There is a  big customer base for PB IDE in Sybase that is not used
> potentially.
>
> Yes you might be competing against VStudio & Eclipse. But you have to.
Face
> the reality. Otherwise PB IDE will not be an IDE it will be a plugin & may
> be nothing very soon. Providing plugin have provided some avenue for the
> customers to use it. But if you want the IDE to generate revenue then
> extending these IDE & framework will be the wise move.
>
> Open Sourcing was a good decision. But then Sybase NOT putting any
> involvement to bring in the energy & participation of the developer
> community like creating new projects and providing inputs.
> These are lacking.
>
> VSV
>
>
>


0
Chris
5/26/2006 3:19:27 PM
I like the name STD eh Chris, something up there in Canada that we don't 
know about?  I bet the symptoms are constant newsgroup posting and 
undecipherable jokes that require low temperatures to understand.

Rich

"Chris Pollach" <cpollach@travel-net.dot.com> wrote in message 
news:44771c7f$1@forums-1-dub...
>
> Its available ... PB9 => 10.5, PocketBuilder 1 => 2.0.4, EAServer 4.2.2 =>
> 5.3 (6.0 beta available), ASP, ASP.net or JSP projects (and I have a PB
> 11.Net beta ready too): http://www.sybase.com/developer/codexchange => STD
> Foundation Classes!
>
> Free too <lol>!
>
> Regards ... Chris
> PS: note - Many Canadian Government projects are using the FC's!
>
>
>
> "vsv" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message news:4474ac1b$1@forums-2-dub...
>> I want to create ONE framework binary & want to reuse it every where.
>>
>> But, the limitations of PB being able to use the PBD as a library file 
>> has
>> been a problem.
>> Only in PB10.5 that they have removed this issue completely in fact 
>> forced
>> because of the proxy objects.
>>
>> The project painter should automatically have in the library list checked
> or
>> the PBD should be like resource library & not included in the list of
>> libraries be generated (if i include the PBD in the exe especially the
> proxy
>> objects the proxy objects don't work).
>>
>> The PBDs should work the same way I do libary list in JAVA or .NET (i.e C
>> flavors).
>>
>> When that works PB can market this as a REAL FRAMEWORK.
>>
>> Provide project line for all the FRAMEWORK it wants to add-on.
>>
>> Come up with some conference options.
>>
>>
>> Having said that, it should start using it internally.
>>
>>
>> Let the PB IDE designers use PB IDE for designing its features.
>>
>> Add those features that are not there in PB IDE & exists in VStudio & C# 
>> &
>> C++.
>> You get your market base increased.
>>
>> There is a  big customer base for PB IDE in Sybase that is not used
>> potentially.
>>
>> Yes you might be competing against VStudio & Eclipse. But you have to.
> Face
>> the reality. Otherwise PB IDE will not be an IDE it will be a plugin & 
>> may
>> be nothing very soon. Providing plugin have provided some avenue for the
>> customers to use it. But if you want the IDE to generate revenue then
>> extending these IDE & framework will be the wise move.
>>
>> Open Sourcing was a good decision. But then Sybase NOT putting any
>> involvement to bring in the energy & participation of the developer
>> community like creating new projects and providing inputs.
>> These are lacking.
>>
>> VSV
>>
>>
>>
>
> 


0
Richard
5/26/2006 4:33:59 PM
No offense Chris,
But yet there is no commitment on that from Sybase.

vsv

"Richard Keller" <richard@kellersystems.com> wrote in message 
news:44772d88@forums-2-dub...
>I like the name STD eh Chris, something up there in Canada that we don't 
>know about?  I bet the symptoms are constant newsgroup posting and 
>undecipherable jokes that require low temperatures to understand.
>
> Rich
>
> "Chris Pollach" <cpollach@travel-net.dot.com> wrote in message 
> news:44771c7f$1@forums-1-dub...
>>
>> Its available ... PB9 => 10.5, PocketBuilder 1 => 2.0.4, EAServer 4.2.2 
>> =>
>> 5.3 (6.0 beta available), ASP, ASP.net or JSP projects (and I have a PB
>> 11.Net beta ready too): http://www.sybase.com/developer/codexchange => 
>> STD
>> Foundation Classes!
>>
>> Free too <lol>!
>>
>> Regards ... Chris
>> PS: note - Many Canadian Government projects are using the FC's!
>>
>>
>>
>> "vsv" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message 
>> news:4474ac1b$1@forums-2-dub...
>>> I want to create ONE framework binary & want to reuse it every where.
>>>
>>> But, the limitations of PB being able to use the PBD as a library file 
>>> has
>>> been a problem.
>>> Only in PB10.5 that they have removed this issue completely in fact 
>>> forced
>>> because of the proxy objects.
>>>
>>> The project painter should automatically have in the library list 
>>> checked
>> or
>>> the PBD should be like resource library & not included in the list of
>>> libraries be generated (if i include the PBD in the exe especially the
>> proxy
>>> objects the proxy objects don't work).
>>>
>>> The PBDs should work the same way I do libary list in JAVA or .NET (i.e 
>>> C
>>> flavors).
>>>
>>> When that works PB can market this as a REAL FRAMEWORK.
>>>
>>> Provide project line for all the FRAMEWORK it wants to add-on.
>>>
>>> Come up with some conference options.
>>>
>>>
>>> Having said that, it should start using it internally.
>>>
>>>
>>> Let the PB IDE designers use PB IDE for designing its features.
>>>
>>> Add those features that are not there in PB IDE & exists in VStudio & C# 
>>> &
>>> C++.
>>> You get your market base increased.
>>>
>>> There is a  big customer base for PB IDE in Sybase that is not used
>>> potentially.
>>>
>>> Yes you might be competing against VStudio & Eclipse. But you have to.
>> Face
>>> the reality. Otherwise PB IDE will not be an IDE it will be a plugin & 
>>> may
>>> be nothing very soon. Providing plugin have provided some avenue for the
>>> customers to use it. But if you want the IDE to generate revenue then
>>> extending these IDE & framework will be the wise move.
>>>
>>> Open Sourcing was a good decision. But then Sybase NOT putting any
>>> involvement to bring in the energy & participation of the developer
>>> community like creating new projects and providing inputs.
>>> These are lacking.
>>>
>>> VSV
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
> 


0
vsv
5/26/2006 4:43:30 PM
     I opened a discussion thread on that in the PFC NG a while ago as to
why Sybase is not evolving the PFC. Seems like they have just "washed their
hands" of the whole thing (its open source now on CodeXchange) and are
burying their heads in the sand (Ostrich syndrome I guess). The real problem
now is that no one is even maintaining / updating the PFC for PB 10.5 or 11.
This gives me great concern as an application developer when the vendor does
not even enhance their own product (IBM calls that "?stable?")!



"vsv" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message news:44773032$1@forums-1-dub...
> No offense Chris,
> But yet there is no commitment on that from Sybase.
>
> vsv
>
> "Richard Keller" <richard@kellersystems.com> wrote in message
> news:44772d88@forums-2-dub...
> >I like the name STD eh Chris, something up there in Canada that we don't
> >know about?  I bet the symptoms are constant newsgroup posting and
> >undecipherable jokes that require low temperatures to understand.
> >
> > Rich
> >
> > "Chris Pollach" <cpollach@travel-net.dot.com> wrote in message
> > news:44771c7f$1@forums-1-dub...
> >>
> >> Its available ... PB9 => 10.5, PocketBuilder 1 => 2.0.4, EAServer 4.2.2
> >> =>
> >> 5.3 (6.0 beta available), ASP, ASP.net or JSP projects (and I have a PB
> >> 11.Net beta ready too): http://www.sybase.com/developer/codexchange =>
> >> STD
> >> Foundation Classes!
> >>
> >> Free too <lol>!
> >>
> >> Regards ... Chris
> >> PS: note - Many Canadian Government projects are using the FC's!
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> "vsv" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
> >> news:4474ac1b$1@forums-2-dub...
> >>> I want to create ONE framework binary & want to reuse it every where.
> >>>
> >>> But, the limitations of PB being able to use the PBD as a library file
> >>> has
> >>> been a problem.
> >>> Only in PB10.5 that they have removed this issue completely in fact
> >>> forced
> >>> because of the proxy objects.
> >>>
> >>> The project painter should automatically have in the library list
> >>> checked
> >> or
> >>> the PBD should be like resource library & not included in the list of
> >>> libraries be generated (if i include the PBD in the exe especially the
> >> proxy
> >>> objects the proxy objects don't work).
> >>>
> >>> The PBDs should work the same way I do libary list in JAVA or .NET
(i.e
> >>> C
> >>> flavors).
> >>>
> >>> When that works PB can market this as a REAL FRAMEWORK.
> >>>
> >>> Provide project line for all the FRAMEWORK it wants to add-on.
> >>>
> >>> Come up with some conference options.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Having said that, it should start using it internally.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Let the PB IDE designers use PB IDE for designing its features.
> >>>
> >>> Add those features that are not there in PB IDE & exists in VStudio &
C#
> >>> &
> >>> C++.
> >>> You get your market base increased.
> >>>
> >>> There is a  big customer base for PB IDE in Sybase that is not used
> >>> potentially.
> >>>
> >>> Yes you might be competing against VStudio & Eclipse. But you have to.
> >> Face
> >>> the reality. Otherwise PB IDE will not be an IDE it will be a plugin &
> >>> may
> >>> be nothing very soon. Providing plugin have provided some avenue for
the
> >>> customers to use it. But if you want the IDE to generate revenue then
> >>> extending these IDE & framework will be the wise move.
> >>>
> >>> Open Sourcing was a good decision. But then Sybase NOT putting any
> >>> involvement to bring in the energy & participation of the developer
> >>> community like creating new projects and providing inputs.
> >>> These are lacking.
> >>>
> >>> VSV
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>
>


0
Chris
5/26/2006 5:01:18 PM
 Bad acronym for Software Tool & Die Inc. - eh! *g*

"Richard Keller" <richard@kellersystems.com> wrote in message
news:44772d88@forums-2-dub...
> I like the name STD eh Chris, something up there in Canada that we don't
> know about?  I bet the symptoms are constant newsgroup posting and
> undecipherable jokes that require low temperatures to understand.
>
> Rich
>
> "Chris Pollach" <cpollach@travel-net.dot.com> wrote in message
> news:44771c7f$1@forums-1-dub...
> >
> > Its available ... PB9 => 10.5, PocketBuilder 1 => 2.0.4, EAServer 4.2.2
=>
> > 5.3 (6.0 beta available), ASP, ASP.net or JSP projects (and I have a PB
> > 11.Net beta ready too): http://www.sybase.com/developer/codexchange =>
STD
> > Foundation Classes!
> >
> > Free too <lol>!
> >
> > Regards ... Chris
> > PS: note - Many Canadian Government projects are using the FC's!
> >
> >
> >
> > "vsv" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:4474ac1b$1@forums-2-dub...
> >> I want to create ONE framework binary & want to reuse it every where.
> >>
> >> But, the limitations of PB being able to use the PBD as a library file
> >> has
> >> been a problem.
> >> Only in PB10.5 that they have removed this issue completely in fact
> >> forced
> >> because of the proxy objects.
> >>
> >> The project painter should automatically have in the library list
checked
> > or
> >> the PBD should be like resource library & not included in the list of
> >> libraries be generated (if i include the PBD in the exe especially the
> > proxy
> >> objects the proxy objects don't work).
> >>
> >> The PBDs should work the same way I do libary list in JAVA or .NET (i.e
C
> >> flavors).
> >>
> >> When that works PB can market this as a REAL FRAMEWORK.
> >>
> >> Provide project line for all the FRAMEWORK it wants to add-on.
> >>
> >> Come up with some conference options.
> >>
> >>
> >> Having said that, it should start using it internally.
> >>
> >>
> >> Let the PB IDE designers use PB IDE for designing its features.
> >>
> >> Add those features that are not there in PB IDE & exists in VStudio &
C#
> >> &
> >> C++.
> >> You get your market base increased.
> >>
> >> There is a  big customer base for PB IDE in Sybase that is not used
> >> potentially.
> >>
> >> Yes you might be competing against VStudio & Eclipse. But you have to.
> > Face
> >> the reality. Otherwise PB IDE will not be an IDE it will be a plugin &
> >> may
> >> be nothing very soon. Providing plugin have provided some avenue for
the
> >> customers to use it. But if you want the IDE to generate revenue then
> >> extending these IDE & framework will be the wise move.
> >>
> >> Open Sourcing was a good decision. But then Sybase NOT putting any
> >> involvement to bring in the energy & participation of the developer
> >> community like creating new projects and providing inputs.
> >> These are lacking.
> >>
> >> VSV
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>
>


0
Chris
5/26/2006 5:02:10 PM
Chris Pollach wrote:
>      I opened a discussion thread on that in the PFC NG a while ago as to
> why Sybase is not evolving the PFC. Seems like they have just "washed their
> hands" of the whole thing (its open source now on CodeXchange) and are
> burying their heads in the sand (Ostrich syndrome I guess). 

You harp on about all the stuff you want in PB11 yet expect the 
engineers to also spend time enhancing a framework that for all 
intensive purposes is complete. Theres an old saying about eating cake 
that is applicable here.

The real problem
> now is that no one is even maintaining / updating the PFC for PB 10.5 or 11.
> This gives me great concern as an application developer when the vendor does
> not even enhance their own product (IBM calls that "?stable?")!

In the famous words of Paul Horan

<horse status="dead">
    <action>beat</action>
</horse>


> 
> 
> 
> "vsv" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message news:44773032$1@forums-1-dub...
>> No offense Chris,
>> But yet there is no commitment on that from Sybase.
>>
>> vsv
>>
>> "Richard Keller" <richard@kellersystems.com> wrote in message
>> news:44772d88@forums-2-dub...
>>> I like the name STD eh Chris, something up there in Canada that we don't
>>> know about?  I bet the symptoms are constant newsgroup posting and
>>> undecipherable jokes that require low temperatures to understand.
>>>
>>> Rich
>>>
>>> "Chris Pollach" <cpollach@travel-net.dot.com> wrote in message
>>> news:44771c7f$1@forums-1-dub...
>>>> Its available ... PB9 => 10.5, PocketBuilder 1 => 2.0.4, EAServer 4.2.2
>>>> =>
>>>> 5.3 (6.0 beta available), ASP, ASP.net or JSP projects (and I have a PB
>>>> 11.Net beta ready too): http://www.sybase.com/developer/codexchange =>
>>>> STD
>>>> Foundation Classes!
>>>>
>>>> Free too <lol>!
>>>>
>>>> Regards ... Chris
>>>> PS: note - Many Canadian Government projects are using the FC's!
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "vsv" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:4474ac1b$1@forums-2-dub...
>>>>> I want to create ONE framework binary & want to reuse it every where.
>>>>>
>>>>> But, the limitations of PB being able to use the PBD as a library file
>>>>> has
>>>>> been a problem.
>>>>> Only in PB10.5 that they have removed this issue completely in fact
>>>>> forced
>>>>> because of the proxy objects.
>>>>>
>>>>> The project painter should automatically have in the library list
>>>>> checked
>>>> or
>>>>> the PBD should be like resource library & not included in the list of
>>>>> libraries be generated (if i include the PBD in the exe especially the
>>>> proxy
>>>>> objects the proxy objects don't work).
>>>>>
>>>>> The PBDs should work the same way I do libary list in JAVA or .NET
> (i.e
>>>>> C
>>>>> flavors).
>>>>>
>>>>> When that works PB can market this as a REAL FRAMEWORK.
>>>>>
>>>>> Provide project line for all the FRAMEWORK it wants to add-on.
>>>>>
>>>>> Come up with some conference options.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Having said that, it should start using it internally.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Let the PB IDE designers use PB IDE for designing its features.
>>>>>
>>>>> Add those features that are not there in PB IDE & exists in VStudio &
> C#
>>>>> &
>>>>> C++.
>>>>> You get your market base increased.
>>>>>
>>>>> There is a  big customer base for PB IDE in Sybase that is not used
>>>>> potentially.
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes you might be competing against VStudio & Eclipse. But you have to.
>>>> Face
>>>>> the reality. Otherwise PB IDE will not be an IDE it will be a plugin &
>>>>> may
>>>>> be nothing very soon. Providing plugin have provided some avenue for
> the
>>>>> customers to use it. But if you want the IDE to generate revenue then
>>>>> extending these IDE & framework will be the wise move.
>>>>>
>>>>> Open Sourcing was a good decision. But then Sybase NOT putting any
>>>>> involvement to bring in the energy & participation of the developer
>>>>> community like creating new projects and providing inputs.
>>>>> These are lacking.
>>>>>
>>>>> VSV
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
> 
> 
0
Adam
5/28/2006 11:52:47 PM
 NO, Sybase should hire a few extra bodies to work on the PFC. I am sure the
primary O/S developers at MS were not pulled of to work on .Net. It's time
Sybase spent some of that $1B in the bank on some more resources!



"Adam Simmonds [TeamSybase]" <adam.simmonds@nospam.micropay.com.au> wrote in
message news:447a3750@forums-2-dub...
> Chris Pollach wrote:
> >      I opened a discussion thread on that in the PFC NG a while ago as
to
> > why Sybase is not evolving the PFC. Seems like they have just "washed
their
> > hands" of the whole thing (its open source now on CodeXchange) and are
> > burying their heads in the sand (Ostrich syndrome I guess).
>
> You harp on about all the stuff you want in PB11 yet expect the
> engineers to also spend time enhancing a framework that for all
> intensive purposes is complete. Theres an old saying about eating cake
> that is applicable here.
>
> The real problem
> > now is that no one is even maintaining / updating the PFC for PB 10.5 or
11.
> > This gives me great concern as an application developer when the vendor
does
> > not even enhance their own product (IBM calls that "?stable?")!
>
> In the famous words of Paul Horan
>
> <horse status="dead">
>     <action>beat</action>
> </horse>
>
>
> >
> >
> >
> > "vsv" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:44773032$1@forums-1-dub...
> >> No offense Chris,
> >> But yet there is no commitment on that from Sybase.
> >>
> >> vsv
> >>
> >> "Richard Keller" <richard@kellersystems.com> wrote in message
> >> news:44772d88@forums-2-dub...
> >>> I like the name STD eh Chris, something up there in Canada that we
don't
> >>> know about?  I bet the symptoms are constant newsgroup posting and
> >>> undecipherable jokes that require low temperatures to understand.
> >>>
> >>> Rich
> >>>
> >>> "Chris Pollach" <cpollach@travel-net.dot.com> wrote in message
> >>> news:44771c7f$1@forums-1-dub...
> >>>> Its available ... PB9 => 10.5, PocketBuilder 1 => 2.0.4, EAServer
4.2.2
> >>>> =>
> >>>> 5.3 (6.0 beta available), ASP, ASP.net or JSP projects (and I have a
PB
> >>>> 11.Net beta ready too): http://www.sybase.com/developer/codexchange
=>
> >>>> STD
> >>>> Foundation Classes!
> >>>>
> >>>> Free too <lol>!
> >>>>
> >>>> Regards ... Chris
> >>>> PS: note - Many Canadian Government projects are using the FC's!
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> "vsv" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
> >>>> news:4474ac1b$1@forums-2-dub...
> >>>>> I want to create ONE framework binary & want to reuse it every
where.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> But, the limitations of PB being able to use the PBD as a library
file
> >>>>> has
> >>>>> been a problem.
> >>>>> Only in PB10.5 that they have removed this issue completely in fact
> >>>>> forced
> >>>>> because of the proxy objects.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> The project painter should automatically have in the library list
> >>>>> checked
> >>>> or
> >>>>> the PBD should be like resource library & not included in the list
of
> >>>>> libraries be generated (if i include the PBD in the exe especially
the
> >>>> proxy
> >>>>> objects the proxy objects don't work).
> >>>>>
> >>>>> The PBDs should work the same way I do libary list in JAVA or .NET
> > (i.e
> >>>>> C
> >>>>> flavors).
> >>>>>
> >>>>> When that works PB can market this as a REAL FRAMEWORK.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Provide project line for all the FRAMEWORK it wants to add-on.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Come up with some conference options.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Having said that, it should start using it internally.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Let the PB IDE designers use PB IDE for designing its features.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Add those features that are not there in PB IDE & exists in VStudio
&
> > C#
> >>>>> &
> >>>>> C++.
> >>>>> You get your market base increased.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> There is a  big customer base for PB IDE in Sybase that is not used
> >>>>> potentially.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Yes you might be competing against VStudio & Eclipse. But you have
to.
> >>>> Face
> >>>>> the reality. Otherwise PB IDE will not be an IDE it will be a plugin
&
> >>>>> may
> >>>>> be nothing very soon. Providing plugin have provided some avenue for
> > the
> >>>>> customers to use it. But if you want the IDE to generate revenue
then
> >>>>> extending these IDE & framework will be the wise move.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Open Sourcing was a good decision. But then Sybase NOT putting any
> >>>>> involvement to bring in the energy & participation of the developer
> >>>>> community like creating new projects and providing inputs.
> >>>>> These are lacking.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> VSV
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>
> >
> >


0
Chris
5/29/2006 11:25:31 AM
I understand the frustration, but your idea shows the mis-understanding 
of how accounting really works.

First, Sybase doesn't have 1 Billion in the bank.  The current amount is 
around 400 million.  Second, we can't just spend it on new developers. 
According to GAAP, any money spent on new resources must be expensed in 
the current quarter, and shown against total income in that same 
quarter.  Unlike personal finances, there is no real way (minus a 
one-time charge) to pull the money out of the bank to spend on new 
resources.  We have to do that with current income against PB.

The money in the bank belongs to the stockholders.  We can use it to 
earn new money (the interest we earn does go against our bottom line) or 
to buy other companies.  But we can't just apply it to new payroll.  Sorry.

We have a name for this process in the US.  We call it "armchair 
quarterbacking".  I can promise you that, from the inside, this is much 
more difficult than it looks from the outside.



Jonathan


Chris Pollach wrote:
>  NO, Sybase should hire a few extra bodies to work on the PFC. I am sure the
> primary O/S developers at MS were not pulled of to work on .Net. It's time
> Sybase spent some of that $1B in the bank on some more resources!
> 
> 
> 
> "Adam Simmonds [TeamSybase]" <adam.simmonds@nospam.micropay.com.au> wrote in
> message news:447a3750@forums-2-dub...
>> Chris Pollach wrote:
>>>      I opened a discussion thread on that in the PFC NG a while ago as
> to
>>> why Sybase is not evolving the PFC. Seems like they have just "washed
> their
>>> hands" of the whole thing (its open source now on CodeXchange) and are
>>> burying their heads in the sand (Ostrich syndrome I guess).
>> You harp on about all the stuff you want in PB11 yet expect the
>> engineers to also spend time enhancing a framework that for all
>> intensive purposes is complete. Theres an old saying about eating cake
>> that is applicable here.
>>
>> The real problem
>>> now is that no one is even maintaining / updating the PFC for PB 10.5 or
> 11.
>>> This gives me great concern as an application developer when the vendor
> does
>>> not even enhance their own product (IBM calls that "?stable?")!
>> In the famous words of Paul Horan
>>
>> <horse status="dead">
>>     <action>beat</action>
>> </horse>
>>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> "vsv" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
> news:44773032$1@forums-1-dub...
>>>> No offense Chris,
>>>> But yet there is no commitment on that from Sybase.
>>>>
>>>> vsv
>>>>
>>>> "Richard Keller" <richard@kellersystems.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:44772d88@forums-2-dub...
>>>>> I like the name STD eh Chris, something up there in Canada that we
> don't
>>>>> know about?  I bet the symptoms are constant newsgroup posting and
>>>>> undecipherable jokes that require low temperatures to understand.
>>>>>
>>>>> Rich
>>>>>
>>>>> "Chris Pollach" <cpollach@travel-net.dot.com> wrote in message
>>>>> news:44771c7f$1@forums-1-dub...
>>>>>> Its available ... PB9 => 10.5, PocketBuilder 1 => 2.0.4, EAServer
> 4.2.2
>>>>>> =>
>>>>>> 5.3 (6.0 beta available), ASP, ASP.net or JSP projects (and I have a
> PB
>>>>>> 11.Net beta ready too): http://www.sybase.com/developer/codexchange
> =>
>>>>>> STD
>>>>>> Foundation Classes!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Free too <lol>!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Regards ... Chris
>>>>>> PS: note - Many Canadian Government projects are using the FC's!
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "vsv" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
>>>>>> news:4474ac1b$1@forums-2-dub...
>>>>>>> I want to create ONE framework binary & want to reuse it every
> where.
>>>>>>> But, the limitations of PB being able to use the PBD as a library
> file
>>>>>>> has
>>>>>>> been a problem.
>>>>>>> Only in PB10.5 that they have removed this issue completely in fact
>>>>>>> forced
>>>>>>> because of the proxy objects.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The project painter should automatically have in the library list
>>>>>>> checked
>>>>>> or
>>>>>>> the PBD should be like resource library & not included in the list
> of
>>>>>>> libraries be generated (if i include the PBD in the exe especially
> the
>>>>>> proxy
>>>>>>> objects the proxy objects don't work).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The PBDs should work the same way I do libary list in JAVA or .NET
>>> (i.e
>>>>>>> C
>>>>>>> flavors).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> When that works PB can market this as a REAL FRAMEWORK.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Provide project line for all the FRAMEWORK it wants to add-on.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Come up with some conference options.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Having said that, it should start using it internally.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Let the PB IDE designers use PB IDE for designing its features.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Add those features that are not there in PB IDE & exists in VStudio
> &
>>> C#
>>>>>>> &
>>>>>>> C++.
>>>>>>> You get your market base increased.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> There is a  big customer base for PB IDE in Sybase that is not used
>>>>>>> potentially.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Yes you might be competing against VStudio & Eclipse. But you have
> to.
>>>>>> Face
>>>>>>> the reality. Otherwise PB IDE will not be an IDE it will be a plugin
> &
>>>>>>> may
>>>>>>> be nothing very soon. Providing plugin have provided some avenue for
>>> the
>>>>>>> customers to use it. But if you want the IDE to generate revenue
> then
>>>>>>> extending these IDE & framework will be the wise move.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Open Sourcing was a good decision. But then Sybase NOT putting any
>>>>>>> involvement to bring in the energy & participation of the developer
>>>>>>> community like creating new projects and providing inputs.
>>>>>>> These are lacking.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> VSV
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>
> 
> 
0
Jonathan
5/29/2006 9:50:26 PM
Chris Pollach wrote:
>  NO, Sybase should hire a few extra bodies to work on the PFC. 

Why? For the 10-15% of clients who use it?

It would be a huge waste of time and if they could afford 2-3 developers 
I would rather see their time invested in PB 11, 12, 13,... and not 
revisiting the past and re-working a stable framework.

You will no doubt be the first to complain when PB11 doesnt have X, Y 
and Z features that you asked for but are happy for time to be spent on 
the PFC to add features that you may not even need.

So what does the PFC really need that you or other developers can not code?

If these changes are so urgent then I would assume someone has probably 
already added it to their PFC code and if thats the case then submit it 
to the project.

The problem in this instance is not Sybase it is the development 
community who have become lazy and are used to putting their hand out 
and not contributing. Time to put up or shut up, IMHO.

a.


I am sure the
> primary O/S developers at MS were not pulled of to work on .Net. It's time
> Sybase spent some of that $1B in the bank on some more resources!
> 
> 
> 
> "Adam Simmonds [TeamSybase]" <adam.simmonds@nospam.micropay.com.au> wrote in
> message news:447a3750@forums-2-dub...
>> Chris Pollach wrote:
>>>      I opened a discussion thread on that in the PFC NG a while ago as
> to
>>> why Sybase is not evolving the PFC. Seems like they have just "washed
> their
>>> hands" of the whole thing (its open source now on CodeXchange) and are
>>> burying their heads in the sand (Ostrich syndrome I guess).
>> You harp on about all the stuff you want in PB11 yet expect the
>> engineers to also spend time enhancing a framework that for all
>> intensive purposes is complete. Theres an old saying about eating cake
>> that is applicable here.
>>
>> The real problem
>>> now is that no one is even maintaining / updating the PFC for PB 10.5 or
> 11.
>>> This gives me great concern as an application developer when the vendor
> does
>>> not even enhance their own product (IBM calls that "?stable?")!
>> In the famous words of Paul Horan
>>
>> <horse status="dead">
>>     <action>beat</action>
>> </horse>
>>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> "vsv" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
> news:44773032$1@forums-1-dub...
>>>> No offense Chris,
>>>> But yet there is no commitment on that from Sybase.
>>>>
>>>> vsv
>>>>
>>>> "Richard Keller" <richard@kellersystems.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:44772d88@forums-2-dub...
>>>>> I like the name STD eh Chris, something up there in Canada that we
> don't
>>>>> know about?  I bet the symptoms are constant newsgroup posting and
>>>>> undecipherable jokes that require low temperatures to understand.
>>>>>
>>>>> Rich
>>>>>
>>>>> "Chris Pollach" <cpollach@travel-net.dot.com> wrote in message
>>>>> news:44771c7f$1@forums-1-dub...
>>>>>> Its available ... PB9 => 10.5, PocketBuilder 1 => 2.0.4, EAServer
> 4.2.2
>>>>>> =>
>>>>>> 5.3 (6.0 beta available), ASP, ASP.net or JSP projects (and I have a
> PB
>>>>>> 11.Net beta ready too): http://www.sybase.com/developer/codexchange
> =>
>>>>>> STD
>>>>>> Foundation Classes!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Free too <lol>!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Regards ... Chris
>>>>>> PS: note - Many Canadian Government projects are using the FC's!
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "vsv" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
>>>>>> news:4474ac1b$1@forums-2-dub...
>>>>>>> I want to create ONE framework binary & want to reuse it every
> where.
>>>>>>> But, the limitations of PB being able to use the PBD as a library
> file
>>>>>>> has
>>>>>>> been a problem.
>>>>>>> Only in PB10.5 that they have removed this issue completely in fact
>>>>>>> forced
>>>>>>> because of the proxy objects.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The project painter should automatically have in the library list
>>>>>>> checked
>>>>>> or
>>>>>>> the PBD should be like resource library & not included in the list
> of
>>>>>>> libraries be generated (if i include the PBD in the exe especially
> the
>>>>>> proxy
>>>>>>> objects the proxy objects don't work).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The PBDs should work the same way I do libary list in JAVA or .NET
>>> (i.e
>>>>>>> C
>>>>>>> flavors).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> When that works PB can market this as a REAL FRAMEWORK.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Provide project line for all the FRAMEWORK it wants to add-on.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Come up with some conference options.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Having said that, it should start using it internally.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Let the PB IDE designers use PB IDE for designing its features.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Add those features that are not there in PB IDE & exists in VStudio
> &
>>> C#
>>>>>>> &
>>>>>>> C++.
>>>>>>> You get your market base increased.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> There is a  big customer base for PB IDE in Sybase that is not used
>>>>>>> potentially.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Yes you might be competing against VStudio & Eclipse. But you have
> to.
>>>>>> Face
>>>>>>> the reality. Otherwise PB IDE will not be an IDE it will be a plugin
> &
>>>>>>> may
>>>>>>> be nothing very soon. Providing plugin have provided some avenue for
>>> the
>>>>>>> customers to use it. But if you want the IDE to generate revenue
> then
>>>>>>> extending these IDE & framework will be the wise move.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Open Sourcing was a good decision. But then Sybase NOT putting any
>>>>>>> involvement to bring in the energy & participation of the developer
>>>>>>> community like creating new projects and providing inputs.
>>>>>>> These are lacking.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> VSV
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>
> 
> 
0
Adam
5/30/2006 1:10:31 AM
 You need to hire Bill Gates -:)


