Why the customer gets it wrong...

Moving Your PowerBuilder Application to the Web

INTRODUCTION
Today�s Internet-connected world virtually requires that all companies
leverage the power of the Internet. There is a wide and sometimes
bewildering array of techniques available to PowerBuilder programmers
to move all or part of their PowerBuilder logic to the Internet. A
process-based approach to examining which aspects of the application
should be moved to the Internet, combined with an intelligent
refactoring of the application and an understanding of your company�s
technology stack will maximize your organization�s PowerBuilder
investment.

Options for PowerBuilder customers moving the all or part of an
application to the web include using PowerBuilder .NET Windows Forms,
PowerBuilder .NET Web Forms, the PowerBuilder Web DataWindow, CITRIX
or Terminal Services, and Appeon.

... http://www.sybase.com/detail?id=1063385

0
Brett
10/18/2010 10:49:52 AM
sybase.powerbuilder.futures 2315 articles. 0 followers. Follow

47 Replies
880 Views

Similar Articles

[PageSpeed] 7
Get it on Google Play
Get it on Apple App Store

Do you really think the customer is going to go looking for this 
document to read? What incentive is there if:
a. they don't know of PB
b. or they know PB and think(rightly or wrongly)that it's a declining tool
c. or it's priced itself out of reach to key groups(no desktop,pro)

FYI I work with it every day and still I have to work at convincing 
myself it's worth staying with....It has served me well over the last 10 
years and hope to continue but the jury is still out


On 18/10/10 6:49 AM, Brett Weaver wrote:
> Moving Your PowerBuilder Application to the Web
>
> INTRODUCTION
> Today�s Internet-connected world virtually requires that all companies
> leverage the power of the Internet. There is a wide and sometimes
> bewildering array of techniques available to PowerBuilder programmers
> to move all or part of their PowerBuilder logic to the Internet. A
> process-based approach to examining which aspects of the application
> should be moved to the Internet, combined with an intelligent
> refactoring of the application and an understanding of your company�s
> technology stack will maximize your organization�s PowerBuilder
> investment.
>
> Options for PowerBuilder customers moving the all or part of an
> application to the web include using PowerBuilder .NET Windows Forms,
> PowerBuilder .NET Web Forms, the PowerBuilder Web DataWindow, CITRIX
> or Terminal Services, and Appeon.
>
> .. http://www.sybase.com/detail?id=1063385
>

0
300ZX
10/18/2010 1:37:47 PM
Sorry, I was (apparently badly) making another point. I am
trying to talk with existing clients of PB about their
options.
Below, it says that PowerBuilder .Net creates WebForms and
WinForms.
Before people jump on me and say that it means Powerbuilder
creates .Net WinForms and .Net WebForms, remember that all
of the promotion of PB12 is about PowerBuilder .Net so its
going to be read that way.
What I am pointing out is that the marketing of PB12 has
been misleading in a number of documents and it needs to be
sorted out. It can currently leave customers feeling
disappointed and a little like they have been conned.



> Do you really think the customer is going to go looking
> for this  document to read? What incentive is there if:
> a. they don't know of PB
> b. or they know PB and think(rightly or wrongly)that it's
> a declining tool c. or it's priced itself out of reach to
> key groups(no desktop,pro)
>
> FYI I work with it every day and still I have to work at
> convincing  myself it's worth staying with....It has
> served me well over the last 10  years and hope to
> continue but the jury is still out
>
>
> On 18/10/10 6:49 AM, Brett Weaver wrote:
> > Moving Your PowerBuilder Application to the Web
> >
> > INTRODUCTION
> > Today=92s Internet-connected world virtually requires
that
> > all companies leverage the power of the Internet. There
> > is a wide and sometimes bewildering array of techniques
> > available to PowerBuilder programmers to move all or
> > part of their PowerBuilder logic to the Internet. A
> process-based approach to examining which aspects of the
> > application should be moved to the Internet, combined
> > with an intelligent refactoring of the application and
> > an understanding of your company=92s technology stack
will
> > maximize your organization=92s PowerBuilder investment.
> >
> > Options for PowerBuilder customers moving the all or
> > part of an application to the web include using
> > PowerBuilder .NET Windows Forms, PowerBuilder .NET Web
> > Forms, the PowerBuilder Web DataWindow, CITRIX or
> Terminal Services, and Appeon. >
> > .. http://www.sybase.com/detail?id=3d1063385
> >
>
0
Brett
10/18/2010 9:26:44 PM
Whether its misleading or not my spidy senses tell me the circle of 
interested people actually reading it is slowly dwindling anyway...I do 
hope I'm wrong


On 18/10/10 5:26 PM, Brett Weaver wrote:
> Sorry, I was (apparently badly) making another point. I am
> trying to talk with existing clients of PB about their
> options.
> Below, it says that PowerBuilder .Net creates WebForms and
> WinForms.
> Before people jump on me and say that it means Powerbuilder
> creates .Net WinForms and .Net WebForms, remember that all
> of the promotion of PB12 is about PowerBuilder .Net so its
> going to be read that way.
> What I am pointing out is that the marketing of PB12 has
> been misleading in a number of documents and it needs to be
> sorted out. It can currently leave customers feeling
> disappointed and a little like they have been conned.
>
>
>
>> Do you really think the customer is going to go looking
>> for this  document to read? What incentive is there if:
>> a. they don't know of PB
>> b. or they know PB and think(rightly or wrongly)that it's
>> a declining tool c. or it's priced itself out of reach to
>> key groups(no desktop,pro)
>>
>> FYI I work with it every day and still I have to work at
>> convincing  myself it's worth staying with....It has
>> served me well over the last 10  years and hope to
>> continue but the jury is still out
>>
>>
>> On 18/10/10 6:49 AM, Brett Weaver wrote:
>>> Moving Your PowerBuilder Application to the Web
>>>
>>> INTRODUCTION
>>> Today�s Internet-connected world virtually requires
> that
>>> all companies leverage the power of the Internet. There
>>> is a wide and sometimes bewildering array of techniques
>>> available to PowerBuilder programmers to move all or
>>> part of their PowerBuilder logic to the Internet. A
>> process-based approach to examining which aspects of the
>>> application should be moved to the Internet, combined
>>> with an intelligent refactoring of the application and
>>> an understanding of your company�s technology stack
> will
>>> maximize your organization�s PowerBuilder investment.
>>>
>>> Options for PowerBuilder customers moving the all or
>>> part of an application to the web include using
>>> PowerBuilder .NET Windows Forms, PowerBuilder .NET Web
>>> Forms, the PowerBuilder Web DataWindow, CITRIX or
>> Terminal Services, and Appeon.>
>>> .. http://www.sybase.com/detail?id=1063385
>>>
>>

0
300ZX
10/18/2010 11:24:30 PM
Hi Brett;

 What a joke ... Terminal Server, Citrix are not Web technologies - they are 
remote access feature. The Web DataWindow (client side plug-in) is a 
deprecated feature. What they describe as Web DataWindow is basically the 
enablement of DW's in the Webform environment. They also missed out on 
EAServer where one can still use the Web DataWindow feature to assist JSP 
technology (you can also use it from ASP/ASP.net as well). However, the 
EAServer is lost to the customer as Sybase does not promote that feature any 
longer. Its too bad because that is the only way you can do true CLF 
Internet applications and where you can scale to 1,000's of concurrent 
users.

  The article also incorrectly states that Webform technology belongs to PB 
..Net where in fact this feature is ONLY support via the "classic" version of 
PB (this old Win32 IDE). In fact PB.Net can only build WPF - a special type 
of Winform (native client) application which is definitely nothing to do 
with Web.

  This is certainly a misleading marketing spin on PB.Net

   For real PB internet applications .... have a look at these websites:

1) Supreme Court of Canada (Case Management) -
    http://www.scc-csc.gc.ca/case-dossier/index-eng.asp
2) Nation Research Council (Grant Applications) -
     https://ebiz.nserc.ca/nserc_web/nserc_login_e.htm
3) Agriculture Canada (Financial Reporting) -
   http://www4.agr.gc.ca/AAFC-AAC/display-afficher.do?id=1210684614941&lang=eng

All three of the above systems are driven by EAServer based PB components.


Regards ... Chris
President: OSUG / STD Inc.
Blog: http://chrispollach.blogspot.com
PBDJ: http://chrispollach.sys-con.com
SourceForge: http://sourceforge.net/projects/stdfndclass



"Brett Weaver" <bretnsp@weaversoft.com> wrote in message 
news:um9ob6hqe73nsk24fkbt8k28g2hntc3vop@4ax.com...
> Moving Your PowerBuilder Application to the Web
>
> INTRODUCTION
> Today's Internet-connected world virtually requires that all companies
> leverage the power of the Internet. There is a wide and sometimes
> bewildering array of techniques available to PowerBuilder programmers
> to move all or part of their PowerBuilder logic to the Internet. A
> process-based approach to examining which aspects of the application
> should be moved to the Internet, combined with an intelligent
> refactoring of the application and an understanding of your company's
> technology stack will maximize your organization's PowerBuilder
> investment.
>
> Options for PowerBuilder customers moving the all or part of an
> application to the web include using PowerBuilder .NET Windows Forms,
> PowerBuilder .NET Web Forms, the PowerBuilder Web DataWindow, CITRIX
> or Terminal Services, and Appeon.
>
> .. http://www.sybase.com/detail?id=1063385
> 
0
Chris
10/19/2010 2:07:01 AM
Looks like the Canadian government is the only place where
EASERver has been used to build internet applications. Here
at the federal Govt in DC area, PB has not progressed beyond
Client Server.Lot of these  apps are just waiting to be
converted to Java.

Regards,
SNS


>   This is certainly a misleading marketing spin on PB.Net
>
>    For real PB internet applications .... have a look at
> these websites:
>
> 1) Supreme Court of Canada (Case Management) -
>     http://www.scc-csc.gc.ca/case-dossier/index-eng.asp
> 2) Nation Research Council (Grant Applications) -
>      https://ebiz.nserc.ca/nserc_web/nserc_login_e.htm
> 3) Agriculture Canada (Financial Reporting) -
>
>
http://www4.agr.gc.ca/AAFC-AAC/display-afficher.do?id=1210684614941&lang=eng
>
> All three of the above systems are driven by EAServer
> based PB components.
>
>
> Regards ... Chris
> President: OSUG / STD Inc.
> Blog: http://chrispollach.blogspot.com
> PBDJ: http://chrispollach.sys-con.com
> SourceForge: http://sourceforge.net/projects/stdfndclass
>
>
>
> "Brett Weaver" <bretnsp@weaversoft.com> wrote in message
> news:um9ob6hqe73nsk24fkbt8k28g2hntc3vop@4ax.com...
> > Moving Your PowerBuilder Application to the Web
> >
> > INTRODUCTION
> > Today's Internet-connected world virtually requires that
> > all companies leverage the power of the Internet. There
> > is a wide and sometimes bewildering array of techniques
> > available to PowerBuilder programmers to move all or
> > part of their PowerBuilder logic to the Internet. A
> process-based approach to examining which aspects of the
> > application should be moved to the Internet, combined
> > with an intelligent refactoring of the application and
> > an understanding of your company's technology stack will
> > maximize your organization's PowerBuilder investment.
> >
> > Options for PowerBuilder customers moving the all or
> > part of an application to the web include using
> > PowerBuilder .NET Windows Forms, PowerBuilder .NET Web
> > Forms, the PowerBuilder Web DataWindow, CITRIX or
> Terminal Services, and Appeon. >
> > .. http://www.sybase.com/detail?id=1063385
> >
0
SNS
10/19/2010 4:22:05 PM
Hi S;

  Yes, there were quite a few web sites built on Distributed PB - when 
Sybase used to offer Web-PB. Then, when they dropped DPB (a stupid move 
IMHO) - many departments switched over to EAServer. EAS was also in vogue at 
that time because of its Java nature and that was the trend in the latter 
1990's. However, I see no development activity with EAS and a large movement 
to IIs (ASP.net). In fact, I would now say that 80% plus of Canadian 
government clients have abandoned Java (JSP/JSF) and switched to ASP.Net 
over the past 5 years.

  I still think that bringing back DPB to replace the stagnant EAS product 
would be the way to go. Especially looking at the price of EAS vs DPB (which 
I think should be free) as many organizations look at the bottom line these 
days and cost of ownership is a big factor. DPB would also allow Win32 
applications to add .NET features and call then outside the main application 
in another thread. This would allow Win32 applications to remain "as is" 
instead of being forced into the WPF realm in order to get to full access to 
..NET code.

  When you say that many of your DC applications are waiting to be converted 
to Java - do you mean the web or still staying native windows?


Regards ... Chris
President: OSUG / STD Inc.
Blog: http://chrispollach.blogspot.com
PBDJ: http://chrispollach.sys-con.com
SourceForge: http://sourceforge.net/projects/stdfndclass



"SNS" wrote in message news:4cbdc5ad.5dd8.1681692777@sybase.com...
> Looks like the Canadian government is the only place where
> EASERver has been used to build internet applications. Here
> at the federal Govt in DC area, PB has not progressed beyond
> Client Server.Lot of these  apps are just waiting to be
> converted to Java.
>
> Regards,
> SNS
>
>
>>   This is certainly a misleading marketing spin on PB.Net
>>
>>    For real PB internet applications .... have a look at
>> these websites:
>>
>> 1) Supreme Court of Canada (Case Management) -
>>     http://www.scc-csc.gc.ca/case-dossier/index-eng.asp
>> 2) Nation Research Council (Grant Applications) -
>>      https://ebiz.nserc.ca/nserc_web/nserc_login_e.htm
>> 3) Agriculture Canada (Financial Reporting) -
>>
>>
> http://www4.agr.gc.ca/AAFC-AAC/display-afficher.do?id=1210684614941&lang=eng
>>
>> All three of the above systems are driven by EAServer
>> based PB components.
>>
>>
>> Regards ... Chris
>> President: OSUG / STD Inc.
>> Blog: http://chrispollach.blogspot.com
>> PBDJ: http://chrispollach.sys-con.com
>> SourceForge: http://sourceforge.net/projects/stdfndclass
>>
>>
>>
>> "Brett Weaver" <bretnsp@weaversoft.com> wrote in message
>> news:um9ob6hqe73nsk24fkbt8k28g2hntc3vop@4ax.com...
>> > Moving Your PowerBuilder Application to the Web
>> >
>> > INTRODUCTION
>> > Today's Internet-connected world virtually requires that
>> > all companies leverage the power of the Internet. There
>> > is a wide and sometimes bewildering array of techniques
>> > available to PowerBuilder programmers to move all or
>> > part of their PowerBuilder logic to the Internet. A
>> process-based approach to examining which aspects of the
>> > application should be moved to the Internet, combined
>> > with an intelligent refactoring of the application and
>> > an understanding of your company's technology stack will
>> > maximize your organization's PowerBuilder investment.
>> >
>> > Options for PowerBuilder customers moving the all or
>> > part of an application to the web include using
>> > PowerBuilder .NET Windows Forms, PowerBuilder .NET Web
>> > Forms, the PowerBuilder Web DataWindow, CITRIX or
>> Terminal Services, and Appeon. >
>> > .. http://www.sybase.com/detail?id=1063385
>> > 
0
Chris
10/19/2010 5:51:59 PM
Hi Brett,

Actually the document is accurate but I can see where the confusion
comes from because we call the new IDE PowerBuilder .NET. 

Please note that the document you reference is dated April 2009, a
full year before PowerBuilder 12 was released. 

It is correct to refer to both Windows Forms and Web Forms
applications as .NET applications but now that PowerBuilder .NET has
been released perhaps it should be updated to read:

PowerBuilder's .NET Windows Forms, PowerBuilder's .NET Web Forms, or
maybe it should be reworded entirely to remove the confusion. 

I'll bring up the issue with the marketing team. 

Regards,
Dave Fish
Sybase

PowerBuilder Blog:
http://blogs.sybase.com/powerbuilder/

On 18 Oct 2010 14:26:44 -0700, Brett Weaver wrote:

>Sorry, I was (apparently badly) making another point. I am
>trying to talk with existing clients of PB about their
>options.
>Below, it says that PowerBuilder .Net creates WebForms and
>WinForms.
>Before people jump on me and say that it means Powerbuilder
>creates .Net WinForms and .Net WebForms, remember that all
>of the promotion of PB12 is about PowerBuilder .Net so its
>going to be read that way.
>What I am pointing out is that the marketing of PB12 has
>been misleading in a number of documents and it needs to be
>sorted out. It can currently leave customers feeling
>disappointed and a little like they have been conned.
>
>
>
>> Do you really think the customer is going to go looking
>> for this  document to read? What incentive is there if:
>> a. they don't know of PB
>> b. or they know PB and think(rightly or wrongly)that it's
>> a declining tool c. or it's priced itself out of reach to
>> key groups(no desktop,pro)
>>
>> FYI I work with it every day and still I have to work at
>> convincing  myself it's worth staying with....It has
>> served me well over the last 10  years and hope to
>> continue but the jury is still out
>>
>>
>> On 18/10/10 6:49 AM, Brett Weaver wrote:
>> > Moving Your PowerBuilder Application to the Web
>> >
>> > INTRODUCTION
>> > Today�s Internet-connected world virtually requires
>that
>> > all companies leverage the power of the Internet. There
>> > is a wide and sometimes bewildering array of techniques
>> > available to PowerBuilder programmers to move all or
>> > part of their PowerBuilder logic to the Internet. A
>> process-based approach to examining which aspects of the
>> > application should be moved to the Internet, combined
>> > with an intelligent refactoring of the application and
>> > an understanding of your company�s technology stack
>will
>> > maximize your organization�s PowerBuilder investment.
>> >
>> > Options for PowerBuilder customers moving the all or
>> > part of an application to the web include using
>> > PowerBuilder .NET Windows Forms, PowerBuilder .NET Web
>> > Forms, the PowerBuilder Web DataWindow, CITRIX or
>> Terminal Services, and Appeon. >
>> > .. http://www.sybase.com/detail?id=1063385
>> >
>>
0
Dave
10/19/2010 7:19:39 PM
Hi chris,

I mean't they are going to be rewritten as a browser based
application using Jave J2EE. Most of them migrate to current
versions of PB as older versions are not supported by
Sybase.Once the time and budget becomes available, these
apps will get converted. PB and Web are considered to be
oxymorons in most shops.