"Jonathan Baker [Sybase]" <lastnamefirstinitial@sybase.com> wrote in message
news:447b6ca2@forums-1-dub...
> I understand the frustration, but your idea shows the mis-understanding
> of how accounting really works.
>
> First, Sybase doesn't have 1 Billion in the bank.  The current amount is
> around 400 million.  Second, we can't just spend it on new developers.
> According to GAAP, any money spent on new resources must be expensed in
> the current quarter, and shown against total income in that same
> quarter.  Unlike personal finances, there is no real way (minus a
> one-time charge) to pull the money out of the bank to spend on new
> resources.  We have to do that with current income against PB.
>
> The money in the bank belongs to the stockholders.  We can use it to
> earn new money (the interest we earn does go against our bottom line) or
> to buy other companies.  But we can't just apply it to new payroll.
Sorry.
>
> We have a name for this process in the US.  We call it "armchair
> quarterbacking".  I can promise you that, from the inside, this is much
> more difficult than it looks from the outside.
>
>
>
> Jonathan
>
>
> Chris Pollach wrote:
> >  NO, Sybase should hire a few extra bodies to work on the PFC. I am sure
the
> > primary O/S developers at MS were not pulled of to work on .Net. It's
time
> > Sybase spent some of that $1B in the bank on some more resources!
> >
> >
> >
> > "Adam Simmonds [TeamSybase]" <adam.simmonds@nospam.micropay.com.au>
wrote in
> > message news:447a3750@forums-2-dub...
> >> Chris Pollach wrote:
> >>>      I opened a discussion thread on that in the PFC NG a while ago as
> > to
> >>> why Sybase is not evolving the PFC. Seems like they have just "washed
> > their
> >>> hands" of the whole thing (its open source now on CodeXchange) and are
> >>> burying their heads in the sand (Ostrich syndrome I guess).
> >> You harp on about all the stuff you want in PB11 yet expect the
> >> engineers to also spend time enhancing a framework that for all
> >> intensive purposes is complete. Theres an old saying about eating cake
> >> that is applicable here.
> >>
> >> The real problem
> >>> now is that no one is even maintaining / updating the PFC for PB 10.5
or
> > 11.
> >>> This gives me great concern as an application developer when the
vendor
> > does
> >>> not even enhance their own product (IBM calls that "?stable?")!
> >> In the famous words of Paul Horan
> >>
> >> <horse status="dead">
> >>     <action>beat</action>
> >> </horse>
> >>
> >>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> "vsv" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
> > news:44773032$1@forums-1-dub...
> >>>> No offense Chris,
> >>>> But yet there is no commitment on that from Sybase.
> >>>>
> >>>> vsv
> >>>>
> >>>> "Richard Keller" <richard@kellersystems.com> wrote in message
> >>>> news:44772d88@forums-2-dub...
> >>>>> I like the name STD eh Chris, something up there in Canada that we
> > don't
> >>>>> know about?  I bet the symptoms are constant newsgroup posting and
> >>>>> undecipherable jokes that require low temperatures to understand.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Rich
> >>>>>
> >>>>> "Chris Pollach" <cpollach@travel-net.dot.com> wrote in message
> >>>>> news:44771c7f$1@forums-1-dub...
> >>>>>> Its available ... PB9 => 10.5, PocketBuilder 1 => 2.0.4, EAServer
> > 4.2.2
> >>>>>> =>
> >>>>>> 5.3 (6.0 beta available), ASP, ASP.net or JSP projects (and I have
a
> > PB
> >>>>>> 11.Net beta ready too): http://www.sybase.com/developer/codexchange
> > =>
> >>>>>> STD
> >>>>>> Foundation Classes!
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Free too <lol>!
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Regards ... Chris
> >>>>>> PS: note - Many Canadian Government projects are using the FC's!
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> "vsv" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
> >>>>>> news:4474ac1b$1@forums-2-dub...
> >>>>>>> I want to create ONE framework binary & want to reuse it every
> > where.
> >>>>>>> But, the limitations of PB being able to use the PBD as a library
> > file
> >>>>>>> has
> >>>>>>> been a problem.
> >>>>>>> Only in PB10.5 that they have removed this issue completely in
fact
> >>>>>>> forced
> >>>>>>> because of the proxy objects.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> The project painter should automatically have in the library list
> >>>>>>> checked
> >>>>>> or
> >>>>>>> the PBD should be like resource library & not included in the list
> > of
> >>>>>>> libraries be generated (if i include the PBD in the exe especially
> > the
> >>>>>> proxy
> >>>>>>> objects the proxy objects don't work).
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> The PBDs should work the same way I do libary list in JAVA or .NET
> >>> (i.e
> >>>>>>> C
> >>>>>>> flavors).
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> When that works PB can market this as a REAL FRAMEWORK.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Provide project line for all the FRAMEWORK it wants to add-on.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Come up with some conference options.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Having said that, it should start using it internally.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Let the PB IDE designers use PB IDE for designing its features.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Add those features that are not there in PB IDE & exists in
VStudio
> > &
> >>> C#
> >>>>>>> &
> >>>>>>> C++.
> >>>>>>> You get your market base increased.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> There is a  big customer base for PB IDE in Sybase that is not
used
> >>>>>>> potentially.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Yes you might be competing against VStudio & Eclipse. But you have
> > to.
> >>>>>> Face
> >>>>>>> the reality. Otherwise PB IDE will not be an IDE it will be a
plugin
> > &
> >>>>>>> may
> >>>>>>> be nothing very soon. Providing plugin have provided some avenue
for
> >>> the
> >>>>>>> customers to use it. But if you want the IDE to generate revenue
> > then
> >>>>>>> extending these IDE & framework will be the wise move.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Open Sourcing was a good decision. But then Sybase NOT putting any
> >>>>>>> involvement to bring in the energy & participation of the
developer
> >>>>>>> community like creating new projects and providing inputs.
> >>>>>>> These are lacking.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> VSV
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>
> >
> >


0
Chris
5/30/2006 11:22:30 AM
     Yep its statements like this "10-15% of clients who use it" is why not
only the PFC, but PB is not used 80+%!! Sooooo .... lets sit back and give
all the excuses why we can not work on it  (you should apply for a Sybase
position in senior management:)!

    A solid business framework is what application developers need ...
Hello, Hello, any body home!



"Adam Simmonds [TeamSybase]" <adam.simmonds@nospam.micropay.com.au> wrote in
message news:447b9b87@forums-1-dub...
> Chris Pollach wrote:
> >  NO, Sybase should hire a few extra bodies to work on the PFC.
>
> Why? For the 10-15% of clients who use it?
>
> It would be a huge waste of time and if they could afford 2-3 developers
> I would rather see their time invested in PB 11, 12, 13,... and not
> revisiting the past and re-working a stable framework.
>
> You will no doubt be the first to complain when PB11 doesnt have X, Y
> and Z features that you asked for but are happy for time to be spent on
> the PFC to add features that you may not even need.
>
> So what does the PFC really need that you or other developers can not
code?
>
> If these changes are so urgent then I would assume someone has probably
> already added it to their PFC code and if thats the case then submit it
> to the project.
>
> The problem in this instance is not Sybase it is the development
> community who have become lazy and are used to putting their hand out
> and not contributing. Time to put up or shut up, IMHO.
>
> a.
>
>
> I am sure the
> > primary O/S developers at MS were not pulled of to work on .Net. It's
time
> > Sybase spent some of that $1B in the bank on some more resources!
> >
> >
> >
> > "Adam Simmonds [TeamSybase]" <adam.simmonds@nospam.micropay.com.au>
wrote in
> > message news:447a3750@forums-2-dub...
> >> Chris Pollach wrote:
> >>>      I opened a discussion thread on that in the PFC NG a while ago as
> > to
> >>> why Sybase is not evolving the PFC. Seems like they have just "washed
> > their
> >>> hands" of the whole thing (its open source now on CodeXchange) and are
> >>> burying their heads in the sand (Ostrich syndrome I guess).
> >> You harp on about all the stuff you want in PB11 yet expect the
> >> engineers to also spend time enhancing a framework that for all
> >> intensive purposes is complete. Theres an old saying about eating cake
> >> that is applicable here.
> >>
> >> The real problem
> >>> now is that no one is even maintaining / updating the PFC for PB 10.5
or
> > 11.
> >>> This gives me great concern as an application developer when the
vendor
> > does
> >>> not even enhance their own product (IBM calls that "?stable?")!
> >> In the famous words of Paul Horan
> >>
> >> <horse status="dead">
> >>     <action>beat</action>
> >> </horse>
> >>
> >>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> "vsv" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
> > news:44773032$1@forums-1-dub...
> >>>> No offense Chris,
> >>>> But yet there is no commitment on that from Sybase.
> >>>>
> >>>> vsv
> >>>>
> >>>> "Richard Keller" <richard@kellersystems.com> wrote in message
> >>>> news:44772d88@forums-2-dub...
> >>>>> I like the name STD eh Chris, something up there in Canada that we
> > don't
> >>>>> know about?  I bet the symptoms are constant newsgroup posting and
> >>>>> undecipherable jokes that require low temperatures to understand.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Rich
> >>>>>
> >>>>> "Chris Pollach" <cpollach@travel-net.dot.com> wrote in message
> >>>>> news:44771c7f$1@forums-1-dub...
> >>>>>> Its available ... PB9 => 10.5, PocketBuilder 1 => 2.0.4, EAServer
> > 4.2.2
> >>>>>> =>
> >>>>>> 5.3 (6.0 beta available), ASP, ASP.net or JSP projects (and I have
a
> > PB
> >>>>>> 11.Net beta ready too): http://www.sybase.com/developer/codexchange
> > =>
> >>>>>> STD
> >>>>>> Foundation Classes!
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Free too <lol>!
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Regards ... Chris
> >>>>>> PS: note - Many Canadian Government projects are using the FC's!
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> "vsv" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
> >>>>>> news:4474ac1b$1@forums-2-dub...
> >>>>>>> I want to create ONE framework binary & want to reuse it every
> > where.
> >>>>>>> But, the limitations of PB being able to use the PBD as a library
> > file
> >>>>>>> has
> >>>>>>> been a problem.
> >>>>>>> Only in PB10.5 that they have removed this issue completely in
fact
> >>>>>>> forced
> >>>>>>> because of the proxy objects.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> The project painter should automatically have in the library list
> >>>>>>> checked
> >>>>>> or
> >>>>>>> the PBD should be like resource library & not included in the list
> > of
> >>>>>>> libraries be generated (if i include the PBD in the exe especially
> > the
> >>>>>> proxy
> >>>>>>> objects the proxy objects don't work).
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> The PBDs should work the same way I do libary list in JAVA or .NET
> >>> (i.e
> >>>>>>> C
> >>>>>>> flavors).
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> When that works PB can market this as a REAL FRAMEWORK.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Provide project line for all the FRAMEWORK it wants to add-on.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Come up with some conference options.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Having said that, it should start using it internally.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Let the PB IDE designers use PB IDE for designing its features.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Add those features that are not there in PB IDE & exists in
VStudio
> > &
> >>> C#
> >>>>>>> &
> >>>>>>> C++.
> >>>>>>> You get your market base increased.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> There is a  big customer base for PB IDE in Sybase that is not
used
> >>>>>>> potentially.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Yes you might be competing against VStudio & Eclipse. But you have
> > to.
> >>>>>> Face
> >>>>>>> the reality. Otherwise PB IDE will not be an IDE it will be a
plugin
> > &
> >>>>>>> may
> >>>>>>> be nothing very soon. Providing plugin have provided some avenue
for
> >>> the
> >>>>>>> customers to use it. But if you want the IDE to generate revenue
> > then
> >>>>>>> extending these IDE & framework will be the wise move.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Open Sourcing was a good decision. But then Sybase NOT putting any
> >>>>>>> involvement to bring in the energy & participation of the
developer
> >>>>>>> community like creating new projects and providing inputs.
> >>>>>>> These are lacking.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> VSV
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>
> >
> >


0
Chris
5/30/2006 11:30:12 AM
"Chris Pollach" <cpollach@travel-net.dot.com> wrote in message 
news:447c2a6f$1@forums-2-dub...
>
> You need to hire Bill Gates -:)
>
>

I don't get it.

Paul Horan[TeamSybase]


0
Paul
5/30/2006 5:53:08 PM
"Chris Pollach" <cpollach@travel-net.dot.com> wrote in message 
news:447c2cc4@forums-1-dub...
>
>     Yep its statements like this "10-15% of clients who use it" is why not
> only the PFC, but PB is not used 80+%!! Sooooo .... lets sit back and give
> all the excuses why we can not work on it  (you should apply for a Sybase
> position in senior management:)!
>
>    A solid business framework is what application developers need ...
> Hello, Hello, any body home!
>
>
>

The point everyone here is trying to make is:
a) it's not broken (or not broken badly enough to allocate new resources or 
devote existing resources to);
b) it's not a revenue-producer, like the IDE itself;
c) there's an active community out here (who are probably more adept at PFC 
than anyone currently at Sybase) who are ready and waiting to enhance and 
fix the framework;

So please list the items that YOU consider to be missing or broken from PFC. 
I will start on them immediately, for no other reason than to SHUT YOU UP 
ABOUT IT!!!

-- 
Paul Horan[TeamSybase]
Cynergy Systems
www.cynergysystems.com


0
Paul
5/30/2006 5:58:00 PM
 Visionary!


"Paul Horan[TeamSybase]" <paul.horan@NOSPAM_cynergysystems.com> wrote in
message news:447c8684$1@forums-1-dub...
> "Chris Pollach" <cpollach@travel-net.dot.com> wrote in message
> news:447c2a6f$1@forums-2-dub...
> >
> > You need to hire Bill Gates -:)
> >
> >
>
> I don't get it.
>
> Paul Horan[TeamSybase]
>
>


0
Chris
5/30/2006 6:05:13 PM
That's so untrue and I pray that upper management is not giving that excuse, 
but I wouldn't be suprised.   We won't go into GAAP accounting details, but 
operations do not get affected by GAAP accounting.

All you have to ask is how Sybase pays for Sybase Workspace when there is no 
revenue??   Statements like this treat the community as ignorant to how 
finance works.

I completely understand that Sybase would not want to expend additional 
resources on Powerbuilder unless fortunes or markets change but do not treat 
it as some sort of GAAP accounting excuse.   Bad etiquette.

Richard

"Jonathan Baker [Sybase]" <lastnamefirstinitial@sybase.com> wrote in message 
news:447b6ca2@forums-1-dub...
>I understand the frustration, but your idea shows the mis-understanding of 
>how accounting really works.
>
> First, Sybase doesn't have 1 Billion in the bank.  The current amount is 
> around 400 million.  Second, we can't just spend it on new developers. 
> According to GAAP, any money spent on new resources must be expensed in 
> the current quarter, and shown against total income in that same quarter. 
> Unlike personal finances, there is no real way (minus a one-time charge) 
> to pull the money out of the bank to spend on new resources.  We have to 
> do that with current income against PB.
>
> The money in the bank belongs to the stockholders.  We can use it to earn 
> new money (the interest we earn does go against our bottom line) or to buy 
> other companies.  But we can't just apply it to new payroll.  Sorry.
>
> We have a name for this process in the US.  We call it "armchair 
> quarterbacking".  I can promise you that, from the inside, this is much 
> more difficult than it looks from the outside.
>
>
>
> Jonathan
>
>
> Chris Pollach wrote:
>>  NO, Sybase should hire a few extra bodies to work on the PFC. I am sure 
>> the
>> primary O/S developers at MS were not pulled of to work on .Net. It's 
>> time
>> Sybase spent some of that $1B in the bank on some more resources!
>>
>>
>>
>> "Adam Simmonds [TeamSybase]" <adam.simmonds@nospam.micropay.com.au> wrote 
>> in
>> message news:447a3750@forums-2-dub...
>>> Chris Pollach wrote:
>>>>      I opened a discussion thread on that in the PFC NG a while ago as
>> to
>>>> why Sybase is not evolving the PFC. Seems like they have just "washed
>> their
>>>> hands" of the whole thing (its open source now on CodeXchange) and are
>>>> burying their heads in the sand (Ostrich syndrome I guess).
>>> You harp on about all the stuff you want in PB11 yet expect the
>>> engineers to also spend time enhancing a framework that for all
>>> intensive purposes is complete. Theres an old saying about eating cake
>>> that is applicable here.
>>>
>>> The real problem
>>>> now is that no one is even maintaining / updating the PFC for PB 10.5 
>>>> or
>> 11.
>>>> This gives me great concern as an application developer when the vendor
>> does
>>>> not even enhance their own product (IBM calls that "?stable?")!
>>> In the famous words of Paul Horan
>>>
>>> <horse status="dead">
>>>     <action>beat</action>
>>> </horse>
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "vsv" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
>> news:44773032$1@forums-1-dub...
>>>>> No offense Chris,
>>>>> But yet there is no commitment on that from Sybase.
>>>>>
>>>>> vsv
>>>>>
>>>>> "Richard Keller" <richard@kellersystems.com> wrote in message
>>>>> news:44772d88@forums-2-dub...
>>>>>> I like the name STD eh Chris, something up there in Canada that we
>> don't
>>>>>> know about?  I bet the symptoms are constant newsgroup posting and
>>>>>> undecipherable jokes that require low temperatures to understand.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Rich
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Chris Pollach" <cpollach@travel-net.dot.com> wrote in message
>>>>>> news:44771c7f$1@forums-1-dub...
>>>>>>> Its available ... PB9 => 10.5, PocketBuilder 1 => 2.0.4, EAServer
>> 4.2.2
>>>>>>> =>
>>>>>>> 5.3 (6.0 beta available), ASP, ASP.net or JSP projects (and I have a
>> PB
>>>>>>> 11.Net beta ready too): http://www.sybase.com/developer/codexchange
>> =>
>>>>>>> STD
>>>>>>> Foundation Classes!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Free too <lol>!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Regards ... Chris
>>>>>>> PS: note - Many Canadian Government projects are using the FC's!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "vsv" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>> news:4474ac1b$1@forums-2-dub...
>>>>>>>> I want to create ONE framework binary & want to reuse it every
>> where.
>>>>>>>> But, the limitations of PB being able to use the PBD as a library
>> file
>>>>>>>> has
>>>>>>>> been a problem.
>>>>>>>> Only in PB10.5 that they have removed this issue completely in fact
>>>>>>>> forced
>>>>>>>> because of the proxy objects.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The project painter should automatically have in the library list
>>>>>>>> checked
>>>>>>> or
>>>>>>>> the PBD should be like resource library & not included in the list
>> of
>>>>>>>> libraries be generated (if i include the PBD in the exe especially
>> the
>>>>>>> proxy
>>>>>>>> objects the proxy objects don't work).
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The PBDs should work the same way I do libary list in JAVA or .NET
>>>> (i.e
>>>>>>>> C
>>>>>>>> flavors).
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> When that works PB can market this as a REAL FRAMEWORK.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Provide project line for all the FRAMEWORK it wants to add-on.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Come up with some conference options.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Having said that, it should start using it internally.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Let the PB IDE designers use PB IDE for designing its features.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Add those features that are not there in PB IDE & exists in VStudio
>> &
>>>> C#
>>>>>>>> &
>>>>>>>> C++.
>>>>>>>> You get your market base increased.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> There is a  big customer base for PB IDE in Sybase that is not used
>>>>>>>> potentially.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Yes you might be competing against VStudio & Eclipse. But you have
>> to.
>>>>>>> Face
>>>>>>>> the reality. Otherwise PB IDE will not be an IDE it will be a 
>>>>>>>> plugin
>> &
>>>>>>>> may
>>>>>>>> be nothing very soon. Providing plugin have provided some avenue 
>>>>>>>> for
>>>> the
>>>>>>>> customers to use it. But if you want the IDE to generate revenue
>> then
>>>>>>>> extending these IDE & framework will be the wise move.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Open Sourcing was a good decision. But then Sybase NOT putting any
>>>>>>>> involvement to bring in the energy & participation of the developer
>>>>>>>> community like creating new projects and providing inputs.
>>>>>>>> These are lacking.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> VSV
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>
>> 

0
Richard
5/30/2006 6:07:02 PM
Paul;

    Since I have my own framework that runs with PK, PB (Ansi and Unicode),
EAServer and now .Net - I am happy (Yeee Haaaa)! I was just being the devils
advocate for all the other PB developers out there that reply of good
frameworks to assist them in RAD ... they look to things like the PFC as
their savior. Soooooo .... the PFC contributes to PB sales indirectly. If
Sybase can not see this then it's too late for PB (put another nail in the
coffin).

    I guess the key thing at this point is that Sybase needs to make a plan
based on what key technology, IDE and RAD features need to be in PK, IM, PB,
EAS, etc and just do them. Personally, I think Sybase needs to rehire the
PowerSoft guys to head-up a "Tools" division (like iAnyWhere) and just let
them run with the products!

    OK ... I am off my soap box *g* - nothing personal there Paul - just
passionate about PB !

Regards  ... Chris



"Paul Horan[TeamSybase]" <paul.horan@NOSPAM_cynergysystems.com> wrote in
message news:447c87a8$1@forums-1-dub...
> "Chris Pollach" <cpollach@travel-net.dot.com> wrote in message
> news:447c2cc4@forums-1-dub...
> >
> >     Yep its statements like this "10-15% of clients who use it" is why
not
> > only the PFC, but PB is not used 80+%!! Sooooo .... lets sit back and
give
> > all the excuses why we can not work on it  (you should apply for a
Sybase
> > position in senior management:)!
> >
> >    A solid business framework is what application developers need ...
> > Hello, Hello, any body home!
> >
> >
> >
>
> The point everyone here is trying to make is:
> a) it's not broken (or not broken badly enough to allocate new resources
or
> devote existing resources to);
> b) it's not a revenue-producer, like the IDE itself;
> c) there's an active community out here (who are probably more adept at
PFC
> than anyone currently at Sybase) who are ready and waiting to enhance and
> fix the framework;
>
> So please list the items that YOU consider to be missing or broken from
PFC.
> I will start on them immediately, for no other reason than to SHUT YOU UP
> ABOUT IT!!!
>
> --
> Paul Horan[TeamSybase]
> Cynergy Systems
> www.cynergysystems.com
>
>


0
Chris
5/30/2006 6:13:10 PM
 Amen brother .. Amen!


"Richard Keller" <richard@kellersystems.com> wrote in message
news:447c893f$1@forums-2-dub...
> That's so untrue and I pray that upper management is not giving that
excuse,
> but I wouldn't be suprised.   We won't go into GAAP accounting details,
but
> operations do not get affected by GAAP accounting.
>
> All you have to ask is how Sybase pays for Sybase Workspace when there is
no
> revenue??   Statements like this treat the community as ignorant to how
> finance works.
>
> I completely understand that Sybase would not want to expend additional
> resources on Powerbuilder unless fortunes or markets change but do not
treat
> it as some sort of GAAP accounting excuse.   Bad etiquette.
>
> Richard
>
> "Jonathan Baker [Sybase]" <lastnamefirstinitial@sybase.com> wrote in
message
> news:447b6ca2@forums-1-dub...
> >I understand the frustration, but your idea shows the mis-understanding
of
> >how accounting really works.
> >
> > First, Sybase doesn't have 1 Billion in the bank.  The current amount is
> > around 400 million.  Second, we can't just spend it on new developers.
> > According to GAAP, any money spent on new resources must be expensed in
> > the current quarter, and shown against total income in that same
quarter.
> > Unlike personal finances, there is no real way (minus a one-time charge)
> > to pull the money out of the bank to spend on new resources.  We have to
> > do that with current income against PB.
> >
> > The money in the bank belongs to the stockholders.  We can use it to
earn
> > new money (the interest we earn does go against our bottom line) or to
buy
> > other companies.  But we can't just apply it to new payroll.  Sorry.
> >
> > We have a name for this process in the US.  We call it "armchair
> > quarterbacking".  I can promise you that, from the inside, this is much
> > more difficult than it looks from the outside.
> >
> >
> >
> > Jonathan
> >
> >
> > Chris Pollach wrote:
> >>  NO, Sybase should hire a few extra bodies to work on the PFC. I am
sure
> >> the
> >> primary O/S developers at MS were not pulled of to work on .Net. It's
> >> time
> >> Sybase spent some of that $1B in the bank on some more resources!
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> "Adam Simmonds [TeamSybase]" <adam.simmonds@nospam.micropay.com.au>
wrote
> >> in
> >> message news:447a3750@forums-2-dub...
> >>> Chris Pollach wrote:
> >>>>      I opened a discussion thread on that in the PFC NG a while ago
as
> >> to
> >>>> why Sybase is not evolving the PFC. Seems like they have just "washed
> >> their
> >>>> hands" of the whole thing (its open source now on CodeXchange) and
are
> >>>> burying their heads in the sand (Ostrich syndrome I guess).
> >>> You harp on about all the stuff you want in PB11 yet expect the
> >>> engineers to also spend time enhancing a framework that for all
> >>> intensive purposes is complete. Theres an old saying about eating cake
> >>> that is applicable here.
> >>>
> >>> The real problem
> >>>> now is that no one is even maintaining / updating the PFC for PB 10.5
> >>>> or
> >> 11.
> >>>> This gives me great concern as an application developer when the
vendor
> >> does
> >>>> not even enhance their own product (IBM calls that "?stable?")!
> >>> In the famous words of Paul Horan
> >>>
> >>> <horse status="dead">
> >>>     <action>beat</action>
> >>> </horse>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> "vsv" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
> >> news:44773032$1@forums-1-dub...
> >>>>> No offense Chris,
> >>>>> But yet there is no commitment on that from Sybase.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> vsv
> >>>>>
> >>>>> "Richard Keller" <richard@kellersystems.com> wrote in message
> >>>>> news:44772d88@forums-2-dub...
> >>>>>> I like the name STD eh Chris, something up there in Canada that we
> >> don't
> >>>>>> know about?  I bet the symptoms are constant newsgroup posting and
> >>>>>> undecipherable jokes that require low temperatures to understand.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Rich
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> "Chris Pollach" <cpollach@travel-net.dot.com> wrote in message
> >>>>>> news:44771c7f$1@forums-1-dub...
> >>>>>>> Its available ... PB9 => 10.5, PocketBuilder 1 => 2.0.4, EAServer
> >> 4.2.2
> >>>>>>> =>
> >>>>>>> 5.3 (6.0 beta available), ASP, ASP.net or JSP projects (and I have
a
> >> PB
> >>>>>>> 11.Net beta ready too):
http://www.sybase.com/developer/codexchange
> >> =>
> >>>>>>> STD
> >>>>>>> Foundation Classes!
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Free too <lol>!
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Regards ... Chris
> >>>>>>> PS: note - Many Canadian Government projects are using the FC's!
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> "vsv" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
> >>>>>>> news:4474ac1b$1@forums-2-dub...
> >>>>>>>> I want to create ONE framework binary & want to reuse it every
> >> where.
> >>>>>>>> But, the limitations of PB being able to use the PBD as a library
> >> file
> >>>>>>>> has
> >>>>>>>> been a problem.
> >>>>>>>> Only in PB10.5 that they have removed this issue completely in
fact
> >>>>>>>> forced
> >>>>>>>> because of the proxy objects.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> The project painter should automatically have in the library list
> >>>>>>>> checked
> >>>>>>> or
> >>>>>>>> the PBD should be like resource library & not included in the
list
> >> of
> >>>>>>>> libraries be generated (if i include the PBD in the exe
especially
> >> the
> >>>>>>> proxy
> >>>>>>>> objects the proxy objects don't work).
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> The PBDs should work the same way I do libary list in JAVA or
..NET
> >>>> (i.e
> >>>>>>>> C
> >>>>>>>> flavors).
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> When that works PB can market this as a REAL FRAMEWORK.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Provide project line for all the FRAMEWORK it wants to add-on.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Come up with some conference options.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Having said that, it should start using it internally.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Let the PB IDE designers use PB IDE for designing its features.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Add those features that are not there in PB IDE & exists in
VStudio
> >> &
> >>>> C#
> >>>>>>>> &
> >>>>>>>> C++.
> >>>>>>>> You get your market base increased.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> There is a  big customer base for PB IDE in Sybase that is not
used
> >>>>>>>> potentially.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Yes you might be competing against VStudio & Eclipse. But you
have
> >> to.
> >>>>>>> Face
> >>>>>>>> the reality. Otherwise PB IDE will not be an IDE it will be a
> >>>>>>>> plugin
> >> &
> >>>>>>>> may
> >>>>>>>> be nothing very soon. Providing plugin have provided some avenue
> >>>>>>>> for
> >>>> the
> >>>>>>>> customers to use it. But if you want the IDE to generate revenue
> >> then
> >>>>>>>> extending these IDE & framework will be the wise move.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Open Sourcing was a good decision. But then Sybase NOT putting
any
> >>>>>>>> involvement to bring in the energy & participation of the
developer
> >>>>>>>> community like creating new projects and providing inputs.
> >>>>>>>> These are lacking.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> VSV
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>
> >>
>


0
Chris
5/30/2006 6:14:47 PM
I really don't want to butt in but I was really looking forward to an 
actual answer to Paul's question. I'm very curious know what people need 
in PFC that doesn't already exist.

Chris, can you please provide an answer, I notice that you dodge a lot 
of questions.

Thanks,

Brad

Chris Pollach wrote:
> Paul;
> 
>     Since I have my own framework that runs with PK, PB (Ansi and Unicode),
> EAServer and now .Net - I am happy (Yeee Haaaa)! I was just being the devils
> advocate for all the other PB developers out there that reply of good
> frameworks to assist them in RAD ... they look to things like the PFC as
> their savior. Soooooo .... the PFC contributes to PB sales indirectly. If
> Sybase can not see this then it's too late for PB (put another nail in the
> coffin).
> 
>     I guess the key thing at this point is that Sybase needs to make a plan
> based on what key technology, IDE and RAD features need to be in PK, IM, PB,
> EAS, etc and just do them. Personally, I think Sybase needs to rehire the
> PowerSoft guys to head-up a "Tools" division (like iAnyWhere) and just let
> them run with the products!
> 
>     OK ... I am off my soap box *g* - nothing personal there Paul - just
> passionate about PB !
> 
> Regards  ... Chris
> 
> 
> 
> "Paul Horan[TeamSybase]" <paul.horan@NOSPAM_cynergysystems.com> wrote in
> message news:447c87a8$1@forums-1-dub...
> 
>>"Chris Pollach" <cpollach@travel-net.dot.com> wrote in message
>>news:447c2cc4@forums-1-dub...
>>
>>>    Yep its statements like this "10-15% of clients who use it" is why
> 
> not
> 
>>>only the PFC, but PB is not used 80+%!! Sooooo .... lets sit back and
> 
> give
> 
>>>all the excuses why we can not work on it  (you should apply for a
> 
> Sybase
> 
>>>position in senior management:)!
>>>
>>>   A solid business framework is what application developers need ...
>>>Hello, Hello, any body home!
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>The point everyone here is trying to make is:
>>a) it's not broken (or not broken badly enough to allocate new resources
> 
> or
> 
>>devote existing resources to);
>>b) it's not a revenue-producer, like the IDE itself;
>>c) there's an active community out here (who are probably more adept at
> 
> PFC
> 
>>than anyone currently at Sybase) who are ready and waiting to enhance and
>>fix the framework;
>>
>>So please list the items that YOU consider to be missing or broken from
> 
> PFC.
> 
>>I will start on them immediately, for no other reason than to SHUT YOU UP
>>ABOUT IT!!!
>>
>>--
>>Paul Horan[TeamSybase]
>>Cynergy Systems
>>www.cynergysystems.com
>>
>>
> 
> 
> 
0
Brad
5/30/2006 6:53:02 PM
>>So please list the items that YOU consider to be missing or broken from 
>>PFC.


"Chris Pollach" <cpollach@travel-net.dot.com> wrote in message 
news:447c8aa7$1@forums-2-dub...
> Paul;
>
>    Since I have my own framework that runs with PK, PB (Ansi and Unicode),
> EAServer and now .Net - I am happy (Yeee Haaaa)! I was just being the 
> devils
> advocate for all the other PB developers out there that reply of good
> frameworks to assist them in RAD ... they look to things like the PFC as
> their savior. Soooooo .... the PFC contributes to PB sales indirectly. If
> Sybase can not see this then it's too late for PB (put another nail in the
> coffin).
>
>    I guess the key thing at this point is that Sybase needs to make a plan
> based on what key technology, IDE and RAD features need to be in PK, IM, 
> PB,
> EAS, etc and just do them. Personally, I think Sybase needs to rehire the
> PowerSoft guys to head-up a "Tools" division (like iAnyWhere) and just let
> them run with the products!
>
>    OK ... I am off my soap box *g* - nothing personal there Paul - just
> passionate about PB !
>
> Regards  ... Chris
>
>
>


Yeah - that was pretty much the response (or lack thereof) that I was 
expecting...

-- 
Paul Horan[TeamSybase]
Cynergy Systems
www.cynergysystems.com


0
Paul
5/30/2006 6:59:08 PM
    Again, the key is that the PFC provides excellent business behaviour
(ie: link manager, start-up/down tasks, messaging, OS interfaces, data
checking, etc). These are all critical things a normal application requires
above an beyond the basic IDE tool. I was just talking to some people at a
local government department last week who have been trying to do some things
in VS2005 .. and they are basically writing their own PFC. As they have
found over the past 6 months ...  just having the .Net framework is far from
a complete application framework that a business developers requires.