Regards,
SNS



> Hi S;
>
>   Yes, there were quite a few web sites built on
> Distributed PB - when  Sybase used to offer Web-PB. Then,
> when they dropped DPB (a stupid move  IMHO) - many
> departments switched over to EAServer. EAS was also in
> vogue at  that time because of its Java nature and that
> was the trend in the latter  1990's. However, I see no
> development activity with EAS and a large movement  to IIs
> (ASP.net). In fact, I would now say that 80% plus of
> Canadian  government clients have abandoned Java (JSP/JSF)
> and switched to ASP.Net  over the past 5 years.
>
>   I still think that bringing back DPB to replace the
> stagnant EAS product  would be the way to go. Especially
> looking at the price of EAS vs DPB (which  I think should
> be free) as many organizations look at the bottom line
> these  days and cost of ownership is a big factor. DPB
> would also allow Win32  applications to add .NET features
> and call then outside the main application  in another
> thread. This would allow Win32 applications to remain "as
> is"  instead of being forced into the WPF realm in order
> to get to full access to  ..NET code.
>
>   When you say that many of your DC applications are
> waiting to be converted  to Java - do you mean the web or
> still staying native windows?
>
>
> Regards ... Chris
> President: OSUG / STD Inc.
> Blog: http://chrispollach.blogspot.com
> PBDJ: http://chrispollach.sys-con.com
> SourceForge: http://sourceforge.net/projects/stdfndclass
>
>
>
> "SNS" wrote in message
> > news:4cbdc5ad.5dd8.1681692777@sybase.com... Looks like
> > the Canadian government is the only place where EASERver
> > has been used to build internet applications. Here at
> > the federal Govt in DC area, PB has not progressed
> beyond Client Server.Lot of these  apps are just waiting
> > to be converted to Java.
> >
> > Regards,
> > SNS
> >
> >
> >>   This is certainly a misleading marketing spin on
> PB.Net >>
> >>    For real PB internet applications .... have a look
> at >> these websites:
> >>
> >> 1) Supreme Court of Canada (Case Management) -
> >>     http://www.scc-csc.gc.ca/case-dossier/index-eng.asp
> >> 2) Nation Research Council (Grant Applications) -
> >>      https://ebiz.nserc.ca/nserc_web/nserc_login_e.htm
> >> 3) Agriculture Canada (Financial Reporting) -
> >>
> >>
> >
>
http://www4.agr.gc.ca/AAFC-AAC/display-afficher.do?id=1210684614941&lang=eng
> >>
> >> All three of the above systems are driven by EAServer
> >> based PB components.
> >>
> >>
> >> Regards ... Chris
> >> President: OSUG / STD Inc.
> >> Blog: http://chrispollach.blogspot.com
> >> PBDJ: http://chrispollach.sys-con.com
> >> SourceForge:
> http://sourceforge.net/projects/stdfndclass >>
> >>
> >>
> >> "Brett Weaver" <bretnsp@weaversoft.com> wrote in
> message >>
> news:um9ob6hqe73nsk24fkbt8k28g2hntc3vop@4ax.com... >> >
> Moving Your PowerBuilder Application to the Web >> >
> >> > INTRODUCTION
> >> > Today's Internet-connected world virtually requires
> that >> > all companies leverage the power of the
> Internet. There >> > is a wide and sometimes bewildering
> array of techniques >> > available to PowerBuilder
> programmers to move all or >> > part of their PowerBuilder
> logic to the Internet. A >> process-based approach to
> examining which aspects of the >> > application should be
> moved to the Internet, combined >> > with an intelligent
> refactoring of the application and >> > an understanding
> of your company's technology stack will >> > maximize your
> organization's PowerBuilder investment. >> >
> >> > Options for PowerBuilder customers moving the all or
> >> > part of an application to the web include using
> >> > PowerBuilder .NET Windows Forms, PowerBuilder .NET
> Web >> > Forms, the PowerBuilder Web DataWindow, CITRIX or
> >> Terminal Services, and Appeon. >
> >> > .. http://www.sybase.com/detail?id=1063385
> >> >
0
SNS
10/19/2010 7:51:06 PM
Yes, the predominant direction here in Canada's National Capital is 
primarily web as well.

Unfortunately, web applications MUST be CLF compliant - which means no 
plug-ins and they must run on all the popular web browsers. Something that 
PB cannot do today - or even in the planned SilverLight version. The CLF 
standard set by Treasury Board has already recommended HTML5 as the 
direction for all web applications in the near future as well.


"SNS" wrote in message news:4cbdf6aa.62b6.1681692777@sybase.com...
> Hi chris,
>
> I mean't they are going to be rewritten as a browser based
> application using Jave J2EE. Most of them migrate to current
> versions of PB as older versions are not supported by
> Sybase.Once the time and budget becomes available, these
> apps will get converted. PB and Web are considered to be
> oxymorons in most shops.
>
> Regards,
> SNS
>
>
>
>> Hi S;
>>
>>   Yes, there were quite a few web sites built on
>> Distributed PB - when  Sybase used to offer Web-PB. Then,
>> when they dropped DPB (a stupid move  IMHO) - many
>> departments switched over to EAServer. EAS was also in
>> vogue at  that time because of its Java nature and that
>> was the trend in the latter  1990's. However, I see no
>> development activity with EAS and a large movement  to IIs
>> (ASP.net). In fact, I would now say that 80% plus of
>> Canadian  government clients have abandoned Java (JSP/JSF)
>> and switched to ASP.Net  over the past 5 years.
>>
>>   I still think that bringing back DPB to replace the
>> stagnant EAS product  would be the way to go. Especially
>> looking at the price of EAS vs DPB (which  I think should
>> be free) as many organizations look at the bottom line
>> these  days and cost of ownership is a big factor. DPB
>> would also allow Win32  applications to add .NET features
>> and call then outside the main application  in another
>> thread. This would allow Win32 applications to remain "as
>> is"  instead of being forced into the WPF realm in order
>> to get to full access to  ..NET code.
>>
>>   When you say that many of your DC applications are
>> waiting to be converted  to Java - do you mean the web or
>> still staying native windows?
>>
>>
>> Regards ... Chris
>> President: OSUG / STD Inc.
>> Blog: http://chrispollach.blogspot.com
>> PBDJ: http://chrispollach.sys-con.com
>> SourceForge: http://sourceforge.net/projects/stdfndclass
>>
>>
>>
>> "SNS" wrote in message
>> > news:4cbdc5ad.5dd8.1681692777@sybase.com... Looks like
>> > the Canadian government is the only place where EASERver
>> > has been used to build internet applications. Here at
>> > the federal Govt in DC area, PB has not progressed
>> beyond Client Server.Lot of these  apps are just waiting
>> > to be converted to Java.
>> >
>> > Regards,
>> > SNS
>> >
>> >
>> >>   This is certainly a misleading marketing spin on
>> PB.Net >>
>> >>    For real PB internet applications .... have a look
>> at >> these websites:
>> >>
>> >> 1) Supreme Court of Canada (Case Management) -
>> >>     http://www.scc-csc.gc.ca/case-dossier/index-eng.asp
>> >> 2) Nation Research Council (Grant Applications) -
>> >>      https://ebiz.nserc.ca/nserc_web/nserc_login_e.htm
>> >> 3) Agriculture Canada (Financial Reporting) -
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>>
> http://www4.agr.gc.ca/AAFC-AAC/display-afficher.do?id=1210684614941&lang=eng
>> >>
>> >> All three of the above systems are driven by EAServer
>> >> based PB components.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Regards ... Chris
>> >> President: OSUG / STD Inc.
>> >> Blog: http://chrispollach.blogspot.com
>> >> PBDJ: http://chrispollach.sys-con.com
>> >> SourceForge:
>> http://sourceforge.net/projects/stdfndclass >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> "Brett Weaver" <bretnsp@weaversoft.com> wrote in
>> message >>
>> news:um9ob6hqe73nsk24fkbt8k28g2hntc3vop@4ax.com... >> >
>> Moving Your PowerBuilder Application to the Web >> >
>> >> > INTRODUCTION
>> >> > Today's Internet-connected world virtually requires
>> that >> > all companies leverage the power of the
>> Internet. There >> > is a wide and sometimes bewildering
>> array of techniques >> > available to PowerBuilder
>> programmers to move all or >> > part of their PowerBuilder
>> logic to the Internet. A >> process-based approach to
>> examining which aspects of the >> > application should be
>> moved to the Internet, combined >> > with an intelligent
>> refactoring of the application and >> > an understanding
>> of your company's technology stack will >> > maximize your
>> organization's PowerBuilder investment. >> >
>> >> > Options for PowerBuilder customers moving the all or
>> >> > part of an application to the web include using
>> >> > PowerBuilder .NET Windows Forms, PowerBuilder .NET
>> Web >> > Forms, the PowerBuilder Web DataWindow, CITRIX or
>> >> Terminal Services, and Appeon. >
>> >> > .. http://www.sybase.com/detail?id=1063385
>> >> > 
0
Chris
10/20/2010 12:32:27 AM
Hi Dave
The document might be old, but its two clicks from sybase.com
--> PowerBuilder
--> Web

Mind you its probably good I didn't print out the paragraphs on RIA
you could go to :-) Oh  dear! 

When I stand up in front of clients to explain options its difficult
when someone in the room has read Sybases Web site and got the story
all wrong..tr�s d�concertant!

Not a biggie.. Just probably should be fixed

Forget the web! Its yesterday! I want PB for the IPad!






On 19 Oct 2010 12:19:39 -0700, "Dave Fish [Sybase]"
<n0Spam__dfish@sybase.com> wrote:

>Hi Brett,
>
>Actually the document is accurate but I can see where the confusion
>comes from because we call the new IDE PowerBuilder .NET. 
>
>Please note that the document you reference is dated April 2009, a
>full year before PowerBuilder 12 was released. 
>
>It is correct to refer to both Windows Forms and Web Forms
>applications as .NET applications but now that PowerBuilder .NET has
>been released perhaps it should be updated to read:
>
>PowerBuilder's .NET Windows Forms, PowerBuilder's .NET Web Forms, or
>maybe it should be reworded entirely to remove the confusion. 
>
>I'll bring up the issue with the marketing team. 
>
>Regards,
>Dave Fish
>Sybase
>
>PowerBuilder Blog:
>http://blogs.sybase.com/powerbuilder/
>
>On 18 Oct 2010 14:26:44 -0700, Brett Weaver wrote:
>
>>Sorry, I was (apparently badly) making another point. I am
>>trying to talk with existing clients of PB about their
>>options.
>>Below, it says that PowerBuilder .Net creates WebForms and
>>WinForms.
>>Before people jump on me and say that it means Powerbuilder
>>creates .Net WinForms and .Net WebForms, remember that all
>>of the promotion of PB12 is about PowerBuilder .Net so its
>>going to be read that way.
>>What I am pointing out is that the marketing of PB12 has
>>been misleading in a number of documents and it needs to be
>>sorted out. It can currently leave customers feeling
>>disappointed and a little like they have been conned.
>>
>>
>>
>>> Do you really think the customer is going to go looking
>>> for this  document to read? What incentive is there if:
>>> a. they don't know of PB
>>> b. or they know PB and think(rightly or wrongly)that it's
>>> a declining tool c. or it's priced itself out of reach to
>>> key groups(no desktop,pro)
>>>
>>> FYI I work with it every day and still I have to work at
>>> convincing  myself it's worth staying with....It has
>>> served me well over the last 10  years and hope to
>>> continue but the jury is still out
>>>
>>>
>>> On 18/10/10 6:49 AM, Brett Weaver wrote:
>>> > Moving Your PowerBuilder Application to the Web
>>> >
>>> > INTRODUCTION
>>> > Today�s Internet-connected world virtually requires
>>that
>>> > all companies leverage the power of the Internet. There
>>> > is a wide and sometimes bewildering array of techniques
>>> > available to PowerBuilder programmers to move all or
>>> > part of their PowerBuilder logic to the Internet. A
>>> process-based approach to examining which aspects of the
>>> > application should be moved to the Internet, combined
>>> > with an intelligent refactoring of the application and
>>> > an understanding of your company�s technology stack
>>will
>>> > maximize your organization�s PowerBuilder investment.
>>> >
>>> > Options for PowerBuilder customers moving the all or
>>> > part of an application to the web include using
>>> > PowerBuilder .NET Windows Forms, PowerBuilder .NET Web
>>> > Forms, the PowerBuilder Web DataWindow, CITRIX or
>>> Terminal Services, and Appeon. >
>>> > .. http://www.sybase.com/detail?id=1063385
>>> >
>>>
0
Brett
10/20/2010 11:33:00 AM
Hi Brett,

I didn't mean to excuse the content of the document because of its
age. I was just pointing out that it wasn't referring to PowerBuilder
..NET, that was just a coincidence of word placement. But your other
points are well taken and I've asked product management and marketing
to look into this. 

>Forget the web! Its yesterday! I want PB for the IPad!

So do I Brett!

On 20 Oct 2010 04:33:00 -0700, Brett Weaver <bretnsp@weaversoft.com>
wrote:

>Hi Dave
>The document might be old, but its two clicks from sybase.com
>--> PowerBuilder
>--> Web
>
>Mind you its probably good I didn't print out the paragraphs on RIA
>you could go to :-) Oh  dear! 
>
>When I stand up in front of clients to explain options its difficult
>when someone in the room has read Sybases Web site and got the story
>all wrong..tr�s d�concertant!
>
>Not a biggie.. Just probably should be fixed
>
>Forget the web! Its yesterday! I want PB for the IPad!
>
>
>
>
>
>
>On 19 Oct 2010 12:19:39 -0700, "Dave Fish [Sybase]"
><n0Spam__dfish@sybase.com> wrote:
>
>>Hi Brett,
>>
>>Actually the document is accurate but I can see where the confusion
>>comes from because we call the new IDE PowerBuilder .NET. 
>>
>>Please note that the document you reference is dated April 2009, a
>>full year before PowerBuilder 12 was released. 
>>
>>It is correct to refer to both Windows Forms and Web Forms
>>applications as .NET applications but now that PowerBuilder .NET has
>>been released perhaps it should be updated to read:
>>
>>PowerBuilder's .NET Windows Forms, PowerBuilder's .NET Web Forms, or
>>maybe it should be reworded entirely to remove the confusion. 
>>
>>I'll bring up the issue with the marketing team. 
>>
>>Regards,
>>Dave Fish
>>Sybase
>>
>>PowerBuilder Blog:
>>http://blogs.sybase.com/powerbuilder/
>>
>>On 18 Oct 2010 14:26:44 -0700, Brett Weaver wrote:
>>
>>>Sorry, I was (apparently badly) making another point. I am
>>>trying to talk with existing clients of PB about their
>>>options.
>>>Below, it says that PowerBuilder .Net creates WebForms and
>>>WinForms.
>>>Before people jump on me and say that it means Powerbuilder
>>>creates .Net WinForms and .Net WebForms, remember that all
>>>of the promotion of PB12 is about PowerBuilder .Net so its
>>>going to be read that way.
>>>What I am pointing out is that the marketing of PB12 has
>>>been misleading in a number of documents and it needs to be
>>>sorted out. It can currently leave customers feeling
>>>disappointed and a little like they have been conned.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> Do you really think the customer is going to go looking
>>>> for this  document to read? What incentive is there if:
>>>> a. they don't know of PB
>>>> b. or they know PB and think(rightly or wrongly)that it's
>>>> a declining tool c. or it's priced itself out of reach to
>>>> key groups(no desktop,pro)
>>>>
>>>> FYI I work with it every day and still I have to work at
>>>> convincing  myself it's worth staying with....It has
>>>> served me well over the last 10  years and hope to
>>>> continue but the jury is still out
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 18/10/10 6:49 AM, Brett Weaver wrote:
>>>> > Moving Your PowerBuilder Application to the Web
>>>> >
>>>> > INTRODUCTION
>>>> > Today�s Internet-connected world virtually requires
>>>that
>>>> > all companies leverage the power of the Internet. There
>>>> > is a wide and sometimes bewildering array of techniques
>>>> > available to PowerBuilder programmers to move all or
>>>> > part of their PowerBuilder logic to the Internet. A
>>>> process-based approach to examining which aspects of the
>>>> > application should be moved to the Internet, combined
>>>> > with an intelligent refactoring of the application and
>>>> > an understanding of your company�s technology stack
>>>will
>>>> > maximize your organization�s PowerBuilder investment.
>>>> >
>>>> > Options for PowerBuilder customers moving the all or
>>>> > part of an application to the web include using
>>>> > PowerBuilder .NET Windows Forms, PowerBuilder .NET Web
>>>> > Forms, the PowerBuilder Web DataWindow, CITRIX or
>>>> Terminal Services, and Appeon. >
>>>> > .. http://www.sybase.com/detail?id=1063385
>>>> >
>>>>
0
Dave
10/20/2010 4:36:23 PM
On 20 Oct 2010 09:36:23 -0700, "Dave Fish [Sybase]"
<n0Spam__dfish@sybase.com> wrote:

>Hi Brett,
>
>I didn't mean to excuse the content of the document because of its
>age. I was just pointing out that it wasn't referring to PowerBuilder
>.NET, that was just a coincidence of word placement. But your other
>points are well taken and I've asked product management and marketing
>to look into this. 
>
>>Forget the web! Its yesterday! I want PB for the IPad!
>
>So do I Brett!

Maybe it would be possible to use MonoTouch for this? 

(www.monotouch.net)
0
Anders
10/20/2010 10:39:20 PM
Rather than resurrect DPB, I would like to see them take EAServer 5.5, 
strip out all the Java crap and turn it into a PowerBuilder only app 
server and include it in PB for free. And while they are stripping out 
the Java, rewrite the admin tool in PowerBuilder as well. Most any PB 
developer that is familiar with EAServer could completely rewrite the 
admin tool within a week.

On 10/19/2010 1:51 PM, Chris Pollach wrote:
> Hi S;
>
>  Yes, there were quite a few web sites built on Distributed PB - when 
> Sybase used to offer Web-PB. Then, when they dropped DPB (a stupid 
> move IMHO) - many departments switched over to EAServer. EAS was also 
> in vogue at that time because of its Java nature and that was the 
> trend in the latter 1990's. However, I see no development activity 
> with EAS and a large movement to IIs (ASP.net). In fact, I would now 
> say that 80% plus of Canadian government clients have abandoned Java 
> (JSP/JSF) and switched to ASP.Net over the past 5 years.
>
>  I still think that bringing back DPB to replace the stagnant EAS 
> product would be the way to go. Especially looking at the price of EAS 
> vs DPB (which I think should be free) as many organizations look at 
> the bottom line these days and cost of ownership is a big factor. DPB 
> would also allow Win32 applications to add .NET features and call then 
> outside the main application in another thread. This would allow Win32 
> applications to remain "as is" instead of being forced into the WPF 
> realm in order to get to full access to .NET code.
>
>  When you say that many of your DC applications are waiting to be 
> converted to Java - do you mean the web or still staying native windows?
>
>
> Regards ... Chris
> President: OSUG / STD Inc.
> Blog: http://chrispollach.blogspot.com
> PBDJ: http://chrispollach.sys-con.com
> SourceForge: http://sourceforge.net/projects/stdfndclass
>
>
>
> "SNS" wrote in message news:4cbdc5ad.5dd8.1681692777@sybase.com...
>> Looks like the Canadian government is the only place where
>> EASERver has been used to build internet applications. Here
>> at the federal Govt in DC area, PB has not progressed beyond
>> Client Server.Lot of these  apps are just waiting to be
>> converted to Java.
>>
>> Regards,
>> SNS
>>
>>
>>>   This is certainly a misleading marketing spin on PB.Net
>>>
>>>    For real PB internet applications .... have a look at
>>> these websites:
>>>
>>> 1) Supreme Court of Canada (Case Management) -
>>>     http://www.scc-csc.gc.ca/case-dossier/index-eng.asp
>>> 2) Nation Research Council (Grant Applications) -
>>>      https://ebiz.nserc.ca/nserc_web/nserc_login_e.htm
>>> 3) Agriculture Canada (Financial Reporting) -
>>>
>>>
>> http://www4.agr.gc.ca/AAFC-AAC/display-afficher.do?id=1210684614941&lang=eng 
>>
>>>
>>> All three of the above systems are driven by EAServer
>>> based PB components.
>>>
>>>
>>> Regards ... Chris
>>> President: OSUG / STD Inc.
>>> Blog: http://chrispollach.blogspot.com
>>> PBDJ: http://chrispollach.sys-con.com
>>> SourceForge: http://sourceforge.net/projects/stdfndclass
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> "Brett Weaver" <bretnsp@weaversoft.com> wrote in message
>>> news:um9ob6hqe73nsk24fkbt8k28g2hntc3vop@4ax.com...
>>> > Moving Your PowerBuilder Application to the Web
>>> >
>>> > INTRODUCTION
>>> > Today's Internet-connected world virtually requires that
>>> > all companies leverage the power of the Internet. There
>>> > is a wide and sometimes bewildering array of techniques
>>> > available to PowerBuilder programmers to move all or
>>> > part of their PowerBuilder logic to the Internet. A
>>> process-based approach to examining which aspects of the
>>> > application should be moved to the Internet, combined
>>> > with an intelligent refactoring of the application and
>>> > an understanding of your company's technology stack will
>>> > maximize your organization's PowerBuilder investment.
>>> >
>>> > Options for PowerBuilder customers moving the all or
>>> > part of an application to the web include using
>>> > PowerBuilder .NET Windows Forms, PowerBuilder .NET Web
>>> > Forms, the PowerBuilder Web DataWindow, CITRIX or
>>> Terminal Services, and Appeon. >
>>> > .. http://www.sybase.com/detail?id=1063385
>>> > 
0
Roland
10/21/2010 12:23:39 PM
Hi Roland;

  Another interesting idea!

I would think that though that DPB would be easier to resurrect. We would 
then have a free server too! EAS 5.5 is the old architecture and 6.3 looks 
like its "stuck in the mud" as far as future development (assumed here 
because I see no road map for it and there have been no releases lately). 
DPB would also allow us to install the server much easier on ISP's, add 
Server Push back (which we lost in EAS), etc.

Regards ... Chris
President: OSUG / STD Inc.
Blog: http://chrispollach.blogspot.com
PBDJ: http://chrispollach.sys-con.com
SourceForge: http://sourceforge.net/projects/stdfndclass



"Roland Smith [TeamSybase]" <rsmith_at_trusthss_dot_com> wrote in message 
news:4cc030cb$1@forums-1-dub...
> Rather than resurrect DPB, I would like to see them take EAServer 5.5, 
> strip out all the Java crap and turn it into a PowerBuilder only app 
> server and include it in PB for free. And while they are stripping out the 
> Java, rewrite the admin tool in PowerBuilder as well. Most any PB 
> developer that is familiar with EAServer could completely rewrite the 
> admin tool within a week.
>
> On 10/19/2010 1:51 PM, Chris Pollach wrote:
>> Hi S;
>>
>>  Yes, there were quite a few web sites built on Distributed PB - when 
>> Sybase used to offer Web-PB. Then, when they dropped DPB (a stupid move 
>> IMHO) - many departments switched over to EAServer. EAS was also in vogue 
>> at that time because of its Java nature and that was the trend in the 
>> latter 1990's. However, I see no development activity with EAS and a 
>> large movement to IIs (ASP.net). In fact, I would now say that 80% plus 
>> of Canadian government clients have abandoned Java (JSP/JSF) and switched 
>> to ASP.Net over the past 5 years.
>>
>>  I still think that bringing back DPB to replace the stagnant EAS product 
>> would be the way to go. Especially looking at the price of EAS vs DPB 
>> (which I think should be free) as many organizations look at the bottom 
>> line these days and cost of ownership is a big factor. DPB would also 
>> allow Win32 applications to add .NET features and call then outside the 
>> main application in another thread. This would allow Win32 applications 
>> to remain "as is" instead of being forced into the WPF realm in order to 
>> get to full access to .NET code.
>>
>>  When you say that many of your DC applications are waiting to be 
>> converted to Java - do you mean the web or still staying native windows?
>>
>>
>> Regards ... Chris
>> President: OSUG / STD Inc.
>> Blog: http://chrispollach.blogspot.com
>> PBDJ: http://chrispollach.sys-con.com
>> SourceForge: http://sourceforge.net/projects/stdfndclass
>>
>>
>>
>> "SNS" wrote in message news:4cbdc5ad.5dd8.1681692777@sybase.com...
>>> Looks like the Canadian government is the only place where
>>> EASERver has been used to build internet applications. Here
>>> at the federal Govt in DC area, PB has not progressed beyond
>>> Client Server.Lot of these  apps are just waiting to be
>>> converted to Java.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> SNS
>>>
>>>
>>>>   This is certainly a misleading marketing spin on PB.Net
>>>>
>>>>    For real PB internet applications .... have a look at
>>>> these websites:
>>>>
>>>> 1) Supreme Court of Canada (Case Management) -
>>>>     http://www.scc-csc.gc.ca/case-dossier/index-eng.asp
>>>> 2) Nation Research Council (Grant Applications) -
>>>>      https://ebiz.nserc.ca/nserc_web/nserc_login_e.htm
>>>> 3) Agriculture Canada (Financial Reporting) -
>>>>
>>>>
>>> http://www4.agr.gc.ca/AAFC-AAC/display-afficher.do?id=1210684614941&lang=eng
>>>>
>>>> All three of the above systems are driven by EAServer
>>>> based PB components.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Regards ... Chris
>>>> President: OSUG / STD Inc.
>>>> Blog: http://chrispollach.blogspot.com
>>>> PBDJ: http://chrispollach.sys-con.com
>>>> SourceForge: http://sourceforge.net/projects/stdfndclass
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "Brett Weaver" <bretnsp@weaversoft.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:um9ob6hqe73nsk24fkbt8k28g2hntc3vop@4ax.com...
>>>> > Moving Your PowerBuilder Application to the Web
>>>> >
>>>> > INTRODUCTION
>>>> > Today's Internet-connected world virtually requires that
>>>> > all companies leverage the power of the Internet. There
>>>> > is a wide and sometimes bewildering array of techniques
>>>> > available to PowerBuilder programmers to move all or
>>>> > part of their PowerBuilder logic to the Internet. A
>>>> process-based approach to examining which aspects of the
>>>> > application should be moved to the Internet, combined
>>>> > with an intelligent refactoring of the application and
>>>> > an understanding of your company's technology stack will
>>>> > maximize your organization's PowerBuilder investment.
>>>> >
>>>> > Options for PowerBuilder customers moving the all or
>>>> > part of an application to the web include using
>>>> > PowerBuilder .NET Windows Forms, PowerBuilder .NET Web
>>>> > Forms, the PowerBuilder Web DataWindow, CITRIX or
>>>> Terminal Services, and Appeon. >
>>>> > .. http://www.sybase.com/detail?id=1063385
>>>> > 
0
Chris
10/21/2010 5:49:04 PM
DPB would be nearly impossible to resurrect, even if it were a good idea to 
do so...

-- 
Paul Horan[Sybase]
http://paulhoran.ulitzer.com

"Chris Pollach" <cpollach@travel-net.com> wrote in message 
news:4cc07d10$1@forums-1-dub...
> Hi Roland;
>
>  Another interesting idea!
>
> I would think that though that DPB would be easier to resurrect. We would 
> then have a free server too! EAS 5.5 is the old architecture and 6.3 looks 
> like its "stuck in the mud" as far as future development (assumed here 
> because I see no road map for it and there have been no releases lately). 
> DPB would also allow us to install the server much easier on ISP's, add 
> Server Push back (which we lost in EAS), etc.
>
> Regards ... Chris
> President: OSUG / STD Inc.
> Blog: http://chrispollach.blogspot.com
> PBDJ: http://chrispollach.sys-con.com
> SourceForge: http://sourceforge.net/projects/stdfndclass
>
>
>
> "Roland Smith [TeamSybase]" <rsmith_at_trusthss_dot_com> wrote in message 
> news:4cc030cb$1@forums-1-dub...
>> Rather than resurrect DPB, I would like to see them take EAServer 5.5, 
>> strip out all the Java crap and turn it into a PowerBuilder only app 
>> server and include it in PB for free. And while they are stripping out 
>> the Java, rewrite the admin tool in PowerBuilder as well. Most any PB 
>> developer that is familiar with EAServer could completely rewrite the 
>> admin tool within a week.
>>
>> On 10/19/2010 1:51 PM, Chris Pollach wrote:
>>> Hi S;
>>>
>>>  Yes, there were quite a few web sites built on Distributed PB - when 
>>> Sybase used to offer Web-PB. Then, when they dropped DPB (a stupid move 
>>> IMHO) - many departments switched over to EAServer. EAS was also in 
>>> vogue at that time because of its Java nature and that was the trend in 
>>> the latter 1990's. However, I see no development activity with EAS and a 
>>> large movement to IIs (ASP.net). In fact, I would now say that 80% plus 
>>> of Canadian government clients have abandoned Java (JSP/JSF) and 
>>> switched to ASP.Net over the past 5 years.
>>>
>>>  I still think that bringing back DPB to replace the stagnant EAS 
>>> product would be the way to go. Especially looking at the price of EAS 
>>> vs DPB (which I think should be free) as many organizations look at the 
>>> bottom line these days and cost of ownership is a big factor. DPB would 
>>> also allow Win32 applications to add .NET features and call then outside 
>>> the main application in another thread. This would allow Win32 
>>> applications to remain "as is" instead of being forced into the WPF 
>>> realm in order to get to full access to .NET code.
>>>
>>>  When you say that many of your DC applications are waiting to be 
>>> converted to Java - do you mean the web or still staying native windows?
>>>
>>>
>>> Regards ... Chris
>>> President: OSUG / STD Inc.
>>> Blog: http://chrispollach.blogspot.com
>>> PBDJ: http://chrispollach.sys-con.com
>>> SourceForge: http://sourceforge.net/projects/stdfndclass
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> "SNS" wrote in message news:4cbdc5ad.5dd8.1681692777@sybase.com...
>>>> Looks like the Canadian government is the only place where
>>>> EASERver has been used to build internet applications. Here
>>>> at the federal Govt in DC area, PB has not progressed beyond
>>>> Client Server.Lot of these  apps are just waiting to be
>>>> converted to Java.
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>> SNS
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>   This is certainly a misleading marketing spin on PB.Net
>>>>>
>>>>>    For real PB internet applications .... have a look at
>>>>> these websites:
>>>>>
>>>>> 1) Supreme Court of Canada (Case Management) -
>>>>>     http://www.scc-csc.gc.ca/case-dossier/index-eng.asp
>>>>> 2) Nation Research Council (Grant Applications) -
>>>>>      https://ebiz.nserc.ca/nserc_web/nserc_login_e.htm
>>>>> 3) Agriculture Canada (Financial Reporting) -
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> http://www4.agr.gc.ca/AAFC-AAC/display-afficher.do?id=1210684614941&lang=eng
>>>>>
>>>>> All three of the above systems are driven by EAServer
>>>>> based PB components.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards ... Chris
>>>>> President: OSUG / STD Inc.
>>>>> Blog: http://chrispollach.blogspot.com
>>>>> PBDJ: http://chrispollach.sys-con.com
>>>>> SourceForge: http://sourceforge.net/projects/stdfndclass
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> "Brett Weaver" <bretnsp@weaversoft.com> wrote in message
>>>>> news:um9ob6hqe73nsk24fkbt8k28g2hntc3vop@4ax.com...
>>>>> > Moving Your PowerBuilder Application to the Web
>>>>> >
>>>>> > INTRODUCTION
>>>>> > Today's Internet-connected world virtually requires that
>>>>> > all companies leverage the power of the Internet. There
>>>>> > is a wide and sometimes bewildering array of techniques
>>>>> > available to PowerBuilder programmers to move all or
>>>>> > part of their PowerBuilder logic to the Internet. A
>>>>> process-based approach to examining which aspects of the
>>>>> > application should be moved to the Internet, combined
>>>>> > with an intelligent refactoring of the application and
>>>>> > an understanding of your company's technology stack will
>>>>> > maximize your organization's PowerBuilder investment.
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Options for PowerBuilder customers moving the all or
>>>>> > part of an application to the web include using
>>>>> > PowerBuilder .NET Windows Forms, PowerBuilder .NET Web
>>>>> > Forms, the PowerBuilder Web DataWindow, CITRIX or
>>>>> Terminal Services, and Appeon. >
>>>>> > .. http://www.sybase.com/detail?id=1063385
>>>>> > 


0
Paul
10/21/2010 8:41:03 PM
Why?




"Paul Horan[Sybase]" <phoran_remove@remove_sybase.com> wrote in message 
news:4cc0a55f$1@forums-1-dub...
> DPB would be nearly impossible to resurrect, even if it were a good idea 
> to do so...
>
> -- 
> Paul Horan[Sybase]
> http://paulhoran.ulitzer.com
>
> "Chris Pollach" <cpollach@travel-net.com> wrote in message 
> news:4cc07d10$1@forums-1-dub...
>> Hi Roland;
>>
>>  Another interesting idea!
>>
>> I would think that though that DPB would be easier to resurrect. We would 
>> then have a free server too! EAS 5.5 is the old architecture and 6.3 
>> looks like its "stuck in the mud" as far as future development (assumed 
>> here because I see no road map for it and there have been no releases 
>> lately). DPB would also allow us to install the server much easier on 
>> ISP's, add Server Push back (which we lost in EAS), etc.
>>
>> Regards ... Chris
>> President: OSUG / STD Inc.
>> Blog: http://chrispollach.blogspot.com
>> PBDJ: http://chrispollach.sys-con.com
>> SourceForge: http://sourceforge.net/projects/stdfndclass
>>
>>
>>
>> "Roland Smith [TeamSybase]" <rsmith_at_trusthss_dot_com> wrote in message 
>> news:4cc030cb$1@forums-1-dub...
>>> Rather than resurrect DPB, I would like to see them take EAServer 5.5, 
>>> strip out all the Java crap and turn it into a PowerBuilder only app 
>>> server and include it in PB for free. And while they are stripping out 
>>> the Java, rewrite the admin tool in PowerBuilder as well. Most any PB 
>>> developer that is familiar with EAServer could completely rewrite the 
>>> admin tool within a week.
>>>
>>> On 10/19/2010 1:51 PM, Chris Pollach wrote:
>>>> Hi S;
>>>>
>>>>  Yes, there were quite a few web sites built on Distributed PB - when 
>>>> Sybase used to offer Web-PB. Then, when they dropped DPB (a stupid move 
>>>> IMHO) - many departments switched over to EAServer. EAS was also in 
>>>> vogue at that time because of its Java nature and that was the trend in 
>>>> the latter 1990's. However, I see no development activity with EAS and 
>>>> a large movement to IIs (ASP.net). In fact, I would now say that 80% 
>>>> plus of Canadian government clients have abandoned Java (JSP/JSF) and 
>>>> switched to ASP.Net over the past 5 years.
>>>>
>>>>  I still think that bringing back DPB to replace the stagnant EAS 
>>>> product would be the way to go. Especially looking at the price of EAS 
>>>> vs DPB (which I think should be free) as many organizations look at the 
>>>> bottom line these days and cost of ownership is a big factor. DPB would 
>>>> also allow Win32 applications to add .NET features and call then 
>>>> outside the main application in another thread. This would allow Win32 
>>>> applications to remain "as is" instead of being forced into the WPF 
>>>> realm in order to get to full access to .NET code.
>>>>
>>>>  When you say that many of your DC applications are waiting to be 
>>>> converted to Java - do you mean the web or still staying native 
>>>> windows?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Regards ... Chris
>>>> President: OSUG / STD Inc.
>>>> Blog: http://chrispollach.blogspot.com
>>>> PBDJ: http://chrispollach.sys-con.com
>>>> SourceForge: http://sourceforge.net/projects/stdfndclass
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "SNS" wrote in message news:4cbdc5ad.5dd8.1681692777@sybase.com...
>>>>> Looks like the Canadian government is the only place where
>>>>> EASERver has been used to build internet applications. Here
>>>>> at the federal Govt in DC area, PB has not progressed beyond
>>>>> Client Server.Lot of these  apps are just waiting to be
>>>>> converted to Java.
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>> SNS
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>   This is certainly a misleading marketing spin on PB.Net
>>>>>>
>>>>>>    For real PB internet applications .... have a look at
>>>>>> these websites:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 1) Supreme Court of Canada (Case Management) -
>>>>>>     http://www.scc-csc.gc.ca/case-dossier/index-eng.asp
>>>>>> 2) Nation Research Council (Grant Applications) -
>>>>>>      https://ebiz.nserc.ca/nserc_web/nserc_login_e.htm
>>>>>> 3) Agriculture Canada (Financial Reporting) -
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> http://www4.agr.gc.ca/AAFC-AAC/display-afficher.do?id=1210684614941&lang=eng
>>>>>>
>>>>>> All three of the above systems are driven by EAServer
>>>>>> based PB components.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Regards ... Chris
>>>>>> President: OSUG / STD Inc.
>>>>>> Blog: http://chrispollach.blogspot.com
>>>>>> PBDJ: http://chrispollach.sys-con.com
>>>>>> SourceForge: http://sourceforge.net/projects/stdfndclass
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Brett Weaver" <bretnsp@weaversoft.com> wrote in message
>>>>>> news:um9ob6hqe73nsk24fkbt8k28g2hntc3vop@4ax.com...
>>>>>> > Moving Your PowerBuilder Application to the Web
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > INTRODUCTION
>>>>>> > Today's Internet-connected world virtually requires that
>>>>>> > all companies leverage the power of the Internet. There
>>>>>> > is a wide and sometimes bewildering array of techniques
>>>>>> > available to PowerBuilder programmers to move all or
>>>>>> > part of their PowerBuilder logic to the Internet. A
>>>>>> process-based approach to examining which aspects of the
>>>>>> > application should be moved to the Internet, combined
>>>>>> > with an intelligent refactoring of the application and
>>>>>> > an understanding of your company's technology stack will
>>>>>> > maximize your organization's PowerBuilder investment.
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > Options for PowerBuilder customers moving the all or
>>>>>> > part of an application to the web include using
>>>>>> > PowerBuilder .NET Windows Forms, PowerBuilder .NET Web
>>>>>> > Forms, the PowerBuilder Web DataWindow, CITRIX or
>>>>>> Terminal Services, and Appeon. >
>>>>>> > .. http://www.sybase.com/detail?id=1063385
>>>>>> >
>
> 
0
Chris
10/22/2010 1:37:16 PM
Chris, could you explain what DPB was and what it did?  Are there similar 
technologies with other languages, .Net for example?  I started in the PB 
world after DPB was already dead and gone.  I know it ruffles a  lot of 
feathers when you bring it up, but I just want to have an understanding of 
what it was and what it's uses were.