    So, if we consider the PFC as the "Business Framework" - for the average
PB developer, that allows them to quickly build, maintain, and migrate their
applications forward - this is a key reason to use PB (even over VS). If
Sybase abandons the PFC - then the average developer sits back and says -
"How long before the PFC will not run at all with PB 11 or 12, etc"? It does
not take a dummy to figure out that PB and the related O/S's will advance
and the PFC will becomes useless as it will stagnate (OK, it is already
doing that *g*). The intelligent manager will also look at this feedback
from the developers as "the vendor does not care about the supporting
product - so we should migrate to something else" (of course, this is all
the MS salesperson needs to hear).

    If Sybase does not look at the PFC or better yet, a redesigned PFC as
one of the key items to continuing to use the PB product - they are sorely
misinformed by naive people. The other factor is to "gain market share" and
in order to do this you need to show that not only does your tool do what
the other guy's does, but it can do it cheaper, faster, easier and (bonus)
with better performance. Over the past 5 years, I have been able to "smoke"
many Java projects with PB 9 & 10 and even get many of those back into using
PB (Old Age Canada Pension being a great example)! Sybase can still deliver
a much better "value for the $" if they stop cutting out PB's great features
.... for example (DPB, ObjectCycle, PFC, C++ User Object, etc). All
management has heard over the past 5-6 years from their PB developers is how
each new release of PB has dropped a feature (or two) that they depend
on!!!! Well guess what, that message has translated into a ... "Lets migrate
off PB as fast as we can" mentality out their that due to a COMPLETE lack of
marketing of PB has fueled the exodus of PB development to Java and now VS.

    Its not so much the PFC as the whole decay of the PB development
infrastructure and lack of ingenuity of new features into PB (until 10.5
anyway) that keeps sending out the "All hands abandon ship" message. This
really "ticks-me-off" as PB is such a great product. I just built a complete
(and working) .Net prototype application in PB 11 (alpha) in 4 hours that a
VS2005 development team ( 4 people) has not even one screen working after 3
months. I showed it to my project leader who almost web their pants - but
said, "too bad management thinks that PB is obsolete... I do not think I
could sell that to upper management" (of course because they just spent that
last 6-18 months convincing management to buy VS - I kid you not, save face
or what). In the meantime, the end user is saying - "Hey, you said you could
develop allot faster in that MS VS thingy .. so where is my application?"
(VS what a joke when it comes to data handling). However, saying that - what
pulled my bacon out of the fire to do this RAD prototype was my own
Foundation Classes (like the PFC) that I have migrated from PB 10.5 to 11
and .Net-a-sized. Now the real power of PB shines through!

    I hope that gives you a sense of where I am coming from and why the PFC
is just a small issue of Sybase incompetancy eroding one of the best
development tools out there (even today). We (the development community)
MUST make Sybase management understand that in order to position PB back on
top, they need to quit neglecting any feature, because believe me, these
features are production critical to many PB applications. No one seems to
ask the REAL PB community - "OK if I remove that feature?" ... just some
&^*@$ makes  a decision like: "wow we could save a developer if we axe that
feature". Ever hear of the expression "Cut your nose off to spite your face"
... well, here is a good example with PB how Sybase did that!

      I am real guy out there building and helping other developers build
real systems (and not just Mickey Mouse stuff either) I am talking 500-1000
concurrent users, terabyte databases, 100000 transactions per hour web
systems, complicated GUI interfaces, etc - and you know what, we ARE doing
this with PB 10 even today (including web services)!

    So to wrap up my soap box ... I do not want to hear from any manager, PB
wannabe, Team-whatever, etc. Lets get some Sybase people - especially
engineers, marketing and senior management - REALLY involved with this
products future. In other words ... lets get off the arm chair management
approach and back to some "hands-on" stuff - just like the good old
PowerSoft days. Maybe, this can be an excellent example of how to turn a
product around that Sybase could use in other endeavours as well. You never
know until you give it the "old college try" - something that all I hear in
the various news groups is why we can not do something. Time to eradicate
that negative behviour!!!!!

Regards ... Chris
Great White North PB Technical Evangelist




"Brad Wery" <bradweryatagricoreunited.com> wrote in message
news:447c948e$1@forums-1-dub...
> I really don't want to butt in but I was really looking forward to an
> actual answer to Paul's question. I'm very curious know what people need
> in PFC that doesn't already exist.
>
> Chris, can you please provide an answer, I notice that you dodge a lot
> of questions.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Brad
>
> Chris Pollach wrote:
> > Paul;
> >
> >     Since I have my own framework that runs with PK, PB (Ansi and
Unicode),
> > EAServer and now .Net - I am happy (Yeee Haaaa)! I was just being the
devils
> > advocate for all the other PB developers out there that reply of good
> > frameworks to assist them in RAD ... they look to things like the PFC as
> > their savior. Soooooo .... the PFC contributes to PB sales indirectly.
If
> > Sybase can not see this then it's too late for PB (put another nail in
the
> > coffin).
> >
> >     I guess the key thing at this point is that Sybase needs to make a
plan
> > based on what key technology, IDE and RAD features need to be in PK, IM,
PB,
> > EAS, etc and just do them. Personally, I think Sybase needs to rehire
the
> > PowerSoft guys to head-up a "Tools" division (like iAnyWhere) and just
let
> > them run with the products!
> >
> >     OK ... I am off my soap box *g* - nothing personal there Paul - just
> > passionate about PB !
> >
> > Regards  ... Chris
> >
> >
> >
> > "Paul Horan[TeamSybase]" <paul.horan@NOSPAM_cynergysystems.com> wrote in
> > message news:447c87a8$1@forums-1-dub...
> >
> >>"Chris Pollach" <cpollach@travel-net.dot.com> wrote in message
> >>news:447c2cc4@forums-1-dub...
> >>
> >>>    Yep its statements like this "10-15% of clients who use it" is why
> >
> > not
> >
> >>>only the PFC, but PB is not used 80+%!! Sooooo .... lets sit back and
> >
> > give
> >
> >>>all the excuses why we can not work on it  (you should apply for a
> >
> > Sybase
> >
> >>>position in senior management:)!
> >>>
> >>>   A solid business framework is what application developers need ...
> >>>Hello, Hello, any body home!
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>The point everyone here is trying to make is:
> >>a) it's not broken (or not broken badly enough to allocate new resources
> >
> > or
> >
> >>devote existing resources to);
> >>b) it's not a revenue-producer, like the IDE itself;
> >>c) there's an active community out here (who are probably more adept at
> >
> > PFC
> >
> >>than anyone currently at Sybase) who are ready and waiting to enhance
and
> >>fix the framework;
> >>
> >>So please list the items that YOU consider to be missing or broken from
> >
> > PFC.
> >
> >>I will start on them immediately, for no other reason than to SHUT YOU
UP
> >>ABOUT IT!!!
> >>
> >>--
> >>Paul Horan[TeamSybase]
> >>Cynergy Systems
> >>www.cynergysystems.com
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >


0
Chris
5/30/2006 7:43:46 PM
How does that solve the accounting problem?


Chris Pollach wrote:
>  Visionary!
> 
> 
> "Paul Horan[TeamSybase]" <paul.horan@NOSPAM_cynergysystems.com> wrote in
> message news:447c8684$1@forums-1-dub...
>> "Chris Pollach" <cpollach@travel-net.dot.com> wrote in message
>> news:447c2a6f$1@forums-2-dub...
>>> You need to hire Bill Gates -:)
>>>
>>>
>> I don't get it.
>>
>> Paul Horan[TeamSybase]
>>
>>
> 
> 
0
Jonathan
5/30/2006 8:15:39 PM
After Sybase is assimilated, there will no longer be an accounting problem.
Rumor has it the new product designation will be Visual P.

"Jonathan Baker [Sybase]" <lastnamefirstinitial@sybase.com> wrote in message
news:447ca7eb$1@forums-1-dub...
> How does that solve the accounting problem?
>
>
> Chris Pollach wrote:
> >  Visionary!
> >
> >
> > "Paul Horan[TeamSybase]" <paul.horan@NOSPAM_cynergysystems.com> wrote in
> > message news:447c8684$1@forums-1-dub...
> >> "Chris Pollach" <cpollach@travel-net.dot.com> wrote in message
> >> news:447c2a6f$1@forums-2-dub...
> >>> You need to hire Bill Gates -:)
> >>>
> >>>
> >> I don't get it.
> >>
> >> Paul Horan[TeamSybase]
> >>
> >>
> >
> >


0
Jerry
5/30/2006 9:03:09 PM
For the record.

I've written some pretty big applications and I can tell you that I've 
never found PowerBuilder to be limiting. Actually, with the release of 
10.5 I was able to add some great new features to my application with 
the help of the treeview datawindow and the new RTE control.

Brad

P.S. I believe you dodged the question again. What is PFC lacking right 
now (aside from Sybase support and marketing (I'm talking about 
functionality))?

Chris Pollach wrote:
>     Again, the key is that the PFC provides excellent business behaviour
> (ie: link manager, start-up/down tasks, messaging, OS interfaces, data
> checking, etc). These are all critical things a normal application requires
> above an beyond the basic IDE tool. I was just talking to some people at a
> local government department last week who have been trying to do some things
> in VS2005 .. and they are basically writing their own PFC. As they have
> found over the past 6 months ...  just having the .Net framework is far from
> a complete application framework that a business developers requires.
> 
>     So, if we consider the PFC as the "Business Framework" - for the average
> PB developer, that allows them to quickly build, maintain, and migrate their
> applications forward - this is a key reason to use PB (even over VS). If
> Sybase abandons the PFC - then the average developer sits back and says -
> "How long before the PFC will not run at all with PB 11 or 12, etc"? It does
> not take a dummy to figure out that PB and the related O/S's will advance
> and the PFC will becomes useless as it will stagnate (OK, it is already
> doing that *g*). The intelligent manager will also look at this feedback
> from the developers as "the vendor does not care about the supporting
> product - so we should migrate to something else" (of course, this is all
> the MS salesperson needs to hear).
> 
>     If Sybase does not look at the PFC or better yet, a redesigned PFC as
> one of the key items to continuing to use the PB product - they are sorely
> misinformed by naive people. The other factor is to "gain market share" and
> in order to do this you need to show that not only does your tool do what
> the other guy's does, but it can do it cheaper, faster, easier and (bonus)
> with better performance. Over the past 5 years, I have been able to "smoke"
> many Java projects with PB 9 & 10 and even get many of those back into using
> PB (Old Age Canada Pension being a great example)! Sybase can still deliver
> a much better "value for the $" if they stop cutting out PB's great features
> ... for example (DPB, ObjectCycle, PFC, C++ User Object, etc). All
> management has heard over the past 5-6 years from their PB developers is how
> each new release of PB has dropped a feature (or two) that they depend
> on!!!! Well guess what, that message has translated into a ... "Lets migrate
> off PB as fast as we can" mentality out their that due to a COMPLETE lack of
> marketing of PB has fueled the exodus of PB development to Java and now VS.
> 
>     Its not so much the PFC as the whole decay of the PB development
> infrastructure and lack of ingenuity of new features into PB (until 10.5
> anyway) that keeps sending out the "All hands abandon ship" message. This
> really "ticks-me-off" as PB is such a great product. I just built a complete
> (and working) .Net prototype application in PB 11 (alpha) in 4 hours that a
> VS2005 development team ( 4 people) has not even one screen working after 3
> months. I showed it to my project leader who almost web their pants - but
> said, "too bad management thinks that PB is obsolete... I do not think I
> could sell that to upper management" (of course because they just spent that
> last 6-18 months convincing management to buy VS - I kid you not, save face
> or what). In the meantime, the end user is saying - "Hey, you said you could
> develop allot faster in that MS VS thingy .. so where is my application?"
> (VS what a joke when it comes to data handling). However, saying that - what
> pulled my bacon out of the fire to do this RAD prototype was my own
> Foundation Classes (like the PFC) that I have migrated from PB 10.5 to 11
> and .Net-a-sized. Now the real power of PB shines through!
> 
>     I hope that gives you a sense of where I am coming from and why the PFC
> is just a small issue of Sybase incompetancy eroding one of the best
> development tools out there (even today). We (the development community)
> MUST make Sybase management understand that in order to position PB back on
> top, they need to quit neglecting any feature, because believe me, these
> features are production critical to many PB applications. No one seems to
> ask the REAL PB community - "OK if I remove that feature?" ... just some
> &^*@$ makes  a decision like: "wow we could save a developer if we axe that
> feature". Ever hear of the expression "Cut your nose off to spite your face"
> .. well, here is a good example with PB how Sybase did that!
> 
>       I am real guy out there building and helping other developers build
> real systems (and not just Mickey Mouse stuff either) I am talking 500-1000
> concurrent users, terabyte databases, 100000 transactions per hour web
> systems, complicated GUI interfaces, etc - and you know what, we ARE doing
> this with PB 10 even today (including web services)!
> 
>     So to wrap up my soap box ... I do not want to hear from any manager, PB
> wannabe, Team-whatever, etc. Lets get some Sybase people - especially
> engineers, marketing and senior management - REALLY involved with this
> products future. In other words ... lets get off the arm chair management
> approach and back to some "hands-on" stuff - just like the good old
> PowerSoft days. Maybe, this can be an excellent example of how to turn a
> product around that Sybase could use in other endeavours as well. You never
> know until you give it the "old college try" - something that all I hear in
> the various news groups is why we can not do something. Time to eradicate
> that negative behviour!!!!!
> 
> Regards ... Chris
> Great White North PB Technical Evangelist
0
Brad
5/30/2006 9:07:16 PM
Actually, Visual P#.

The DataWindow and the DataStore will finally have a common ancestor.  In 
fact, there will be 12 layers of abstraction between those objects and their 
common ancestor.

There will be a native driver for MS SQL Server again.  Unfortunately, all 
of the other native drivers are replaced by OLE DB drivers.

"Jerry Siegel" <jerrys@dataDASHsciDOTcom.die.spammer.die.die.die> wrote in 
message news:447cb283$1@forums-2-dub...
> After Sybase is assimilated, there will no longer be an accounting 
> problem.
> Rumor has it the new product designation will be Visual P.
>
> "Jonathan Baker [Sybase]" <lastnamefirstinitial@sybase.com> wrote in 
> message
> news:447ca7eb$1@forums-1-dub...
>> How does that solve the accounting problem?
>>
>>
>> Chris Pollach wrote:
>> >  Visionary!
>> >
>> >
>> > "Paul Horan[TeamSybase]" <paul.horan@NOSPAM_cynergysystems.com> wrote 
>> > in
>> > message news:447c8684$1@forums-1-dub...
>> >> "Chris Pollach" <cpollach@travel-net.dot.com> wrote in message
>> >> news:447c2a6f$1@forums-2-dub...
>> >>> You need to hire Bill Gates -:)
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >> I don't get it.
>> >>
>> >> Paul Horan[TeamSybase]
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>
> 


0
Bruce
5/30/2006 9:26:12 PM
LOL!!!!

"Jerry Siegel" <jerrys@dataDASHsciDOTcom.die.spammer.die.die.die> escribi� 
en el mensaje news:447cb283$1@forums-2-dub...
> After Sybase is assimilated, there will no longer be an accounting 
> problem.
> Rumor has it the new product designation will be Visual P.
>
> "Jonathan Baker [Sybase]" <lastnamefirstinitial@sybase.com> wrote in 
> message
> news:447ca7eb$1@forums-1-dub...
>> How does that solve the accounting problem?
>>
>>
>> Chris Pollach wrote:
>> >  Visionary!
>> >
>> >
>> > "Paul Horan[TeamSybase]" <paul.horan@NOSPAM_cynergysystems.com> wrote 
>> > in
>> > message news:447c8684$1@forums-1-dub...
>> >> "Chris Pollach" <cpollach@travel-net.dot.com> wrote in message
>> >> news:447c2a6f$1@forums-2-dub...
>> >>> You need to hire Bill Gates -:)
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >> I don't get it.
>> >>
>> >> Paul Horan[TeamSybase]
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>
> 


0
Adri
5/30/2006 9:27:19 PM
Thank you Brad.  I would also love to change this thread towards
constructive criticism.

On 30 May 2006 11:53:02 -0700, Brad Wery
<bradweryatagricoreunited.com> wrote:

>I really don't want to butt in but I was really looking forward to an 
>actual answer to Paul's question. I'm very curious know what people need 
>in PFC that doesn't already exist.
>
>Chris, can you please provide an answer, I notice that you dodge a lot 
>of questions.
>
>Thanks,
>
>Brad
>
>Chris Pollach wrote:
>> Paul;
>> 
>>     Since I have my own framework that runs with PK, PB (Ansi and Unicode),
>> EAServer and now .Net - I am happy (Yeee Haaaa)! I was just being the devils
>> advocate for all the other PB developers out there that reply of good
>> frameworks to assist them in RAD ... they look to things like the PFC as
>> their savior. Soooooo .... the PFC contributes to PB sales indirectly. If
>> Sybase can not see this then it's too late for PB (put another nail in the
>> coffin).
>> 
>>     I guess the key thing at this point is that Sybase needs to make a plan
>> based on what key technology, IDE and RAD features need to be in PK, IM, PB,
>> EAS, etc and just do them. Personally, I think Sybase needs to rehire the
>> PowerSoft guys to head-up a "Tools" division (like iAnyWhere) and just let
>> them run with the products!
>> 
>>     OK ... I am off my soap box *g* - nothing personal there Paul - just
>> passionate about PB !
>> 
>> Regards  ... Chris
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> "Paul Horan[TeamSybase]" <paul.horan@NOSPAM_cynergysystems.com> wrote in
>> message news:447c87a8$1@forums-1-dub...
>> 
>>>"Chris Pollach" <cpollach@travel-net.dot.com> wrote in message
>>>news:447c2cc4@forums-1-dub...
>>>
>>>>    Yep its statements like this "10-15% of clients who use it" is why
>> 
>> not
>> 
>>>>only the PFC, but PB is not used 80+%!! Sooooo .... lets sit back and
>> 
>> give
>> 
>>>>all the excuses why we can not work on it  (you should apply for a
>> 
>> Sybase
>> 
>>>>position in senior management:)!
>>>>
>>>>   A solid business framework is what application developers need ...
>>>>Hello, Hello, any body home!
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>The point everyone here is trying to make is:
>>>a) it's not broken (or not broken badly enough to allocate new resources
>> 
>> or
>> 
>>>devote existing resources to);
>>>b) it's not a revenue-producer, like the IDE itself;
>>>c) there's an active community out here (who are probably more adept at
>> 
>> PFC
>> 
>>>than anyone currently at Sybase) who are ready and waiting to enhance and
>>>fix the framework;
>>>
>>>So please list the items that YOU consider to be missing or broken from
>> 
>> PFC.
>> 
>>>I will start on them immediately, for no other reason than to SHUT YOU UP
>>>ABOUT IT!!!
>>>
>>>--
>>>Paul Horan[TeamSybase]
>>>Cynergy Systems
>>>www.cynergysystems.com
>>>
>>>
>> 
>> 
>> 


  Boris Gasin [TeamSybase]
  mailto:NOSPAM_bgasin@dynamictechgroup.com
    ___ 
  ____   _      
 _____    _     
  ____   _      
    ___ 


  Dynamic Technology Group, Inc.
  http://www.dynamictechgroup.com/
0
Boris
5/30/2006 9:35:15 PM
So, why not buy a company full of developers? <g>

If the only way to pay for development is from existing revenues, how is
there ever new development? (Sorry if I'm ignorant. Just trying to close the
mental circle.)

As far as "earn new money" goes, it seems to make sense to me (GAAP
notwithstanding) that the purpose of investing in your own company's future
(whether it's buying advertising time, buying a new company or hiring a new
resource or two) is to earn new money. How is investing in new developers
not acceptable, while passively earning interest is acceptable? If the only
way to earn new money were to schlump it into a bank account somewhere and
let it sit, that's all anybody would ever do with their money. Seems like
negative growth is inevitable given these accounting restrictions.

Regards,
Millard

"Jonathan Baker [Sybase]" <lastnamefirstinitial@sybase.com> wrote in message
news:447b6ca2@forums-1-dub...
> I understand the frustration, but your idea shows the mis-understanding
> of how accounting really works.
>
> First, Sybase doesn't have 1 Billion in the bank.  The current amount is
> around 400 million.  Second, we can't just spend it on new developers.
> According to GAAP, any money spent on new resources must be expensed in
> the current quarter, and shown against total income in that same
> quarter.  Unlike personal finances, there is no real way (minus a
> one-time charge) to pull the money out of the bank to spend on new
> resources.  We have to do that with current income against PB.
>
> The money in the bank belongs to the stockholders.  We can use it to
> earn new money (the interest we earn does go against our bottom line) or
> to buy other companies.  But we can't just apply it to new payroll.
Sorry.
>
> We have a name for this process in the US.  We call it "armchair
> quarterbacking".  I can promise you that, from the inside, this is much
> more difficult than it looks from the outside.
>
>
>
> Jonathan
>
>
> Chris Pollach wrote:
> >  NO, Sybase should hire a few extra bodies to work on the PFC. I am sure
the
> > primary O/S developers at MS were not pulled of to work on .Net. It's
time
> > Sybase spent some of that $1B in the bank on some more resources!
> >
> >
> >
> > "Adam Simmonds [TeamSybase]" <adam.simmonds@nospam.micropay.com.au>
wrote in
> > message news:447a3750@forums-2-dub...
> >> Chris Pollach wrote:
> >>>      I opened a discussion thread on that in the PFC NG a while ago as
> > to
> >>> why Sybase is not evolving the PFC. Seems like they have just "washed
> > their
> >>> hands" of the whole thing (its open source now on CodeXchange) and are
> >>> burying their heads in the sand (Ostrich syndrome I guess).
> >> You harp on about all the stuff you want in PB11 yet expect the
> >> engineers to also spend time enhancing a framework that for all
> >> intensive purposes is complete. Theres an old saying about eating cake
> >> that is applicable here.
> >>
> >> The real problem
> >>> now is that no one is even maintaining / updating the PFC for PB 10.5
or
> > 11.
> >>> This gives me great concern as an application developer when the
vendor
> > does
> >>> not even enhance their own product (IBM calls that "?stable?")!
> >> In the famous words of Paul Horan
> >>
> >> <horse status="dead">
> >>     <action>beat</action>
> >> </horse>
> >>
> >>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> "vsv" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
> > news:44773032$1@forums-1-dub...
> >>>> No offense Chris,
> >>>> But yet there is no commitment on that from Sybase.
> >>>>
> >>>> vsv
> >>>>
> >>>> "Richard Keller" <richard@kellersystems.com> wrote in message
> >>>> news:44772d88@forums-2-dub...
> >>>>> I like the name STD eh Chris, something up there in Canada that we
> > don't
> >>>>> know about?  I bet the symptoms are constant newsgroup posting and
> >>>>> undecipherable jokes that require low temperatures to understand.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Rich
> >>>>>
> >>>>> "Chris Pollach" <cpollach@travel-net.dot.com> wrote in message
> >>>>> news:44771c7f$1@forums-1-dub...
> >>>>>> Its available ... PB9 => 10.5, PocketBuilder 1 => 2.0.4, EAServer
> > 4.2.2
> >>>>>> =>
> >>>>>> 5.3 (6.0 beta available), ASP, ASP.net or JSP projects (and I have
a
> > PB
> >>>>>> 11.Net beta ready too): http://www.sybase.com/developer/codexchange
> > =>
> >>>>>> STD
> >>>>>> Foundation Classes!
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Free too <lol>!
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Regards ... Chris
> >>>>>> PS: note - Many Canadian Government projects are using the FC's!
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> "vsv" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
> >>>>>> news:4474ac1b$1@forums-2-dub...
> >>>>>>> I want to create ONE framework binary & want to reuse it every
> > where.
> >>>>>>> But, the limitations of PB being able to use the PBD as a library
> > file
> >>>>>>> has
> >>>>>>> been a problem.
> >>>>>>> Only in PB10.5 that they have removed this issue completely in
fact
> >>>>>>> forced
> >>>>>>> because of the proxy objects.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> The project painter should automatically have in the library list
> >>>>>>> checked
> >>>>>> or
> >>>>>>> the PBD should be like resource library & not included in the list
> > of
> >>>>>>> libraries be generated (if i include the PBD in the exe especially
> > the
> >>>>>> proxy
> >>>>>>> objects the proxy objects don't work).
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> The PBDs should work the same way I do libary list in JAVA or .NET
> >>> (i.e
> >>>>>>> C
> >>>>>>> flavors).
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> When that works PB can market this as a REAL FRAMEWORK.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Provide project line for all the FRAMEWORK it wants to add-on.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Come up with some conference options.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Having said that, it should start using it internally.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Let the PB IDE designers use PB IDE for designing its features.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Add those features that are not there in PB IDE & exists in
VStudio
> > &
> >>> C#
> >>>>>>> &
> >>>>>>> C++.
> >>>>>>> You get your market base increased.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> There is a  big customer base for PB IDE in Sybase that is not
used
> >>>>>>> potentially.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Yes you might be competing against VStudio & Eclipse. But you have
> > to.
> >>>>>> Face
> >>>>>>> the reality. Otherwise PB IDE will not be an IDE it will be a
plugin
> > &
> >>>>>>> may
> >>>>>>> be nothing very soon. Providing plugin have provided some avenue
for
> >>> the
> >>>>>>> customers to use it. But if you want the IDE to generate revenue
> > then
> >>>>>>> extending these IDE & framework will be the wise move.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Open Sourcing was a good decision. But then Sybase NOT putting any
> >>>>>>> involvement to bring in the energy & participation of the
developer
> >>>>>>> community like creating new projects and providing inputs.
> >>>>>>> These are lacking.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> VSV
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>
> >
> >


0
Millard
5/30/2006 10:25:39 PM
Bruce Armstrong [TeamSybase] wrote:
> Actually, Visual P#.

It wouldn't be Pb? (P flat)
0
Jason
5/30/2006 11:44:35 PM
Chris Pollach wrote:
>     Again, the key is that the PFC provides excellent business behaviour
> (ie: link manager, start-up/down tasks, messaging, OS interfaces, data
> checking, etc). These are all critical things a normal application requires
> above an beyond the basic IDE tool. I was just talking to some people at a
> local government department last week who have been trying to do some things
> in VS2005 .. and they are basically writing their own PFC. As they have
> found over the past 6 months ...  just having the .Net framework is far from
> a complete application framework that a business developers requires.
> 
>     So, if we consider the PFC as the "Business Framework" - for the average
> PB developer, that allows them to quickly build, maintain, and migrate their
> applications forward - this is a key reason to use PB (even over VS). If
> Sybase abandons the PFC - then the average developer sits back and says -

So on that basis the PFC already provides this "business framework" 
(although I would not call it that)

> "How long before the PFC will not run at all with PB 11 or 12, etc"? 

Hence the open source and the ability for developers to maintain the code.

It does
> not take a dummy to figure out that PB and the related O/S's will advance
> and the PFC will becomes useless as it will stagnate 

Hence the open source and the ability for developers to maintain the code.

(OK, it is already
> doing that *g*). The intelligent manager will also look at this feedback
> from the developers as "the vendor does not care about the supporting
> product - so we should migrate to something else" (of course, this is all
> the MS salesperson needs to hear).

Would these would be the same managers using the plethora of open source 
code available ( Tomcat, MySql, Struts to name a few ). Your argument is 
totally flawed since the product(PB) is supported.

>     If Sybase does not look at the PFC or better yet, a redesigned PFC as
> one of the key items to continuing to use the PB product - 

Yet you can not answer the simple question: What additions/modifications 
are required in the PFC.

To make it simple just fill in the blanks below for your top 5 PFC 
enhancements

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

they are sorely
> misinformed by naive people. The other factor is to "gain market share" and
> in order to do this you need to show that not only does your tool do what
> the other guy's does, but it can do it cheaper, faster, easier and (bonus)
> with better performance. Over the past 5 years, I have been able to "smoke"
> many Java projects with PB 9 & 10 and even get many of those back into using
> PB (Old Age Canada Pension being a great example)! Sybase can still deliver
> a much better "value for the $" if they stop cutting out PB's great features
> ... for example (DPB, ObjectCycle

pmsl. you have lost all credibility if you believe ObjectCycle should 
have been retained.

, PFC, C++ User Object, etc). All
> management has heard over the past 5-6 years from their PB developers is how
> each new release of PB has dropped a feature (or two) that they depend
> on!!!! 

So basing this on PB6-10 that would be about 8 lost features.

Please list these 8 features, maybe Sybase will consider putting them 
back in.

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.


Well guess what, that message has translated into a ... "Lets migrate
> off PB as fast as we can" mentality out their that due to a COMPLETE lack of
> marketing of PB has fueled the exodus of PB development to Java and now VS.

So now its marketing? I thought you said its the lack of a "business 
framework" that will bring back the masses?

>     Its not so much the PFC as the whole decay of the PB development
> infrastructure and lack of ingenuity of new features into PB 

Now you are starting to backtrack, "Its not so much the PFC" now?

<snip nothing to do with the PFC discussion>

> I hope that gives you a sense of where I am coming from and why the PFC
> is just a small issue of Sybase incompetancy eroding one of the best
> development tools out there (even today). 
> We (the development community) MUST 

..... start to work on the PFC via CodeExchange. Its quite simple really.

make Sybase management understand that in order to position PB back on
> top, they need to quit neglecting any feature, because believe me, these
> features are production critical to many PB applications. No one seems to
> ask the REAL PB community - "OK if I remove that feature?" ... just some
> &^*@$ makes  a decision like: "wow we could save a developer if we axe that
> feature". Ever hear of the expression "Cut your nose off to spite your face"
> .. well, here is a good example with PB how Sybase did that!
>       I am real guy out there building and helping other developers build
> real systems (and not just Mickey Mouse stuff either) I am talking 500-1000
> concurrent users, terabyte databases, 100000 transactions per hour web
> systems, complicated GUI interfaces, etc - and you know what, we ARE doing
> this with PB 10 even today (including web services)!
> 
>     So to wrap up my soap box ... I do not want to hear from any manager, PB
> wannabe, Team-whatever, etc. Lets get some Sybase people - especially
> engineers, marketing and senior management - REALLY involved with this
> products future. In other words ... lets get off the arm chair management
> approach and back to some "hands-on" stuff 
- just like the good old
> PowerSoft days. Maybe, this can be an excellent example of how to turn a
> product around that Sybase could use in other endeavours as well. You never
> know until you give it the "old college try" - something that all I hear in
> the various news groups is why we can not do something

.. Time to eradicate
> that negative behviour!!!!!

Well I know where I would start and its not the PFC.

a.


> 
> Regards ... Chris
> Great White North PB Technical Evangelist
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "Brad Wery" <bradweryatagricoreunited.com> wrote in message
> news:447c948e$1@forums-1-dub...
>> I really don't want to butt in but I was really looking forward to an
>> actual answer to Paul's question. I'm very curious know what people need
>> in PFC that doesn't already exist.
>>
>> Chris, can you please provide an answer, I notice that you dodge a lot
>> of questions.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Brad
>>
>> Chris Pollach wrote:
>>> Paul;
>>>
>>>     Since I have my own framework that runs with PK, PB (Ansi and
> Unicode),
>>> EAServer and now .Net - I am happy (Yeee Haaaa)! I was just being the
> devils
>>> advocate for all the other PB developers out there that reply of good
>>> frameworks to assist them in RAD ... they look to things like the PFC as
>>> their savior. Soooooo .... the PFC contributes to PB sales indirectly.
> If
>>> Sybase can not see this then it's too late for PB (put another nail in
> the
>>> coffin).
>>>
>>>     I guess the key thing at this point is that Sybase needs to make a
> plan
>>> based on what key technology, IDE and RAD features need to be in PK, IM,
> PB,
>>> EAS, etc and just do them. Personally, I think Sybase needs to rehire
> the
>>> PowerSoft guys to head-up a "Tools" division (like iAnyWhere) and just
> let
>>> them run with the products!
>>>
>>>     OK ... I am off my soap box *g* - nothing personal there Paul - just
>>> passionate about PB !
>>>
>>> Regards  ... Chris
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> "Paul Horan[TeamSybase]" <paul.horan@NOSPAM_cynergysystems.com> wrote in
>>> message news:447c87a8$1@forums-1-dub...
>>>
>>>> "Chris Pollach" <cpollach@travel-net.dot.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:447c2cc4@forums-1-dub...
>>>>
>>>>>    Yep its statements like this "10-15% of clients who use it" is why
>>> not
>>>
>>>>> only the PFC, but PB is not used 80+%!! Sooooo .... lets sit back and
>>> give
>>>
>>>>> all the excuses why we can not work on it  (you should apply for a
>>> Sybase
>>>
>>>>> position in senior management:)!
>>>>>
>>>>>   A solid business framework is what application developers need ...
>>>>> Hello, Hello, any body home!
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> The point everyone here is trying to make is:
>>>> a) it's not broken (or not broken badly enough to allocate new resources
>>> or
>>>
>>>> devote existing resources to);
>>>> b) it's not a revenue-producer, like the IDE itself;
>>>> c) there's an active community out here (who are probably more adept at
>>> PFC
>>>
>>>> than anyone currently at Sybase) who are ready and waiting to enhance
> and
>>>> fix the framework;
>>>>
>>>> So please list the items that YOU consider to be missing or broken from
>>> PFC.
>>>
>>>> I will start on them immediately, for no other reason than to SHUT YOU
> UP
>>>> ABOUT IT!!!
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Paul Horan[TeamSybase]
>>>> Cynergy Systems
>>>> www.cynergysystems.com
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
> 
> 
0
Adam
5/30/2006 11:56:08 PM
 You and I know that no one is going to maintain it .. otherwise we would of 
seen a PB 10.2.1 and PB 10.5 version with enhancements!