"Chris Pollach" <cpollach@travel-net.com> wrote in message 
news:4cc1938c$1@forums-1-dub...
> Why?
>
>
>
>
> "Paul Horan[Sybase]" <phoran_remove@remove_sybase.com> wrote in message 
> news:4cc0a55f$1@forums-1-dub...
>> DPB would be nearly impossible to resurrect, even if it were a good idea 
>> to do so...
>>
>> -- 
>> Paul Horan[Sybase]
>> http://paulhoran.ulitzer.com
>>
>> "Chris Pollach" <cpollach@travel-net.com> wrote in message 
>> news:4cc07d10$1@forums-1-dub...
>>> Hi Roland;
>>>
>>>  Another interesting idea!
>>>
>>> I would think that though that DPB would be easier to resurrect. We 
>>> would then have a free server too! EAS 5.5 is the old architecture and 
>>> 6.3 looks like its "stuck in the mud" as far as future development 
>>> (assumed here because I see no road map for it and there have been no 
>>> releases lately). DPB would also allow us to install the server much 
>>> easier on ISP's, add Server Push back (which we lost in EAS), etc.
>>>
>>> Regards ... Chris
>>> President: OSUG / STD Inc.
>>> Blog: http://chrispollach.blogspot.com
>>> PBDJ: http://chrispollach.sys-con.com
>>> SourceForge: http://sourceforge.net/projects/stdfndclass
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> "Roland Smith [TeamSybase]" <rsmith_at_trusthss_dot_com> wrote in 
>>> message news:4cc030cb$1@forums-1-dub...
>>>> Rather than resurrect DPB, I would like to see them take EAServer 5.5, 
>>>> strip out all the Java crap and turn it into a PowerBuilder only app 
>>>> server and include it in PB for free. And while they are stripping out 
>>>> the Java, rewrite the admin tool in PowerBuilder as well. Most any PB 
>>>> developer that is familiar with EAServer could completely rewrite the 
>>>> admin tool within a week.
>>>>
>>>> On 10/19/2010 1:51 PM, Chris Pollach wrote:
>>>>> Hi S;
>>>>>
>>>>>  Yes, there were quite a few web sites built on Distributed PB - when 
>>>>> Sybase used to offer Web-PB. Then, when they dropped DPB (a stupid 
>>>>> move IMHO) - many departments switched over to EAServer. EAS was also 
>>>>> in vogue at that time because of its Java nature and that was the 
>>>>> trend in the latter 1990's. However, I see no development activity 
>>>>> with EAS and a large movement to IIs (ASP.net). In fact, I would now 
>>>>> say that 80% plus of Canadian government clients have abandoned Java 
>>>>> (JSP/JSF) and switched to ASP.Net over the past 5 years.
>>>>>
>>>>>  I still think that bringing back DPB to replace the stagnant EAS 
>>>>> product would be the way to go. Especially looking at the price of EAS 
>>>>> vs DPB (which I think should be free) as many organizations look at 
>>>>> the bottom line these days and cost of ownership is a big factor. DPB 
>>>>> would also allow Win32 applications to add .NET features and call then 
>>>>> outside the main application in another thread. This would allow Win32 
>>>>> applications to remain "as is" instead of being forced into the WPF 
>>>>> realm in order to get to full access to .NET code.
>>>>>
>>>>>  When you say that many of your DC applications are waiting to be 
>>>>> converted to Java - do you mean the web or still staying native 
>>>>> windows?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards ... Chris
>>>>> President: OSUG / STD Inc.
>>>>> Blog: http://chrispollach.blogspot.com
>>>>> PBDJ: http://chrispollach.sys-con.com
>>>>> SourceForge: http://sourceforge.net/projects/stdfndclass
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> "SNS" wrote in message news:4cbdc5ad.5dd8.1681692777@sybase.com...
>>>>>> Looks like the Canadian government is the only place where
>>>>>> EASERver has been used to build internet applications. Here
>>>>>> at the federal Govt in DC area, PB has not progressed beyond
>>>>>> Client Server.Lot of these  apps are just waiting to be
>>>>>> converted to Java.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>> SNS
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>   This is certainly a misleading marketing spin on PB.Net
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>    For real PB internet applications .... have a look at
>>>>>>> these websites:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 1) Supreme Court of Canada (Case Management) -
>>>>>>>     http://www.scc-csc.gc.ca/case-dossier/index-eng.asp
>>>>>>> 2) Nation Research Council (Grant Applications) -
>>>>>>>      https://ebiz.nserc.ca/nserc_web/nserc_login_e.htm
>>>>>>> 3) Agriculture Canada (Financial Reporting) -
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://www4.agr.gc.ca/AAFC-AAC/display-afficher.do?id=1210684614941&lang=eng
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> All three of the above systems are driven by EAServer
>>>>>>> based PB components.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Regards ... Chris
>>>>>>> President: OSUG / STD Inc.
>>>>>>> Blog: http://chrispollach.blogspot.com
>>>>>>> PBDJ: http://chrispollach.sys-con.com
>>>>>>> SourceForge: http://sourceforge.net/projects/stdfndclass
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "Brett Weaver" <bretnsp@weaversoft.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>> news:um9ob6hqe73nsk24fkbt8k28g2hntc3vop@4ax.com...
>>>>>>> > Moving Your PowerBuilder Application to the Web
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> > INTRODUCTION
>>>>>>> > Today's Internet-connected world virtually requires that
>>>>>>> > all companies leverage the power of the Internet. There
>>>>>>> > is a wide and sometimes bewildering array of techniques
>>>>>>> > available to PowerBuilder programmers to move all or
>>>>>>> > part of their PowerBuilder logic to the Internet. A
>>>>>>> process-based approach to examining which aspects of the
>>>>>>> > application should be moved to the Internet, combined
>>>>>>> > with an intelligent refactoring of the application and
>>>>>>> > an understanding of your company's technology stack will
>>>>>>> > maximize your organization's PowerBuilder investment.
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> > Options for PowerBuilder customers moving the all or
>>>>>>> > part of an application to the web include using
>>>>>>> > PowerBuilder .NET Windows Forms, PowerBuilder .NET Web
>>>>>>> > Forms, the PowerBuilder Web DataWindow, CITRIX or
>>>>>>> Terminal Services, and Appeon. >
>>>>>>> > .. http://www.sybase.com/detail?id=1063385
>>>>>>> >
>>
>> 


0
Jay
10/22/2010 2:09:13 PM
It was a proprietary, rudimentary implementation of a component transaction 
server, in native PB.  It allowed PB apps (and only PB apps) to communicate 
with each other across a LAN/WAN.  It didn't use any industry standards, and 
was quickly obviated by commercially available J2EE servers.
But it was free...

-- 
Paul Horan[Sybase]
http://paulhoran.ulitzer.com

"Jay Williams" <jwillia@cvps.com> wrote in message 
news:4cc19b09$1@forums-1-dub...
> Chris, could you explain what DPB was and what it did?  Are there similar 
> technologies with other languages, .Net for example?  I started in the PB 
> world after DPB was already dead and gone.  I know it ruffles a  lot of 
> feathers when you bring it up, but I just want to have an understanding of 
> what it was and what it's uses were.
>
>
> "Chris Pollach" <cpollach@travel-net.com> wrote in message 
> news:4cc1938c$1@forums-1-dub...
>> Why?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> "Paul Horan[Sybase]" <phoran_remove@remove_sybase.com> wrote in message 
>> news:4cc0a55f$1@forums-1-dub...
>>> DPB would be nearly impossible to resurrect, even if it were a good idea 
>>> to do so...
>>>
>>> -- 
>>> Paul Horan[Sybase]
>>> http://paulhoran.ulitzer.com
>>>
>>> "Chris Pollach" <cpollach@travel-net.com> wrote in message 
>>> news:4cc07d10$1@forums-1-dub...
>>>> Hi Roland;
>>>>
>>>>  Another interesting idea!
>>>>
>>>> I would think that though that DPB would be easier to resurrect. We 
>>>> would then have a free server too! EAS 5.5 is the old architecture and 
>>>> 6.3 looks like its "stuck in the mud" as far as future development 
>>>> (assumed here because I see no road map for it and there have been no 
>>>> releases lately). DPB would also allow us to install the server much 
>>>> easier on ISP's, add Server Push back (which we lost in EAS), etc.
>>>>
>>>> Regards ... Chris
>>>> President: OSUG / STD Inc.
>>>> Blog: http://chrispollach.blogspot.com
>>>> PBDJ: http://chrispollach.sys-con.com
>>>> SourceForge: http://sourceforge.net/projects/stdfndclass
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "Roland Smith [TeamSybase]" <rsmith_at_trusthss_dot_com> wrote in 
>>>> message news:4cc030cb$1@forums-1-dub...
>>>>> Rather than resurrect DPB, I would like to see them take EAServer 5.5, 
>>>>> strip out all the Java crap and turn it into a PowerBuilder only app 
>>>>> server and include it in PB for free. And while they are stripping out 
>>>>> the Java, rewrite the admin tool in PowerBuilder as well. Most any PB 
>>>>> developer that is familiar with EAServer could completely rewrite the 
>>>>> admin tool within a week.
>>>>>
>>>>> On 10/19/2010 1:51 PM, Chris Pollach wrote:
>>>>>> Hi S;
>>>>>>
>>>>>>  Yes, there were quite a few web sites built on Distributed PB - when 
>>>>>> Sybase used to offer Web-PB. Then, when they dropped DPB (a stupid 
>>>>>> move IMHO) - many departments switched over to EAServer. EAS was also 
>>>>>> in vogue at that time because of its Java nature and that was the 
>>>>>> trend in the latter 1990's. However, I see no development activity 
>>>>>> with EAS and a large movement to IIs (ASP.net). In fact, I would now 
>>>>>> say that 80% plus of Canadian government clients have abandoned Java 
>>>>>> (JSP/JSF) and switched to ASP.Net over the past 5 years.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>  I still think that bringing back DPB to replace the stagnant EAS 
>>>>>> product would be the way to go. Especially looking at the price of 
>>>>>> EAS vs DPB (which I think should be free) as many organizations look 
>>>>>> at the bottom line these days and cost of ownership is a big factor. 
>>>>>> DPB would also allow Win32 applications to add .NET features and call 
>>>>>> then outside the main application in another thread. This would allow 
>>>>>> Win32 applications to remain "as is" instead of being forced into the 
>>>>>> WPF realm in order to get to full access to .NET code.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>  When you say that many of your DC applications are waiting to be 
>>>>>> converted to Java - do you mean the web or still staying native 
>>>>>> windows?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Regards ... Chris
>>>>>> President: OSUG / STD Inc.
>>>>>> Blog: http://chrispollach.blogspot.com
>>>>>> PBDJ: http://chrispollach.sys-con.com
>>>>>> SourceForge: http://sourceforge.net/projects/stdfndclass
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "SNS" wrote in message news:4cbdc5ad.5dd8.1681692777@sybase.com...
>>>>>>> Looks like the Canadian government is the only place where
>>>>>>> EASERver has been used to build internet applications. Here
>>>>>>> at the federal Govt in DC area, PB has not progressed beyond
>>>>>>> Client Server.Lot of these  apps are just waiting to be
>>>>>>> converted to Java.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>> SNS
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>   This is certainly a misleading marketing spin on PB.Net
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>    For real PB internet applications .... have a look at
>>>>>>>> these websites:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 1) Supreme Court of Canada (Case Management) -
>>>>>>>>     http://www.scc-csc.gc.ca/case-dossier/index-eng.asp
>>>>>>>> 2) Nation Research Council (Grant Applications) -
>>>>>>>>      https://ebiz.nserc.ca/nserc_web/nserc_login_e.htm
>>>>>>>> 3) Agriculture Canada (Financial Reporting) -
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> http://www4.agr.gc.ca/AAFC-AAC/display-afficher.do?id=1210684614941&lang=eng
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> All three of the above systems are driven by EAServer
>>>>>>>> based PB components.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Regards ... Chris
>>>>>>>> President: OSUG / STD Inc.
>>>>>>>> Blog: http://chrispollach.blogspot.com
>>>>>>>> PBDJ: http://chrispollach.sys-con.com
>>>>>>>> SourceForge: http://sourceforge.net/projects/stdfndclass
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "Brett Weaver" <bretnsp@weaversoft.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>>> news:um9ob6hqe73nsk24fkbt8k28g2hntc3vop@4ax.com...
>>>>>>>> > Moving Your PowerBuilder Application to the Web
>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>> > INTRODUCTION
>>>>>>>> > Today's Internet-connected world virtually requires that
>>>>>>>> > all companies leverage the power of the Internet. There
>>>>>>>> > is a wide and sometimes bewildering array of techniques
>>>>>>>> > available to PowerBuilder programmers to move all or
>>>>>>>> > part of their PowerBuilder logic to the Internet. A
>>>>>>>> process-based approach to examining which aspects of the
>>>>>>>> > application should be moved to the Internet, combined
>>>>>>>> > with an intelligent refactoring of the application and
>>>>>>>> > an understanding of your company's technology stack will
>>>>>>>> > maximize your organization's PowerBuilder investment.
>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>> > Options for PowerBuilder customers moving the all or
>>>>>>>> > part of an application to the web include using
>>>>>>>> > PowerBuilder .NET Windows Forms, PowerBuilder .NET Web
>>>>>>>> > Forms, the PowerBuilder Web DataWindow, CITRIX or
>>>>>>>> Terminal Services, and Appeon. >
>>>>>>>> > .. http://www.sybase.com/detail?id=1063385
>>>>>>>> >
>>>
>>>
>
> 


0
Paul
10/22/2010 2:40:08 PM
Hi Jay;

   Yes, you can do this in .NET and Java. Basically its the ability to 
create a "Server" that can listen for requests. The DPB Server allowed us to 
dispatch NVUO's and thus execute business logic in the server. The 
processing result (ANSI RS, Blob, DW + Buffers, etc) answer could then be 
returned to the client (requestor). We can still do the same processing 
today from the client side using IIOP to communicate to EAServer (which 
Sybase forced us to use to replace the DPB server).

   The bonus of DPB now is that EAS seems to be a sun setting product. It is 
certainly that way from the industry perspective. Just have a look at 
products like MyEclipse that support a myriad of Application Servers and you 
will see that EAS is not on its supported list. This is <sad> the case for 
many products that interface to AS's </sad>. The other handicap is that EAS 
is J2EE based not .NET - so accessing the .NET framework or housing .NET 
objects in EAS is not an option. Whereas if we had DPB back today, we could 
just compile the server into a Winform or WPF application server. Thus the 
NVUO's running inside there would be .NET aware. DPB also allowed use to do 
server push (which EAS does not support). SP allowed us to have the server 
inform the client when data was ready vs EAS forced us to recode the client 
side to constantly "poll" the Server to see if something was ready.

  The other main advantage of DPB was that your current business 
applications could run as both a Windows application and a Server * at the 
same time *. This allowed the PB developer to have two PB applications (on 
the same PC or on the network) * easily * communicate back and forth to one 
another to share processing information or just synchronize activities for 
example. Now fast forward this today and we can have a Win32 application 
talking to a Winform application talking to a WPF application etc - wouldn't 
that make our lives easier. I can think of 100's of applications for this 
feature alone. In fact, in the DPB days we had many of these types of 
application scenarios running.

  The other key factors for DPB are: low cost of ownership, added value to 
application design, made PB more unique, added a feature other development 
tools did not have (but do today - so PB is penalized by not having it now), 
allowed Server Push technology, very easy to code and maintain, etc.

AFAIK the removal of DPB was one of the significant turning points in PB's 
dominance of the MS-Windows development tool market. My Dad often said that 
it takes a big person to admit when they were wrong. I think the only reason 
Sybase removed DPB was to force customers to EAS - which has now back fired 
on them in many ways. Lets admit the mistake and correct it by reintroducing 
DPB back and show the community that Sybase is big enough to correct past 
mistakes.

  If you do not think DPB is a big requirement - have a look in the NG's for 
all the people trying to use Roland's TCIP communication routines or 
SocketWrench and other technologies to get two PB applications to talk to 
one another again. HELLO ... is this not a CSF (critical Success Factor) 
that Sybase marketing should have realized many years ago?????

Just my frustrated $0.02 on the subject.   :-)

HTH


Regards ... Chris
President: OSUG / STD Inc.
Blog: http://chrispollach.blogspot.com
PBDJ: http://chrispollach.sys-con.com
SourceForge: http://sourceforge.net/projects/stdfndclass



"Jay Williams" <jwillia@cvps.com> wrote in message 
news:4cc19b09$1@forums-1-dub...
> Chris, could you explain what DPB was and what it did?  Are there similar 
> technologies with other languages, .Net for example?  I started in the PB 
> world after DPB was already dead and gone.  I know it ruffles a  lot of 
> feathers when you bring it up, but I just want to have an understanding of 
> what it was and what it's uses were.
>
>
> "Chris Pollach" <cpollach@travel-net.com> wrote in message 
> news:4cc1938c$1@forums-1-dub...
>> Why?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> "Paul Horan[Sybase]" <phoran_remove@remove_sybase.com> wrote in message 
>> news:4cc0a55f$1@forums-1-dub...
>>> DPB would be nearly impossible to resurrect, even if it were a good idea 
>>> to do so...
>>>
>>> -- 
>>> Paul Horan[Sybase]
>>> http://paulhoran.ulitzer.com
>>>
>>> "Chris Pollach" <cpollach@travel-net.com> wrote in message 
>>> news:4cc07d10$1@forums-1-dub...
>>>> Hi Roland;
>>>>
>>>>  Another interesting idea!
>>>>
>>>> I would think that though that DPB would be easier to resurrect. We 
>>>> would then have a free server too! EAS 5.5 is the old architecture and 
>>>> 6.3 looks like its "stuck in the mud" as far as future development 
>>>> (assumed here because I see no road map for it and there have been no 
>>>> releases lately). DPB would also allow us to install the server much 
>>>> easier on ISP's, add Server Push back (which we lost in EAS), etc.
>>>>
>>>> Regards ... Chris
>>>> President: OSUG / STD Inc.
>>>> Blog: http://chrispollach.blogspot.com
>>>> PBDJ: http://chrispollach.sys-con.com
>>>> SourceForge: http://sourceforge.net/projects/stdfndclass
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "Roland Smith [TeamSybase]" <rsmith_at_trusthss_dot_com> wrote in 
>>>> message news:4cc030cb$1@forums-1-dub...
>>>>> Rather than resurrect DPB, I would like to see them take EAServer 5.5, 
>>>>> strip out all the Java crap and turn it into a PowerBuilder only app 
>>>>> server and include it in PB for free. And while they are stripping out 
>>>>> the Java, rewrite the admin tool in PowerBuilder as well. Most any PB 
>>>>> developer that is familiar with EAServer could completely rewrite the 
>>>>> admin tool within a week.
>>>>>
>>>>> On 10/19/2010 1:51 PM, Chris Pollach wrote:
>>>>>> Hi S;
>>>>>>
>>>>>>  Yes, there were quite a few web sites built on Distributed PB - when 
>>>>>> Sybase used to offer Web-PB. Then, when they dropped DPB (a stupid 
>>>>>> move IMHO) - many departments switched over to EAServer. EAS was also 
>>>>>> in vogue at that time because of its Java nature and that was the 
>>>>>> trend in the latter 1990's. However, I see no development activity 
>>>>>> with EAS and a large movement to IIs (ASP.net). In fact, I would now 
>>>>>> say that 80% plus of Canadian government clients have abandoned Java 
>>>>>> (JSP/JSF) and switched to ASP.Net over the past 5 years.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>  I still think that bringing back DPB to replace the stagnant EAS 
>>>>>> product would be the way to go. Especially looking at the price of 
>>>>>> EAS vs DPB (which I think should be free) as many organizations look 
>>>>>> at the bottom line these days and cost of ownership is a big factor. 
>>>>>> DPB would also allow Win32 applications to add .NET features and call 
>>>>>> then outside the main application in another thread. This would allow 
>>>>>> Win32 applications to remain "as is" instead of being forced into the 
>>>>>> WPF realm in order to get to full access to .NET code.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>  When you say that many of your DC applications are waiting to be 
>>>>>> converted to Java - do you mean the web or still staying native 
>>>>>> windows?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Regards ... Chris
>>>>>> President: OSUG / STD Inc.
>>>>>> Blog: http://chrispollach.blogspot.com
>>>>>> PBDJ: http://chrispollach.sys-con.com
>>>>>> SourceForge: http://sourceforge.net/projects/stdfndclass
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "SNS" wrote in message news:4cbdc5ad.5dd8.1681692777@sybase.com...
>>>>>>> Looks like the Canadian government is the only place where
>>>>>>> EASERver has been used to build internet applications. Here
>>>>>>> at the federal Govt in DC area, PB has not progressed beyond
>>>>>>> Client Server.Lot of these  apps are just waiting to be
>>>>>>> converted to Java.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>> SNS
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>   This is certainly a misleading marketing spin on PB.Net
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>    For real PB internet applications .... have a look at
>>>>>>>> these websites:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 1) Supreme Court of Canada (Case Management) -
>>>>>>>>     http://www.scc-csc.gc.ca/case-dossier/index-eng.asp
>>>>>>>> 2) Nation Research Council (Grant Applications) -
>>>>>>>>      https://ebiz.nserc.ca/nserc_web/nserc_login_e.htm
>>>>>>>> 3) Agriculture Canada (Financial Reporting) -
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> http://www4.agr.gc.ca/AAFC-AAC/display-afficher.do?id=1210684614941&lang=eng
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> All three of the above systems are driven by EAServer
>>>>>>>> based PB components.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Regards ... Chris
>>>>>>>> President: OSUG / STD Inc.
>>>>>>>> Blog: http://chrispollach.blogspot.com
>>>>>>>> PBDJ: http://chrispollach.sys-con.com
>>>>>>>> SourceForge: http://sourceforge.net/projects/stdfndclass
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "Brett Weaver" <bretnsp@weaversoft.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>>> news:um9ob6hqe73nsk24fkbt8k28g2hntc3vop@4ax.com...
>>>>>>>> > Moving Your PowerBuilder Application to the Web
>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>> > INTRODUCTION
>>>>>>>> > Today's Internet-connected world virtually requires that
>>>>>>>> > all companies leverage the power of the Internet. There
>>>>>>>> > is a wide and sometimes bewildering array of techniques
>>>>>>>> > available to PowerBuilder programmers to move all or
>>>>>>>> > part of their PowerBuilder logic to the Internet. A
>>>>>>>> process-based approach to examining which aspects of the
>>>>>>>> > application should be moved to the Internet, combined
>>>>>>>> > with an intelligent refactoring of the application and
>>>>>>>> > an understanding of your company's technology stack will
>>>>>>>> > maximize your organization's PowerBuilder investment.
>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>> > Options for PowerBuilder customers moving the all or
>>>>>>>> > part of an application to the web include using
>>>>>>>> > PowerBuilder .NET Windows Forms, PowerBuilder .NET Web
>>>>>>>> > Forms, the PowerBuilder Web DataWindow, CITRIX or
>>>>>>>> Terminal Services, and Appeon. >
>>>>>>>> > .. http://www.sybase.com/detail?id=1063385
>>>>>>>> >
>>>
>>>
>
> 
0
Chris
10/22/2010 2:40:24 PM
DPB used Proxy objects similar to how they are used in EAServer so you 
could make calls to nvo functions within a program running on another pc 
as if they were within the app.

http://www.topwizprogramming.com/freecode_winsock.html


On 10/22/2010 10:40 AM, Chris Pollach wrote:
> Hi Jay;
>
>   Yes, you can do this in .NET and Java. Basically its the ability to 
> create a "Server" that can listen for requests. The DPB Server allowed 
> us to dispatch NVUO's and thus execute business logic in the server. 
> The processing result (ANSI RS, Blob, DW + Buffers, etc) answer could 
> then be returned to the client (requestor). We can still do the same 
> processing today from the client side using IIOP to communicate to 
> EAServer (which Sybase forced us to use to replace the DPB server).
>
>   The bonus of DPB now is that EAS seems to be a sun setting product. 
> It is certainly that way from the industry perspective. Just have a 
> look at products like MyEclipse that support a myriad of Application 
> Servers and you will see that EAS is not on its supported list. This 
> is <sad> the case for many products that interface to AS's </sad>. The 
> other handicap is that EAS is J2EE based not .NET - so accessing the 
> .NET framework or housing .NET objects in EAS is not an option. 
> Whereas if we had DPB back today, we could just compile the server 
> into a Winform or WPF application server. Thus the NVUO's running 
> inside there would be .NET aware. DPB also allowed use to do server 
> push (which EAS does not support). SP allowed us to have the server 
> inform the client when data was ready vs EAS forced us to recode the 
> client side to constantly "poll" the Server to see if something was 
> ready.
>
>  The other main advantage of DPB was that your current business 
> applications could run as both a Windows application and a Server * at 
> the same time *. This allowed the PB developer to have two PB 
> applications (on the same PC or on the network) * easily * communicate 
> back and forth to one another to share processing information or just 
> synchronize activities for example. Now fast forward this today and we 
> can have a Win32 application talking to a Winform application talking 
> to a WPF application etc - wouldn't that make our lives easier. I can 
> think of 100's of applications for this feature alone. In fact, in the 
> DPB days we had many of these types of application scenarios running.
>
>  The other key factors for DPB are: low cost of ownership, added value 
> to application design, made PB more unique, added a feature other 
> development tools did not have (but do today - so PB is penalized by 
> not having it now), allowed Server Push technology, very easy to code 
> and maintain, etc.
>
> AFAIK the removal of DPB was one of the significant turning points in 
> PB's dominance of the MS-Windows development tool market. My Dad often 
> said that it takes a big person to admit when they were wrong. I think 
> the only reason Sybase removed DPB was to force customers to EAS - 
> which has now back fired on them in many ways. Lets admit the mistake 
> and correct it by reintroducing DPB back and show the community that 
> Sybase is big enough to correct past mistakes.
>
>  If you do not think DPB is a big requirement - have a look in the 
> NG's for all the people trying to use Roland's TCIP communication 
> routines or SocketWrench and other technologies to get two PB 
> applications to talk to one another again. HELLO ... is this not a CSF 
> (critical Success Factor) that Sybase marketing should have realized 
> many years ago?????
>
> Just my frustrated $0.02 on the subject.   :-)
>
> HTH
>
>
> Regards ... Chris
> President: OSUG / STD Inc.
> Blog: http://chrispollach.blogspot.com
> PBDJ: http://chrispollach.sys-con.com
> SourceForge: http://sourceforge.net/projects/stdfndclass
>
>
>
> "Jay Williams" <jwillia@cvps.com> wrote in message 
> news:4cc19b09$1@forums-1-dub...
>> Chris, could you explain what DPB was and what it did?  Are there 
>> similar technologies with other languages, .Net for example?  I 
>> started in the PB world after DPB was already dead and gone.  I know 
>> it ruffles a  lot of feathers when you bring it up, but I just want 
>> to have an understanding of what it was and what it's uses were.
>>
>>
>> "Chris Pollach" <cpollach@travel-net.com> wrote in message 
>> news:4cc1938c$1@forums-1-dub...
>>> Why?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> "Paul Horan[Sybase]" <phoran_remove@remove_sybase.com> wrote in 
>>> message news:4cc0a55f$1@forums-1-dub...
>>>> DPB would be nearly impossible to resurrect, even if it were a good 
>>>> idea to do so...
>>>>
>>>> -- 
>>>> Paul Horan[Sybase]
>>>> http://paulhoran.ulitzer.com
>>>>
>>>> "Chris Pollach" <cpollach@travel-net.com> wrote in message 
>>>> news:4cc07d10$1@forums-1-dub...
>>>>> Hi Roland;
>>>>>
>>>>>  Another interesting idea!
>>>>>
>>>>> I would think that though that DPB would be easier to resurrect. 
>>>>> We would then have a free server too! EAS 5.5 is the old 
>>>>> architecture and 6.3 looks like its "stuck in the mud" as far as 
>>>>> future development (assumed here because I see no road map for it 
>>>>> and there have been no releases lately). DPB would also allow us 
>>>>> to install the server much easier on ISP's, add Server Push back 
>>>>> (which we lost in EAS), etc.
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards ... Chris
>>>>> President: OSUG / STD Inc.
>>>>> Blog: http://chrispollach.blogspot.com
>>>>> PBDJ: http://chrispollach.sys-con.com
>>>>> SourceForge: http://sourceforge.net/projects/stdfndclass
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> "Roland Smith [TeamSybase]" <rsmith_at_trusthss_dot_com> wrote in 
>>>>> message news:4cc030cb$1@forums-1-dub...
>>>>>> Rather than resurrect DPB, I would like to see them take EAServer 
>>>>>> 5.5, strip out all the Java crap and turn it into a PowerBuilder 
>>>>>> only app server and include it in PB for free. And while they are 
>>>>>> stripping out the Java, rewrite the admin tool in PowerBuilder as 
>>>>>> well. Most any PB developer that is familiar with EAServer could 
>>>>>> completely rewrite the admin tool within a week.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 10/19/2010 1:51 PM, Chris Pollach wrote:
>>>>>>> Hi S;
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  Yes, there were quite a few web sites built on Distributed PB - 
>>>>>>> when Sybase used to offer Web-PB. Then, when they dropped DPB (a 
>>>>>>> stupid move IMHO) - many departments switched over to EAServer. 
>>>>>>> EAS was also in vogue at that time because of its Java nature 
>>>>>>> and that was the trend in the latter 1990's. However, I see no 
>>>>>>> development activity with EAS and a large movement to IIs 
>>>>>>> (ASP.net). In fact, I would now say that 80% plus of Canadian 
>>>>>>> government clients have abandoned Java (JSP/JSF) and switched to 
>>>>>>> ASP.Net over the past 5 years.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  I still think that bringing back DPB to replace the stagnant 
>>>>>>> EAS product would be the way to go. Especially looking at the 
>>>>>>> price of EAS vs DPB (which I think should be free) as many 
>>>>>>> organizations look at the bottom line these days and cost of 
>>>>>>> ownership is a big factor. DPB would also allow Win32 
>>>>>>> applications to add .NET features and call then outside the main 
>>>>>>> application in another thread. This would allow Win32 
>>>>>>> applications to remain "as is" instead of being forced into the 
>>>>>>> WPF realm in order to get to full access to .NET code.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  When you say that many of your DC applications are waiting to 
>>>>>>> be converted to Java - do you mean the web or still staying 
>>>>>>> native windows?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Regards ... Chris
>>>>>>> President: OSUG / STD Inc.
>>>>>>> Blog: http://chrispollach.blogspot.com
>>>>>>> PBDJ: http://chrispollach.sys-con.com
>>>>>>> SourceForge: http://sourceforge.net/projects/stdfndclass
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "SNS" wrote in message news:4cbdc5ad.5dd8.1681692777@sybase.com...
>>>>>>>> Looks like the Canadian government is the only place where
>>>>>>>> EASERver has been used to build internet applications. Here
>>>>>>>> at the federal Govt in DC area, PB has not progressed beyond
>>>>>>>> Client Server.Lot of these  apps are just waiting to be
>>>>>>>> converted to Java.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>> SNS
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>   This is certainly a misleading marketing spin on PB.Net
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>    For real PB internet applications .... have a look at
>>>>>>>>> these websites:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> 1) Supreme Court of Canada (Case Management) -
>>>>>>>>>     http://www.scc-csc.gc.ca/case-dossier/index-eng.asp
>>>>>>>>> 2) Nation Research Council (Grant Applications) -
>>>>>>>>>      https://ebiz.nserc.ca/nserc_web/nserc_login_e.htm
>>>>>>>>> 3) Agriculture Canada (Financial Reporting) -
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> http://www4.agr.gc.ca/AAFC-AAC/display-afficher.do?id=1210684614941&lang=eng 
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> All three of the above systems are driven by EAServer
>>>>>>>>> based PB components.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Regards ... Chris
>>>>>>>>> President: OSUG / STD Inc.
>>>>>>>>> Blog: http://chrispollach.blogspot.com
>>>>>>>>> PBDJ: http://chrispollach.sys-con.com
>>>>>>>>> SourceForge: http://sourceforge.net/projects/stdfndclass
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> "Brett Weaver" <bretnsp@weaversoft.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>>>> news:um9ob6hqe73nsk24fkbt8k28g2hntc3vop@4ax.com...
>>>>>>>>> > Moving Your PowerBuilder Application to the Web
>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>> > INTRODUCTION
>>>>>>>>> > Today's Internet-connected world virtually requires that
>>>>>>>>> > all companies leverage the power of the Internet. There
>>>>>>>>> > is a wide and sometimes bewildering array of techniques
>>>>>>>>> > available to PowerBuilder programmers to move all or
>>>>>>>>> > part of their PowerBuilder logic to the Internet. A
>>>>>>>>> process-based approach to examining which aspects of the
>>>>>>>>> > application should be moved to the Internet, combined
>>>>>>>>> > with an intelligent refactoring of the application and
>>>>>>>>> > an understanding of your company's technology stack will
>>>>>>>>> > maximize your organization's PowerBuilder investment.
>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>> > Options for PowerBuilder customers moving the all or
>>>>>>>>> > part of an application to the web include using
>>>>>>>>> > PowerBuilder .NET Windows Forms, PowerBuilder .NET Web
>>>>>>>>> > Forms, the PowerBuilder Web DataWindow, CITRIX or
>>>>>>>>> Terminal Services, and Appeon. >
>>>>>>>>> > .. http://www.sybase.com/detail?id=1063385
>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
0
Roland
10/22/2010 7:00:57 PM
Correct ... just like EAServer forces us to do today to gain access. WCF 
incorporates proxies as well.