"Adam Simmonds [TeamSybase]" <adam.simmonds@nospam.micropay.com.au> wrote in 
message news:447cdb98$1@forums-1-dub...
> Chris Pollach wrote:
>>     Again, the key is that the PFC provides excellent business behaviour
>> (ie: link manager, start-up/down tasks, messaging, OS interfaces, data
>> checking, etc). These are all critical things a normal application 
>> requires
>> above an beyond the basic IDE tool. I was just talking to some people at 
>> a
>> local government department last week who have been trying to do some 
>> things
>> in VS2005 .. and they are basically writing their own PFC. As they have
>> found over the past 6 months ...  just having the .Net framework is far 
>> from
>> a complete application framework that a business developers requires.
>>
>>     So, if we consider the PFC as the "Business Framework" - for the 
>> average
>> PB developer, that allows them to quickly build, maintain, and migrate 
>> their
>> applications forward - this is a key reason to use PB (even over VS). If
>> Sybase abandons the PFC - then the average developer sits back and says -
>
> So on that basis the PFC already provides this "business framework" 
> (although I would not call it that)
>
>> "How long before the PFC will not run at all with PB 11 or 12, etc"?
>
> Hence the open source and the ability for developers to maintain the code.
>
> It does
>> not take a dummy to figure out that PB and the related O/S's will advance
>> and the PFC will becomes useless as it will stagnate
>
> Hence the open source and the ability for developers to maintain the code.
>
> (OK, it is already
>> doing that *g*). The intelligent manager will also look at this feedback
>> from the developers as "the vendor does not care about the supporting
>> product - so we should migrate to something else" (of course, this is all
>> the MS salesperson needs to hear).
>
> Would these would be the same managers using the plethora of open source 
> code available ( Tomcat, MySql, Struts to name a few ). Your argument is 
> totally flawed since the product(PB) is supported.
>
>>     If Sybase does not look at the PFC or better yet, a redesigned PFC as
>> one of the key items to continuing to use the PB product -
>
> Yet you can not answer the simple question: What additions/modifications 
> are required in the PFC.
>
> To make it simple just fill in the blanks below for your top 5 PFC 
> enhancements
>
> 1.
> 2.
> 3.
> 4.
> 5.
>
> they are sorely
>> misinformed by naive people. The other factor is to "gain market share" 
>> and
>> in order to do this you need to show that not only does your tool do what
>> the other guy's does, but it can do it cheaper, faster, easier and 
>> (bonus)
>> with better performance. Over the past 5 years, I have been able to 
>> "smoke"
>> many Java projects with PB 9 & 10 and even get many of those back into 
>> using
>> PB (Old Age Canada Pension being a great example)! Sybase can still 
>> deliver
>> a much better "value for the $" if they stop cutting out PB's great 
>> features
>> ... for example (DPB, ObjectCycle
>
> pmsl. you have lost all credibility if you believe ObjectCycle should have 
> been retained.
>
> , PFC, C++ User Object, etc). All
>> management has heard over the past 5-6 years from their PB developers is 
>> how
>> each new release of PB has dropped a feature (or two) that they depend
>> on!!!!
>
> So basing this on PB6-10 that would be about 8 lost features.
>
> Please list these 8 features, maybe Sybase will consider putting them back 
> in.
>
> 1.
> 2.
> 3.
> 4.
> 5.
> 6.
> 7.
> 8.
>
>
> Well guess what, that message has translated into a ... "Lets migrate
>> off PB as fast as we can" mentality out their that due to a COMPLETE lack 
>> of
>> marketing of PB has fueled the exodus of PB development to Java and now 
>> VS.
>
> So now its marketing? I thought you said its the lack of a "business 
> framework" that will bring back the masses?
>
>>     Its not so much the PFC as the whole decay of the PB development
>> infrastructure and lack of ingenuity of new features into PB
>
> Now you are starting to backtrack, "Its not so much the PFC" now?
>
> <snip nothing to do with the PFC discussion>
>
>> I hope that gives you a sense of where I am coming from and why the PFC
>> is just a small issue of Sybase incompetancy eroding one of the best
>> development tools out there (even today). We (the development community) 
>> MUST
>
> .... start to work on the PFC via CodeExchange. Its quite simple really.
>
> make Sybase management understand that in order to position PB back on
>> top, they need to quit neglecting any feature, because believe me, these
>> features are production critical to many PB applications. No one seems to
>> ask the REAL PB community - "OK if I remove that feature?" ... just some
>> &^*@$ makes  a decision like: "wow we could save a developer if we axe 
>> that
>> feature". Ever hear of the expression "Cut your nose off to spite your 
>> face"
>> .. well, here is a good example with PB how Sybase did that!
>>       I am real guy out there building and helping other developers build
>> real systems (and not just Mickey Mouse stuff either) I am talking 
>> 500-1000
>> concurrent users, terabyte databases, 100000 transactions per hour web
>> systems, complicated GUI interfaces, etc - and you know what, we ARE 
>> doing
>> this with PB 10 even today (including web services)!
>>
>>     So to wrap up my soap box ... I do not want to hear from any manager, 
>> PB
>> wannabe, Team-whatever, etc. Lets get some Sybase people - especially
>> engineers, marketing and senior management - REALLY involved with this
>> products future. In other words ... lets get off the arm chair management
>> approach and back to some "hands-on" stuff
> - just like the good old
>> PowerSoft days. Maybe, this can be an excellent example of how to turn a
>> product around that Sybase could use in other endeavours as well. You 
>> never
>> know until you give it the "old college try" - something that all I hear 
>> in
>> the various news groups is why we can not do something
>
> . Time to eradicate
>> that negative behviour!!!!!
>
> Well I know where I would start and its not the PFC.
>
> a.
>
>
>>
>> Regards ... Chris
>> Great White North PB Technical Evangelist
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> "Brad Wery" <bradweryatagricoreunited.com> wrote in message
>> news:447c948e$1@forums-1-dub...
>>> I really don't want to butt in but I was really looking forward to an
>>> actual answer to Paul's question. I'm very curious know what people need
>>> in PFC that doesn't already exist.
>>>
>>> Chris, can you please provide an answer, I notice that you dodge a lot
>>> of questions.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> Brad
>>>
>>> Chris Pollach wrote:
>>>> Paul;
>>>>
>>>>     Since I have my own framework that runs with PK, PB (Ansi and
>> Unicode),
>>>> EAServer and now .Net - I am happy (Yeee Haaaa)! I was just being the
>> devils
>>>> advocate for all the other PB developers out there that reply of good
>>>> frameworks to assist them in RAD ... they look to things like the PFC 
>>>> as
>>>> their savior. Soooooo .... the PFC contributes to PB sales indirectly.
>> If
>>>> Sybase can not see this then it's too late for PB (put another nail in
>> the
>>>> coffin).
>>>>
>>>>     I guess the key thing at this point is that Sybase needs to make a
>> plan
>>>> based on what key technology, IDE and RAD features need to be in PK, 
>>>> IM,
>> PB,
>>>> EAS, etc and just do them. Personally, I think Sybase needs to rehire
>> the
>>>> PowerSoft guys to head-up a "Tools" division (like iAnyWhere) and just
>> let
>>>> them run with the products!
>>>>
>>>>     OK ... I am off my soap box *g* - nothing personal there Paul - 
>>>> just
>>>> passionate about PB !
>>>>
>>>> Regards  ... Chris
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "Paul Horan[TeamSybase]" <paul.horan@NOSPAM_cynergysystems.com> wrote 
>>>> in
>>>> message news:447c87a8$1@forums-1-dub...
>>>>
>>>>> "Chris Pollach" <cpollach@travel-net.dot.com> wrote in message
>>>>> news:447c2cc4@forums-1-dub...
>>>>>
>>>>>>    Yep its statements like this "10-15% of clients who use it" is why
>>>> not
>>>>
>>>>>> only the PFC, but PB is not used 80+%!! Sooooo .... lets sit back and
>>>> give
>>>>
>>>>>> all the excuses why we can not work on it  (you should apply for a
>>>> Sybase
>>>>
>>>>>> position in senior management:)!
>>>>>>
>>>>>>   A solid business framework is what application developers need ...
>>>>>> Hello, Hello, any body home!
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> The point everyone here is trying to make is:
>>>>> a) it's not broken (or not broken badly enough to allocate new 
>>>>> resources
>>>> or
>>>>
>>>>> devote existing resources to);
>>>>> b) it's not a revenue-producer, like the IDE itself;
>>>>> c) there's an active community out here (who are probably more adept 
>>>>> at
>>>> PFC
>>>>
>>>>> than anyone currently at Sybase) who are ready and waiting to enhance
>> and
>>>>> fix the framework;
>>>>>
>>>>> So please list the items that YOU consider to be missing or broken 
>>>>> from
>>>> PFC.
>>>>
>>>>> I will start on them immediately, for no other reason than to SHUT YOU
>> UP
>>>>> ABOUT IT!!!
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Paul Horan[TeamSybase]
>>>>> Cynergy Systems
>>>>> www.cynergysystems.com
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>> 

0
Chris
5/31/2006 2:17:20 AM
Chris Pollach wrote:
>  You and I know that no one is going to maintain it .. otherwise we would of 
> seen a PB 10.2.1 and PB 10.5 version with enhancements!

How about answering the questions. You continue to make statements that 
the PFC needs enhancing so come on, let us know what is required.

To make it simple just fill in the blanks below for your top 5 PFC
enhancements

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

Please list these 8 features dropped since PB6, maybe Sybase will 
consider putting them back in.

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.




> 
> 
> "Adam Simmonds [TeamSybase]" <adam.simmonds@nospam.micropay.com.au> wrote in 
> message news:447cdb98$1@forums-1-dub...
>> Chris Pollach wrote:
>>>     Again, the key is that the PFC provides excellent business behaviour
>>> (ie: link manager, start-up/down tasks, messaging, OS interfaces, data
>>> checking, etc). These are all critical things a normal application 
>>> requires
>>> above an beyond the basic IDE tool. I was just talking to some people at 
>>> a
>>> local government department last week who have been trying to do some 
>>> things
>>> in VS2005 .. and they are basically writing their own PFC. As they have
>>> found over the past 6 months ...  just having the .Net framework is far 
>>> from
>>> a complete application framework that a business developers requires.
>>>
>>>     So, if we consider the PFC as the "Business Framework" - for the 
>>> average
>>> PB developer, that allows them to quickly build, maintain, and migrate 
>>> their
>>> applications forward - this is a key reason to use PB (even over VS). If
>>> Sybase abandons the PFC - then the average developer sits back and says -
>> So on that basis the PFC already provides this "business framework" 
>> (although I would not call it that)
>>
>>> "How long before the PFC will not run at all with PB 11 or 12, etc"?
>> Hence the open source and the ability for developers to maintain the code.
>>
>> It does
>>> not take a dummy to figure out that PB and the related O/S's will advance
>>> and the PFC will becomes useless as it will stagnate
>> Hence the open source and the ability for developers to maintain the code.
>>
>> (OK, it is already
>>> doing that *g*). The intelligent manager will also look at this feedback
>>> from the developers as "the vendor does not care about the supporting
>>> product - so we should migrate to something else" (of course, this is all
>>> the MS salesperson needs to hear).
>> Would these would be the same managers using the plethora of open source 
>> code available ( Tomcat, MySql, Struts to name a few ). Your argument is 
>> totally flawed since the product(PB) is supported.
>>
>>>     If Sybase does not look at the PFC or better yet, a redesigned PFC as
>>> one of the key items to continuing to use the PB product -
>> Yet you can not answer the simple question: What additions/modifications 
>> are required in the PFC.
>>
>> To make it simple just fill in the blanks below for your top 5 PFC 
>> enhancements
>>
>> 1.
>> 2.
>> 3.
>> 4.
>> 5.
>>
>> they are sorely
>>> misinformed by naive people. The other factor is to "gain market share" 
>>> and
>>> in order to do this you need to show that not only does your tool do what
>>> the other guy's does, but it can do it cheaper, faster, easier and 
>>> (bonus)
>>> with better performance. Over the past 5 years, I have been able to 
>>> "smoke"
>>> many Java projects with PB 9 & 10 and even get many of those back into 
>>> using
>>> PB (Old Age Canada Pension being a great example)! Sybase can still 
>>> deliver
>>> a much better "value for the $" if they stop cutting out PB's great 
>>> features
>>> ... for example (DPB, ObjectCycle
>> pmsl. you have lost all credibility if you believe ObjectCycle should have 
>> been retained.
>>
>> , PFC, C++ User Object, etc). All
>>> management has heard over the past 5-6 years from their PB developers is 
>>> how
>>> each new release of PB has dropped a feature (or two) that they depend
>>> on!!!!
>> So basing this on PB6-10 that would be about 8 lost features.
>>
>> Please list these 8 features, maybe Sybase will consider putting them back 
>> in.
>>
>> 1.
>> 2.
>> 3.
>> 4.
>> 5.
>> 6.
>> 7.
>> 8.
>>
>>
>> Well guess what, that message has translated into a ... "Lets migrate
>>> off PB as fast as we can" mentality out their that due to a COMPLETE lack 
>>> of
>>> marketing of PB has fueled the exodus of PB development to Java and now 
>>> VS.
>> So now its marketing? I thought you said its the lack of a "business 
>> framework" that will bring back the masses?
>>
>>>     Its not so much the PFC as the whole decay of the PB development
>>> infrastructure and lack of ingenuity of new features into PB
>> Now you are starting to backtrack, "Its not so much the PFC" now?
>>
>> <snip nothing to do with the PFC discussion>
>>
>>> I hope that gives you a sense of where I am coming from and why the PFC
>>> is just a small issue of Sybase incompetancy eroding one of the best
>>> development tools out there (even today). We (the development community) 
>>> MUST
>> .... start to work on the PFC via CodeExchange. Its quite simple really.
>>
>> make Sybase management understand that in order to position PB back on
>>> top, they need to quit neglecting any feature, because believe me, these
>>> features are production critical to many PB applications. No one seems to
>>> ask the REAL PB community - "OK if I remove that feature?" ... just some
>>> &^*@$ makes  a decision like: "wow we could save a developer if we axe 
>>> that
>>> feature". Ever hear of the expression "Cut your nose off to spite your 
>>> face"
>>> .. well, here is a good example with PB how Sybase did that!
>>>       I am real guy out there building and helping other developers build
>>> real systems (and not just Mickey Mouse stuff either) I am talking 
>>> 500-1000
>>> concurrent users, terabyte databases, 100000 transactions per hour web
>>> systems, complicated GUI interfaces, etc - and you know what, we ARE 
>>> doing
>>> this with PB 10 even today (including web services)!
>>>
>>>     So to wrap up my soap box ... I do not want to hear from any manager, 
>>> PB
>>> wannabe, Team-whatever, etc. Lets get some Sybase people - especially
>>> engineers, marketing and senior management - REALLY involved with this
>>> products future. In other words ... lets get off the arm chair management
>>> approach and back to some "hands-on" stuff
>> - just like the good old
>>> PowerSoft days. Maybe, this can be an excellent example of how to turn a
>>> product around that Sybase could use in other endeavours as well. You 
>>> never
>>> know until you give it the "old college try" - something that all I hear 
>>> in
>>> the various news groups is why we can not do something
>> . Time to eradicate
>>> that negative behviour!!!!!
>> Well I know where I would start and its not the PFC.
>>
>> a.
>>
>>
>>> Regards ... Chris
>>> Great White North PB Technical Evangelist
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> "Brad Wery" <bradweryatagricoreunited.com> wrote in message
>>> news:447c948e$1@forums-1-dub...
>>>> I really don't want to butt in but I was really looking forward to an
>>>> actual answer to Paul's question. I'm very curious know what people need
>>>> in PFC that doesn't already exist.
>>>>
>>>> Chris, can you please provide an answer, I notice that you dodge a lot
>>>> of questions.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>>
>>>> Brad
>>>>
>>>> Chris Pollach wrote:
>>>>> Paul;
>>>>>
>>>>>     Since I have my own framework that runs with PK, PB (Ansi and
>>> Unicode),
>>>>> EAServer and now .Net - I am happy (Yeee Haaaa)! I was just being the
>>> devils
>>>>> advocate for all the other PB developers out there that reply of good
>>>>> frameworks to assist them in RAD ... they look to things like the PFC 
>>>>> as
>>>>> their savior. Soooooo .... the PFC contributes to PB sales indirectly.
>>> If
>>>>> Sybase can not see this then it's too late for PB (put another nail in
>>> the
>>>>> coffin).
>>>>>
>>>>>     I guess the key thing at this point is that Sybase needs to make a
>>> plan
>>>>> based on what key technology, IDE and RAD features need to be in PK, 
>>>>> IM,
>>> PB,
>>>>> EAS, etc and just do them. Personally, I think Sybase needs to rehire
>>> the
>>>>> PowerSoft guys to head-up a "Tools" division (like iAnyWhere) and just
>>> let
>>>>> them run with the products!
>>>>>
>>>>>     OK ... I am off my soap box *g* - nothing personal there Paul - 
>>>>> just
>>>>> passionate about PB !
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards  ... Chris
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> "Paul Horan[TeamSybase]" <paul.horan@NOSPAM_cynergysystems.com> wrote 
>>>>> in
>>>>> message news:447c87a8$1@forums-1-dub...
>>>>>
>>>>>> "Chris Pollach" <cpollach@travel-net.dot.com> wrote in message
>>>>>> news:447c2cc4@forums-1-dub...
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>    Yep its statements like this "10-15% of clients who use it" is why
>>>>> not
>>>>>
>>>>>>> only the PFC, but PB is not used 80+%!! Sooooo .... lets sit back and
>>>>> give
>>>>>
>>>>>>> all the excuses why we can not work on it  (you should apply for a
>>>>> Sybase
>>>>>
>>>>>>> position in senior management:)!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>   A solid business framework is what application developers need ...
>>>>>>> Hello, Hello, any body home!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> The point everyone here is trying to make is:
>>>>>> a) it's not broken (or not broken badly enough to allocate new 
>>>>>> resources
>>>>> or
>>>>>
>>>>>> devote existing resources to);
>>>>>> b) it's not a revenue-producer, like the IDE itself;
>>>>>> c) there's an active community out here (who are probably more adept 
>>>>>> at
>>>>> PFC
>>>>>
>>>>>> than anyone currently at Sybase) who are ready and waiting to enhance
>>> and
>>>>>> fix the framework;
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So please list the items that YOU consider to be missing or broken 
>>>>>> from
>>>>> PFC.
>>>>>
>>>>>> I will start on them immediately, for no other reason than to SHUT YOU
>>> UP
>>>>>> ABOUT IT!!!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Paul Horan[TeamSybase]
>>>>>> Cynergy Systems
>>>>>> www.cynergysystems.com
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
> 
0
Adam
5/31/2006 2:21:16 AM
It's not missing too much as far as I am concerned.  Samples of things we do 
to enhance the PFC :

1.  Datawindow default values service by user, by company to populate the 
initial InsertRow.
2.  Datawindow Storage in the Database vs PBL.
3.  Multi-Currency Enhancements.
4.  DWO.Tag Service to allow double clicking and Right Clicking a Business 
Object ( such as an orders ) to improve application navigation ( all 
programs are database stored and executed. )
5.  Report Service Extensions.
6.  Security replacements.
7.  Switch User functions

I think these items are domain specific and not something that the overall 
PFC framework needs.   Give a list Chris and many of us can implement 
easily.

Richard


"Paul Horan[TeamSybase]" <paul.horan@NOSPAM_cynergysystems.com> wrote in 
message news:447c95fc$1@forums-1-dub...
>>>So please list the items that YOU consider to be missing or broken from 
>>>PFC.
>
>
> "Chris Pollach" <cpollach@travel-net.dot.com> wrote in message 
> news:447c8aa7$1@forums-2-dub...
>> Paul;
>>
>>    Since I have my own framework that runs with PK, PB (Ansi and 
>> Unicode),
>> EAServer and now .Net - I am happy (Yeee Haaaa)! I was just being the 
>> devils
>> advocate for all the other PB developers out there that reply of good
>> frameworks to assist them in RAD ... they look to things like the PFC as
>> their savior. Soooooo .... the PFC contributes to PB sales indirectly. If
>> Sybase can not see this then it's too late for PB (put another nail in 
>> the
>> coffin).
>>
>>    I guess the key thing at this point is that Sybase needs to make a 
>> plan
>> based on what key technology, IDE and RAD features need to be in PK, IM, 
>> PB,
>> EAS, etc and just do them. Personally, I think Sybase needs to rehire the
>> PowerSoft guys to head-up a "Tools" division (like iAnyWhere) and just 
>> let
>> them run with the products!
>>
>>    OK ... I am off my soap box *g* - nothing personal there Paul - just
>> passionate about PB !
>>
>> Regards  ... Chris
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> Yeah - that was pretty much the response (or lack thereof) that I was 
> expecting...
>
> -- 
> Paul Horan[TeamSybase]
> Cynergy Systems
> www.cynergysystems.com
>
> 


0
Richard
5/31/2006 5:23:59 AM
 If you can not sell the product ... *$%@#  the accounting!


"Jonathan Baker [Sybase]" <lastnamefirstinitial@sybase.com> wrote in message
news:447ca7eb$1@forums-1-dub...
> How does that solve the accounting problem?
>
>
> Chris Pollach wrote:
> >  Visionary!
> >
> >
> > "Paul Horan[TeamSybase]" <paul.horan@NOSPAM_cynergysystems.com> wrote in
> > message news:447c8684$1@forums-1-dub...
> >> "Chris Pollach" <cpollach@travel-net.dot.com> wrote in message
> >> news:447c2a6f$1@forums-2-dub...
> >>> You need to hire Bill Gates -:)
> >>>
> >>>
> >> I don't get it.
> >>
> >> Paul Horan[TeamSybase]
> >>
> >>
> >
> >


0
Chris
5/31/2006 11:49:14 AM
 Thats the current name <lol>!


"Jason 'Bug' Fenter" <fenterbug@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:447cd859@forums-2-dub...
> Bruce Armstrong [TeamSybase] wrote:
> > Actually, Visual P#.
>
> It wouldn't be Pb? (P flat)


0
Chris
5/31/2006 11:49:50 AM
 1. Make it PB11.Net ready
 2. Morph an EAServer version
 3. Morph a PK version
 4. Make sure it's Vista friendly
 5. Catch up to the current PB (TV DW, Ink, Signature, etc new controls)
friendly
 6. Align it to use .Net services
 7. Rewrite some code
Etc, etc, etc - come on there is a "ton" of work to be done on that puppy!

Note: The PFC was also an great test bench for PB engineering. I can
remember that the PFC group forced the PB development team to clean-up and
improve allot of features within PB! We have lost a great internal resource
at Sybase doing this kind of internal stress and functional testing. In
essence, they flush-out allot of new PB functionality at the QA level!


"Adam Simmonds [TeamSybase]" <adam.simmonds@nospam.micropay.com.au> wrote in
message news:447cfd9c$1@forums-1-dub...
> Chris Pollach wrote:
> >  You and I know that no one is going to maintain it .. otherwise we
would of
> > seen a PB 10.2.1 and PB 10.5 version with enhancements!
>
> How about answering the questions. You continue to make statements that
> the PFC needs enhancing so come on, let us know what is required.
>
> To make it simple just fill in the blanks below for your top 5 PFC
> enhancements
>
> 1.
> 2.
> 3.
> 4.
> 5.
>
> Please list these 8 features dropped since PB6, maybe Sybase will
> consider putting them back in.
>
> 1.
> 2.
> 3.
> 4.
> 5.
> 6.
> 7.
> 8.
>
>
>
>
> >
> >
> > "Adam Simmonds [TeamSybase]" <adam.simmonds@nospam.micropay.com.au>
wrote in
> > message news:447cdb98$1@forums-1-dub...
> >> Chris Pollach wrote:
> >>>     Again, the key is that the PFC provides excellent business
behaviour
> >>> (ie: link manager, start-up/down tasks, messaging, OS interfaces, data
> >>> checking, etc). These are all critical things a normal application
> >>> requires
> >>> above an beyond the basic IDE tool. I was just talking to some people
at
> >>> a
> >>> local government department last week who have been trying to do some
> >>> things
> >>> in VS2005 .. and they are basically writing their own PFC. As they
have
> >>> found over the past 6 months ...  just having the .Net framework is
far
> >>> from
> >>> a complete application framework that a business developers requires.
> >>>
> >>>     So, if we consider the PFC as the "Business Framework" - for the
> >>> average
> >>> PB developer, that allows them to quickly build, maintain, and migrate
> >>> their
> >>> applications forward - this is a key reason to use PB (even over VS).
If
> >>> Sybase abandons the PFC - then the average developer sits back and
says -
> >> So on that basis the PFC already provides this "business framework"
> >> (although I would not call it that)
> >>
> >>> "How long before the PFC will not run at all with PB 11 or 12, etc"?
> >> Hence the open source and the ability for developers to maintain the
code.
> >>
> >> It does
> >>> not take a dummy to figure out that PB and the related O/S's will
advance
> >>> and the PFC will becomes useless as it will stagnate
> >> Hence the open source and the ability for developers to maintain the
code.
> >>
> >> (OK, it is already
> >>> doing that *g*). The intelligent manager will also look at this
feedback
> >>> from the developers as "the vendor does not care about the supporting
> >>> product - so we should migrate to something else" (of course, this is
all
> >>> the MS salesperson needs to hear).
> >> Would these would be the same managers using the plethora of open
source
> >> code available ( Tomcat, MySql, Struts to name a few ). Your argument
is
> >> totally flawed since the product(PB) is supported.
> >>
> >>>     If Sybase does not look at the PFC or better yet, a redesigned PFC
as
> >>> one of the key items to continuing to use the PB product -
> >> Yet you can not answer the simple question: What
additions/modifications
> >> are required in the PFC.
> >>
> >> To make it simple just fill in the blanks below for your top 5 PFC
> >> enhancements
> >>
> >> 1.
> >> 2.
> >> 3.
> >> 4.
> >> 5.
> >>
> >> they are sorely
> >>> misinformed by naive people. The other factor is to "gain market
share"
> >>> and
> >>> in order to do this you need to show that not only does your tool do
what
> >>> the other guy's does, but it can do it cheaper, faster, easier and
> >>> (bonus)
> >>> with better performance. Over the past 5 years, I have been able to
> >>> "smoke"
> >>> many Java projects with PB 9 & 10 and even get many of those back into
> >>> using
> >>> PB (Old Age Canada Pension being a great example)! Sybase can still
> >>> deliver
> >>> a much better "value for the $" if they stop cutting out PB's great
> >>> features
> >>> ... for example (DPB, ObjectCycle
> >> pmsl. you have lost all credibility if you believe ObjectCycle should
have
> >> been retained.
> >>
> >> , PFC, C++ User Object, etc). All
> >>> management has heard over the past 5-6 years from their PB developers
is
> >>> how
> >>> each new release of PB has dropped a feature (or two) that they depend
> >>> on!!!!
> >> So basing this on PB6-10 that would be about 8 lost features.
> >>
> >> Please list these 8 features, maybe Sybase will consider putting them
back
> >> in.
> >>
> >> 1.
> >> 2.
> >> 3.
> >> 4.
> >> 5.
> >> 6.
> >> 7.
> >> 8.
> >>
> >>
> >> Well guess what, that message has translated into a ... "Lets migrate
> >>> off PB as fast as we can" mentality out their that due to a COMPLETE
lack
> >>> of
> >>> marketing of PB has fueled the exodus of PB development to Java and
now
> >>> VS.
> >> So now its marketing? I thought you said its the lack of a "business
> >> framework" that will bring back the masses?
> >>
> >>>     Its not so much the PFC as the whole decay of the PB development
> >>> infrastructure and lack of ingenuity of new features into PB
> >> Now you are starting to backtrack, "Its not so much the PFC" now?
> >>
> >> <snip nothing to do with the PFC discussion>
> >>
> >>> I hope that gives you a sense of where I am coming from and why the
PFC
> >>> is just a small issue of Sybase incompetancy eroding one of the best
> >>> development tools out there (even today). We (the development
community)
> >>> MUST
> >> .... start to work on the PFC via CodeExchange. Its quite simple
really.
> >>
> >> make Sybase management understand that in order to position PB back on
> >>> top, they need to quit neglecting any feature, because believe me,
these
> >>> features are production critical to many PB applications. No one seems
to
> >>> ask the REAL PB community - "OK if I remove that feature?" ... just
some
> >>> &^*@$ makes  a decision like: "wow we could save a developer if we axe
> >>> that
> >>> feature". Ever hear of the expression "Cut your nose off to spite your
> >>> face"
> >>> .. well, here is a good example with PB how Sybase did that!
> >>>       I am real guy out there building and helping other developers
build
> >>> real systems (and not just Mickey Mouse stuff either) I am talking
> >>> 500-1000
> >>> concurrent users, terabyte databases, 100000 transactions per hour web
> >>> systems, complicated GUI interfaces, etc - and you know what, we ARE
> >>> doing
> >>> this with PB 10 even today (including web services)!
> >>>
> >>>     So to wrap up my soap box ... I do not want to hear from any
manager,
> >>> PB
> >>> wannabe, Team-whatever, etc. Lets get some Sybase people - especially
> >>> engineers, marketing and senior management - REALLY involved with this
> >>> products future. In other words ... lets get off the arm chair
management
> >>> approach and back to some "hands-on" stuff
> >> - just like the good old
> >>> PowerSoft days. Maybe, this can be an excellent example of how to turn
a
> >>> product around that Sybase could use in other endeavours as well. You
> >>> never
> >>> know until you give it the "old college try" - something that all I
hear
> >>> in
> >>> the various news groups is why we can not do something
> >> . Time to eradicate
> >>> that negative behviour!!!!!
> >> Well I know where I would start and its not the PFC.
> >>
> >> a.
> >>
> >>
> >>> Regards ... Chris
> >>> Great White North PB Technical Evangelist
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> "Brad Wery" <bradweryatagricoreunited.com> wrote in message
> >>> news:447c948e$1@forums-1-dub...
> >>>> I really don't want to butt in but I was really looking forward to an
> >>>> actual answer to Paul's question. I'm very curious know what people
need
> >>>> in PFC that doesn't already exist.
> >>>>
> >>>> Chris, can you please provide an answer, I notice that you dodge a
lot
> >>>> of questions.
> >>>>
> >>>> Thanks,
> >>>>
> >>>> Brad
> >>>>
> >>>> Chris Pollach wrote:
> >>>>> Paul;
> >>>>>
> >>>>>     Since I have my own framework that runs with PK, PB (Ansi and
> >>> Unicode),
> >>>>> EAServer and now .Net - I am happy (Yeee Haaaa)! I was just being
the
> >>> devils
> >>>>> advocate for all the other PB developers out there that reply of
good
> >>>>> frameworks to assist them in RAD ... they look to things like the
PFC
> >>>>> as
> >>>>> their savior. Soooooo .... the PFC contributes to PB sales
indirectly.
> >>> If
> >>>>> Sybase can not see this then it's too late for PB (put another nail
in
> >>> the
> >>>>> coffin).
> >>>>>
> >>>>>     I guess the key thing at this point is that Sybase needs to make
a
> >>> plan
> >>>>> based on what key technology, IDE and RAD features need to be in PK,
> >>>>> IM,
> >>> PB,
> >>>>> EAS, etc and just do them. Personally, I think Sybase needs to
rehire
> >>> the
> >>>>> PowerSoft guys to head-up a "Tools" division (like iAnyWhere) and
just
> >>> let
> >>>>> them run with the products!
> >>>>>
> >>>>>     OK ... I am off my soap box *g* - nothing personal there Paul -
> >>>>> just
> >>>>> passionate about PB !
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Regards  ... Chris
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> "Paul Horan[TeamSybase]" <paul.horan@NOSPAM_cynergysystems.com>
wrote
> >>>>> in
> >>>>> message news:447c87a8$1@forums-1-dub...
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> "Chris Pollach" <cpollach@travel-net.dot.com> wrote in message
> >>>>>> news:447c2cc4@forums-1-dub...
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>>    Yep its statements like this "10-15% of clients who use it" is
why
> >>>>> not
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>> only the PFC, but PB is not used 80+%!! Sooooo .... lets sit back
and
> >>>>> give
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>> all the excuses why we can not work on it  (you should apply for a
> >>>>> Sybase
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>> position in senior management:)!
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>   A solid business framework is what application developers need
....
> >>>>>>> Hello, Hello, any body home!
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>> The point everyone here is trying to make is:
> >>>>>> a) it's not broken (or not broken badly enough to allocate new
> >>>>>> resources
> >>>>> or
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> devote existing resources to);
> >>>>>> b) it's not a revenue-producer, like the IDE itself;
> >>>>>> c) there's an active community out here (who are probably more
adept
> >>>>>> at
> >>>>> PFC
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> than anyone currently at Sybase) who are ready and waiting to
enhance
> >>> and
> >>>>>> fix the framework;
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> So please list the items that YOU consider to be missing or broken
> >>>>>> from
> >>>>> PFC.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> I will start on them immediately, for no other reason than to SHUT
YOU
> >>> UP
> >>>>>> ABOUT IT!!!
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> --
> >>>>>> Paul Horan[TeamSybase]
> >>>>>> Cynergy Systems
> >>>>>> www.cynergysystems.com
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >


0
Chris
5/31/2006 12:24:52 PM
 Great start .. may I add ..

a) TabletPC extensions
b) Multi-lingual support
c) PowerTip text on everything (since PB can not do it for some unknown
reason) *g*
d) Make it easier to use (ie: developers should not have to deal with
service objects directly).
e) Drop features that are not used .. make the framework tighter
etc



"Richard Keller" <richard@kellersystems.com> wrote in message
news:447d27e4$1@forums-2-dub...
> It's not missing too much as far as I am concerned.  Samples of things we
do
> to enhance the PFC :
>
> 1.  Datawindow default values service by user, by company to populate the
> initial InsertRow.
> 2.  Datawindow Storage in the Database vs PBL.
> 3.  Multi-Currency Enhancements.
> 4.  DWO.Tag Service to allow double clicking and Right Clicking a Business
> Object ( such as an orders ) to improve application navigation ( all
> programs are database stored and executed. )
> 5.  Report Service Extensions.
> 6.  Security replacements.
> 7.  Switch User functions
>
> I think these items are domain specific and not something that the overall
> PFC framework needs.   Give a list Chris and many of us can implement
> easily.
>
> Richard
>
>
> "Paul Horan[TeamSybase]" <paul.horan@NOSPAM_cynergysystems.com> wrote in
> message news:447c95fc$1@forums-1-dub...
> >>>So please list the items that YOU consider to be missing or broken from
> >>>PFC.
> >
> >
> > "Chris Pollach" <cpollach@travel-net.dot.com> wrote in message
> > news:447c8aa7$1@forums-2-dub...
> >> Paul;
> >>
> >>    Since I have my own framework that runs with PK, PB (Ansi and
> >> Unicode),
> >> EAServer and now .Net - I am happy (Yeee Haaaa)! I was just being the
> >> devils
> >> advocate for all the other PB developers out there that reply of good
> >> frameworks to assist them in RAD ... they look to things like the PFC
as
> >> their savior. Soooooo .... the PFC contributes to PB sales indirectly.
If
> >> Sybase can not see this then it's too late for PB (put another nail in
> >> the
> >> coffin).
> >>
> >>    I guess the key thing at this point is that Sybase needs to make a
> >> plan
> >> based on what key technology, IDE and RAD features need to be in PK,
IM,
> >> PB,
> >> EAS, etc and just do them. Personally, I think Sybase needs to rehire
the
> >> PowerSoft guys to head-up a "Tools" division (like iAnyWhere) and just
> >> let
> >> them run with the products!
> >>
> >>    OK ... I am off my soap box *g* - nothing personal there Paul - just
> >> passionate about PB !
> >>
> >> Regards  ... Chris
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> > Yeah - that was pretty much the response (or lack thereof) that I was
> > expecting...
> >
> > --
> > Paul Horan[TeamSybase]
> > Cynergy Systems
> > www.cynergysystems.com
> >
> >
>
>


0
Chris
5/31/2006 12:28:48 PM
    I have seen allot of Constructive Criticism about PFC improvements in
the news groups over the past year. The point I am trying to make is that
the PFC needs to have coordinated work done on it and by people who have
direct and intimate knowledge of the PB engineers working on the new
features of PB. That way, when a new release of PB hits the street ... the
PFC is right there with it!!!!! Open source development will NOT guarantee
that .. only Sybase maintained will make that scenario happen (Not rocket
science here to figure this one out)!


"Boris Gasin [TeamSybase]" <NOSPAM_bgasin@dynamictechgroup.com> wrote in
message news:raep72d6gep8rhnoqcf42lip6l85itqh2q@4ax.com...
> Thank you Brad.  I would also love to change this thread towards
> constructive criticism.
>
> On 30 May 2006 11:53:02 -0700, Brad Wery
> <bradweryatagricoreunited.com> wrote:
>
> >I really don't want to butt in but I was really looking forward to an
> >actual answer to Paul's question. I'm very curious know what people need
> >in PFC that doesn't already exist.
> >
> >Chris, can you please provide an answer, I notice that you dodge a lot
> >of questions.
> >
> >Thanks,
> >
> >Brad
> >
> >Chris Pollach wrote:
> >> Paul;
> >>
> >>     Since I have my own framework that runs with PK, PB (Ansi and
Unicode),
> >> EAServer and now .Net - I am happy (Yeee Haaaa)! I was just being the
devils
> >> advocate for all the other PB developers out there that reply of good
> >> frameworks to assist them in RAD ... they look to things like the PFC
as
> >> their savior. Soooooo .... the PFC contributes to PB sales indirectly.
If
> >> Sybase can not see this then it's too late for PB (put another nail in
the
> >> coffin).
> >>
> >>     I guess the key thing at this point is that Sybase needs to make a
plan
> >> based on what key technology, IDE and RAD features need to be in PK,
IM, PB,
> >> EAS, etc and just do them. Personally, I think Sybase needs to rehire
the
> >> PowerSoft guys to head-up a "Tools" division (like iAnyWhere) and just
let
> >> them run with the products!
> >>
> >>     OK ... I am off my soap box *g* - nothing personal there Paul -
just
> >> passionate about PB !
> >>
> >> Regards  ... Chris
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> "Paul Horan[TeamSybase]" <paul.horan@NOSPAM_cynergysystems.com> wrote
in
> >> message news:447c87a8$1@forums-1-dub...
> >>
> >>>"Chris Pollach" <cpollach@travel-net.dot.com> wrote in message
> >>>news:447c2cc4@forums-1-dub...
> >>>
> >>>>    Yep its statements like this "10-15% of clients who use it" is why
> >>
> >> not
> >>
> >>>>only the PFC, but PB is not used 80+%!! Sooooo .... lets sit back and
> >>
> >> give
> >>
> >>>>all the excuses why we can not work on it  (you should apply for a
> >>
> >> Sybase
> >>
> >>>>position in senior management:)!
> >>>>
> >>>>   A solid business framework is what application developers need ...
> >>>>Hello, Hello, any body home!
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>The point everyone here is trying to make is:
> >>>a) it's not broken (or not broken badly enough to allocate new
resources
> >>
> >> or
> >>
> >>>devote existing resources to);
> >>>b) it's not a revenue-producer, like the IDE itself;
> >>>c) there's an active community out here (who are probably more adept at
> >>
> >> PFC
> >>
> >>>than anyone currently at Sybase) who are ready and waiting to enhance
and
> >>>fix the framework;
> >>>
> >>>So please list the items that YOU consider to be missing or broken from
> >>
> >> PFC.
> >>
> >>>I will start on them immediately, for no other reason than to SHUT YOU
UP
> >>>ABOUT IT!!!
> >>>
> >>>--
> >>>Paul Horan[TeamSybase]
> >>>Cynergy Systems
> >>>www.cynergysystems.com
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >>
>
>
>   Boris Gasin [TeamSybase]
>   mailto:NOSPAM_bgasin@dynamictechgroup.com
>     ___
>   ____   _
>  _____    _
>   ____   _
>     ___
>
>
>   Dynamic Technology Group, Inc.
>   http://www.dynamictechgroup.com/


0
Chris
5/31/2006 12:31:49 PM
That could possibly be true if it weren't for very public beta programs, and the
publicity Sybase has given upcoming features (we've known most of the PB11
features for 2 years now). Additionally, the PFC-OS leadership team has never
been turned down for a pre-public early release. I've had PB11 for months. I
think I or anyone else can handle the 10 minutes it takes to add new controls
(which, BTW, was NOT done consistently when it was in the hands of Sybase).

Now, in terms of being constructive, I bet if all the time spent on this thread
were spent on code reviews, every piece of outstanding code could have been
reviewed twice (probably more than happens in most corporate environments <g>)
and we could have been well on our way to a release. Instead.....

Good luck,

Terry [TeamSybase] and Sequel the techno-kitten

On 31 May 2006 05:31:49 -0700,
 in sybase.public.powerbuilder.futures.discussion
Chris Pollach <cpollach@travel-net.dot.com> wrote: 
>    I have seen allot of Constructive Criticism about PFC improvements in
>the news groups over the past year. The point I am trying to make is that
>the PFC needs to have coordinated work done on it and by people who have
>direct and intimate knowledge of the PB engineers working on the new
>features of PB. That way, when a new release of PB hits the street ... the
>PFC is right there with it!!!!! Open source development will NOT guarantee
>that .. only Sybase maintained will make that scenario happen (Not rocket
>science here to figure this one out)!
>
>
>"Boris Gasin [TeamSybase]" <NOSPAM_bgasin@dynamictechgroup.com> wrote in
>message news:raep72d6gep8rhnoqcf42lip6l85itqh2q@4ax.com...
>> Thank you Brad.  I would also love to change this thread towards
>> constructive criticism.
>>
>> On 30 May 2006 11:53:02 -0700, Brad Wery
>> <bradweryatagricoreunited.com> wrote:
>>
>> >I really don't want to butt in but I was really looking forward to an
>> >actual answer to Paul's question. I'm very curious know what people need
>> >in PFC that doesn't already exist.
>> >
>> >Chris, can you please provide an answer, I notice that you dodge a lot
>> >of questions.
>> >
>> >Thanks,
>> >
>> >Brad
>> >
>> >Chris Pollach wrote:
>> >> Paul;
>> >>
>> >>     Since I have my own framework that runs with PK, PB (Ansi and
>Unicode),
>> >> EAServer and now .Net - I am happy (Yeee Haaaa)! I was just being the
>devils
>> >> advocate for all the other PB developers out there that reply of good
>> >> frameworks to assist them in RAD ... they look to things like the PFC
>as
>> >> their savior. Soooooo .... the PFC contributes to PB sales indirectly.
>If
>> >> Sybase can not see this then it's too late for PB (put another nail in
>the
>> >> coffin).
>> >>
>> >>     I guess the key thing at this point is that Sybase needs to make a
>plan
>> >> based on what key technology, IDE and RAD features need to be in PK,
>IM, PB,
>> >> EAS, etc and just do them. Personally, I think Sybase needs to rehire
>the
>> >> PowerSoft guys to head-up a "Tools" division (like iAnyWhere) and just
>let
>> >> them run with the products!
>> >>
>> >>     OK ... I am off my soap box *g* - nothing personal there Paul -
>just
>> >> passionate about PB !
>> >>
>> >> Regards  ... Chris
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> "Paul Horan[TeamSybase]" <paul.horan@NOSPAM_cynergysystems.com> wrote
>in
>> >> message news:447c87a8$1@forums-1-dub...
>> >>
>> >>>"Chris Pollach" <cpollach@travel-net.dot.com> wrote in message
>> >>>news:447c2cc4@forums-1-dub...
>> >>>
>> >>>>    Yep its statements like this "10-15% of clients who use it" is why
>> >>
>> >> not
>> >>
>> >>>>only the PFC, but PB is not used 80+%!! Sooooo .... lets sit back and
>> >>
>> >> give
>> >>
>> >>>>all the excuses why we can not work on it  (you should apply for a
>> >>
>> >> Sybase
>> >>
>> >>>>position in senior management:)!
>> >>>>
>> >>>>   A solid business framework is what application developers need ...
>> >>>>Hello, Hello, any body home!
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>
>> >>>The point everyone here is trying to make is:
>> >>>a) it's not broken (or not broken badly enough to allocate new
>resources
>> >>
>> >> or
>> >>
>> >>>devote existing resources to);
>> >>>b) it's not a revenue-producer, like the IDE itself;
>> >>>c) there's an active community out here (who are probably more adept at
>> >>
>> >> PFC
>> >>
>> >>>than anyone currently at Sybase) who are ready and waiting to enhance
>and
>> >>>fix the framework;
>> >>>
>> >>>So please list the items that YOU consider to be missing or broken from
>> >>
>> >> PFC.
>> >>
>> >>>I will start on them immediately, for no other reason than to SHUT YOU
>UP
>> >>>ABOUT IT!!!
*********************************
PowerBuilder for $75? No.
Personal use PowerBuilder Enterprise *AND* PocketBuilder *AND* DataWindow.NET
*AND* Sybase IQ as free benefits of a $75 ISUG membership. See
http://www.isug.com/ISUG3/Membership_benefits.html for details.
Prices may change soon. Sign up now!

*********************************
Click once a day to help the hungry
http://www.thehungersite.com
*********************************
User Manual
===========
TeamSybase <> Sybase employee
Forums = Peer-to-peer
Forums <> Communication with Sybase
IsNull (AnswerTo (Posting)) can return TRUE
Forums.Moderated = TRUE, so behave or be deleted
*********************************

Sequel's Sandbox: http://www.techno-kitten.com
Home of PBL Peeper, a free PowerBuilder Developer's Toolkit. 
Version 3.0.02 now available at the Sandbox
PB Futures updated Apr 24/2006
See the PB Troubleshooting & Migration Guides at the Sandbox
^ ^
o o
=*=
0
Terry
5/31/2006 2:15:41 PM
 Looking forward to your PFC 11.net release *g*! In the mean time, I am
going to bet on my FC's as I have already made quite a few changes to it to
make it PB 11.Net friendly even for the Alpha releases (compiles and
performs like lightening already too!).


"Terry Voth" <sequel@techno-kitten.com> wrote in message
news:447da480$1@forums-2-dub...
> That could possibly be true if it weren't for very public beta programs,
and the
> publicity Sybase has given upcoming features (we've known most of the PB11
> features for 2 years now). Additionally, the PFC-OS leadership team has
never
> been turned down for a pre-public early release. I've had PB11 for months.
I
> think I or anyone else can handle the 10 minutes it takes to add new
controls
> (which, BTW, was NOT done consistently when it was in the hands of
Sybase).
>
> Now, in terms of being constructive, I bet if all the time spent on this
thread
> were spent on code reviews, every piece of outstanding code could have
been
> reviewed twice (probably more than happens in most corporate environments
<g>)
> and we could have been well on our way to a release. Instead.....
>
> Good luck,
>
> Terry [TeamSybase] and Sequel the techno-kitten
>
> On 31 May 2006 05:31:49 -0700,
>  in sybase.public.powerbuilder.futures.discussion
> Chris Pollach <cpollach@travel-net.dot.com> wrote:
> >    I have seen allot of Constructive Criticism about PFC improvements in
> >the news groups over the past year. The point I am trying to make is that
> >the PFC needs to have coordinated work done on it and by people who have
> >direct and intimate knowledge of the PB engineers working on the new
> >features of PB. That way, when a new release of PB hits the street ...
the
> >PFC is right there with it!!!!! Open source development will NOT
guarantee
> >that .. only Sybase maintained will make that scenario happen (Not rocket
> >science here to figure this one out)!
> >
> >
> >"Boris Gasin [TeamSybase]" <NOSPAM_bgasin@dynamictechgroup.com> wrote in
> >message news:raep72d6gep8rhnoqcf42lip6l85itqh2q@4ax.com...
> >> Thank you Brad.  I would also love to change this thread towards
> >> constructive criticism.
> >>
> >> On 30 May 2006 11:53:02 -0700, Brad Wery
> >> <bradweryatagricoreunited.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> >I really don't want to butt in but I was really looking forward to an
> >> >actual answer to Paul's question. I'm very curious know what people
need
> >> >in PFC that doesn't already exist.
> >> >
> >> >Chris, can you please provide an answer, I notice that you dodge a lot
> >> >of questions.
> >> >
> >> >Thanks,
> >> >
> >> >Brad
> >> >
> >> >Chris Pollach wrote:
> >> >> Paul;
> >> >>
> >> >>     Since I have my own framework that runs with PK, PB (Ansi and
> >Unicode),
> >> >> EAServer and now .Net - I am happy (Yeee Haaaa)! I was just being
the
> >devils
> >> >> advocate for all the other PB developers out there that reply of
good
> >> >> frameworks to assist them in RAD ... they look to things like the
PFC
> >as
> >> >> their savior. Soooooo .... the PFC contributes to PB sales
indirectly.
> >If
> >> >> Sybase can not see this then it's too late for PB (put another nail
in
> >the
> >> >> coffin).
> >> >>
> >> >>     I guess the key thing at this point is that Sybase needs to make
a
> >plan
> >> >> based on what key technology, IDE and RAD features need to be in PK,
> >IM, PB,
> >> >> EAS, etc and just do them. Personally, I think Sybase needs to
rehire
> >the
> >> >> PowerSoft guys to head-up a "Tools" division (like iAnyWhere) and
just
> >let
> >> >> them run with the products!
> >> >>
> >> >>     OK ... I am off my soap box *g* - nothing personal there Paul -
> >just
> >> >> passionate about PB !
> >> >>
> >> >> Regards  ... Chris
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> "Paul Horan[TeamSybase]" <paul.horan@NOSPAM_cynergysystems.com>
wrote
> >in
> >> >> message news:447c87a8$1@forums-1-dub...
> >> >>
> >> >>>"Chris Pollach" <cpollach@travel-net.dot.com> wrote in message
> >> >>>news:447c2cc4@forums-1-dub...
> >> >>>
> >> >>>>    Yep its statements like this "10-15% of clients who use it" is
why
> >> >>
> >> >> not
> >> >>
> >> >>>>only the PFC, but PB is not used 80+%!! Sooooo .... lets sit back
and
> >> >>
> >> >> give
> >> >>
> >> >>>>all the excuses why we can not work on it  (you should apply for a
> >> >>
> >> >> Sybase
> >> >>
> >> >>>>position in senior management:)!
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>>   A solid business framework is what application developers need
....
> >> >>>>Hello, Hello, any body home!
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>>The point everyone here is trying to make is:
> >> >>>a) it's not broken (or not broken badly enough to allocate new
> >resources
> >> >>
> >> >> or
> >> >>
> >> >>>devote existing resources to);
> >> >>>b) it's not a revenue-producer, like the IDE itself;
> >> >>>c) there's an active community out here (who are probably more adept
at
> >> >>
> >> >> PFC
> >> >>
> >> >>>than anyone currently at Sybase) who are ready and waiting to
enhance
> >and
> >> >>>fix the framework;
> >> >>>
> >> >>>So please list the items that YOU consider to be missing or broken
from
> >> >>
> >> >> PFC.
> >> >>
> >> >>>I will start on them immediately, for no other reason than to SHUT
YOU
> >UP
> >> >>>ABOUT IT!!!
> *********************************
> PowerBuilder for $75? No.
> Personal use PowerBuilder Enterprise *AND* PocketBuilder *AND*
DataWindow.NET
> *AND* Sybase IQ as free benefits of a $75 ISUG membership. See
> http://www.isug.com/ISUG3/Membership_benefits.html for details.
> Prices may change soon. Sign up now!
>
> *********************************
> Click once a day to help the hungry
> http://www.thehungersite.com
> *********************************
> User Manual
> ===========
> TeamSybase <> Sybase employee
> Forums = Peer-to-peer
> Forums <> Communication with Sybase
> IsNull (AnswerTo (Posting)) can return TRUE
> Forums.Moderated = TRUE, so behave or be deleted
> *********************************
>
> Sequel's Sandbox: http://www.techno-kitten.com
> Home of PBL Peeper, a free PowerBuilder Developer's Toolkit.
> Version 3.0.02 now available at the Sandbox
> PB Futures updated Apr 24/2006
> See the PB Troubleshooting & Migration Guides at the Sandbox
> ^ ^
> o o
> =*=


0
Chris
5/31/2006 3:37:47 PM
So, you're just in here bad-mouthing PFC without any interest in the
outcome? Neat.

-- 
Regards,
Millard [TeamSybase]

"Chris Pollach" <cpollach@travel-net.dot.com> wrote in message
news:447db7bb$1@forums-2-dub...
>
>  Looking forward to your PFC 11.net release *g*! In the mean time, I am
> going to bet on my FC's as I have already made quite a few changes to it
to
> make it PB 11.Net friendly even for the Alpha releases (compiles and
> performs like lightening already too!).
>
>
> "Terry Voth" <sequel@techno-kitten.com> wrote in message
> news:447da480$1@forums-2-dub...
> > That could possibly be true if it weren't for very public beta programs,
> and the
> > publicity Sybase has given upcoming features (we've known most of the
PB11
> > features for 2 years now). Additionally, the PFC-OS leadership team has
> never
> > been turned down for a pre-public early release. I've had PB11 for
months.
> I
> > think I or anyone else can handle the 10 minutes it takes to add new
> controls
> > (which, BTW, was NOT done consistently when it was in the hands of
> Sybase).
> >
> > Now, in terms of being constructive, I bet if all the time spent on this
> thread
> > were spent on code reviews, every piece of outstanding code could have
> been
> > reviewed twice (probably more than happens in most corporate
environments
> <g>)
> > and we could have been well on our way to a release. Instead.....
> >
> > Good luck,
> >
> > Terry [TeamSybase] and Sequel the techno-kitten
> >
> > On 31 May 2006 05:31:49 -0700,
> >  in sybase.public.powerbuilder.futures.discussion
> > Chris Pollach <cpollach@travel-net.dot.com> wrote:
> > >    I have seen allot of Constructive Criticism about PFC improvements
in
> > >the news groups over the past year. The point I am trying to make is
that
> > >the PFC needs to have coordinated work done on it and by people who
have
> > >direct and intimate knowledge of the PB engineers working on the new
> > >features of PB. That way, when a new release of PB hits the street ...
> the
> > >PFC is right there with it!!!!! Open source development will NOT
> guarantee
> > >that .. only Sybase maintained will make that scenario happen (Not
rocket
> > >science here to figure this one out)!
> > >
> > >
> > >"Boris Gasin [TeamSybase]" <NOSPAM_bgasin@dynamictechgroup.com> wrote
in
> > >message news:raep72d6gep8rhnoqcf42lip6l85itqh2q@4ax.com...
> > >> Thank you Brad.  I would also love to change this thread towards
> > >> constructive criticism.
> > >>
> > >> On 30 May 2006 11:53:02 -0700, Brad Wery
> > >> <bradweryatagricoreunited.com> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> >I really don't want to butt in but I was really looking forward to
an
> > >> >actual answer to Paul's question. I'm very curious know what people
> need
> > >> >in PFC that doesn't already exist.
> > >> >
> > >> >Chris, can you please provide an answer, I notice that you dodge a
lot
> > >> >of questions.
> > >> >
> > >> >Thanks,
> > >> >
> > >> >Brad
> > >> >
> > >> >Chris Pollach wrote:
> > >> >> Paul;
> > >> >>
> > >> >>     Since I have my own framework that runs with PK, PB (Ansi and
> > >Unicode),
> > >> >> EAServer and now .Net - I am happy (Yeee Haaaa)! I was just being
> the
> > >devils
> > >> >> advocate for all the other PB developers out there that reply of
> good
> > >> >> frameworks to assist them in RAD ... they look to things like the
> PFC
> > >as
> > >> >> their savior. Soooooo .... the PFC contributes to PB sales
> indirectly.
> > >If
> > >> >> Sybase can not see this then it's too late for PB (put another
nail
> in
> > >the
> > >> >> coffin).
> > >> >>
> > >> >>     I guess the key thing at this point is that Sybase needs to
make
> a
> > >plan
> > >> >> based on what key technology, IDE and RAD features need to be in
PK,
> > >IM, PB,
> > >> >> EAS, etc and just do them. Personally, I think Sybase needs to
> rehire
> > >the
> > >> >> PowerSoft guys to head-up a "Tools" division (like iAnyWhere) and
> just
> > >let
> > >> >> them run with the products!
> > >> >>
> > >> >>     OK ... I am off my soap box *g* - nothing personal there
Paul -
> > >just
> > >> >> passionate about PB !
> > >> >>
> > >> >> Regards  ... Chris
> > >> >>
> > >> >>
> > >> >>
> > >> >> "Paul Horan[TeamSybase]" <paul.horan@NOSPAM_cynergysystems.com>
> wrote
> > >in
> > >> >> message news:447c87a8$1@forums-1-dub...
> > >> >>
> > >> >>>"Chris Pollach" <cpollach@travel-net.dot.com> wrote in message
> > >> >>>news:447c2cc4@forums-1-dub...
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>>    Yep its statements like this "10-15% of clients who use it"
is
> why
> > >> >>
> > >> >> not
> > >> >>
> > >> >>>>only the PFC, but PB is not used 80+%!! Sooooo .... lets sit back
> and
> > >> >>
> > >> >> give
> > >> >>
> > >> >>>>all the excuses why we can not work on it  (you should apply for
a
> > >> >>
> > >> >> Sybase
> > >> >>
> > >> >>>>position in senior management:)!
> > >> >>>>
> > >> >>>>   A solid business framework is what application developers need
> ...
> > >> >>>>Hello, Hello, any body home!
> > >> >>>>
> > >> >>>>
> > >> >>>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>The point everyone here is trying to make is:
> > >> >>>a) it's not broken (or not broken badly enough to allocate new
> > >resources
> > >> >>
> > >> >> or
> > >> >>
> > >> >>>devote existing resources to);
> > >> >>>b) it's not a revenue-producer, like the IDE itself;
> > >> >>>c) there's an active community out here (who are probably more
adept
> at
> > >> >>
> > >> >> PFC
> > >> >>
> > >> >>>than anyone currently at Sybase) who are ready and waiting to
> enhance
> > >and
> > >> >>>fix the framework;
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>So please list the items that YOU consider to be missing or broken
> from
> > >> >>
> > >> >> PFC.
> > >> >>
> > >> >>>I will start on them immediately, for no other reason than to SHUT
> YOU
> > >UP
> > >> >>>ABOUT IT!!!
> > *********************************
> > PowerBuilder for $75? No.
> > Personal use PowerBuilder Enterprise *AND* PocketBuilder *AND*
> DataWindow.NET
> > *AND* Sybase IQ as free benefits of a $75 ISUG membership. See
> > http://www.isug.com/ISUG3/Membership_benefits.html for details.
> > Prices may change soon. Sign up now!
> >
> > *********************************
> > Click once a day to help the hungry
> > http://www.thehungersite.com
> > *********************************
> > User Manual
> > ===========
> > TeamSybase <> Sybase employee
> > Forums = Peer-to-peer
> > Forums <> Communication with Sybase
> > IsNull (AnswerTo (Posting)) can return TRUE
> > Forums.Moderated = TRUE, so behave or be deleted
> > *********************************
> >
> > Sequel's Sandbox: http://www.techno-kitten.com
> > Home of PBL Peeper, a free PowerBuilder Developer's Toolkit.
> > Version 3.0.02 now available at the Sandbox
> > PB Futures updated Apr 24/2006
> > See the PB Troubleshooting & Migration Guides at the Sandbox
> > ^ ^
> > o o
> > =*=
>
>


0
Millard
5/31/2006 8:02:45 PM
Chris Pollach wrote:
>  1. Make it PB11.Net ready
>  2. Morph an EAServer version
>  3. Morph a PK version
>  4. Make sure it's Vista friendly
>  5. Catch up to the current PB (TV DW, Ink, Signature, etc new controls)
> friendly
>  6. Align it to use .Net services
>  7. Rewrite some code
> Etc, etc, etc - come on there is a "ton" of work to be done on that puppy!

You are now talking multiple frameworks. A PFC framework for C/S is 
going to be a lot different than one for EAServer which is different 
than one for PK. Sybase would have to spend 3x the resources for 
frameworks that may or may not be used by clients and would not 
necessarily have any impact on new sales or revenue. Then you have the 
problem that many clients are using the EAF framework which is closely 
aligned with Sybase (shipped with PB10?). Again, why would sybase waste 
time writing a framework when Cynergy have the best product available. I 
would rather see someone write a client-PFC that integrates with EAF but 
again this is not Sybases role, they should however support this through 
continuing to distribute the code with future releases of EAS/PB. Sybase 
investing in partners and leaving their staff to do the grunt work is 
the best way forward IMO.

I agree that some of those things you mentioned would be nice to add 
(web service support would be nice) but I still think that we (the 
developers) have the ability to do this and in a shorter timeframe than 
the enhancement/bug process that would exist if Sybase still controlled 
the source.

a.