"Roland Smith [TeamSybase]" <rsmith_at_trusthss_dot_com> wrote in message 
news:4cc1df69@forums-1-dub...
> DPB used Proxy objects similar to how they are used in EAServer so you 
> could make calls to nvo functions within a program running on another pc 
> as if they were within the app.
>
> http://www.topwizprogramming.com/freecode_winsock.html
>
>
> On 10/22/2010 10:40 AM, Chris Pollach wrote:
>> Hi Jay;
>>
>>   Yes, you can do this in .NET and Java. Basically its the ability to 
>> create a "Server" that can listen for requests. The DPB Server allowed us 
>> to dispatch NVUO's and thus execute business logic in the server. The 
>> processing result (ANSI RS, Blob, DW + Buffers, etc) answer could then be 
>> returned to the client (requestor). We can still do the same processing 
>> today from the client side using IIOP to communicate to EAServer (which 
>> Sybase forced us to use to replace the DPB server).
>>
>>   The bonus of DPB now is that EAS seems to be a sun setting product. It 
>> is certainly that way from the industry perspective. Just have a look at 
>> products like MyEclipse that support a myriad of Application Servers and 
>> you will see that EAS is not on its supported list. This is <sad> the 
>> case for many products that interface to AS's </sad>. The other handicap 
>> is that EAS is J2EE based not .NET - so accessing the .NET framework or 
>> housing .NET objects in EAS is not an option. Whereas if we had DPB back 
>> today, we could just compile the server into a Winform or WPF application 
>> server. Thus the NVUO's running inside there would be .NET aware. DPB 
>> also allowed use to do server push (which EAS does not support). SP 
>> allowed us to have the server inform the client when data was ready vs 
>> EAS forced us to recode the client side to constantly "poll" the Server 
>> to see if something was ready.
>>
>>  The other main advantage of DPB was that your current business 
>> applications could run as both a Windows application and a Server * at 
>> the same time *. This allowed the PB developer to have two PB 
>> applications (on the same PC or on the network) * easily * communicate 
>> back and forth to one another to share processing information or just 
>> synchronize activities for example. Now fast forward this today and we 
>> can have a Win32 application talking to a Winform application talking to 
>> a WPF application etc - wouldn't that make our lives easier. I can think 
>> of 100's of applications for this feature alone. In fact, in the DPB days 
>> we had many of these types of application scenarios running.
>>
>>  The other key factors for DPB are: low cost of ownership, added value to 
>> application design, made PB more unique, added a feature other 
>> development tools did not have (but do today - so PB is penalized by not 
>> having it now), allowed Server Push technology, very easy to code and 
>> maintain, etc.
>>
>> AFAIK the removal of DPB was one of the significant turning points in 
>> PB's dominance of the MS-Windows development tool market. My Dad often 
>> said that it takes a big person to admit when they were wrong. I think 
>> the only reason Sybase removed DPB was to force customers to EAS - which 
>> has now back fired on them in many ways. Lets admit the mistake and 
>> correct it by reintroducing DPB back and show the community that Sybase 
>> is big enough to correct past mistakes.
>>
>>  If you do not think DPB is a big requirement - have a look in the NG's 
>> for all the people trying to use Roland's TCIP communication routines or 
>> SocketWrench and other technologies to get two PB applications to talk to 
>> one another again. HELLO ... is this not a CSF (critical Success Factor) 
>> that Sybase marketing should have realized many years ago?????
>>
>> Just my frustrated $0.02 on the subject.   :-)
>>
>> HTH
>>
>>
>> Regards ... Chris
>> President: OSUG / STD Inc.
>> Blog: http://chrispollach.blogspot.com
>> PBDJ: http://chrispollach.sys-con.com
>> SourceForge: http://sourceforge.net/projects/stdfndclass
>>
>>
>>
>> "Jay Williams" <jwillia@cvps.com> wrote in message 
>> news:4cc19b09$1@forums-1-dub...
>>> Chris, could you explain what DPB was and what it did?  Are there 
>>> similar technologies with other languages, .Net for example?  I started 
>>> in the PB world after DPB was already dead and gone.  I know it ruffles 
>>> a  lot of feathers when you bring it up, but I just want to have an 
>>> understanding of what it was and what it's uses were.
>>>
>>>
>>> "Chris Pollach" <cpollach@travel-net.com> wrote in message 
>>> news:4cc1938c$1@forums-1-dub...
>>>> Why?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "Paul Horan[Sybase]" <phoran_remove@remove_sybase.com> wrote in message 
>>>> news:4cc0a55f$1@forums-1-dub...
>>>>> DPB would be nearly impossible to resurrect, even if it were a good 
>>>>> idea to do so...
>>>>>
>>>>> -- 
>>>>> Paul Horan[Sybase]
>>>>> http://paulhoran.ulitzer.com
>>>>>
>>>>> "Chris Pollach" <cpollach@travel-net.com> wrote in message 
>>>>> news:4cc07d10$1@forums-1-dub...
>>>>>> Hi Roland;
>>>>>>
>>>>>>  Another interesting idea!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I would think that though that DPB would be easier to resurrect. We 
>>>>>> would then have a free server too! EAS 5.5 is the old architecture 
>>>>>> and 6.3 looks like its "stuck in the mud" as far as future 
>>>>>> development (assumed here because I see no road map for it and there 
>>>>>> have been no releases lately). DPB would also allow us to install the 
>>>>>> server much easier on ISP's, add Server Push back (which we lost in 
>>>>>> EAS), etc.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Regards ... Chris
>>>>>> President: OSUG / STD Inc.
>>>>>> Blog: http://chrispollach.blogspot.com
>>>>>> PBDJ: http://chrispollach.sys-con.com
>>>>>> SourceForge: http://sourceforge.net/projects/stdfndclass
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Roland Smith [TeamSybase]" <rsmith_at_trusthss_dot_com> wrote in 
>>>>>> message news:4cc030cb$1@forums-1-dub...
>>>>>>> Rather than resurrect DPB, I would like to see them take EAServer 
>>>>>>> 5.5, strip out all the Java crap and turn it into a PowerBuilder 
>>>>>>> only app server and include it in PB for free. And while they are 
>>>>>>> stripping out the Java, rewrite the admin tool in PowerBuilder as 
>>>>>>> well. Most any PB developer that is familiar with EAServer could 
>>>>>>> completely rewrite the admin tool within a week.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 10/19/2010 1:51 PM, Chris Pollach wrote:
>>>>>>>> Hi S;
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>  Yes, there were quite a few web sites built on Distributed PB - 
>>>>>>>> when Sybase used to offer Web-PB. Then, when they dropped DPB (a 
>>>>>>>> stupid move IMHO) - many departments switched over to EAServer. EAS 
>>>>>>>> was also in vogue at that time because of its Java nature and that 
>>>>>>>> was the trend in the latter 1990's. However, I see no development 
>>>>>>>> activity with EAS and a large movement to IIs (ASP.net). In fact, I 
>>>>>>>> would now say that 80% plus of Canadian government clients have 
>>>>>>>> abandoned Java (JSP/JSF) and switched to ASP.Net over the past 5 
>>>>>>>> years.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>  I still think that bringing back DPB to replace the stagnant EAS 
>>>>>>>> product would be the way to go. Especially looking at the price of 
>>>>>>>> EAS vs DPB (which I think should be free) as many organizations 
>>>>>>>> look at the bottom line these days and cost of ownership is a big 
>>>>>>>> factor. DPB would also allow Win32 applications to add .NET 
>>>>>>>> features and call then outside the main application in another 
>>>>>>>> thread. This would allow Win32 applications to remain "as is" 
>>>>>>>> instead of being forced into the WPF realm in order to get to full 
>>>>>>>> access to .NET code.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>  When you say that many of your DC applications are waiting to be 
>>>>>>>> converted to Java - do you mean the web or still staying native 
>>>>>>>> windows?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Regards ... Chris
>>>>>>>> President: OSUG / STD Inc.
>>>>>>>> Blog: http://chrispollach.blogspot.com
>>>>>>>> PBDJ: http://chrispollach.sys-con.com
>>>>>>>> SourceForge: http://sourceforge.net/projects/stdfndclass
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "SNS" wrote in message news:4cbdc5ad.5dd8.1681692777@sybase.com...
>>>>>>>>> Looks like the Canadian government is the only place where
>>>>>>>>> EASERver has been used to build internet applications. Here
>>>>>>>>> at the federal Govt in DC area, PB has not progressed beyond
>>>>>>>>> Client Server.Lot of these  apps are just waiting to be
>>>>>>>>> converted to Java.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>> SNS
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>   This is certainly a misleading marketing spin on PB.Net
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>    For real PB internet applications .... have a look at
>>>>>>>>>> these websites:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> 1) Supreme Court of Canada (Case Management) -
>>>>>>>>>>     http://www.scc-csc.gc.ca/case-dossier/index-eng.asp
>>>>>>>>>> 2) Nation Research Council (Grant Applications) -
>>>>>>>>>>      https://ebiz.nserc.ca/nserc_web/nserc_login_e.htm
>>>>>>>>>> 3) Agriculture Canada (Financial Reporting) -
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> http://www4.agr.gc.ca/AAFC-AAC/display-afficher.do?id=1210684614941&lang=eng
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> All three of the above systems are driven by EAServer
>>>>>>>>>> based PB components.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Regards ... Chris
>>>>>>>>>> President: OSUG / STD Inc.
>>>>>>>>>> Blog: http://chrispollach.blogspot.com
>>>>>>>>>> PBDJ: http://chrispollach.sys-con.com
>>>>>>>>>> SourceForge: http://sourceforge.net/projects/stdfndclass
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> "Brett Weaver" <bretnsp@weaversoft.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>>>>> news:um9ob6hqe73nsk24fkbt8k28g2hntc3vop@4ax.com...
>>>>>>>>>> > Moving Your PowerBuilder Application to the Web
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> > INTRODUCTION
>>>>>>>>>> > Today's Internet-connected world virtually requires that
>>>>>>>>>> > all companies leverage the power of the Internet. There
>>>>>>>>>> > is a wide and sometimes bewildering array of techniques
>>>>>>>>>> > available to PowerBuilder programmers to move all or
>>>>>>>>>> > part of their PowerBuilder logic to the Internet. A
>>>>>>>>>> process-based approach to examining which aspects of the
>>>>>>>>>> > application should be moved to the Internet, combined
>>>>>>>>>> > with an intelligent refactoring of the application and
>>>>>>>>>> > an understanding of your company's technology stack will
>>>>>>>>>> > maximize your organization's PowerBuilder investment.
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> > Options for PowerBuilder customers moving the all or
>>>>>>>>>> > part of an application to the web include using
>>>>>>>>>> > PowerBuilder .NET Windows Forms, PowerBuilder .NET Web
>>>>>>>>>> > Forms, the PowerBuilder Web DataWindow, CITRIX or
>>>>>>>>>> Terminal Services, and Appeon. >
>>>>>>>>>> > .. http://www.sybase.com/detail?id=1063385
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>> 
0
Chris
10/22/2010 7:51:44 PM
Hi Chris
What could you do in DPB/EAServer that you can't with Web Services? I
like the ease at which I can deploy NVO's as Web Services in PB...
Also consumption of most Web Services is pretty good - if  more
complex message types could be handled that would be nice of course.

Cheers




On 22 Oct 2010 12:51:44 -0700, "Chris Pollach"
<cpollach@travel-net.com> wrote:

>Correct ... just like EAServer forces us to do today to gain access. WCF 
>incorporates proxies as well.
>
>
>
>"Roland Smith [TeamSybase]" <rsmith_at_trusthss_dot_com> wrote in message 
>news:4cc1df69@forums-1-dub...
>> DPB used Proxy objects similar to how they are used in EAServer so you 
>> could make calls to nvo functions within a program running on another pc 
>> as if they were within the app.
>>
0
Brett
10/22/2010 10:09:26 PM
Hi Brett;

  For web services you deploy and run these under IIs. In the case of DPB - 
the PB Server becomes IIs and can house any combination of components. The 
DPB server is easy to deploy and does not require the installation 
complexity of IIs, EAS, jBoss, WebSphere, etc and would be free - which I 
think would be a great selling feature in this cost conscious environment we 
are now in.

DPB of source can be part of a current application. So the business 
application can use the small foot print engine to allow other applications 
to communicate to it. These client applications also can use DPB and thus we 
now have easy two way communication capabilities between business 
applications (for free).

DPB would give us server push back so that we can have applications notified 
when certain actions are ready to process. This is much more efficient that 
a "polling" technique forces us into when you consider 100's of concurrent 
clients polling to a completions status. Web services forces us into the 
same polling scenario as well.

DPB applications can also be deployed along with business applications to 
the same PC. The DPB application could just sit on the taskbar and be an 
"assistant" to the Win32 application. I have uses this technique for 
parallel processing, security brokering, isolating and encapsulating 3rd 
party products, etc.

I think bringing DPB back would open up a realm of possibilities and also 
give creative PB developers a chance to build custom distributed PB 
applications - bar none!

Regards ... Chris
President: OSUG / STD Inc.
Blog: http://chrispollach.blogspot.com
PBDJ: http://chrispollach.sys-con.com
SourceForge: http://sourceforge.net/projects/stdfndclass



"Brett Weaver" <bretnsp@weaversoft.com> wrote in message 
news:ft24c6t0ak2jk6ko35o4ml2mvashctu84v@4ax.com...
> Hi Chris
> What could you do in DPB/EAServer that you can't with Web Services? I
> like the ease at which I can deploy NVO's as Web Services in PB...
> Also consumption of most Web Services is pretty good - if  more
> complex message types could be handled that would be nice of course.
>
> Cheers
>
>
>
>
> On 22 Oct 2010 12:51:44 -0700, "Chris Pollach"
> <cpollach@travel-net.com> wrote:
>
>>Correct ... just like EAServer forces us to do today to gain access. WCF
>>incorporates proxies as well.
>>
>>
>>
>>"Roland Smith [TeamSybase]" <rsmith_at_trusthss_dot_com> wrote in message
>>news:4cc1df69@forums-1-dub...
>>> DPB used Proxy objects similar to how they are used in EAServer so you
>>> could make calls to nvo functions within a program running on another pc
>>> as if they were within the app.
>>> 
0
Chris
10/23/2010 11:39:38 PM
On 23 Oct 2010 16:39:38 -0700, "Chris Pollach"
<cpollach@travel-net.com> wrote:

>Web services forces us into the 
>same polling scenario as well.

That is not strictly true, for instance OPC UA
(www.opcfoundation.org/UA) uses web services to setup an observer
pattern for clients monitoring real-time process values. Web services
doesn't imply polling - it all boils down to how you implement the
communicaton stack. OPC UA was invented to break free from the DCOM
dependency and make the communication both platform and language
agnostic. Maybe using a similar technology for DPB would be a better
approach than to resurrect something based on old technique.


0
Anders
10/24/2010 12:31:44 AM
Hi Anders;

   That's for the Info!

Yes, I would support not only bringing back DPB but modernizing it as well!
:-)

Regards ... Chris
President: OSUG / STD Inc.
Blog: http://chrispollach.blogspot.com
PBDJ: http://chrispollach.sys-con.com
SourceForge: http://sourceforge.net/projects/stdfndclass



"Anders Karlsson" <anders43@gmajl.com> wrote in message 
news:2su6c6lvj8mb8ak7krqmsub781ta8m4vv2@4ax.com...
> On 23 Oct 2010 16:39:38 -0700, "Chris Pollach"
> <cpollach@travel-net.com> wrote:
>
>>Web services forces us into the
>>same polling scenario as well.
>
> That is not strictly true, for instance OPC UA
> (www.opcfoundation.org/UA) uses web services to setup an observer
> pattern for clients monitoring real-time process values. Web services
> doesn't imply polling - it all boils down to how you implement the
> communicaton stack. OPC UA was invented to break free from the DCOM
> dependency and make the communication both platform and language
> agnostic. Maybe using a similar technology for DPB would be a better
> approach than to resurrect something based on old technique.
>
> 
0
Chris
10/24/2010 1:04:47 AM
People keep referring to DPB as free. There was a licensing cost to 
deploying DPB. Each DPB server component needed a license. A card insert 
was added into the product box (PB7 IIRC) to clarify this.

-chris

On 10/23/2010 7:39 PM, Chris Pollach wrote:
> Hi Brett;
>
> For web services you deploy and run these under IIs. In the case of DPB
> - the PB Server becomes IIs and can house any combination of components.
> The DPB server is easy to deploy and does not require the installation
> complexity of IIs, EAS, jBoss, WebSphere, etc and would be free - which
> I think would be a great selling feature in this cost conscious
> environment we are now in.
>
> DPB of source can be part of a current application. So the business
> application can use the small foot print engine to allow other
> applications to communicate to it. These client applications also can
> use DPB and thus we now have easy two way communication capabilities
> between business applications (for free).
>
> DPB would give us server push back so that we can have applications
> notified when certain actions are ready to process. This is much more
> efficient that a "polling" technique forces us into when you consider
> 100's of concurrent clients polling to a completions status. Web
> services forces us into the same polling scenario as well.
>
> DPB applications can also be deployed along with business applications
> to the same PC. The DPB application could just sit on the taskbar and be
> an "assistant" to the Win32 application. I have uses this technique for
> parallel processing, security brokering, isolating and encapsulating 3rd
> party products, etc.
>
> I think bringing DPB back would open up a realm of possibilities and
> also give creative PB developers a chance to build custom distributed PB
> applications - bar none!
>
> Regards ... Chris
> President: OSUG / STD Inc.
> Blog: http://chrispollach.blogspot.com
> PBDJ: http://chrispollach.sys-con.com
> SourceForge: http://sourceforge.net/projects/stdfndclass
>
>
>
> "Brett Weaver" <bretnsp@weaversoft.com> wrote in message
> news:ft24c6t0ak2jk6ko35o4ml2mvashctu84v@4ax.com...
>> Hi Chris
>> What could you do in DPB/EAServer that you can't with Web Services? I
>> like the ease at which I can deploy NVO's as Web Services in PB...
>> Also consumption of most Web Services is pretty good - if more
>> complex message types could be handled that would be nice of course.
>>
>> Cheers
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 22 Oct 2010 12:51:44 -0700, "Chris Pollach"
>> <cpollach@travel-net.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Correct ... just like EAServer forces us to do today to gain access. WCF
>>> incorporates proxies as well.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> "Roland Smith [TeamSybase]" <rsmith_at_trusthss_dot_com> wrote in
>>> message
>>> news:4cc1df69@forums-1-dub...
>>>> DPB used Proxy objects similar to how they are used in EAServer so you
>>>> could make calls to nvo functions within a program running on
>>>> another pc
>>>> as if they were within the app.
>>>>

0
Chris
10/24/2010 12:03:41 PM
IIRC that requirement was removed in PB7, along with the notice that 7 
would be the last version to support DPB.

Report Bugs to Sybase:  http://case-express.sybase.com/cx/welcome.do
Product Enhancement Requests:
http://my.isug.com/cgi-bin/1/c/submit_enhancement

On 10/24/2010 8:03 AM, Chris Keating [Sybase] wrote:
> People keep referring to DPB as free. There was a licensing cost to
> deploying DPB. Each DPB server component needed a license. A card insert
> was added into the product box (PB7 IIRC) to clarify this.
>
> -chris
>
> On 10/23/2010 7:39 PM, Chris Pollach wrote:
>> Hi Brett;
>>
>> For web services you deploy and run these under IIs. In the case of DPB
>> - the PB Server becomes IIs and can house any combination of components.
>> The DPB server is easy to deploy and does not require the installation
>> complexity of IIs, EAS, jBoss, WebSphere, etc and would be free - which
>> I think would be a great selling feature in this cost conscious
>> environment we are now in.
>>
>> DPB of source can be part of a current application. So the business
>> application can use the small foot print engine to allow other
>> applications to communicate to it. These client applications also can
>> use DPB and thus we now have easy two way communication capabilities
>> between business applications (for free).
>>
>> DPB would give us server push back so that we can have applications
>> notified when certain actions are ready to process. This is much more
>> efficient that a "polling" technique forces us into when you consider
>> 100's of concurrent clients polling to a completions status. Web
>> services forces us into the same polling scenario as well.
>>
>> DPB applications can also be deployed along with business applications
>> to the same PC. The DPB application could just sit on the taskbar and be
>> an "assistant" to the Win32 application. I have uses this technique for
>> parallel processing, security brokering, isolating and encapsulating 3rd
>> party products, etc.
>>
>> I think bringing DPB back would open up a realm of possibilities and
>> also give creative PB developers a chance to build custom distributed PB
>> applications - bar none!
>>
>> Regards ... Chris
>> President: OSUG / STD Inc.
>> Blog: http://chrispollach.blogspot.com
>> PBDJ: http://chrispollach.sys-con.com
>> SourceForge: http://sourceforge.net/projects/stdfndclass
>>
>>
>>
>> "Brett Weaver" <bretnsp@weaversoft.com> wrote in message
>> news:ft24c6t0ak2jk6ko35o4ml2mvashctu84v@4ax.com...
>>> Hi Chris
>>> What could you do in DPB/EAServer that you can't with Web Services? I
>>> like the ease at which I can deploy NVO's as Web Services in PB...
>>> Also consumption of most Web Services is pretty good - if more
>>> complex message types could be handled that would be nice of course.
>>>
>>> Cheers
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 22 Oct 2010 12:51:44 -0700, "Chris Pollach"
>>> <cpollach@travel-net.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Correct ... just like EAServer forces us to do today to gain access.
>>>> WCF
>>>> incorporates proxies as well.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "Roland Smith [TeamSybase]" <rsmith_at_trusthss_dot_com> wrote in
>>>> message
>>>> news:4cc1df69@forums-1-dub...
>>>>> DPB used Proxy objects similar to how they are used in EAServer so you
>>>>> could make calls to nvo functions within a program running on
>>>>> another pc
>>>>> as if they were within the app.
>>>>>
>
0
Jerry
10/24/2010 2:51:24 PM
My suggestion was to bring DPB back and make it free. PB needs more features 
like DPB to add value for the $$$  and give it more uniqueness (make it 
stand out amongst its competitors).   :-)

Right now all PB 12.NET did was show developers that they can learn the VS 
IDE. Once you have mastered that - you might as well switch - is what many 
of my Ottawa clients have said recently.   :-(



"Chris Keating [Sybase]" <keating_nospam@sybase.com> wrote in message 
news:4cc4209d$1@forums-1-dub...
> People keep referring to DPB as free. There was a licensing cost to 
> deploying DPB. Each DPB server component needed a license. A card insert 
> was added into the product box (PB7 IIRC) to clarify this.
>
> -chris
>
> On 10/23/2010 7:39 PM, Chris Pollach wrote:
>> Hi Brett;
>>
>> For web services you deploy and run these under IIs. In the case of DPB
>> - the PB Server becomes IIs and can house any combination of components.
>> The DPB server is easy to deploy and does not require the installation
>> complexity of IIs, EAS, jBoss, WebSphere, etc and would be free - which
>> I think would be a great selling feature in this cost conscious
>> environment we are now in.
>>
>> DPB of source can be part of a current application. So the business
>> application can use the small foot print engine to allow other
>> applications to communicate to it. These client applications also can
>> use DPB and thus we now have easy two way communication capabilities
>> between business applications (for free).
>>
>> DPB would give us server push back so that we can have applications
>> notified when certain actions are ready to process. This is much more
>> efficient that a "polling" technique forces us into when you consider
>> 100's of concurrent clients polling to a completions status. Web
>> services forces us into the same polling scenario as well.
>>
>> DPB applications can also be deployed along with business applications
>> to the same PC. The DPB application could just sit on the taskbar and be
>> an "assistant" to the Win32 application. I have uses this technique for
>> parallel processing, security brokering, isolating and encapsulating 3rd
>> party products, etc.
>>
>> I think bringing DPB back would open up a realm of possibilities and
>> also give creative PB developers a chance to build custom distributed PB
>> applications - bar none!
>>
>> Regards ... Chris
>> President: OSUG / STD Inc.
>> Blog: http://chrispollach.blogspot.com
>> PBDJ: http://chrispollach.sys-con.com
>> SourceForge: http://sourceforge.net/projects/stdfndclass
>>
>>
>>
>> "Brett Weaver" <bretnsp@weaversoft.com> wrote in message
>> news:ft24c6t0ak2jk6ko35o4ml2mvashctu84v@4ax.com...
>>> Hi Chris
>>> What could you do in DPB/EAServer that you can't with Web Services? I
>>> like the ease at which I can deploy NVO's as Web Services in PB...
>>> Also consumption of most Web Services is pretty good - if more
>>> complex message types could be handled that would be nice of course.
>>>
>>> Cheers
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 22 Oct 2010 12:51:44 -0700, "Chris Pollach"
>>> <cpollach@travel-net.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Correct ... just like EAServer forces us to do today to gain access. 
>>>> WCF
>>>> incorporates proxies as well.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "Roland Smith [TeamSybase]" <rsmith_at_trusthss_dot_com> wrote in
>>>> message
>>>> news:4cc1df69@forums-1-dub...
>>>>> DPB used Proxy objects similar to how they are used in EAServer so you
>>>>> could make calls to nvo functions within a program running on
>>>>> another pc
>>>>> as if they were within the app.
>>>>>
> 
0
Chris
10/24/2010 9:20:03 PM
>>Right now all PB 12.NET did was show developers that they can learn the VS
IDE. Once you have mastered that - you might as well switch - is what many
of my Ottawa clients have said recently.<<

The response to that of course is "Powerscript" and "DataWindow".
....which may be attenduated if you take DW .NET and/or the upcoming
CVUO .NET Assembly target into account.

-- 
John Strano - Sybase Technology Evangelist


"Chris Pollach" <cpollach@travel-net.com> wrote in message 
news:4cc4a303@forums-1-dub...
> My suggestion was to bring DPB back and make it free. PB needs more 
> features like DPB to add value for the $$$  and give it more uniqueness 
> (make it stand out amongst its competitors).   :-)
>
> Right now all PB 12.NET did was show developers that they can learn the VS 
> IDE. Once you have mastered that - you might as well switch - is what many 
> of my Ottawa clients have said recently.   :-(
>
>
>
> "Chris Keating [Sybase]" <keating_nospam@sybase.com> wrote in message 
> news:4cc4209d$1@forums-1-dub...
>> People keep referring to DPB as free. There was a licensing cost to 
>> deploying DPB. Each DPB server component needed a license. A card insert 
>> was added into the product box (PB7 IIRC) to clarify this.
>>
>> -chris
>>
>> On 10/23/2010 7:39 PM, Chris Pollach wrote:
>>> Hi Brett;
>>>
>>> For web services you deploy and run these under IIs. In the case of DPB
>>> - the PB Server becomes IIs and can house any combination of components.
>>> The DPB server is easy to deploy and does not require the installation
>>> complexity of IIs, EAS, jBoss, WebSphere, etc and would be free - which
>>> I think would be a great selling feature in this cost conscious
>>> environment we are now in.
>>>
>>> DPB of source can be part of a current application. So the business
>>> application can use the small foot print engine to allow other
>>> applications to communicate to it. These client applications also can
>>> use DPB and thus we now have easy two way communication capabilities
>>> between business applications (for free).
>>>
>>> DPB would give us server push back so that we can have applications
>>> notified when certain actions are ready to process. This is much more
>>> efficient that a "polling" technique forces us into when you consider
>>> 100's of concurrent clients polling to a completions status. Web
>>> services forces us into the same polling scenario as well.
>>>
>>> DPB applications can also be deployed along with business applications
>>> to the same PC. The DPB application could just sit on the taskbar and be
>>> an "assistant" to the Win32 application. I have uses this technique for
>>> parallel processing, security brokering, isolating and encapsulating 3rd
>>> party products, etc.
>>>
>>> I think bringing DPB back would open up a realm of possibilities and
>>> also give creative PB developers a chance to build custom distributed PB
>>> applications - bar none!
>>>
>>> Regards ... Chris
>>> President: OSUG / STD Inc.
>>> Blog: http://chrispollach.blogspot.com
>>> PBDJ: http://chrispollach.sys-con.com
>>> SourceForge: http://sourceforge.net/projects/stdfndclass
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> "Brett Weaver" <bretnsp@weaversoft.com> wrote in message
>>> news:ft24c6t0ak2jk6ko35o4ml2mvashctu84v@4ax.com...
>>>> Hi Chris
>>>> What could you do in DPB/EAServer that you can't with Web Services? I
>>>> like the ease at which I can deploy NVO's as Web Services in PB...
>>>> Also consumption of most Web Services is pretty good - if more
>>>> complex message types could be handled that would be nice of course.
>>>>
>>>> Cheers
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 22 Oct 2010 12:51:44 -0700, "Chris Pollach"
>>>> <cpollach@travel-net.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Correct ... just like EAServer forces us to do today to gain access. 
>>>>> WCF
>>>>> incorporates proxies as well.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> "Roland Smith [TeamSybase]" <rsmith_at_trusthss_dot_com> wrote in
>>>>> message
>>>>> news:4cc1df69@forums-1-dub...
>>>>>> DPB used Proxy objects similar to how they are used in EAServer so 
>>>>>> you
>>>>>> could make calls to nvo functions within a program running on
>>>>>> another pc
>>>>>> as if they were within the app.
>>>>>>
>> 


0
John
10/25/2010 6:55:43 PM
and the patented method for visual inheritance...

Report Bugs to Sybase:  http://case-express.sybase.com/cx/welcome.do
Product Enhancement Requests:
http://my.isug.com/cgi-bin/1/c/submit_enhancement

On 10/25/2010 2:55 PM, John Strano[Sybase] wrote:
>>> Right now all PB 12.NET did was show developers that they can learn the VS
> IDE. Once you have mastered that - you might as well switch - is what many
> of my Ottawa clients have said recently.<<
>
> The response to that of course is "Powerscript" and "DataWindow".
> ...which may be attenduated if you take DW .NET and/or the upcoming
> CVUO .NET Assembly target into account.
>
0
Jerry
10/25/2010 7:08:52 PM
>>...and the patented method for visual inheritance...

Thank you. Yes.

-- 
John Strano - Sybase Technology Evangelist


"Jerry Siegel [TeamSybase]" <jNOsSPAMsiegel@yahoo.com> wrote in message 
news:4cc5d5c4$1@forums-1-dub...
> and the patented method for visual inheritance...
>
> Report Bugs to Sybase:  http://case-express.sybase.com/cx/welcome.do
> Product Enhancement Requests:
> http://my.isug.com/cgi-bin/1/c/submit_enhancement
>
> On 10/25/2010 2:55 PM, John Strano[Sybase] wrote:
>>>> Right now all PB 12.NET did was show developers that they can learn the 
>>>> VS
>> IDE. Once you have mastered that - you might as well switch - is what 
>> many
>> of my Ottawa clients have said recently.<<
>>
>> The response to that of course is "Powerscript" and "DataWindow".
>> ...which may be attenduated if you take DW .NET and/or the upcoming
>> CVUO .NET Assembly target into account.
>> 


0
John
10/25/2010 7:12:57 PM
Hi Jerry;

  That would be true for WPF but my clients want full web enablement.
Unfortunately, the PB 12.Net IDE offers no ROI to address this technology 
space.

Regards ... Chris
President: OSUG / STD Inc.
Blog: http://chrispollach.blogspot.com
PBDJ: http://chrispollach.sys-con.com
SourceForge: http://sourceforge.net/projects/stdfndclass

"Jerry Siegel [TeamSybase]"  wrote in message 
news:4cc5d5c4$1@forums-1-dub...

and the patented method for visual inheritance...

Report Bugs to Sybase:  http://case-express.sybase.com/cx/welcome.do
Product Enhancement Requests:
http://my.isug.com/cgi-bin/1/c/submit_enhancement

On 10/25/2010 2:55 PM, John Strano[Sybase] wrote:
>>> Right now all PB 12.NET did was show developers that they can learn the 
>>> VS
> IDE. Once you have mastered that - you might as well switch - is what many
> of my Ottawa clients have said recently.<<
>
> The response to that of course is "Powerscript" and "DataWindow".
> ...which may be attenduated if you take DW .NET and/or the upcoming
> CVUO .NET Assembly target into account.
> 

0
Chris
10/25/2010 7:31:50 PM
Perhaps they should add Winform & Webform capability to the PB .Net IDE.

On 10/25/2010 3:31 PM, Chris Pollach wrote:
> Hi Jerry;
>
>  That would be true for WPF but my clients want full web enablement.
> Unfortunately, the PB 12.Net IDE offers no ROI to address this 
> technology space.
>
> Regards ... Chris
> President: OSUG / STD Inc.
> Blog: http://chrispollach.blogspot.com
> PBDJ: http://chrispollach.sys-con.com
> SourceForge: http://sourceforge.net/projects/stdfndclass
>
> "Jerry Siegel [TeamSybase]"  wrote in message 
> news:4cc5d5c4$1@forums-1-dub...
>
> and the patented method for visual inheritance...
>
> Report Bugs to Sybase:  http://case-express.sybase.com/cx/welcome.do
> Product Enhancement Requests:
> http://my.isug.com/cgi-bin/1/c/submit_enhancement
>
> On 10/25/2010 2:55 PM, John Strano[Sybase] wrote:
>>>> Right now all PB 12.NET did was show developers that they can learn 
>>>> the VS
>> IDE. Once you have mastered that - you might as well switch - is what 
>> many
>> of my Ottawa clients have said recently.<<
>>
>> The response to that of course is "Powerscript" and "DataWindow".
>> ...which may be attenduated if you take DW .NET and/or the upcoming
>> CVUO .NET Assembly target into account.
>>
>
0
Roland
10/26/2010 12:38:41 PM
Yes, AND they need to "spiff up" the Webform feature to the scale that 
Appeon has done it! Then they need to take Webforms to the next level and 
make it capable of meeting CLF2 standards and multi-browser support. Instead 
of spending all that time in WPF - I think that this would have given PB the 
greatest ROI. The next critical area that needs updating are the controls in 
order to give PB applications a modern look. Something that Sybase started 
to address somewhat in PB 10.5 and 11.5 - but, still needs to go a lot 
further.


"Roland Smith [TeamSybase]"  wrote in message 
news:4cc6cbd1$1@forums-1-dub...

Perhaps they should add Winform & Webform capability to the PB .Net IDE.

On 10/25/2010 3:31 PM, Chris Pollach wrote:
> Hi Jerry;
>
>  That would be true for WPF but my clients want full web enablement.
> Unfortunately, the PB 12.Net IDE offers no ROI to address this technology 
> space.
>
> Regards ... Chris
> President: OSUG / STD Inc.
> Blog: http://chrispollach.blogspot.com
> PBDJ: http://chrispollach.sys-con.com
> SourceForge: http://sourceforge.net/projects/stdfndclass
>
> "Jerry Siegel [TeamSybase]"  wrote in message 
> news:4cc5d5c4$1@forums-1-dub...
>
> and the patented method for visual inheritance...
>
> Report Bugs to Sybase:  http://case-express.sybase.com/cx/welcome.do
> Product Enhancement Requests:
> http://my.isug.com/cgi-bin/1/c/submit_enhancement
>
> On 10/25/2010 2:55 PM, John Strano[Sybase] wrote:
>>>> Right now all PB 12.NET did was show developers that they can learn the 
>>>> VS
>> IDE. Once you have mastered that - you might as well switch - is what 
>> many
>> of my Ottawa clients have said recently.<<
>>
>> The response to that of course is "Powerscript" and "DataWindow".
>> ...which may be attenduated if you take DW .NET and/or the upcoming
>> CVUO .NET Assembly target into account.
>>
> 

0
Chris
10/26/2010 12:58:37 PM
In article <4cc5d5c4$1@forums-1-dub>, jNOsSPAMsiegel@yahoo.com says...
> and the patented method for visual inheritance...
> 

More like a "patented kludge".

I understand that this "visual inheritence" thing is necessary for 
backward compatibility. But it's a remnant of an old style of coding 
that really makes no sense when you completely separate presentation 
from content.

For a nice demo of the kinds of possibilities you have when you really 
have complete separation, check out:

Take a look at http://www.csszengarden.com/

Inheritance doesn't provide anywhere near that kind of flexibility 
regarding presentation.
0
Mark
10/26/2010 5:21:56 PM
I respectfully disagree. Having visual user objects to inherit from 
makes consistent UI easier and allows code reuse.
And IMHO it's necessary to good GUI to push some of the business rules 
down to the presentation level - like visual disabling of controls that 
are not allowed to change given the current data, or only showing 
available options in a DDLB or radio button. Remember, PB is at its best 
for LOB applications.

Report Bugs to Sybase:  http://case-express.sybase.com/cx/welcome.do
Product Enhancement Requests:
http://my.isug.com/cgi-bin/1/c/submit_enhancement

On 10/26/2010 1:21 PM, Mark Maslow wrote:
> In article<4cc5d5c4$1@forums-1-dub>, jNOsSPAMsiegel@yahoo.com says...
>> and the patented method for visual inheritance...
>>
>
> More like a "patented kludge".
>
> I understand that this "visual inheritence" thing is necessary for
> backward compatibility. But it's a remnant of an old style of coding
> that really makes no sense when you completely separate presentation
> from content.
>
> For a nice demo of the kinds of possibilities you have when you really
> have complete separation, check out:
>
> Take a look at http://www.csszengarden.com/
>
> Inheritance doesn't provide anywhere near that kind of flexibility
> regarding presentation.
0
Jerry
10/26/2010 6:28:01 PM
It makes no sense to C# developers because they can't do it in Visual 
Studio. Just because something is done a certain way by C# developers 
doesn't automatically make it best practice for all languages.

On 10/26/2010 1:21 PM, Mark Maslow wrote:
> In article<4cc5d5c4$1@forums-1-dub>, jNOsSPAMsiegel@yahoo.com says...
>> and the patented method for visual inheritance...
>>
> More like a "patented kludge".
>
> I understand that this "visual inheritence" thing is necessary for
> backward compatibility. But it's a remnant of an old style of coding
> that really makes no sense when you completely separate presentation
> from content.
>
> For a nice demo of the kinds of possibilities you have when you really
> have complete separation, check out:
>
> Take a look at http://www.csszengarden.com/
>
> Inheritance doesn't provide anywhere near that kind of flexibility
> regarding presentation.
0
Roland
10/26/2010 6:58:41 PM
In article <4cc724e1$1@forums-1-dub>, "Roland Smith [TeamSybase]" 
<rsmith_at_trusthss_dot_com> says...
> It makes no sense to C# developers because they can't do it in Visual 
> Studio. Just because something is done a certain way by C# developers 
> doesn't automatically make it best practice for all languages.