> Note: The PFC was also an great test bench for PB engineering. I can
> remember that the PFC group forced the PB development team to clean-up and
> improve allot of features within PB! We have lost a great internal resource
> at Sybase doing this kind of internal stress and functional testing. In
> essence, they flush-out allot of new PB functionality at the QA level!
> 
> 
> "Adam Simmonds [TeamSybase]" <adam.simmonds@nospam.micropay.com.au> wrote in
> message news:447cfd9c$1@forums-1-dub...
>> Chris Pollach wrote:
>>>  You and I know that no one is going to maintain it .. otherwise we
> would of
>>> seen a PB 10.2.1 and PB 10.5 version with enhancements!
>> How about answering the questions. You continue to make statements that
>> the PFC needs enhancing so come on, let us know what is required.
>>
>> To make it simple just fill in the blanks below for your top 5 PFC
>> enhancements
>>
>> 1.
>> 2.
>> 3.
>> 4.
>> 5.
>>
>> Please list these 8 features dropped since PB6, maybe Sybase will
>> consider putting them back in.
>>
>> 1.
>> 2.
>> 3.
>> 4.
>> 5.
>> 6.
>> 7.
>> 8.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>> "Adam Simmonds [TeamSybase]" <adam.simmonds@nospam.micropay.com.au>
> wrote in
>>> message news:447cdb98$1@forums-1-dub...
>>>> Chris Pollach wrote:
>>>>>     Again, the key is that the PFC provides excellent business
> behaviour
>>>>> (ie: link manager, start-up/down tasks, messaging, OS interfaces, data
>>>>> checking, etc). These are all critical things a normal application
>>>>> requires
>>>>> above an beyond the basic IDE tool. I was just talking to some people
> at
>>>>> a
>>>>> local government department last week who have been trying to do some
>>>>> things
>>>>> in VS2005 .. and they are basically writing their own PFC. As they
> have
>>>>> found over the past 6 months ...  just having the .Net framework is
> far
>>>>> from
>>>>> a complete application framework that a business developers requires.
>>>>>
>>>>>     So, if we consider the PFC as the "Business Framework" - for the
>>>>> average
>>>>> PB developer, that allows them to quickly build, maintain, and migrate
>>>>> their
>>>>> applications forward - this is a key reason to use PB (even over VS).
> If
>>>>> Sybase abandons the PFC - then the average developer sits back and
> says -
>>>> So on that basis the PFC already provides this "business framework"
>>>> (although I would not call it that)
>>>>
>>>>> "How long before the PFC will not run at all with PB 11 or 12, etc"?
>>>> Hence the open source and the ability for developers to maintain the
> code.
>>>> It does
>>>>> not take a dummy to figure out that PB and the related O/S's will
> advance
>>>>> and the PFC will becomes useless as it will stagnate
>>>> Hence the open source and the ability for developers to maintain the
> code.
>>>> (OK, it is already
>>>>> doing that *g*). The intelligent manager will also look at this
> feedback
>>>>> from the developers as "the vendor does not care about the supporting
>>>>> product - so we should migrate to something else" (of course, this is
> all
>>>>> the MS salesperson needs to hear).
>>>> Would these would be the same managers using the plethora of open
> source
>>>> code available ( Tomcat, MySql, Struts to name a few ). Your argument
> is
>>>> totally flawed since the product(PB) is supported.
>>>>
>>>>>     If Sybase does not look at the PFC or better yet, a redesigned PFC
> as
>>>>> one of the key items to continuing to use the PB product -
>>>> Yet you can not answer the simple question: What
> additions/modifications
>>>> are required in the PFC.
>>>>
>>>> To make it simple just fill in the blanks below for your top 5 PFC
>>>> enhancements
>>>>
>>>> 1.
>>>> 2.
>>>> 3.
>>>> 4.
>>>> 5.
>>>>
>>>> they are sorely
>>>>> misinformed by naive people. The other factor is to "gain market
> share"
>>>>> and
>>>>> in order to do this you need to show that not only does your tool do
> what
>>>>> the other guy's does, but it can do it cheaper, faster, easier and
>>>>> (bonus)
>>>>> with better performance. Over the past 5 years, I have been able to
>>>>> "smoke"
>>>>> many Java projects with PB 9 & 10 and even get many of those back into
>>>>> using
>>>>> PB (Old Age Canada Pension being a great example)! Sybase can still
>>>>> deliver
>>>>> a much better "value for the $" if they stop cutting out PB's great
>>>>> features
>>>>> ... for example (DPB, ObjectCycle
>>>> pmsl. you have lost all credibility if you believe ObjectCycle should
> have
>>>> been retained.
>>>>
>>>> , PFC, C++ User Object, etc). All
>>>>> management has heard over the past 5-6 years from their PB developers
> is
>>>>> how
>>>>> each new release of PB has dropped a feature (or two) that they depend
>>>>> on!!!!
>>>> So basing this on PB6-10 that would be about 8 lost features.
>>>>
>>>> Please list these 8 features, maybe Sybase will consider putting them
> back
>>>> in.
>>>>
>>>> 1.
>>>> 2.
>>>> 3.
>>>> 4.
>>>> 5.
>>>> 6.
>>>> 7.
>>>> 8.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Well guess what, that message has translated into a ... "Lets migrate
>>>>> off PB as fast as we can" mentality out their that due to a COMPLETE
> lack
>>>>> of
>>>>> marketing of PB has fueled the exodus of PB development to Java and
> now
>>>>> VS.
>>>> So now its marketing? I thought you said its the lack of a "business
>>>> framework" that will bring back the masses?
>>>>
>>>>>     Its not so much the PFC as the whole decay of the PB development
>>>>> infrastructure and lack of ingenuity of new features into PB
>>>> Now you are starting to backtrack, "Its not so much the PFC" now?
>>>>
>>>> <snip nothing to do with the PFC discussion>
>>>>
>>>>> I hope that gives you a sense of where I am coming from and why the
> PFC
>>>>> is just a small issue of Sybase incompetancy eroding one of the best
>>>>> development tools out there (even today). We (the development
> community)
>>>>> MUST
>>>> .... start to work on the PFC via CodeExchange. Its quite simple
> really.
>>>> make Sybase management understand that in order to position PB back on
>>>>> top, they need to quit neglecting any feature, because believe me,
> these
>>>>> features are production critical to many PB applications. No one seems
> to
>>>>> ask the REAL PB community - "OK if I remove that feature?" ... just
> some
>>>>> &^*@$ makes  a decision like: "wow we could save a developer if we axe
>>>>> that
>>>>> feature". Ever hear of the expression "Cut your nose off to spite your
>>>>> face"
>>>>> .. well, here is a good example with PB how Sybase did that!
>>>>>       I am real guy out there building and helping other developers
> build
>>>>> real systems (and not just Mickey Mouse stuff either) I am talking
>>>>> 500-1000
>>>>> concurrent users, terabyte databases, 100000 transactions per hour web
>>>>> systems, complicated GUI interfaces, etc - and you know what, we ARE
>>>>> doing
>>>>> this with PB 10 even today (including web services)!
>>>>>
>>>>>     So to wrap up my soap box ... I do not want to hear from any
> manager,
>>>>> PB
>>>>> wannabe, Team-whatever, etc. Lets get some Sybase people - especially
>>>>> engineers, marketing and senior management - REALLY involved with this
>>>>> products future. In other words ... lets get off the arm chair
> management
>>>>> approach and back to some "hands-on" stuff
>>>> - just like the good old
>>>>> PowerSoft days. Maybe, this can be an excellent example of how to turn
> a
>>>>> product around that Sybase could use in other endeavours as well. You
>>>>> never
>>>>> know until you give it the "old college try" - something that all I
> hear
>>>>> in
>>>>> the various news groups is why we can not do something
>>>> . Time to eradicate
>>>>> that negative behviour!!!!!
>>>> Well I know where I would start and its not the PFC.
>>>>
>>>> a.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Regards ... Chris
>>>>> Great White North PB Technical Evangelist
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> "Brad Wery" <bradweryatagricoreunited.com> wrote in message
>>>>> news:447c948e$1@forums-1-dub...
>>>>>> I really don't want to butt in but I was really looking forward to an
>>>>>> actual answer to Paul's question. I'm very curious know what people
> need
>>>>>> in PFC that doesn't already exist.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Chris, can you please provide an answer, I notice that you dodge a
> lot
>>>>>> of questions.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Brad
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Chris Pollach wrote:
>>>>>>> Paul;
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>     Since I have my own framework that runs with PK, PB (Ansi and
>>>>> Unicode),
>>>>>>> EAServer and now .Net - I am happy (Yeee Haaaa)! I was just being
> the
>>>>> devils
>>>>>>> advocate for all the other PB developers out there that reply of
> good
>>>>>>> frameworks to assist them in RAD ... they look to things like the
> PFC
>>>>>>> as
>>>>>>> their savior. Soooooo .... the PFC contributes to PB sales
> indirectly.
>>>>> If
>>>>>>> Sybase can not see this then it's too late for PB (put another nail
> in
>>>>> the
>>>>>>> coffin).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>     I guess the key thing at this point is that Sybase needs to make
> a
>>>>> plan
>>>>>>> based on what key technology, IDE and RAD features need to be in PK,
>>>>>>> IM,
>>>>> PB,
>>>>>>> EAS, etc and just do them. Personally, I think Sybase needs to
> rehire
>>>>> the
>>>>>>> PowerSoft guys to head-up a "Tools" division (like iAnyWhere) and
> just
>>>>> let
>>>>>>> them run with the products!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>     OK ... I am off my soap box *g* - nothing personal there Paul -
>>>>>>> just
>>>>>>> passionate about PB !
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Regards  ... Chris
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "Paul Horan[TeamSybase]" <paul.horan@NOSPAM_cynergysystems.com>
> wrote
>>>>>>> in
>>>>>>> message news:447c87a8$1@forums-1-dub...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "Chris Pollach" <cpollach@travel-net.dot.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>>> news:447c2cc4@forums-1-dub...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>    Yep its statements like this "10-15% of clients who use it" is
> why
>>>>>>> not
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> only the PFC, but PB is not used 80+%!! Sooooo .... lets sit back
> and
>>>>>>> give
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> all the excuses why we can not work on it  (you should apply for a
>>>>>>> Sybase
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> position in senior management:)!
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>   A solid business framework is what application developers need
> ...
>>>>>>>>> Hello, Hello, any body home!
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The point everyone here is trying to make is:
>>>>>>>> a) it's not broken (or not broken badly enough to allocate new
>>>>>>>> resources
>>>>>>> or
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> devote existing resources to);
>>>>>>>> b) it's not a revenue-producer, like the IDE itself;
>>>>>>>> c) there's an active community out here (who are probably more
> adept
>>>>>>>> at
>>>>>>> PFC
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> than anyone currently at Sybase) who are ready and waiting to
> enhance
>>>>> and
>>>>>>>> fix the framework;
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> So please list the items that YOU consider to be missing or broken
>>>>>>>> from
>>>>>>> PFC.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I will start on them immediately, for no other reason than to SHUT
> YOU
>>>>> UP
>>>>>>>> ABOUT IT!!!
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> Paul Horan[TeamSybase]
>>>>>>>> Cynergy Systems
>>>>>>>> www.cynergysystems.com
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
> 
> 
0
Adam
5/31/2006 10:52:34 PM
Millard F. Brown III wrote:
> So, you're just in here bad-mouthing PFC without any interest in the
> outcome? Neat.
> 

Q.E.D.
0
Adam
6/1/2006 8:52:37 AM
 Are you TeamSybase all the same (can not read) .. I am NOT bad mouthing the
PFC. Just making the point that it needs to be updated and Sybase should be
doing it!!!!!


"Millard F. Brown III" <millard.brown@teamsybase.com> wrote in message
news:447df665$1@forums-1-dub...
> So, you're just in here bad-mouthing PFC without any interest in the
> outcome? Neat.
>
> --
> Regards,
> Millard [TeamSybase]
>
> "Chris Pollach" <cpollach@travel-net.dot.com> wrote in message
> news:447db7bb$1@forums-2-dub...
> >
> >  Looking forward to your PFC 11.net release *g*! In the mean time, I am
> > going to bet on my FC's as I have already made quite a few changes to it
> to
> > make it PB 11.Net friendly even for the Alpha releases (compiles and
> > performs like lightening already too!).
> >
> >
> > "Terry Voth" <sequel@techno-kitten.com> wrote in message
> > news:447da480$1@forums-2-dub...
> > > That could possibly be true if it weren't for very public beta
programs,
> > and the
> > > publicity Sybase has given upcoming features (we've known most of the
> PB11
> > > features for 2 years now). Additionally, the PFC-OS leadership team
has
> > never
> > > been turned down for a pre-public early release. I've had PB11 for
> months.
> > I
> > > think I or anyone else can handle the 10 minutes it takes to add new
> > controls
> > > (which, BTW, was NOT done consistently when it was in the hands of
> > Sybase).
> > >
> > > Now, in terms of being constructive, I bet if all the time spent on
this
> > thread
> > > were spent on code reviews, every piece of outstanding code could have
> > been
> > > reviewed twice (probably more than happens in most corporate
> environments
> > <g>)
> > > and we could have been well on our way to a release. Instead.....
> > >
> > > Good luck,
> > >
> > > Terry [TeamSybase] and Sequel the techno-kitten
> > >
> > > On 31 May 2006 05:31:49 -0700,
> > >  in sybase.public.powerbuilder.futures.discussion
> > > Chris Pollach <cpollach@travel-net.dot.com> wrote:
> > > >    I have seen allot of Constructive Criticism about PFC
improvements
> in
> > > >the news groups over the past year. The point I am trying to make is
> that
> > > >the PFC needs to have coordinated work done on it and by people who
> have
> > > >direct and intimate knowledge of the PB engineers working on the new
> > > >features of PB. That way, when a new release of PB hits the street
....
> > the
> > > >PFC is right there with it!!!!! Open source development will NOT
> > guarantee
> > > >that .. only Sybase maintained will make that scenario happen (Not
> rocket
> > > >science here to figure this one out)!
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >"Boris Gasin [TeamSybase]" <NOSPAM_bgasin@dynamictechgroup.com> wrote
> in
> > > >message news:raep72d6gep8rhnoqcf42lip6l85itqh2q@4ax.com...
> > > >> Thank you Brad.  I would also love to change this thread towards
> > > >> constructive criticism.
> > > >>
> > > >> On 30 May 2006 11:53:02 -0700, Brad Wery
> > > >> <bradweryatagricoreunited.com> wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> >I really don't want to butt in but I was really looking forward to
> an
> > > >> >actual answer to Paul's question. I'm very curious know what
people
> > need
> > > >> >in PFC that doesn't already exist.
> > > >> >
> > > >> >Chris, can you please provide an answer, I notice that you dodge a
> lot
> > > >> >of questions.
> > > >> >
> > > >> >Thanks,
> > > >> >
> > > >> >Brad
> > > >> >
> > > >> >Chris Pollach wrote:
> > > >> >> Paul;
> > > >> >>
> > > >> >>     Since I have my own framework that runs with PK, PB (Ansi
and
> > > >Unicode),
> > > >> >> EAServer and now .Net - I am happy (Yeee Haaaa)! I was just
being
> > the
> > > >devils
> > > >> >> advocate for all the other PB developers out there that reply of
> > good
> > > >> >> frameworks to assist them in RAD ... they look to things like
the
> > PFC
> > > >as
> > > >> >> their savior. Soooooo .... the PFC contributes to PB sales
> > indirectly.
> > > >If
> > > >> >> Sybase can not see this then it's too late for PB (put another
> nail
> > in
> > > >the
> > > >> >> coffin).
> > > >> >>
> > > >> >>     I guess the key thing at this point is that Sybase needs to
> make
> > a
> > > >plan
> > > >> >> based on what key technology, IDE and RAD features need to be in
> PK,
> > > >IM, PB,
> > > >> >> EAS, etc and just do them. Personally, I think Sybase needs to
> > rehire
> > > >the
> > > >> >> PowerSoft guys to head-up a "Tools" division (like iAnyWhere)
and
> > just
> > > >let
> > > >> >> them run with the products!
> > > >> >>
> > > >> >>     OK ... I am off my soap box *g* - nothing personal there
> Paul -
> > > >just
> > > >> >> passionate about PB !
> > > >> >>
> > > >> >> Regards  ... Chris
> > > >> >>
> > > >> >>
> > > >> >>
> > > >> >> "Paul Horan[TeamSybase]" <paul.horan@NOSPAM_cynergysystems.com>
> > wrote
> > > >in
> > > >> >> message news:447c87a8$1@forums-1-dub...
> > > >> >>
> > > >> >>>"Chris Pollach" <cpollach@travel-net.dot.com> wrote in message
> > > >> >>>news:447c2cc4@forums-1-dub...
> > > >> >>>
> > > >> >>>>    Yep its statements like this "10-15% of clients who use it"
> is
> > why
> > > >> >>
> > > >> >> not
> > > >> >>
> > > >> >>>>only the PFC, but PB is not used 80+%!! Sooooo .... lets sit
back
> > and
> > > >> >>
> > > >> >> give
> > > >> >>
> > > >> >>>>all the excuses why we can not work on it  (you should apply
for
> a
> > > >> >>
> > > >> >> Sybase
> > > >> >>
> > > >> >>>>position in senior management:)!
> > > >> >>>>
> > > >> >>>>   A solid business framework is what application developers
need
> > ...
> > > >> >>>>Hello, Hello, any body home!
> > > >> >>>>
> > > >> >>>>
> > > >> >>>>
> > > >> >>>
> > > >> >>>The point everyone here is trying to make is:
> > > >> >>>a) it's not broken (or not broken badly enough to allocate new
> > > >resources
> > > >> >>
> > > >> >> or
> > > >> >>
> > > >> >>>devote existing resources to);
> > > >> >>>b) it's not a revenue-producer, like the IDE itself;
> > > >> >>>c) there's an active community out here (who are probably more
> adept
> > at
> > > >> >>
> > > >> >> PFC
> > > >> >>
> > > >> >>>than anyone currently at Sybase) who are ready and waiting to
> > enhance
> > > >and
> > > >> >>>fix the framework;
> > > >> >>>
> > > >> >>>So please list the items that YOU consider to be missing or
broken
> > from
> > > >> >>
> > > >> >> PFC.
> > > >> >>
> > > >> >>>I will start on them immediately, for no other reason than to
SHUT
> > YOU
> > > >UP
> > > >> >>>ABOUT IT!!!
> > > *********************************
> > > PowerBuilder for $75? No.
> > > Personal use PowerBuilder Enterprise *AND* PocketBuilder *AND*
> > DataWindow.NET
> > > *AND* Sybase IQ as free benefits of a $75 ISUG membership. See
> > > http://www.isug.com/ISUG3/Membership_benefits.html for details.
> > > Prices may change soon. Sign up now!
> > >
> > > *********************************
> > > Click once a day to help the hungry
> > > http://www.thehungersite.com
> > > *********************************
> > > User Manual
> > > ===========
> > > TeamSybase <> Sybase employee
> > > Forums = Peer-to-peer
> > > Forums <> Communication with Sybase
> > > IsNull (AnswerTo (Posting)) can return TRUE
> > > Forums.Moderated = TRUE, so behave or be deleted
> > > *********************************
> > >
> > > Sequel's Sandbox: http://www.techno-kitten.com
> > > Home of PBL Peeper, a free PowerBuilder Developer's Toolkit.
> > > Version 3.0.02 now available at the Sandbox
> > > PB Futures updated Apr 24/2006
> > > See the PB Troubleshooting & Migration Guides at the Sandbox
> > > ^ ^
> > > o o
> > > =*=
> >
> >
>
>


0
Chris
6/1/2006 2:46:46 PM
On 31 May 2006 05:24:52 -0700, "Chris Pollach"
<cpollach@travel-net.dot.com> wrote:
> 1. Make it PB11.Net ready
> 2. Morph an EAServer version
> 3. Morph a PK version
> 4. Make sure it's Vista friendly
> 5. Catch up to the current PB (TV DW, Ink, Signature, etc new controls)
>friendly
> 6. Align it to use .Net services
> 7. Rewrite some code
>Etc, etc, etc - come on there is a "ton" of work to be done on that puppy!

Thank you Chris for the suggestions...  I'll address those in a
separate reply.

>Note: The PFC was also an great test bench for PB engineering. I can
>remember that the PFC group forced the PB development team to clean-up and
>improve allot of features within PB! We have lost a great internal resource
>at Sybase doing this kind of internal stress and functional testing. In
>essence, they flush-out allot of new PB functionality at the QA level!

Do you realize that the scenario you are describing did not exist
since PB6?  I mean PFC team driving PB features.  As far as I know
Sybase QA still uses PFC apps in their test environment.  

PFC Development team came from the Sybase Consulting, people with
background in business application development.   But they left Sybase
in 1998!  Chris that's 8 years ago!   At some point you have to accept
the reality.   PFC7 saw bug fixes and new control support upgrade.
PFC 8 bug fixes, PFC 9 same.   What you are asking for requires a
proactive steps by Sybase in a direction they have absolutely no
interest in.   That's the reality based on their actions of the last
eight years. 

Now we have the opportunity at *minimum* to provide the same support
Sybase has provided for last eight years.  But if there is interest it
could be so much more!  Road to the left says "moan and groan", road
to the right do something productive.   I know where I'm going. <g>

  Boris Gasin [TeamSybase]
  mailto:NOSPAM_bgasin@dynamictechgroup.com
    ___ 
  ____   _      
 _____    _     
  ____   _      
    ___ 


  Dynamic Technology Group, Inc.
  http://www.dynamictechgroup.com/
0
Boris
6/1/2006 5:47:28 PM
Guilty of "can not read". You haven't really been bad-mouthing PFC! Just PB
and Sybase. My bad.
-- 
Regards,
Millard [TeamSybase]

"Chris Pollach" <cpollach@travel-net.dot.com> wrote in message
news:447efd43@forums-2-dub...
>
>  Are you TeamSybase all the same (can not read) .. I am NOT bad mouthing
the
> PFC. Just making the point that it needs to be updated and Sybase should
be
> doing it!!!!!
>
>
> "Millard F. Brown III" <millard.brown@teamsybase.com> wrote in message
> news:447df665$1@forums-1-dub...
> > So, you're just in here bad-mouthing PFC without any interest in the
> > outcome? Neat.
> >
> > --
> > Regards,
> > Millard [TeamSybase]
> >
> > "Chris Pollach" <cpollach@travel-net.dot.com> wrote in message
> > news:447db7bb$1@forums-2-dub...
> > >
> > >  Looking forward to your PFC 11.net release *g*! In the mean time, I
am
> > > going to bet on my FC's as I have already made quite a few changes to
it
> > to
> > > make it PB 11.Net friendly even for the Alpha releases (compiles and
> > > performs like lightening already too!).
> > >
> > >
> > > "Terry Voth" <sequel@techno-kitten.com> wrote in message
> > > news:447da480$1@forums-2-dub...
> > > > That could possibly be true if it weren't for very public beta
> programs,
> > > and the
> > > > publicity Sybase has given upcoming features (we've known most of
the
> > PB11
> > > > features for 2 years now). Additionally, the PFC-OS leadership team
> has
> > > never
> > > > been turned down for a pre-public early release. I've had PB11 for
> > months.
> > > I
> > > > think I or anyone else can handle the 10 minutes it takes to add new
> > > controls
> > > > (which, BTW, was NOT done consistently when it was in the hands of
> > > Sybase).
> > > >
> > > > Now, in terms of being constructive, I bet if all the time spent on
> this
> > > thread
> > > > were spent on code reviews, every piece of outstanding code could
have
> > > been
> > > > reviewed twice (probably more than happens in most corporate
> > environments
> > > <g>)
> > > > and we could have been well on our way to a release. Instead.....
> > > >
> > > > Good luck,
> > > >
> > > > Terry [TeamSybase] and Sequel the techno-kitten
> > > >
> > > > On 31 May 2006 05:31:49 -0700,
> > > >  in sybase.public.powerbuilder.futures.discussion
> > > > Chris Pollach <cpollach@travel-net.dot.com> wrote:
> > > > >    I have seen allot of Constructive Criticism about PFC
> improvements
> > in
> > > > >the news groups over the past year. The point I am trying to make
is
> > that
> > > > >the PFC needs to have coordinated work done on it and by people who
> > have
> > > > >direct and intimate knowledge of the PB engineers working on the
new
> > > > >features of PB. That way, when a new release of PB hits the street
> ...
> > > the
> > > > >PFC is right there with it!!!!! Open source development will NOT
> > > guarantee
> > > > >that .. only Sybase maintained will make that scenario happen (Not
> > rocket
> > > > >science here to figure this one out)!
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >"Boris Gasin [TeamSybase]" <NOSPAM_bgasin@dynamictechgroup.com>
wrote
> > in
> > > > >message news:raep72d6gep8rhnoqcf42lip6l85itqh2q@4ax.com...
> > > > >> Thank you Brad.  I would also love to change this thread towards
> > > > >> constructive criticism.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> On 30 May 2006 11:53:02 -0700, Brad Wery
> > > > >> <bradweryatagricoreunited.com> wrote:
> > > > >>
> > > > >> >I really don't want to butt in but I was really looking forward
to
> > an
> > > > >> >actual answer to Paul's question. I'm very curious know what
> people
> > > need
> > > > >> >in PFC that doesn't already exist.
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> >Chris, can you please provide an answer, I notice that you dodge
a
> > lot
> > > > >> >of questions.
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> >Thanks,
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> >Brad
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> >Chris Pollach wrote:
> > > > >> >> Paul;
> > > > >> >>
> > > > >> >>     Since I have my own framework that runs with PK, PB (Ansi
> and
> > > > >Unicode),
> > > > >> >> EAServer and now .Net - I am happy (Yeee Haaaa)! I was just
> being
> > > the
> > > > >devils
> > > > >> >> advocate for all the other PB developers out there that reply
of
> > > good
> > > > >> >> frameworks to assist them in RAD ... they look to things like
> the
> > > PFC
> > > > >as
> > > > >> >> their savior. Soooooo .... the PFC contributes to PB sales
> > > indirectly.
> > > > >If
> > > > >> >> Sybase can not see this then it's too late for PB (put another
> > nail
> > > in
> > > > >the
> > > > >> >> coffin).
> > > > >> >>
> > > > >> >>     I guess the key thing at this point is that Sybase needs
to
> > make
> > > a
> > > > >plan
> > > > >> >> based on what key technology, IDE and RAD features need to be
in
> > PK,
> > > > >IM, PB,
> > > > >> >> EAS, etc and just do them. Personally, I think Sybase needs to
> > > rehire
> > > > >the
> > > > >> >> PowerSoft guys to head-up a "Tools" division (like iAnyWhere)
> and
> > > just
> > > > >let
> > > > >> >> them run with the products!
> > > > >> >>
> > > > >> >>     OK ... I am off my soap box *g* - nothing personal there
> > Paul -
> > > > >just
> > > > >> >> passionate about PB !
> > > > >> >>
> > > > >> >> Regards  ... Chris
> > > > >> >>
> > > > >> >>
> > > > >> >>
> > > > >> >> "Paul Horan[TeamSybase]"
<paul.horan@NOSPAM_cynergysystems.com>
> > > wrote
> > > > >in
> > > > >> >> message news:447c87a8$1@forums-1-dub...
> > > > >> >>
> > > > >> >>>"Chris Pollach" <cpollach@travel-net.dot.com> wrote in message
> > > > >> >>>news:447c2cc4@forums-1-dub...
> > > > >> >>>
> > > > >> >>>>    Yep its statements like this "10-15% of clients who use
it"
> > is
> > > why
> > > > >> >>
> > > > >> >> not
> > > > >> >>
> > > > >> >>>>only the PFC, but PB is not used 80+%!! Sooooo .... lets sit
> back
> > > and
> > > > >> >>
> > > > >> >> give
> > > > >> >>
> > > > >> >>>>all the excuses why we can not work on it  (you should apply
> for
> > a
> > > > >> >>
> > > > >> >> Sybase
> > > > >> >>
> > > > >> >>>>position in senior management:)!
> > > > >> >>>>
> > > > >> >>>>   A solid business framework is what application developers
> need
> > > ...
> > > > >> >>>>Hello, Hello, any body home!
> > > > >> >>>>
> > > > >> >>>>
> > > > >> >>>>
> > > > >> >>>
> > > > >> >>>The point everyone here is trying to make is:
> > > > >> >>>a) it's not broken (or not broken badly enough to allocate new
> > > > >resources
> > > > >> >>
> > > > >> >> or
> > > > >> >>
> > > > >> >>>devote existing resources to);
> > > > >> >>>b) it's not a revenue-producer, like the IDE itself;
> > > > >> >>>c) there's an active community out here (who are probably more
> > adept
> > > at
> > > > >> >>
> > > > >> >> PFC
> > > > >> >>
> > > > >> >>>than anyone currently at Sybase) who are ready and waiting to
> > > enhance
> > > > >and
> > > > >> >>>fix the framework;
> > > > >> >>>
> > > > >> >>>So please list the items that YOU consider to be missing or
> broken
> > > from
> > > > >> >>
> > > > >> >> PFC.
> > > > >> >>
> > > > >> >>>I will start on them immediately, for no other reason than to
> SHUT
> > > YOU
> > > > >UP
> > > > >> >>>ABOUT IT!!!
> > > > *********************************
> > > > PowerBuilder for $75? No.
> > > > Personal use PowerBuilder Enterprise *AND* PocketBuilder *AND*
> > > DataWindow.NET
> > > > *AND* Sybase IQ as free benefits of a $75 ISUG membership. See
> > > > http://www.isug.com/ISUG3/Membership_benefits.html for details.
> > > > Prices may change soon. Sign up now!
> > > >
> > > > *********************************
> > > > Click once a day to help the hungry
> > > > http://www.thehungersite.com
> > > > *********************************
> > > > User Manual
> > > > ===========
> > > > TeamSybase <> Sybase employee
> > > > Forums = Peer-to-peer
> > > > Forums <> Communication with Sybase
> > > > IsNull (AnswerTo (Posting)) can return TRUE
> > > > Forums.Moderated = TRUE, so behave or be deleted
> > > > *********************************
> > > >
> > > > Sequel's Sandbox: http://www.techno-kitten.com
> > > > Home of PBL Peeper, a free PowerBuilder Developer's Toolkit.
> > > > Version 3.0.02 now available at the Sandbox
> > > > PB Futures updated Apr 24/2006
> > > > See the PB Troubleshooting & Migration Guides at the Sandbox
> > > > ^ ^
> > > > o o
> > > > =*=
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>


0
Millard
6/1/2006 7:51:28 PM
Millard F. Brown III wrote:
> Guilty of "can not read". You haven't really been bad-mouthing PFC! Just PB
> and Sybase. My bad.

I enrolled in a "introduction to reading" course this 
weekend once it was pointed out why I had such a hard time 
understanding Chris <g>
0
Adam
6/2/2006 2:00:32 PM
Richard:

Actually, it is true.  We were discussing the specific case of hiring 
more employees using the money Sybase has "in the bank" as a result of 
past profits.  All such hirings would result in payroll, which are 
covered under GAAP.  GAAP requires that payroll changes be reflected in 
the quarterly reports, as a cost of doing business.  We can't pay people 
out of our "bank" fund.

What you're discussing was not what I was talking about.  New products, 
like Workspace, are developed using the same accounting rules as 
anything else.  We use developers that we pay for out of other 
profitable product lines.  But, before I hear the rabid cry of 
"PowerBulder money!" remember that we have two other, much larger, 
income positive cash streams in ASE and Replication Server.  I know you 
have no way of knowing it (we don't break out financials by product), 
but I can assure you that is where the money for Workspace comes from.

Look, the cries for more developers and to re-absorb PFC are all valid. 
  But why do you think we haven't already thought of those ideas?  We 
have, and we looked in to all of that already.  And, for various reasons 
we can't do any of those things.  (And the reasons are often based on 
scheduling and/or resource realities - for example, additional 
developers would just slow  us down further.)

Why do you insist on thinking we don't hear you, and haven't heard all 
this before?  The reason we don't often reply is more because we are 
tired of responding the same way (ad infinitum) and not because we 
aren't listening.  How about a few new ideas?




Jonathan



Richard Keller wrote:
> That's so untrue and I pray that upper management is not giving that excuse, 
> but I wouldn't be suprised.   We won't go into GAAP accounting details, but 
> operations do not get affected by GAAP accounting.
> 
> All you have to ask is how Sybase pays for Sybase Workspace when there is no 
> revenue??   Statements like this treat the community as ignorant to how 
> finance works.
> 
> I completely understand that Sybase would not want to expend additional 
> resources on Powerbuilder unless fortunes or markets change but do not treat 
> it as some sort of GAAP accounting excuse.   Bad etiquette.
> 
> Richard
> 
> "Jonathan Baker [Sybase]" <lastnamefirstinitial@sybase.com> wrote in message 
> news:447b6ca2@forums-1-dub...
>> I understand the frustration, but your idea shows the mis-understanding of 
>> how accounting really works.
>>
>> First, Sybase doesn't have 1 Billion in the bank.  The current amount is 
>> around 400 million.  Second, we can't just spend it on new developers. 
>> According to GAAP, any money spent on new resources must be expensed in 
>> the current quarter, and shown against total income in that same quarter. 
>> Unlike personal finances, there is no real way (minus a one-time charge) 
>> to pull the money out of the bank to spend on new resources.  We have to 
>> do that with current income against PB.
>>
>> The money in the bank belongs to the stockholders.  We can use it to earn 
>> new money (the interest we earn does go against our bottom line) or to buy 
>> other companies.  But we can't just apply it to new payroll.  Sorry.
>>
>> We have a name for this process in the US.  We call it "armchair 
>> quarterbacking".  I can promise you that, from the inside, this is much 
>> more difficult than it looks from the outside.
>>
>>
>>
>> Jonathan
>>
>>
>> Chris Pollach wrote:
>>>  NO, Sybase should hire a few extra bodies to work on the PFC. I am sure 
>>> the
>>> primary O/S developers at MS were not pulled of to work on .Net. It's 
>>> time
>>> Sybase spent some of that $1B in the bank on some more resources!
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> "Adam Simmonds [TeamSybase]" <adam.simmonds@nospam.micropay.com.au> wrote 
>>> in
>>> message news:447a3750@forums-2-dub...
>>>> Chris Pollach wrote:
>>>>>      I opened a discussion thread on that in the PFC NG a while ago as
>>> to
>>>>> why Sybase is not evolving the PFC. Seems like they have just "washed
>>> their
>>>>> hands" of the whole thing (its open source now on CodeXchange) and are
>>>>> burying their heads in the sand (Ostrich syndrome I guess).
>>>> You harp on about all the stuff you want in PB11 yet expect the
>>>> engineers to also spend time enhancing a framework that for all
>>>> intensive purposes is complete. Theres an old saying about eating cake
>>>> that is applicable here.
>>>>
>>>> The real problem
>>>>> now is that no one is even maintaining / updating the PFC for PB 10.5 
>>>>> or
>>> 11.
>>>>> This gives me great concern as an application developer when the vendor
>>> does
>>>>> not even enhance their own product (IBM calls that "?stable?")!
>>>> In the famous words of Paul Horan
>>>>
>>>> <horse status="dead">
>>>>     <action>beat</action>
>>>> </horse>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> "vsv" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
>>> news:44773032$1@forums-1-dub...
>>>>>> No offense Chris,
>>>>>> But yet there is no commitment on that from Sybase.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> vsv
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Richard Keller" <richard@kellersystems.com> wrote in message
>>>>>> news:44772d88@forums-2-dub...
>>>>>>> I like the name STD eh Chris, something up there in Canada that we
>>> don't
>>>>>>> know about?  I bet the symptoms are constant newsgroup posting and
>>>>>>> undecipherable jokes that require low temperatures to understand.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Rich
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "Chris Pollach" <cpollach@travel-net.dot.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>> news:44771c7f$1@forums-1-dub...
>>>>>>>> Its available ... PB9 => 10.5, PocketBuilder 1 => 2.0.4, EAServer
>>> 4.2.2
>>>>>>>> =>
>>>>>>>> 5.3 (6.0 beta available), ASP, ASP.net or JSP projects (and I have a
>>> PB
>>>>>>>> 11.Net beta ready too): http://www.sybase.com/developer/codexchange
>>> =>
>>>>>>>> STD
>>>>>>>> Foundation Classes!
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Free too <lol>!
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Regards ... Chris
>>>>>>>> PS: note - Many Canadian Government projects are using the FC's!
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "vsv" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>>> news:4474ac1b$1@forums-2-dub...
>>>>>>>>> I want to create ONE framework binary & want to reuse it every
>>> where.
>>>>>>>>> But, the limitations of PB being able to use the PBD as a library
>>> file
>>>>>>>>> has
>>>>>>>>> been a problem.
>>>>>>>>> Only in PB10.5 that they have removed this issue completely in fact
>>>>>>>>> forced
>>>>>>>>> because of the proxy objects.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The project painter should automatically have in the library list
>>>>>>>>> checked
>>>>>>>> or
>>>>>>>>> the PBD should be like resource library & not included in the list
>>> of
>>>>>>>>> libraries be generated (if i include the PBD in the exe especially
>>> the
>>>>>>>> proxy
>>>>>>>>> objects the proxy objects don't work).
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The PBDs should work the same way I do libary list in JAVA or .NET
>>>>> (i.e
>>>>>>>>> C
>>>>>>>>> flavors).
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> When that works PB can market this as a REAL FRAMEWORK.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Provide project line for all the FRAMEWORK it wants to add-on.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Come up with some conference options.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Having said that, it should start using it internally.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Let the PB IDE designers use PB IDE for designing its features.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Add those features that are not there in PB IDE & exists in VStudio
>>> &
>>>>> C#
>>>>>>>>> &
>>>>>>>>> C++.
>>>>>>>>> You get your market base increased.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> There is a  big customer base for PB IDE in Sybase that is not used
>>>>>>>>> potentially.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Yes you might be competing against VStudio & Eclipse. But you have
>>> to.
>>>>>>>> Face
>>>>>>>>> the reality. Otherwise PB IDE will not be an IDE it will be a 
>>>>>>>>> plugin
>>> &
>>>>>>>>> may
>>>>>>>>> be nothing very soon. Providing plugin have provided some avenue 
>>>>>>>>> for
>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>> customers to use it. But if you want the IDE to generate revenue
>>> then
>>>>>>>>> extending these IDE & framework will be the wise move.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Open Sourcing was a good decision. But then Sybase NOT putting any
>>>>>>>>> involvement to bring in the energy & participation of the developer
>>>>>>>>> community like creating new projects and providing inputs.
>>>>>>>>> These are lacking.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> VSV
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
> 
0
Jonathan
6/2/2006 2:18:00 PM
LOL,

Yes, accounting for payroll is under GAAP.   And Jon it does not sound good 
that we cannot take cash for PB development but we can take it for Workspace 
development because of GAAP.   Sybase does not have a volatile stock and 
quarter to quarter management is a sign of bad management.  It also suggests 
that PB does not make a profit and breaks even, or you wouldn't have to take 
it from the bank, you simply wouldn't be putting as much back in.

I don't advocate for more developers and the PFC should not be enhanced and 
let 3rd parties update it or create a new framework.   I just suggest more 
frequent and incremental improvements, I believe it keeps focus and 
interaction with the community.   And when a feature gets added it focuses 
on being the best long term not just to fill in a industry buzzword.



Richard

"Jonathan Baker [Sybase]" <lastnamefirstinitial@sybase.com> wrote in message 
news:448047fe$1@forums-2-dub...
> Richard:
>
> Actually, it is true.  We were discussing the specific case of hiring more 
> employees using the money Sybase has "in the bank" as a result of past 
> profits.  All such hirings would result in payroll, which are covered 
> under GAAP.  GAAP requires that payroll changes be reflected in the 
> quarterly reports, as a cost of doing business.  We can't pay people out 
> of our "bank" fund.
>
> What you're discussing was not what I was talking about.  New products, 
> like Workspace, are developed using the same accounting rules as anything 
> else.  We use developers that we pay for out of other profitable product 
> lines.  But, before I hear the rabid cry of "PowerBulder money!" remember 
> that we have two other, much larger, income positive cash streams in ASE 
> and Replication Server.  I know you have no way of knowing it (we don't 
> break out financials by product), but I can assure you that is where the 
> money for Workspace comes from.
>
> Look, the cries for more developers and to re-absorb PFC are all valid. 
> But why do you think we haven't already thought of those ideas?  We have, 
> and we looked in to all of that already.  And, for various reasons we 
> can't do any of those things.  (And the reasons are often based on 
> scheduling and/or resource realities - for example, additional developers 
> would just slow  us down further.)
>
> Why do you insist on thinking we don't hear you, and haven't heard all 
> this before?  The reason we don't often reply is more because we are tired 
> of responding the same way (ad infinitum) and not because we aren't 
> listening.  How about a few new ideas?
>
>
>
>
> Jonathan
>
>
>
> Richard Keller wrote:
>> That's so untrue and I pray that upper management is not giving that 
>> excuse, but I wouldn't be suprised.   We won't go into GAAP accounting 
>> details, but operations do not get affected by GAAP accounting.
>>
>> All you have to ask is how Sybase pays for Sybase Workspace when there is 
>> no revenue??   Statements like this treat the community as ignorant to 
>> how finance works.
>>
>> I completely understand that Sybase would not want to expend additional 
>> resources on Powerbuilder unless fortunes or markets change but do not 
>> treat it as some sort of GAAP accounting excuse.   Bad etiquette.
>>
>> Richard
>>
>> "Jonathan Baker [Sybase]" <lastnamefirstinitial@sybase.com> wrote in 
>> message news:447b6ca2@forums-1-dub...
>>> I understand the frustration, but your idea shows the mis-understanding 
>>> of how accounting really works.
>>>
>>> First, Sybase doesn't have 1 Billion in the bank.  The current amount is 
>>> around 400 million.  Second, we can't just spend it on new developers. 
>>> According to GAAP, any money spent on new resources must be expensed in 
>>> the current quarter, and shown against total income in that same 
>>> quarter. Unlike personal finances, there is no real way (minus a 
>>> one-time charge) to pull the money out of the bank to spend on new 
>>> resources.  We have to do that with current income against PB.
>>>
>>> The money in the bank belongs to the stockholders.  We can use it to 
>>> earn new money (the interest we earn does go against our bottom line) or 
>>> to buy other companies.  But we can't just apply it to new payroll. 
>>> Sorry.
>>>
>>> We have a name for this process in the US.  We call it "armchair 
>>> quarterbacking".  I can promise you that, from the inside, this is much 
>>> more difficult than it looks from the outside.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Jonathan
>>>
>>>
>>> Chris Pollach wrote:
>>>>  NO, Sybase should hire a few extra bodies to work on the PFC. I am 
>>>> sure the
>>>> primary O/S developers at MS were not pulled of to work on .Net. It's 
>>>> time
>>>> Sybase spent some of that $1B in the bank on some more resources!
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "Adam Simmonds [TeamSybase]" <adam.simmonds@nospam.micropay.com.au> 
>>>> wrote in
>>>> message news:447a3750@forums-2-dub...
>>>>> Chris Pollach wrote:
>>>>>>      I opened a discussion thread on that in the PFC NG a while ago 
>>>>>> as
>>>> to
>>>>>> why Sybase is not evolving the PFC. Seems like they have just "washed
>>>> their
>>>>>> hands" of the whole thing (its open source now on CodeXchange) and 
>>>>>> are
>>>>>> burying their heads in the sand (Ostrich syndrome I guess).
>>>>> You harp on about all the stuff you want in PB11 yet expect the
>>>>> engineers to also spend time enhancing a framework that for all
>>>>> intensive purposes is complete. Theres an old saying about eating cake
>>>>> that is applicable here.
>>>>>
>>>>> The real problem
>>>>>> now is that no one is even maintaining / updating the PFC for PB 10.5 
>>>>>> or
>>>> 11.
>>>>>> This gives me great concern as an application developer when the 
>>>>>> vendor
>>>> does
>>>>>> not even enhance their own product (IBM calls that "?stable?")!
>>>>> In the famous words of Paul Horan
>>>>>
>>>>> <horse status="dead">
>>>>>     <action>beat</action>
>>>>> </horse>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "vsv" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:44773032$1@forums-1-dub...
>>>>>>> No offense Chris,
>>>>>>> But yet there is no commitment on that from Sybase.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> vsv
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "Richard Keller" <richard@kellersystems.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>> news:44772d88@forums-2-dub...
>>>>>>>> I like the name STD eh Chris, something up there in Canada that we
>>>> don't
>>>>>>>> know about?  I bet the symptoms are constant newsgroup posting and
>>>>>>>> undecipherable jokes that require low temperatures to understand.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Rich
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "Chris Pollach" <cpollach@travel-net.dot.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>>> news:44771c7f$1@forums-1-dub...
>>>>>>>>> Its available ... PB9 => 10.5, PocketBuilder 1 => 2.0.4, EAServer
>>>> 4.2.2
>>>>>>>>> =>
>>>>>>>>> 5.3 (6.0 beta available), ASP, ASP.net or JSP projects (and I have 
>>>>>>>>> a
>>>> PB
>>>>>>>>> 11.Net beta ready too): 
>>>>>>>>> http://www.sybase.com/developer/codexchange
>>>> =>
>>>>>>>>> STD
>>>>>>>>> Foundation Classes!
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Free too <lol>!
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Regards ... Chris
>>>>>>>>> PS: note - Many Canadian Government projects are using the FC's!
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> "vsv" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>>>> news:4474ac1b$1@forums-2-dub...
>>>>>>>>>> I want to create ONE framework binary & want to reuse it every
>>>> where.
>>>>>>>>>> But, the limitations of PB being able to use the PBD as a library
>>>> file
>>>>>>>>>> has
>>>>>>>>>> been a problem.
>>>>>>>>>> Only in PB10.5 that they have removed this issue completely in 
>>>>>>>>>> fact
>>>>>>>>>> forced
>>>>>>>>>> because of the proxy objects.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> The project painter should automatically have in the library list
>>>>>>>>>> checked
>>>>>>>>> or
>>>>>>>>>> the PBD should be like resource library & not included in the 
>>>>>>>>>> list
>>>> of
>>>>>>>>>> libraries be generated (if i include the PBD in the exe 
>>>>>>>>>> especially
>>>> the
>>>>>>>>> proxy
>>>>>>>>>> objects the proxy objects don't work).
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> The PBDs should work the same way I do libary list in JAVA or 
>>>>>>>>>> .NET
>>>>>> (i.e
>>>>>>>>>> C
>>>>>>>>>> flavors).
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> When that works PB can market this as a REAL FRAMEWORK.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Provide project line for all the FRAMEWORK it wants to add-on.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Come up with some conference options.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Having said that, it should start using it internally.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Let the PB IDE designers use PB IDE for designing its features.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Add those features that are not there in PB IDE & exists in 
>>>>>>>>>> VStudio
>>>> &
>>>>>> C#
>>>>>>>>>> &
>>>>>>>>>> C++.
>>>>>>>>>> You get your market base increased.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> There is a  big customer base for PB IDE in Sybase that is not 
>>>>>>>>>> used
>>>>>>>>>> potentially.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Yes you might be competing against VStudio & Eclipse. But you 
>>>>>>>>>> have
>>>> to.
>>>>>>>>> Face
>>>>>>>>>> the reality. Otherwise PB IDE will not be an IDE it will be a 
>>>>>>>>>> plugin
>>>> &
>>>>>>>>>> may
>>>>>>>>>> be nothing very soon. Providing plugin have provided some avenue 
>>>>>>>>>> for
>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>> customers to use it. But if you want the IDE to generate revenue
>>>> then
>>>>>>>>>> extending these IDE & framework will be the wise move.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Open Sourcing was a good decision. But then Sybase NOT putting 
>>>>>>>>>> any
>>>>>>>>>> involvement to bring in the energy & participation of the 
>>>>>>>>>> developer
>>>>>>>>>> community like creating new projects and providing inputs.
>>>>>>>>>> These are lacking.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> VSV
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>> 


0
Richard
6/2/2006 5:00:26 PM
I absolutely agree with Boris.  PFC being spun off from Sybase (or whatever) 
is nothing new.  This is just the final step.  Boris is 100% right - the PFC 
really stopped any additional development when the PFC team left - years 
ago.  I think the time for vocalizing has come and gone.  Give it up.  May 
as well start complaining (again) about the distributed option being dropped 
out.  It is done.  Get over it.
If somebody is really bent out of shape over this - the most productive 
approach would be to join the PFC-OS group and work on the code there.

Not trying to get anybody aggravated - but I really agree with Boris's point 
and this is just how I feel.  My attitude - accept it or work on changing 
it.  Complaining is a waste of breath and gives a bad impression of the 
complainer.

Tim.

"Boris Gasin [TeamSybase]" <NOSPAM_bgasin@dynamictechgroup.com> wrote in 
message news:2p6u72tb2npa5oa26q67mqdphu5hjubgpo@4ax.com...
> On 31 May 2006 05:24:52 -0700, "Chris Pollach"
> <cpollach@travel-net.dot.com> wrote:
>> 1. Make it PB11.Net ready
>> 2. Morph an EAServer version
>> 3. Morph a PK version
>> 4. Make sure it's Vista friendly
>> 5. Catch up to the current PB (TV DW, Ink, Signature, etc new controls)
>>friendly
>> 6. Align it to use .Net services
>> 7. Rewrite some code
>>Etc, etc, etc - come on there is a "ton" of work to be done on that puppy!
>
> Thank you Chris for the suggestions...  I'll address those in a
> separate reply.
>
>>Note: The PFC was also an great test bench for PB engineering. I can
>>remember that the PFC group forced the PB development team to clean-up and
>>improve allot of features within PB! We have lost a great internal 
>>resource
>>at Sybase doing this kind of internal stress and functional testing. In
>>essence, they flush-out allot of new PB functionality at the QA level!
>
> Do you realize that the scenario you are describing did not exist
> since PB6?  I mean PFC team driving PB features.  As far as I know
> Sybase QA still uses PFC apps in their test environment.
>
> PFC Development team came from the Sybase Consulting, people with
> background in business application development.   But they left Sybase
> in 1998!  Chris that's 8 years ago!   At some point you have to accept
> the reality.   PFC7 saw bug fixes and new control support upgrade.
> PFC 8 bug fixes, PFC 9 same.   What you are asking for requires a
> proactive steps by Sybase in a direction they have absolutely no
> interest in.   That's the reality based on their actions of the last
> eight years.
>
> Now we have the opportunity at *minimum* to provide the same support
> Sybase has provided for last eight years.  But if there is interest it
> could be so much more!  Road to the left says "moan and groan", road
> to the right do something productive.   I know where I'm going. <g>
>
>  Boris Gasin [TeamSybase]
>  mailto:NOSPAM_bgasin@dynamictechgroup.com
>    ___
>  ____   _
> _____    _
>  ____   _
>    ___
>
>
>  Dynamic Technology Group, Inc.
>  http://www.dynamictechgroup.com/ 


0
Timothy
6/3/2006 1:31:00 AM
Timothy Madsen wrote:
> I absolutely agree with Boris.  PFC being spun off from Sybase (or whatever) 
> is nothing new.  This is just the final step.  Boris is 100% right - the PFC 
> really stopped any additional development when the PFC team left - years 
> ago.  I think the time for vocalizing has come and gone.  Give it up.  May 
> as well start complaining (again) about the distributed option being dropped 
> out.  

Oh dear, you have opened that old chestnut again <g>

It is done.  Get over it.
> If somebody is really bent out of shape over this - the most productive 
> approach would be to join the PFC-OS group and work on the code there.

Exactly, but instead the approach has been to create a 
seperate framework and bad mouth Sybase instead of working 
on enhancing it. Crazy!

> Not trying to get anybody aggravated - but I really agree with Boris's point 
> and this is just how I feel.  My attitude - accept it or work on changing 
> it.  Complaining is a waste of breath and gives a bad impression of the 
> complainer.

Well said Tim.
a.

> 
> Tim.
> 
> "Boris Gasin [TeamSybase]" <NOSPAM_bgasin@dynamictechgroup.com> wrote in 
> message news:2p6u72tb2npa5oa26q67mqdphu5hjubgpo@4ax.com...
> 
>>On 31 May 2006 05:24:52 -0700, "Chris Pollach"
>><cpollach@travel-net.dot.com> wrote:
>>
>>>1. Make it PB11.Net ready
>>>2. Morph an EAServer version
>>>3. Morph a PK version
>>>4. Make sure it's Vista friendly
>>>5. Catch up to the current PB (TV DW, Ink, Signature, etc new controls)
>>>friendly
>>>6. Align it to use .Net services
>>>7. Rewrite some code
>>>Etc, etc, etc - come on there is a "ton" of work to be done on that puppy!
>>
>>Thank you Chris for the suggestions...  I'll address those in a
>>separate reply.
>>
>>
>>>Note: The PFC was also an great test bench for PB engineering. I can
>>>remember that the PFC group forced the PB development team to clean-up and
>>>improve allot of features within PB! We have lost a great internal 
>>>resource
>>>at Sybase doing this kind of internal stress and functional testing. In
>>>essence, they flush-out allot of new PB functionality at the QA level!
>>
>>Do you realize that the scenario you are describing did not exist
>>since PB6?  I mean PFC team driving PB features.  As far as I know
>>Sybase QA still uses PFC apps in their test environment.
>>
>>PFC Development team came from the Sybase Consulting, people with
>>background in business application development.   But they left Sybase
>>in 1998!  Chris that's 8 years ago!   At some point you have to accept
>>the reality.   PFC7 saw bug fixes and new control support upgrade.
>>PFC 8 bug fixes, PFC 9 same.   What you are asking for requires a
>>proactive steps by Sybase in a direction they have absolutely no
>>interest in.   That's the reality based on their actions of the last
>>eight years.
>>
>>Now we have the opportunity at *minimum* to provide the same support
>>Sybase has provided for last eight years.  But if there is interest it
>>could be so much more!  Road to the left says "moan and groan", road
>>to the right do something productive.   I know where I'm going. <g>
>>
>> Boris Gasin [TeamSybase]
>> mailto:NOSPAM_bgasin@dynamictechgroup.com
>>   ___
>> ____   _
>>_____    _
>> ____   _
>>   ___
>>
>>
>> Dynamic Technology Group, Inc.
>> http://www.dynamictechgroup.com/ 
> 
> 
> 
0
Adam
6/3/2006 2:42:53 AM
 >> gone.  Give it up.  May as well start complaining (again) about the
 >> distributed option being dropped out.

WHAT??? Distributed PowerBuilder was dropped? When did this happen?  Why?

</BIG GIANT SNARK>




Adam Simmonds [TeamSybase] wrote:
> Timothy Madsen wrote:
>> I absolutely agree with Boris.  PFC being spun off from Sybase (or 
>> whatever) is nothing new.  This is just the final step.  Boris is 100% 
>> right - the PFC really stopped any additional development when the PFC 
>> team left - years ago.  I think the time for vocalizing has come and 
>> gone.  Give it up.  May as well start complaining (again) about the 
>> distributed option being dropped out.  
> 
> Oh dear, you have opened that old chestnut again <g>
> 
> It is done.  Get over it.
>> If somebody is really bent out of shape over this - the most 
>> productive approach would be to join the PFC-OS group and work on the 
>> code there.
> 
> Exactly, but instead the approach has been to create a seperate 
> framework and bad mouth Sybase instead of working on enhancing it. Crazy!
> 
>> Not trying to get anybody aggravated - but I really agree with Boris's 
>> point and this is just how I feel.  My attitude - accept it or work on 
>> changing it.  Complaining is a waste of breath and gives a bad 
>> impression of the complainer.
> 
> Well said Tim.
> a.
> 
>>
>> Tim.
>>
>> "Boris Gasin [TeamSybase]" <NOSPAM_bgasin@dynamictechgroup.com> wrote 
>> in message news:2p6u72tb2npa5oa26q67mqdphu5hjubgpo@4ax.com...
>>
>>> On 31 May 2006 05:24:52 -0700, "Chris Pollach"
>>> <cpollach@travel-net.dot.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> 1. Make it PB11.Net ready
>>>> 2. Morph an EAServer version
>>>> 3. Morph a PK version
>>>> 4. Make sure it's Vista friendly
>>>> 5. Catch up to the current PB (TV DW, Ink, Signature, etc new controls)
>>>> friendly
>>>> 6. Align it to use .Net services
>>>> 7. Rewrite some code
>>>> Etc, etc, etc - come on there is a "ton" of work to be done on that 
>>>> puppy!
>>>
>>> Thank you Chris for the suggestions...  I'll address those in a
>>> separate reply.
>>>
>>>
>>>> Note: The PFC was also an great test bench for PB engineering. I can
>>>> remember that the PFC group forced the PB development team to 
>>>> clean-up and
>>>> improve allot of features within PB! We have lost a great internal 
>>>> resource
>>>> at Sybase doing this kind of internal stress and functional testing. In
>>>> essence, they flush-out allot of new PB functionality at the QA level!
>>>
>>> Do you realize that the scenario you are describing did not exist
>>> since PB6?  I mean PFC team driving PB features.  As far as I know
>>> Sybase QA still uses PFC apps in their test environment.
>>>
>>> PFC Development team came from the Sybase Consulting, people with
>>> background in business application development.   But they left Sybase
>>> in 1998!  Chris that's 8 years ago!   At some point you have to accept
>>> the reality.   PFC7 saw bug fixes and new control support upgrade.
>>> PFC 8 bug fixes, PFC 9 same.   What you are asking for requires a
>>> proactive steps by Sybase in a direction they have absolutely no
>>> interest in.   That's the reality based on their actions of the last
>>> eight years.
>>>
>>> Now we have the opportunity at *minimum* to provide the same support
>>> Sybase has provided for last eight years.  But if there is interest it
>>> could be so much more!  Road to the left says "moan and groan", road
>>> to the right do something productive.   I know where I'm going. <g>
>>>
>>> Boris Gasin [TeamSybase]
>>> mailto:NOSPAM_bgasin@dynamictechgroup.com
>>>   ___
>>> ____   _
>>> _____    _
>>> ____   _
>>>   ___
>>>
>>>
>>> Dynamic Technology Group, Inc.
>>> http://www.dynamictechgroup.com/ 
>>
>>
>>
0
Daniel
6/3/2006 5:20:14 AM
 I heard that they now offer that course free for all TS members <lol>!


"Adam Simmonds [TeamSybase]" <adam.simmonds@REMOVEexemail.com.au> wrote in
message news:448043e7@forums-2-dub...
> Millard F. Brown III wrote:
> > Guilty of "can not read". You haven't really been bad-mouthing PFC! Just
PB
> > and Sybase. My bad.
>
> I enrolled in a "introduction to reading" course this
> weekend once it was pointed out why I had such a hard time
> understanding Chris <g>


0
Chris
6/5/2006 11:29:52 AM
When I asked about that at TechWave, I was told it was sucking up too much
developer time and had to become a separate product, EAS, to pay its own
way. Those of us who did not need the third tier transactional features and
just needed native program-to-program communications wound up jilted.
Management was so peeved at having to re-architect a key service that if
Java had been worth a <censored> as a client platform at the time, this
would no longer be a PB shop.

"Daniel Coppersmith" <daniel_AT_infrontsoftware_DOT_com@N0SPAM.com> wrote in
message news:44811b70$1@forums-2-dub...
> >> gone.  Give it up.  May as well start complaining (again) about the
>  >> distributed option being dropped out.
>
> WHAT??? Distributed PowerBuilder was dropped? When did this happen?  Why?
>
> </BIG GIANT SNARK>
>
>
>
>
> Adam Simmonds [TeamSybase] wrote:
> > Timothy Madsen wrote:
> >> I absolutely agree with Boris.  PFC being spun off from Sybase (or
> >> whatever) is nothing new.  This is just the final step.  Boris is 100%
> >> right - the PFC really stopped any additional development when the PFC
> >> team left - years ago.  I think the time for vocalizing has come and
> >> gone.  Give it up.  May as well start complaining (again) about the
> >> distributed option being dropped out.
> >
> > Oh dear, you have opened that old chestnut again <g>
> >
> > It is done.  Get over it.
> >> If somebody is really bent out of shape over this - the most
> >> productive approach would be to join the PFC-OS group and work on the
> >> code there.
> >
> > Exactly, but instead the approach has been to create a seperate
> > framework and bad mouth Sybase instead of working on enhancing it.
Crazy!
> >
> >> Not trying to get anybody aggravated - but I really agree with Boris's
> >> point and this is just how I feel.  My attitude - accept it or work on
> >> changing it.  Complaining is a waste of breath and gives a bad
> >> impression of the complainer.
> >
> > Well said Tim.
> > a.
> >
> >>
> >> Tim.
> >>
> >> "Boris Gasin [TeamSybase]" <NOSPAM_bgasin@dynamictechgroup.com> wrote
> >> in message news:2p6u72tb2npa5oa26q67mqdphu5hjubgpo@4ax.com...
> >>
> >>> On 31 May 2006 05:24:52 -0700, "Chris Pollach"
> >>> <cpollach@travel-net.dot.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> 1. Make it PB11.Net ready
> >>>> 2. Morph an EAServer version
> >>>> 3. Morph a PK version
> >>>> 4. Make sure it's Vista friendly
> >>>> 5. Catch up to the current PB (TV DW, Ink, Signature, etc new
controls)
> >>>> friendly
> >>>> 6. Align it to use .Net services
> >>>> 7. Rewrite some code
> >>>> Etc, etc, etc - come on there is a "ton" of work to be done on that
> >>>> puppy!
> >>>
> >>> Thank you Chris for the suggestions...  I'll address those in a
> >>> separate reply.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> Note: The PFC was also an great test bench for PB engineering. I can
> >>>> remember that the PFC group forced the PB development team to
> >>>> clean-up and
> >>>> improve allot of features within PB! We have lost a great internal
> >>>> resource
> >>>> at Sybase doing this kind of internal stress and functional testing.
In
> >>>> essence, they flush-out allot of new PB functionality at the QA
level!
> >>>
> >>> Do you realize that the scenario you are describing did not exist
> >>> since PB6?  I mean PFC team driving PB features.  As far as I know
> >>> Sybase QA still uses PFC apps in their test environment.
> >>>
> >>> PFC Development team came from the Sybase Consulting, people with
> >>> background in business application development.   But they left Sybase
> >>> in 1998!  Chris that's 8 years ago!   At some point you have to accept
> >>> the reality.   PFC7 saw bug fixes and new control support upgrade.
> >>> PFC 8 bug fixes, PFC 9 same.   What you are asking for requires a
> >>> proactive steps by Sybase in a direction they have absolutely no
> >>> interest in.   That's the reality based on their actions of the last
> >>> eight years.
> >>>
> >>> Now we have the opportunity at *minimum* to provide the same support
> >>> Sybase has provided for last eight years.  But if there is interest it
> >>> could be so much more!  Road to the left says "moan and groan", road
> >>> to the right do something productive.   I know where I'm going. <g>
> >>>
> >>> Boris Gasin [TeamSybase]
> >>> mailto:NOSPAM_bgasin@dynamictechgroup.com
> >>>   ___
> >>> ____   _
> >>> _____    _
> >>> ____   _
> >>>   ___
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Dynamic Technology Group, Inc.
> >>> http://www.dynamictechgroup.com/
> >>
> >>
> >>


0
Jerry
6/5/2006 2:13:17 PM
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0032_01C68888.E20B29B0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Haven't you heard? Java is dead. <evil laugh>


-----Original Message-----
From: Jerry Siegel
[mailto:jerrys@dataDASHsciDOTcom.die.spammer.die.die.die] 
Posted At: Monday, June 05, 2006 10:13 AM
Posted To: sybase.public.powerbuilder.futures.discussion
Conversation: PFC as a framework has outlived its live, we need new
FRAMEWORKreengineered from what we have, give a new life to it.
Subject: Re: PFC as a framework has outlived its live, we need new
FRAMEWORKreengineered from what we have, give a new life to it.


When I asked about that at TechWave, I was told it was sucking up too
much
developer time and had to become a separate product, EAS, to pay its own
way. Those of us who did not need the third tier transactional features
and
just needed native program-to-program communications wound up jilted.
Management was so peeved at having to re-architect a key service that if
Java had been worth a <censored> as a client platform at the time, this
would no longer be a PB shop.

"Daniel Coppersmith" <daniel_AT_infrontsoftware_DOT_com@N0SPAM.com>
wrote in
message news:44811b70$1@forums-2-dub...
> >> gone.  Give it up.  May as well start complaining (again) about the
>  >> distributed option being dropped out.
>
> WHAT??? Distributed PowerBuilder was dropped? When did this happen?
Why?
>
> </BIG GIANT SNARK>
>
>
>
>
> Adam Simmonds [TeamSybase] wrote:
> > Timothy Madsen wrote:
> >> I absolutely agree with Boris.  PFC being spun off from Sybase (or
> >> whatever) is nothing new.  This is just the final step.  Boris is
100%
> >> right - the PFC really stopped any additional development when the
PFC
> >> team left - years ago.  I think the time for vocalizing has come
and
> >> gone.  Give it up.  May as well start complaining (again) about the
> >> distributed option being dropped out.
> >
> > Oh dear, you have opened that old chestnut again <g>
> >
> > It is done.  Get over it.
> >> If somebody is really bent out of shape over this - the most
> >> productive approach would be to join the PFC-OS group and work on
the
> >> code there.
> >
> > Exactly, but instead the approach has been to create a seperate
> > framework and bad mouth Sybase instead of working on enhancing it.
Crazy!
> >
> >> Not trying to get anybody aggravated - but I really agree with
Boris's
> >> point and this is just how I feel.  My attitude - accept it or work
on
> >> changing it.  Complaining is a waste of breath and gives a bad
> >> impression of the complainer.
> >
> > Well said Tim.
> > a.
> >
> >>
> >> Tim.
> >>
> >> "Boris Gasin [TeamSybase]" <NOSPAM_bgasin@dynamictechgroup.com>
wrote
> >> in message news:2p6u72tb2npa5oa26q67mqdphu5hjubgpo@4ax.com...
> >>
> >>> On 31 May 2006 05:24:52 -0700, "Chris Pollach"
> >>> <cpollach@travel-net.dot.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> 1. Make it PB11.Net ready
> >>>> 2. Morph an EAServer version
> >>>> 3. Morph a PK version
> >>>> 4. Make sure it's Vista friendly
> >>>> 5. Catch up to the current PB (TV DW, Ink, Signature, etc new
controls)
> >>>> friendly
> >>>> 6. Align it to use .Net services
> >>>> 7. Rewrite some code
> >>>> Etc, etc, etc - come on there is a "ton" of work to be done on
that
> >>>> puppy!
> >>>
> >>> Thank you Chris for the suggestions...  I'll address those in a
> >>> separate reply.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> Note: The PFC was also an great test bench for PB engineering. I
can
> >>>> remember that the PFC group forced the PB development team to
> >>>> clean-up and
> >>>> improve allot of features within PB! We have lost a great
internal
> >>>> resource
> >>>> at Sybase doing this kind of internal stress and functional
testing.
In
> >>>> essence, they flush-out allot of new PB functionality at the QA
level!
> >>>
> >>> Do you realize that the scenario you are describing did not exist
> >>> since PB6?  I mean PFC team driving PB features.  As far as I know
> >>> Sybase QA still uses PFC apps in their test environment.
> >>>
> >>> PFC Development team came from the Sybase Consulting, people with
> >>> background in business application development.   But they left
Sybase
> >>> in 1998!  Chris that's 8 years ago!   At some point you have to
accept
> >>> the reality.   PFC7 saw bug fixes and new control support upgrade.
> >>> PFC 8 bug fixes, PFC 9 same.   What you are asking for requires a
> >>> proactive steps by Sybase in a direction they have absolutely no
> >>> interest in.   That's the reality based on their actions of the
last
> >>> eight years.
> >>>
> >>> Now we have the opportunity at *minimum* to provide the same
support
> >>> Sybase has provided for last eight years.  But if there is
interest it
> >>> could be so much more!  Road to the left says "moan and groan",
road
> >>> to the right do something productive.   I know where I'm going.
<g>
> >>>
> >>> Boris Gasin [TeamSybase]
> >>> mailto:NOSPAM_bgasin@dynamictechgroup.com
> >>>   ___
> >>> ____   _
> >>> _____    _
> >>> ____   _
> >>>   ___
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Dynamic Technology Group, Inc.
> >>> http://www.dynamictechgroup.com/
> >>
> >>
> >>


------=_NextPart_000_0032_01C68888.E20B29B0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<META HTTP-EQUIV=3D"Content-Type" CONTENT=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Dus-ascii">
<META NAME=3D"Generator" CONTENT=3D"MS Exchange Server version =
6.5.7036.0">
<TITLE>PFC as a framework has outlived its live, we need new =
FRAMEWORKreengineered from what we have, give a new life to it.</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<!-- Converted from text/plain format -->

<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>Haven't you heard? Java is dead. &lt;evil =
laugh&gt;</FONT>
</P>
<BR>

<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>-----Original Message-----</FONT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>From: Jerry Siegel [<A =
HREF=3D"mailto:jerrys@dataDASHsciDOTcom.die.spammer.die.die.die">mailto:j=
errys@dataDASHsciDOTcom.die.spammer.die.die.die</A>] </FONT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>Posted At: Monday, June 05, 2006 10:13 AM</FONT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>Posted To: =
sybase.public.powerbuilder.futures.discussion</FONT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>Conversation: PFC as a framework has outlived its =
live, we need new FRAMEWORKreengineered from what we have, give a new =
life to it.</FONT></P>

<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>Subject: Re: PFC as a framework has outlived its live, =
we need new FRAMEWORKreengineered from what we have, give a new life to =
it.</FONT></P>
<BR>

<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>When I asked about that at TechWave, I was told it was =
sucking up too much</FONT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>developer time and had to become a separate product, =
EAS, to pay its own</FONT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>way. Those of us who did not need the third tier =
transactional features and</FONT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>just needed native program-to-program communications =
wound up jilted.</FONT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>Management was so peeved at having to re-architect a =
key service that if</FONT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>Java had been worth a &lt;censored&gt; as a client =
platform at the time, this</FONT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>would no longer be a PB shop.</FONT>
</P>

<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>&quot;Daniel Coppersmith&quot; =
&lt;daniel_AT_infrontsoftware_DOT_com@N0SPAM.com&gt; wrote in</FONT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>message <A =
HREF=3D"news:44811b70$1@forums-2-dub">news:44811b70$1@forums-2-dub</A>...=
</FONT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; &gt;&gt; gone.&nbsp; Give it up.&nbsp; May as =
well start complaining (again) about the</FONT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt;&nbsp; &gt;&gt; distributed option being dropped =
out.</FONT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt;</FONT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; WHAT??? Distributed PowerBuilder was dropped? =
When did this happen?&nbsp; Why?</FONT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt;</FONT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; &lt;/BIG GIANT SNARK&gt;</FONT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt;</FONT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt;</FONT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt;</FONT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt;</FONT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; Adam Simmonds [TeamSybase] wrote:</FONT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; &gt; Timothy Madsen wrote:</FONT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; &gt;&gt; I absolutely agree with Boris.&nbsp; =
PFC being spun off from Sybase (or</FONT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; &gt;&gt; whatever) is nothing new.&nbsp; This is =
just the final step.&nbsp; Boris is 100%</FONT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; &gt;&gt; right - the PFC really stopped any =
additional development when the PFC</FONT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; &gt;&gt; team left - years ago.&nbsp; I think =
the time for vocalizing has come and</FONT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; &gt;&gt; gone.&nbsp; Give it up.&nbsp; May as =
well start complaining (again) about the</FONT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; &gt;&gt; distributed option being dropped =
out.</FONT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; &gt;</FONT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; &gt; Oh dear, you have opened that old chestnut =
again &lt;g&gt;</FONT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; &gt;</FONT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; &gt; It is done.&nbsp; Get over it.</FONT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; &gt;&gt; If somebody is really bent out of shape =
over this - the most</FONT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; &gt;&gt; productive approach would be to join =
the PFC-OS group and work on the</FONT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; &gt;&gt; code there.</FONT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; &gt;</FONT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; &gt; Exactly, but instead the approach has been =
to create a seperate</FONT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; &gt; framework and bad mouth Sybase instead of =
working on enhancing it.</FONT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>Crazy!</FONT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; &gt;</FONT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; &gt;&gt; Not trying to get anybody aggravated - =
but I really agree with Boris's</FONT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; &gt;&gt; point and this is just how I =
feel.&nbsp; My attitude - accept it or work on</FONT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; &gt;&gt; changing it.&nbsp; Complaining is a =
waste of breath and gives a bad</FONT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; &gt;&gt; impression of the complainer.</FONT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; &gt;</FONT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; &gt; Well said Tim.</FONT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; &gt; a.</FONT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; &gt;</FONT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; &gt;&gt;</FONT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; &gt;&gt; Tim.</FONT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; &gt;&gt;</FONT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; &gt;&gt; &quot;Boris Gasin [TeamSybase]&quot; =
&lt;NOSPAM_bgasin@dynamictechgroup.com&gt; wrote</FONT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; &gt;&gt; in message <A =
HREF=3D"news:2p6u72tb2npa5oa26q67mqdphu5hjubgpo@4ax.com">news:2p6u72tb2np=
a5oa26q67mqdphu5hjubgpo@4ax.com</A>...</FONT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; &gt;&gt;</FONT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; &gt;&gt;&gt; On 31 May 2006 05:24:52 -0700, =
&quot;Chris Pollach&quot;</FONT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; &gt;&gt;&gt; &lt;cpollach@travel-net.dot.com&gt; =
wrote:</FONT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; &gt;&gt;&gt;</FONT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; &gt;&gt;&gt;&gt; 1. Make it PB11.Net =
ready</FONT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; &gt;&gt;&gt;&gt; 2. Morph an EAServer =
version</FONT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; &gt;&gt;&gt;&gt; 3. Morph a PK version</FONT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; &gt;&gt;&gt;&gt; 4. Make sure it's Vista =
friendly</FONT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; &gt;&gt;&gt;&gt; 5. Catch up to the current PB =
(TV DW, Ink, Signature, etc new</FONT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>controls)</FONT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; &gt;&gt;&gt;&gt; friendly</FONT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; &gt;&gt;&gt;&gt; 6. Align it to use .Net =
services</FONT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; &gt;&gt;&gt;&gt; 7. Rewrite some code</FONT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; &gt;&gt;&gt;&gt; Etc, etc, etc - come on there =
is a &quot;ton&quot; of work to be done on that</FONT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; &gt;&gt;&gt;&gt; puppy!</FONT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; &gt;&gt;&gt;</FONT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; &gt;&gt;&gt; Thank you Chris for the =
suggestions...&nbsp; I'll address those in a</FONT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; &gt;&gt;&gt; separate reply.</FONT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; &gt;&gt;&gt;</FONT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; &gt;&gt;&gt;</FONT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; &gt;&gt;&gt;&gt; Note: The PFC was also an great =
test bench for PB engineering. I can</FONT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; &gt;&gt;&gt;&gt; remember that the PFC group =
forced the PB development team to</FONT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; &gt;&gt;&gt;&gt; clean-up and</FONT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; &gt;&gt;&gt;&gt; improve allot of features =
within PB! We have lost a great internal</FONT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; &gt;&gt;&gt;&gt; resource</FONT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; &gt;&gt;&gt;&gt; at Sybase doing this kind of =
internal stress and functional testing.</FONT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>In</FONT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; &gt;&gt;&gt;&gt; essence, they flush-out allot =
of new PB functionality at the QA</FONT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>level!</FONT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; &gt;&gt;&gt;</FONT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; &gt;&gt;&gt; Do you realize that the scenario =
you are describing did not exist</FONT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; &gt;&gt;&gt; since PB6?&nbsp; I mean PFC team =
driving PB features.&nbsp; As far as I know</FONT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; &gt;&gt;&gt; Sybase QA still uses PFC apps in =
their test environment.</FONT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; &gt;&gt;&gt;</FONT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; &gt;&gt;&gt; PFC Development team came from the =
Sybase Consulting, people with</FONT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; &gt;&gt;&gt; background in business application =
development.&nbsp;&nbsp; But they left Sybase</FONT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; &gt;&gt;&gt; in 1998!&nbsp; Chris that's 8 years =
ago!&nbsp;&nbsp; At some point you have to accept</FONT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; &gt;&gt;&gt; the reality.&nbsp;&nbsp; PFC7 saw =
bug fixes and new control support upgrade.</FONT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; &gt;&gt;&gt; PFC 8 bug fixes, PFC 9 =
same.&nbsp;&nbsp; What you are asking for requires a</FONT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; &gt;&gt;&gt; proactive steps by Sybase in a =
direction they have absolutely no</FONT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; &gt;&gt;&gt; interest in.&nbsp;&nbsp; That's the =
reality based on their actions of the last</FONT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; &gt;&gt;&gt; eight years.</FONT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; &gt;&gt;&gt;</FONT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; &gt;&gt;&gt; Now we have the opportunity at =
*minimum* to provide the same support</FONT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; &gt;&gt;&gt; Sybase has provided for last eight =
years.&nbsp; But if there is interest it</FONT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; &gt;&gt;&gt; could be so much more!&nbsp; Road =
to the left says &quot;moan and groan&quot;, road</FONT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; &gt;&gt;&gt; to the right do something =
productive.&nbsp;&nbsp; I know where I'm going. &lt;g&gt;</FONT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; &gt;&gt;&gt;</FONT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; &gt;&gt;&gt; Boris Gasin [TeamSybase]</FONT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; &gt;&gt;&gt; <A =
HREF=3D"mailto:NOSPAM_bgasin@dynamictechgroup.com">mailto:NOSPAM_bgasin@d=
ynamictechgroup.com</A></FONT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; &gt;&gt;&gt;&nbsp;&nbsp; ___</FONT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; &gt;&gt;&gt; ____&nbsp;&nbsp; _</FONT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; &gt;&gt;&gt; _____&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; _</FONT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; &gt;&gt;&gt; ____&nbsp;&nbsp; _</FONT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; &gt;&gt;&gt;&nbsp;&nbsp; ___</FONT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; &gt;&gt;&gt;</FONT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; &gt;&gt;&gt;</FONT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; &gt;&gt;&gt; Dynamic Technology Group, =
Inc.</FONT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; &gt;&gt;&gt; <A =
HREF=3D"http://www.dynamictechgroup.com/">http://www.dynamictechgroup.com=
/</A></FONT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; &gt;&gt;</FONT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; &gt;&gt;</FONT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; &gt;&gt;</FONT>
</P>

</BODY>
</HTML>
------=_NextPart_000_0032_01C68888.E20B29B0--

0
John
6/5/2006 2:17:09 PM
PFC as a framework has outlived its live, we need new FRAMEWORKreengineered
from what we have, give a new life to it.I am not surprised to hear that
Jabba is dieing of its own bloatedness. If we had tried a rewrite, we'd
probably still be working on it ;-)

"John" <J0hnD_N0_SPAM@D3lWar3.c0m> wrote in message
news:003601c688aa$691e5050$6601a8c0@delware.com...
Haven't you heard? Java is dead. <evil laugh>


-----Original Message----- 
From: Jerry Siegel [mailto:jerrys@dataDASHsciDOTcom.die.spammer.die.die.die]
Posted At: Monday, June 05, 2006 10:13 AM
Posted To: sybase.public.powerbuilder.futures.discussion
Conversation: PFC as a framework has outlived its live, we need new
FRAMEWORKreengineered from what we have, give a new life to it.
Subject: Re: PFC as a framework has outlived its live, we need new
FRAMEWORKreengineered from what we have, give a new life to it.


When I asked about that at TechWave, I was told it was sucking up too much
developer time and had to become a separate product, EAS, to pay its own
way. Those of us who did not need the third tier transactional features and
just needed native program-to-program communications wound up jilted.
Management was so peeved at having to re-architect a key service that if
Java had been worth a <censored> as a client platform at the time, this
would no longer be a PB shop.
"Daniel Coppersmith" <daniel_AT_infrontsoftware_DOT_com@N0SPAM.com> wrote in
message news:44811b70$1@forums-2-dub...
> >> gone.  Give it up.  May as well start complaining (again) about the
>  >> distributed option being dropped out.
>
> WHAT??? Distributed PowerBuilder was dropped? When did this happen?  Why?
>
> </BIG GIANT SNARK>
>
>
>
>
> Adam Simmonds [TeamSybase] wrote:
> > Timothy Madsen wrote:
> >> I absolutely agree with Boris.  PFC being spun off from Sybase (or
> >> whatever) is nothing new.  This is just the final step.  Boris is 100%
> >> right - the PFC really stopped any additional development when the PFC
> >> team left - years ago.  I think the time for vocalizing has come and
> >> gone.  Give it up.  May as well start complaining (again) about the
> >> distributed option being dropped out.
> >
> > Oh dear, you have opened that old chestnut again <g>
> >
> > It is done.  Get over it.
> >> If somebody is really bent out of shape over this - the most
> >> productive approach would be to join the PFC-OS group and work on the
> >> code there.
> >
> > Exactly, but instead the approach has been to create a seperate
> > framework and bad mouth Sybase instead of working on enhancing it.
Crazy!
> >
> >> Not trying to get anybody aggravated - but I really agree with Boris's
> >> point and this is just how I feel.  My attitude - accept it or work on
> >> changing it.  Complaining is a waste of breath and gives a bad
> >> impression of the complainer.
> >
> > Well said Tim.
> > a.
> >
> >>
> >> Tim.
> >>
> >> "Boris Gasin [TeamSybase]" <NOSPAM_bgasin@dynamictechgroup.com> wrote
> >> in message news:2p6u72tb2npa5oa26q67mqdphu5hjubgpo@4ax.com...
> >>
> >>> On 31 May 2006 05:24:52 -0700, "Chris Pollach"
> >>> <cpollach@travel-net.dot.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> 1. Make it PB11.Net ready
> >>>> 2. Morph an EAServer version
> >>>> 3. Morph a PK version
> >>>> 4. Make sure it's Vista friendly
> >>>> 5. Catch up to the current PB (TV DW, Ink, Signature, etc new
controls)
> >>>> friendly
> >>>> 6. Align it to use .Net services
> >>>> 7. Rewrite some code
> >>>> Etc, etc, etc - come on there is a "ton" of work to be done on that
> >>>> puppy!
> >>>
> >>> Thank you Chris for the suggestions...  I'll address those in a
> >>> separate reply.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> Note: The PFC was also an great test bench for PB engineering. I can
> >>>> remember that the PFC group forced the PB development team to
> >>>> clean-up and
> >>>> improve allot of features within PB! We have lost a great internal
> >>>> resource
> >>>> at Sybase doing this kind of internal stress and functional testing.
In
> >>>> essence, they flush-out allot of new PB functionality at the QA
level!
> >>>
> >>> Do you realize that the scenario you are describing did not exist
> >>> since PB6?  I mean PFC team driving PB features.  As far as I know
> >>> Sybase QA still uses PFC apps in their test environment.
> >>>
> >>> PFC Development team came from the Sybase Consulting, people with
> >>> background in business application development.   But they left Sybase
> >>> in 1998!  Chris that's 8 years ago!   At some point you have to accept
> >>> the reality.   PFC7 saw bug fixes and new control support upgrade.
> >>> PFC 8 bug fixes, PFC 9 same.   What you are asking for requires a
> >>> proactive steps by Sybase in a direction they have absolutely no
> >>> interest in.   That's the reality based on their actions of the last
> >>> eight years.
> >>>
> >>> Now we have the opportunity at *minimum* to provide the same support
> >>> Sybase has provided for last eight years.  But if there is interest it
> >>> could be so much more!  Road to the left says "moan and groan", road
> >>> to the right do something productive.   I know where I'm going. <g>
> >>>
> >>> Boris Gasin [TeamSybase]
> >>> mailto:NOSPAM_bgasin@dynamictechgroup.com
> >>>   ___
> >>> ____   _
> >>> _____    _
> >>> ____   _
> >>>   ___
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Dynamic Technology Group, Inc.
> >>> http://www.dynamictechgroup.com/
> >>
> >>
> >>


0
Jerry
6/5/2006 2:28:35 PM
Reply:

Similar Artilces:

NEW NEW NEW
hi I have a huge form to build on an asp.net page with multiple fields  that come from and also connect to (postback=true) 10 different tables{database is access for now } .which controls would be helpful please suggest. Also how about usign infopath to build forms and hosting it on iis is it feasible..please advice. Thanks in advance Environment: Visual studio 2005 ,iis webserver,ms access,Thanks to all the PROS who are helping other developers.. Hi, For ASP.NET 2.0 Hosting purpose I am currently using GoDaddy.com. And satisfied with the service.RegardsKuldeep Deokule  MCSD.NETBlog: http://dkuldeep.blogspot.comThis posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights. mranonimus:hi I have a huge form to build on an asp.net page with multiple fields  that come from and also connect to (postback=true) 10 different tables{database is access for now } .which controls would be helpful please suggest. Requirement is not so clear. Advise you to give more clarity for better response. MCSD.NETBlog: http://dkuldeep.blogspot.comThis posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.   The real question is how should you access the data.   Since you are using Access, you could create a query that pulls all the various data fields (from the 10 tables) together into one query. That way you can write one SQL statement to access the correct record in the query. Also, I believe when y...

New New New to SOAP..
I've looked around, apparently not well enough. I have an simple classic ASP example of a soap service i need to consume. However I need this to work in .net, and have failed had issues at every turn. Any help would be Great... Thanks, Dim sCid, iSid, sCinfo, sGuid sCid= "9.20.20.0.0" iSid= "2.2.2.0" 'below is a single string, added space before User so it could wrap sCinfo= "<CLIENTINFO><CLIENTID>TheClientIDRetrievedFromTheEndEnd User</CLIENTID><CLIENTVERSION>TheClientVersionRetrievedFromTheEndEnd User</CLIENTVERSION><SECURITYVERSION>TheDRMSecurityVersionRetrievedFromTheEndEnd User</SECURITYVERSION><APPSECURITY>AppSecurityRetrievedFromTheEndEnd User</APPSECURITY><SUBJECTID1>TheSubjectIDRetrievedFromTheEndEnd User</SUBJECTID1><SUBJECTID2></SUBJECTID2><DRMKVERSION>TheDRMKVersionRetrievedFromTheEndEnd User</DRMKVERSION></CLIENTINFO>" sGuid = "XYZABCD" Response.Write getLicense(sCid, iSid, sCinfo, sGuid) Function getLicense(cid, sid, cinfo, guid) Dim soapClient Set soapClient = Server.CreateObject("MSSOAP.SoapClient") soapClient.ClientProperty("ServerHTTPRequest") = True soapClient.mssoapinit "http://www.playstream.com/license/DRMLicense.asmx?wsdl" getLicense = soapClient.getLicense(cid, sid, cinfo, guid) End Function Project Manager, Back-end Designer & Coder,...

a new version, new modules new skinobjects new colorpalettes new links
Hi Well dnn3 is on the horizon lots of people are working on some cool new stuff to add, so am I. A new free menu stem pure css based combined with a skinpackage also pure css based very fast loading and pretty much xbrowser. No need to buy sidemenus vetical menus etc all this can be handled in css alone. Im also working on some new modules and a javascript helper ( as some of you kow I love my Javascript :). But each new portal starts with a new designs and i found some more interesting color links. Colourlover User submitted colors and color schemes. this is my favourite some very interesting but realy good looking color combinations in here</a> Spectacle color schemes <i> the favourite color schemes of a design studio Its time we add more interesting color schemes in the dnn world, Fortunately ofcourse there is Nina with her purplishe yellow color scheme, and I like the greengreeyish color combo from Crispy's site as well I have some interesting color schemes for my new sites and menu's in mind and I hope to see some more creative dnn use in the future :) have fun experimenting with colorsArmand Datema5 Skins, 4 SkinObject, 38 Containers, 2 Modules and more Euro 50 a year.SchwingNukeOffshore DNN and ASP.net development Container Creator Armand. that's some nice looking eye candy for colour variances. I can't wait to get my separate skinning resource site running where I'll be covering colours to a finer degree, but these are such love...

new future needed
Name: John Email: supportatbrainstuffdotcom Product: Thunderbird Summary: new future needed Comments: Hi, we want two new features for Thunderbird: 1 make possible to edit the message subsuject. In this way it will be possible to "Rename" the subject of an messagen and then it is possible to sort the messages on her subject. We want that it is possible to have messages and answers to messages for multiple subjects in ONE folder and sorted by subject and date (received and send mail). 2 we want to have a better configuration for the accounts (like a sp...

New ideas not so new
Name: Edward Morales Email: edwardmoraleatgmaildotcom Product: Firefox Summary: New ideas not so new Comments: Here is a list of new tools that would make FF much better than IE6 1. Skins I love having mine charcoal color 2. Screen Capture methods, regional or whole page. Or I just can down load Maxthon Browser. Edward Morales Browser Details: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.9.1) Gecko/20090624 Firefox/3.5 From URL: http://hendrix.mozilla.org/ Note to readers: Hendrix gives no expectation of a response to this feedback but if you wish to provi...

uniGUI framework New version
New version: http://www.unigui.com/wpblog/2012/03/14/another-update-for-version-0-88/ Download: http://www.unigui.com/downloads Demo: http://www.unigui.com/demo New uniGUI v.0.89.0.950: http://www.unigui.com/component/docman/doc_download/20-unigui-beta-v089 Installation Instructions for Delphi and C++ Builder: http://www.unigui.com/downloads/90 Online Demos: http://www.unigui.com/demo ...

new localization framework
[Posting this to multiple relevant newsgroups, followups to mozilla.dev.i18n, which is very low-traffic, so don't hesitate to subscribe to it if you're interested in this topic] A few months ago, Axel Hecht from MoCo has worked on an idea for a new localization framework that could be used for Mozilla2, but also for web sites and other software. The main goals of this framework are to overcome the problems and limitations we know that the current Mozilla dtd/properties model and the gettext/PO model have and provide not only a "best of both worlds" but a...

Framework Update? New Error
I implemented a wizard component for IBuySpy to dynamically modify each sites style sheet. It has been up and running for a few weeks now with no problems. Apparently within the last couple of days an update when out onto my server for .Net Framework. I have found that on some machines I just need to install the new updates for the framework while others I need to install a Critical Service patch. But I have one group of users that the updated didn't work for. The error is an IndexOutOfBounds error and even if I login as that user and access the same data on my machine I do not get t...

Suggested Framework for new site
 Hello! I will be building a rather simple asp.net web site and am looking for a suggestion as to a good starting framework.  I have examined DNN but have also noticed there are several other starter kits available for download.The site has a single main page located at http://www.somewhere.com .  Users of the site will create new accounts from this page.  After a user creates an account, they will have their own page located at http://www.somewhere.com/user1 .  The individual user pages will be static as far as layout, etc, simply each users data will be popula...

new unit test framework
I've just released a new unit testing framework (called Zanebug). It has full compatability w/ NUnit, but also adds a lot of new and enhanced features, such as: * Performance Metrics * Result Graphing * Perfmon Integration * Test Iterations * Pass / Fail Stats * Assemblies Loaded I'm looking for feedback to make it better. Check it out at: http://www.adapdev.com/zanebug/ Sean McCormack http://www.adapdev.com Leading Open Source Solutions...

Nearly new Hawking HWUG1 needs a new home
I got this USB-pluggable wireless nic for some testing I was doing with different wireless antenna shapes and signal levels. In addition to the compactness and antenna jack, I picked the hawking for its chipset, widely supported among sniffer apps. Anyway, my testing is done now and the poor thing's been sitting on a shelf looking forlorn. Anyone here need to add a hawking to their war driving kit? It's a few months old but in mint condition. No takers on your card? n3rvp4in wrote: > No takers on your card? Not much interest here, but someone's suggestion a...

new version too new
wher can I download an older version. My system has less then 1 gig of ram so I can not run the 11.3 version, I tried 5 times. Thank you. -- trevrep ------------------------------------------------------------------------ You can find the openSUSE version 11.2 ISO download files, for making bootable DVD & CD's, from the following Link: ftp://ftp.klid.dk/opensuse/distribution/11.2/iso/ Thank You, -- Remember that little in Life is certain, including any advice you may get from me, you poor soul, but at least I am trying to help. :)Its James again fro...

Adjusting new email notification to give a teaser of the new message
Greetings, Again missing TB 2.x functionality. That code would show the message subject and teaser of arriving emails. I have over 700 folders, many of which have unread mail in them. Giving such information in the pop-up new message indicator would expedite if I need to attend to the new message immediately or not. So, could that code get borrowed from TB 2.x please? Thanks! -- Michael Lueck Lueck Data Systems http://www.lueckdatasystems.com/ Michael Lueck wrote: > Again missing TB 2.x functionality. That code would show the message > subject and teaser of arrivin...

need a new field for browser type in enter a new bug
Need a new field for browser type and version in bug report. Could some one give me some advice how can I add a new column in bug table and a new field in all coresponding pages? Thanks. Jun Jun Ding wrote: > Need a new field for browser type and version in bug report. Could some one > give me some advice how can I add a new column in bug table and a new field > in all coresponding pages? Thanks. http://www.gerv.net/hacking/custom-fields.html Gerv ...

PowerBuilder 10.5 New Menus, Toolbars and New Icons
Hi Guys We are having problems with the GUI interface with our application running in Win2000 remote server (which does not support 32bits color), the new look-and-feel is not working at all and on the other hand we have a lot user running the app in WinXP so what do you recommend us? Thanks Fabio ...

Hello i am new to the forums and new to ASP.NET but need your help!
So please excuse if this sounds really elementary, and very newbish. But I am trying to further my knowledge in the IT field (since I am completely new to it) and ASP.NET is something I must learn. My question to you all is, I've downloaded the visual web developer, and want to know what kind of project could I give myself to do in order to learn ASP.NET better?I haven't even looked at Visual Web Developer yet, so without knowing the whole picture it's kind of hard to really pinpoint what I am  asking, but I hope someone out there understands.Thank you. the best project to start with ...

Write new email on a new tab instead of a new window
Is there a way to tell Thunderbird to open a new tab instead of a new window when composing a new message? gapka gapka wrote: > Is there a way to tell Thunderbird to open a new tab instead of a new > window when composing a new message? https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=449299 Opened back in Auguts 2008. Still open. They let you read in a tab but not write in a tab. On 3/21/2014 1:31 AM, gapka <gapka@anonumous.invalid> wrote: > Is there a way to tell Thunderbird to open a new tab instead of a new > window when composing a new message? Not at this time. See https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=449299 Personally, I hate tabs in Thunderbird. Love them in Firefox, but would never use them in Thunderbird. Am 21.03.2014 10:37, schrieb Tanstaafl: > On 3/21/2014 1:31 AM, gapka <gapka@anonumous.invalid> wrote: > > Is there a way to tell Thunderbird to open a new tab instead of a new > > window when composing a new message? > > Not at this time. > > See https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=449299 > > Personally, I hate tabs in Thunderbird. Love them in Firefox, but would > never use them in Thunderbird. > +1 Christoph -- email: nurfuerspam -> gmx de -> net ...

trying to introduce a new asp framework
called aspbeans if you could tell me what you guys think, i'd appreciate it. it's at http://aspbeans.sourceforge.net . coming from doing everything in java, it's definitely made the transition easier, but i'd like suggestions as to how to make it more powerful or other features you guys might like. thanks! ...

New PB & .NET Framework
I hope this is the correct group, as I think this is a future type of thing, sorry if it isn't. I'm currently working on an old client-server Powerbuilder application. You know the sort, the code is all over the place, logic is in events and functions on windows, there are no standards, many people have worked on it over the years, etc. We are now at the stage where we want to create a brand-new framework, and what with PB 11 just out we think the ability to use the .NET libraries would be very useful for things like emailing and faxing etc., but as all our developers are ...

New browser chrome testing framework
Hi all, I've recently landed a new test framework that will make it easier to test front-end features (code related to main-window browser chrome code especially, but also anything testable from privileged JavaScript code). The test framework uses runtests.pl (a script from the Mochitest framework), to start a Firefox instance, and then runs snippets of JavaScript code in the main browser window's scope, capturing and reporting the results. It uses the same comparison functions as Mochitest, so those familiar with writing Mochitests should have no problem writing browser ...

DPB Server
HI All, I built a new DPB server. Using this server you can deploy your own application. You can add the PBD's into this server at runtime without bringing down the server. This server is totaly decoupled from the appln. logic. so it can be used for any kind of appln, where DPB is used. And this server can be monitored by a Remote console. You can shutdown or boot your server from a remote location, not necessarily on the same machine. To get the download of this visit this site http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Grid/6401/ Expecting some feedbacks from you guys and soon...

New to DotNetNuke. Framework Implementation Problem
Trying to implement DNN with a legacy database we found a few problems.   First DNN is designed to support multiple portals with only one web application /SQL server instance (great feature).   Unfortunately our legacy database is designed in such a way that only one server instance per client is allowed (a school is a client in our case).   Is there a way to associate (link) each portal on DNN to pull data from different external instance of our legacy database. We would like to host max 10-15 portals on one instance of DNN. (Which would make 1 DNN database and 10-15 ...

.NET framework version for new Reportviewer
Can anyone tell me what's the framework version the 2008 reportviewer control based on? I am going to upgrade my IDE to VS2008, but I have this control version conflicts issue during the past, so I just want to know is there any solution for that?The more you cook the ASP.NET, the much better you taste it. VS.NET 2008 ships with ReportViewer 9and VS.NET ships with ReportViewer 8 The more you cook the ASP.NET, the much better you taste it....

Timer Control in the new AJAX Framework
Thank you in advance for anyone that can help me with the bug  I had a Timer control working well with the old Atlas, but yesterday we updated to the Ajax Framework and now I get runtime error with my Timer control.  I can't seem to find anyone discussing this problem.  Here are the details:   Could not find an event named 'Interval' on associated control 'UpdateTimer' for the trigger in UpdatePanel 'UpdatePanel1' I have a Timer control that looks like this<asp:Timer ID="UpdateTimer" Interval="120000" runat="server" Enabled="true"></asp:Timer>and of ...

Web resources about - PFC as a framework has outlived its live, we need new FRAMEWORK reengineered from what we have, give a new life to it. - sybase.powerbuilder.futures

Wunderlist 2: Reengineered, Redesigned And Coming Soon To Android, iOS, Mac & PC
... announced a brand new version of Wunderlist that’s coming to Android, iOS, Mac, and PC just in time for Christmas. Wunderlist 2 has been “reengineered, ...

"The Exquisitely Reengineered Frankenstein Housing Monster," by Wolf Richter
... his posts in their entirety for the benefit of the Daily Kos community.] (h/t to Yves at Naked Capitalism) [http: The Exquisitely Reengineered ...

Your Toolbox Is Hopelessly Inadequate Without Fiskars' Reengineered Hammer and Machete
An early champion of user-friendly design, Fiskars tackles your toolshed. "We have a saying here that even the simplest things can be made better ...

Veljko Sekelj - Google+ - Fastbook Facebook reengineered in HTML5! again Well isn't…
Fastbook Facebook reengineered in HTML5! again Well isn't this interesting - Facebook claimed that HTML5 was still too slow and the boys and ...

New Acura NSX Was Totally Reengineered In 18 Months, Has At Least 550 HP
The gestation period of the 2016 Acura NSX feels like it has taken forever, but in reality this car has taken just three years to go from concept ...

“RoboCop”: An ’80s classic reengineered — but why?
In an era when real-life police look ever more like RoboCop, this sleek, dull remake is a missed opportunity

Ranch Rush 2 HD Free for iPad on the iTunes App Store
Read reviews, get customer ratings, see screenshots, and learn more about Ranch Rush 2 HD Free on the App Store. Download Ranch Rush 2 HD Free ...

TurboGrafx-16 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
"TG-16", "TurboGrafx", and "PC Engine" redirect here. For the U.S. Air Force training glider, see DG Flugzeugbau DG-1000. ) , is a video game ...

Seminar Series 2010
Seminar Series Semester 1 2010

Pandora Archive - Digital Archiving System
The PANDORA Digital Archiving System, known as PANDAS, was developed by the National Library following an unsuccessful attempt to find an off-the-shelf ...

Resources last updated: 3/24/2016 9:44:56 AM