I have no idea what makes sense to C# developers or VS users, since I'm 
not a C# developer and I don't use VS.

It doesn't make sense to anyone who has experience using markup language 
to define the presentation layer.
 

0
Mark
10/26/2010 7:15:56 PM
I'll have to agree with Mark on this one. Visual inheritance in WPF 
doesn't make much sense. The idea with WPF is that you develop reusable 
components.



On 10/26/2010 2:15 PM, Mark Maslow wrote:
> In article<4cc724e1$1@forums-1-dub>, "Roland Smith [TeamSybase]"
> <rsmith_at_trusthss_dot_com>  says...
>> It makes no sense to C# developers because they can't do it in Visual
>> Studio. Just because something is done a certain way by C# developers
>> doesn't automatically make it best practice for all languages.
>
> I have no idea what makes sense to C# developers or VS users, since I'm
> not a C# developer and I don't use VS.
>
> It doesn't make sense to anyone who has experience using markup language
> to define the presentation layer.
>
>

0
Brad
10/26/2010 7:48:20 PM
In article <4cc71db1$1@forums-1-dub>, jNOsSPAMsiegel@yahoo.com says...
> I respectfully disagree. Having visual user objects to inherit from 
> makes consistent UI easier and allows code reuse.
> And IMHO it's necessary to good GUI to push some of the business rules 
> down to the presentation level - like visual disabling of controls that 
> are not allowed to change given the current data, or only showing 
> available options in a DDLB or radio button. Remember, PB is at its best 
> for LOB applications.

WPF has UserControls and CustomControls that can be reused. It's a 
mystery to me as to what advantages "visual inheritance" brings. The 
disadvantages are pretty clear - it makes for an extra deployment step 
in order to flatten the inheritance, as well as making the XAML "non-
standard".
0
Mark
10/26/2010 7:49:34 PM
So given that Appeon is THAT good (and I just saw Armeen present at
the last CT PBUG meeting), why couldn't *that* be the solution you're
looking for?   He announced Firefox support upcoming as well.

With Appeon as such a key partner, wouldn't updating WebForms be a big
slap in the face to this partner?  That's presuming it could be done
at all "in this lifetime" with PB engineering resources.   Appeon has
a great product, but it's 10 years in the making and it's their ONLY
focus - I find it hard to believe 'spiffing up' is really all that PB
needs.

I suspect that the pricetag is *the* factor, right?  Gotta wonder
though how much folks would be saving today if they'd gone with Appeon
3 or 4 years ago?


On 26 Oct 2010 05:58:37 -0700, "Chris Pollach"
<cpollach@travel-net.com> wrote:

>Yes, AND they need to "spiff up" the Webform feature to the scale that 
>Appeon has done it! Then they need to take Webforms to the next level and 
>make it capable of meeting CLF2 standards and multi-browser support. Instead 
>of spending all that time in WPF - I think that this would have given PB the 
>greatest ROI. The next critical area that needs updating are the controls in 
>order to give PB applications a modern look. Something that Sybase started 
>to address somewhat in PB 10.5 and 11.5 - but, still needs to go a lot 
>further.
>
>
>"Roland Smith [TeamSybase]"  wrote in message 
>news:4cc6cbd1$1@forums-1-dub...
>
>Perhaps they should add Winform & Webform capability to the PB .Net IDE.
>
>On 10/25/2010 3:31 PM, Chris Pollach wrote:
>> Hi Jerry;
>>
>>  That would be true for WPF but my clients want full web enablement.
>> Unfortunately, the PB 12.Net IDE offers no ROI to address this technology 
>> space.
>>
>> Regards ... Chris
>> President: OSUG / STD Inc.
>> Blog: http://chrispollach.blogspot.com
>> PBDJ: http://chrispollach.sys-con.com
>> SourceForge: http://sourceforge.net/projects/stdfndclass
>>
>> "Jerry Siegel [TeamSybase]"  wrote in message 
>> news:4cc5d5c4$1@forums-1-dub...
>>
>> and the patented method for visual inheritance...
>>
>> Report Bugs to Sybase:  http://case-express.sybase.com/cx/welcome.do
>> Product Enhancement Requests:
>> http://my.isug.com/cgi-bin/1/c/submit_enhancement
>>
>> On 10/25/2010 2:55 PM, John Strano[Sybase] wrote:
>>>>> Right now all PB 12.NET did was show developers that they can learn the 
>>>>> VS
>>> IDE. Once you have mastered that - you might as well switch - is what 
>>> many
>>> of my Ottawa clients have said recently.<<
>>>
>>> The response to that of course is "Powerscript" and "DataWindow".
>>> ...which may be attenduated if you take DW .NET and/or the upcoming
>>> CVUO .NET Assembly target into account.
>>>
>> 
0
Jim
10/27/2010 1:15:13 AM
Not that that doesn't work, but the trend across the board is away
from inheritance in general and more toward composition - not just
talking visual here.   "Dependency injection" and "Inversion of
Control" may seem to be the latest 'fad', but there's a lot going for
them in terms of separation of concerns, testability, flexibility,
maintainability, etc.

As for pushing down business rules to the UI, not sure WHY you have to
do that to accomplish the things you've mentioned here for instance.
That's where patterns like MVC and MVP come in - granted they're more
rooted in web development - perhaps not a coincidence given the markup
nature of the UI (which is now permeating WPF/Silverlight, heck even
Flash has MXML)

Not sure if Yakov is reading this post, but I'd definitely value his
perspective given the work he's doing applying some of the WPF
development patterns in PB 12.NET.   Is he using visual inheritance?
does it help or hinder?

Jim O'Neil
Developer Evangelist
Microsoft
http://blogs.msdn.com/jimoneil | @jimoneil


On 26 Oct 2010 11:28:01 -0700, "Jerry Siegel [TeamSybase]"
<jNOsSPAMsiegel@yahoo.com> wrote:

>I respectfully disagree. Having visual user objects to inherit from 
>makes consistent UI easier and allows code reuse.
>And IMHO it's necessary to good GUI to push some of the business rules 
>down to the presentation level - like visual disabling of controls that 
>are not allowed to change given the current data, or only showing 
>available options in a DDLB or radio button. Remember, PB is at its best 
>for LOB applications.
>
>Report Bugs to Sybase:  http://case-express.sybase.com/cx/welcome.do
>Product Enhancement Requests:
>http://my.isug.com/cgi-bin/1/c/submit_enhancement
>
>On 10/26/2010 1:21 PM, Mark Maslow wrote:
>> In article<4cc5d5c4$1@forums-1-dub>, jNOsSPAMsiegel@yahoo.com says...
>>> and the patented method for visual inheritance...
>>>
>>
>> More like a "patented kludge".
>>
>> I understand that this "visual inheritence" thing is necessary for
>> backward compatibility. But it's a remnant of an old style of coding
>> that really makes no sense when you completely separate presentation
>> from content.
>>
>> For a nice demo of the kinds of possibilities you have when you really
>> have complete separation, check out:
>>
>> Take a look at http://www.csszengarden.com/
>>
>> Inheritance doesn't provide anywhere near that kind of flexibility
>> regarding presentation.
0
Jim
10/27/2010 1:31:46 AM
I guess I'd have to disagree, particularly with "It doesn't make sense
to anyone who has experience using markup language to define the
presentation layer."  Flex uses a markup language called MXML, and it
supports inheritance.

http://www.cynergysystems.com/blogs/blogs/andrew.trice/cfunited/Object%20Oriented%20Flex%20-%20Andrew%20Trice.pdf

Both ActionScript (the scripting language) and MXML (the markup
language) support inheritance.  What Flex does is convert MXML to
Actioncript at runtime, so in a sense it's just a different way of
coding Actionscript.

On 26 Oct 2010 12:48:20 -0700, "Brad Wery [TeamSybase]"
<bradweryatgmail.com> wrote:

>I'll have to agree with Mark on this one. Visual inheritance in WPF 
>doesn't make much sense. The idea with WPF is that you develop reusable 
>components.
>
>
>
>On 10/26/2010 2:15 PM, Mark Maslow wrote:
>> In article<4cc724e1$1@forums-1-dub>, "Roland Smith [TeamSybase]"
>> <rsmith_at_trusthss_dot_com>  says...
>>> It makes no sense to C# developers because they can't do it in Visual
>>> Studio. Just because something is done a certain way by C# developers
>>> doesn't automatically make it best practice for all languages.
>>
>> I have no idea what makes sense to C# developers or VS users, since I'm
>> not a C# developer and I don't use VS.
>>
>> It doesn't make sense to anyone who has experience using markup language
>> to define the presentation layer.
>>
>>
0
Bruce
10/27/2010 3:01:58 PM
In article <uvegc6pvid8htpburlss3qkncitad8dvop@4ax.com>, 
NOCANSPAM_bruce.armstrong@yahoo.com says...
> 
> I guess I'd have to disagree, particularly with "It doesn't make sense
> to anyone who has experience using markup language to define the
> presentation layer."  Flex uses a markup language called MXML, and it
> supports inheritance.
> 
I don't have any experience with MXML. If the markup language itself 
supports inheritance, then it seems fine to use it when appropriate. But 
PB is attempting to impose it on a markup language that does not support 
it. As I said, I understand that Sybase did that for backward 
compatibility, but it doesn't seem to me to be something that should be 
touted as a great "feature" that developers should be encouraged to use 
going forward. It doesn't fit well into the underlying technology, and 
there are many other mechanisms for reuse that work very well and are 
fully supported.

0
Mark
10/27/2010 6:00:53 PM
Hi Jim;

   You are making the great arguments that support what I have said for some 
time now ... why doesn't Sybase but Appeon and just fold it into the PB 
product family as its new Webform platform?

:-)


Regards ... Chris
President: OSUG / STD Inc.
Blog: http://chrispollach.blogspot.com
PBDJ: http://chrispollach.sys-con.com
SourceForge: http://sourceforge.net/projects/stdfndclass

"Jim O'Neil"  wrote in message 
news:6suec654mp43hvt86d5r5g8ger9l2196po@4ax.com...

So given that Appeon is THAT good (and I just saw Armeen present at
the last CT PBUG meeting), why couldn't *that* be the solution you're
looking for?   He announced Firefox support upcoming as well.

With Appeon as such a key partner, wouldn't updating WebForms be a big
slap in the face to this partner?  That's presuming it could be done
at all "in this lifetime" with PB engineering resources.   Appeon has
a great product, but it's 10 years in the making and it's their ONLY
focus - I find it hard to believe 'spiffing up' is really all that PB
needs.

I suspect that the pricetag is *the* factor, right?  Gotta wonder
though how much folks would be saving today if they'd gone with Appeon
3 or 4 years ago?


On 26 Oct 2010 05:58:37 -0700, "Chris Pollach"
<cpollach@travel-net.com> wrote:

>Yes, AND they need to "spiff up" the Webform feature to the scale that
>Appeon has done it! Then they need to take Webforms to the next level and
>make it capable of meeting CLF2 standards and multi-browser support. 
>Instead
>of spending all that time in WPF - I think that this would have given PB 
>the
>greatest ROI. The next critical area that needs updating are the controls 
>in
>order to give PB applications a modern look. Something that Sybase started
>to address somewhat in PB 10.5 and 11.5 - but, still needs to go a lot
>further.
>
>
>"Roland Smith [TeamSybase]"  wrote in message
>news:4cc6cbd1$1@forums-1-dub...
>
>Perhaps they should add Winform & Webform capability to the PB .Net IDE.
>
>On 10/25/2010 3:31 PM, Chris Pollach wrote:
>> Hi Jerry;
>>
>>  That would be true for WPF but my clients want full web enablement.
>> Unfortunately, the PB 12.Net IDE offers no ROI to address this technology
>> space.
>>
>> Regards ... Chris
>> President: OSUG / STD Inc.
>> Blog: http://chrispollach.blogspot.com
>> PBDJ: http://chrispollach.sys-con.com
>> SourceForge: http://sourceforge.net/projects/stdfndclass
>>
>> "Jerry Siegel [TeamSybase]"  wrote in message
>> news:4cc5d5c4$1@forums-1-dub...
>>
>> and the patented method for visual inheritance...
>>
>> Report Bugs to Sybase:  http://case-express.sybase.com/cx/welcome.do
>> Product Enhancement Requests:
>> http://my.isug.com/cgi-bin/1/c/submit_enhancement
>>
>> On 10/25/2010 2:55 PM, John Strano[Sybase] wrote:
>>>>> Right now all PB 12.NET did was show developers that they can learn 
>>>>> the
>>>>> VS
>>> IDE. Once you have mastered that - you might as well switch - is what
>>> many
>>> of my Ottawa clients have said recently.<<
>>>
>>> The response to that of course is "Powerscript" and "DataWindow".
>>> ...which may be attenduated if you take DW .NET and/or the upcoming
>>> CVUO .NET Assembly target into account.
>>>
>> 

0
Chris
11/16/2010 4:21:53 PM
I think that instead of spending all that time developing visual 
inheritance for WPF and the complex conversion process that goes with 
it, they should have given PB.Net support for Winform/Webform and left 
the WPF windows for new development only.

Support for Winform/Webform would just be a matter of recycling some 
code from the Classic IDE and bringing it into compliance with version 
3.5 of the framework.

The current situation requires you to use WPF if you want a full .Net 
Framework development environment. If you don't want WPF then you have 
to stay in Classic.

On 10/26/2010 9:31 PM, Jim O'Neil wrote:
> Not that that doesn't work, but the trend across the board is away
> from inheritance in general and more toward composition - not just
> talking visual here.   "Dependency injection" and "Inversion of
> Control" may seem to be the latest 'fad', but there's a lot going for
> them in terms of separation of concerns, testability, flexibility,
> maintainability, etc.
>
> As for pushing down business rules to the UI, not sure WHY you have to
> do that to accomplish the things you've mentioned here for instance.
> That's where patterns like MVC and MVP come in - granted they're more
> rooted in web development - perhaps not a coincidence given the markup
> nature of the UI (which is now permeating WPF/Silverlight, heck even
> Flash has MXML)
>
> Not sure if Yakov is reading this post, but I'd definitely value his
> perspective given the work he's doing applying some of the WPF
> development patterns in PB 12.NET.   Is he using visual inheritance?
> does it help or hinder?
>
> Jim O'Neil
> Developer Evangelist
> Microsoft
> http://blogs.msdn.com/jimoneil | @jimoneil
>
>
> On 26 Oct 2010 11:28:01 -0700, "Jerry Siegel [TeamSybase]"
> <jNOsSPAMsiegel@yahoo.com>  wrote:
>
>> I respectfully disagree. Having visual user objects to inherit from
>> makes consistent UI easier and allows code reuse.
>> And IMHO it's necessary to good GUI to push some of the business rules
>> down to the presentation level - like visual disabling of controls that
>> are not allowed to change given the current data, or only showing
>> available options in a DDLB or radio button. Remember, PB is at its best
>> for LOB applications.
>>
>> Report Bugs to Sybase:  http://case-express.sybase.com/cx/welcome.do
>> Product Enhancement Requests:
>> http://my.isug.com/cgi-bin/1/c/submit_enhancement
>>
>> On 10/26/2010 1:21 PM, Mark Maslow wrote:
>>> In article<4cc5d5c4$1@forums-1-dub>, jNOsSPAMsiegel@yahoo.com says...
>>>> and the patented method for visual inheritance...
>>>>
>>> More like a "patented kludge".
>>>
>>> I understand that this "visual inheritence" thing is necessary for
>>> backward compatibility. But it's a remnant of an old style of coding
>>> that really makes no sense when you completely separate presentation
>>> from content.
>>>
>>> For a nice demo of the kinds of possibilities you have when you really
>>> have complete separation, check out:
>>>
>>> Take a look at http://www.csszengarden.com/
>>>
>>> Inheritance doesn't provide anywhere near that kind of flexibility
>>> regarding presentation.
0
Roland
11/16/2010 6:41:12 PM
On 11/16/2010 12:41 PM, Roland Smith [TeamSybase] wrote:
> Support for Winform/Webform would just be a matter of recycling some
> code from the Classic IDE and bringing it into compliance with version
> 3.5 of the framework.

I don't think it would have been that easy. With Winform/Webform, you 
have conditional compiler blocks for pure PowerScript and mixed PS/.NET. 
I'm not sure what it would have taken to get that-- especially the pure 
PS parts-- into the .NET framework.
0
Jason
11/16/2010 8:13:52 PM
Reply:

Similar Artilces:

WRONG WRONG WRONG
Name: ROZ mandelcorn Email: thunderstaratearthlinkdotnet Product: Firefox Summary: WRONG WRONG WRONG Comments: as a long-time user, first of netscape and, mozilla firefox, i must say i DO NOT LIKE THE PLACEMENT of TABS in version 4. nor do i like the whole rearrangement of the upper/navigation portion of firefox. I NEED/WANT MY TABS DIRECTLY ABOVE MY WINDOWS AS IT IS NOW....NOT ON TOP OF THE BROWSER. I WANT MY FILE-EDIT-ETC-MENU on TOP. ETC. AT LEAST GIVE US THE CHOICE AS TO WHICH FORMAT WE WANT....CAN YOU SAY CUSTOMIZATION! I WILL NOT USE 4 IF THIS IS THE WAY IT IS. [just ...

Custom composite contorl contains custom contols: controls collection gets empty (Or control get reinitialized) on postback.
Hi, I'm  developing a ASP .Net custom server control library. Where all the basic(Text,check,etc) controls are working well. I have developed an composite control which is more like a Tabular control with the basic custom controls in every cell. The problem is, this composite control reinitializes on post back. I 've added the custom controls (in CreateChildControls method) as cell.controls.add(customcontrol)  row.controls.add(cell) ; this.controls.add(row) Please give me a solution as early as possible IMXO. ASP.NET constructs and reinitializes&n...

PowerBuilder Marketing - "The Future is Getting Brighter"
Just an FYI, PB banners are running on the sites below. Software Development Times: http://www.sdtimes.com (June 1st - August 31st) Software Development Magazine: http://www.sdmagazine.com/ (June 1st - August 31st) Dr. Dobb's Journal: http://www.ddj.com/ (June 1st - August 31st) Byte Magazine: http://www.byte.com (June 1st - August 31st) Builder.com: http://builder.com (June 5th - August 31st) Application Development Mag: http://www.adtmag.com (July and August) CIO Magazine: http://www.cio.com (later in June - August 31st) Regards, Dave Fish [TeamSybase] Glad...

POST GET GET GET GET... WTH?
Hi, I'm at a loss to explain this... I have an ASPX page that I can't always navigate to. When I developed the app (it's Starter Kit Portal-based), I did it on my LAN and have had no trouble accessing the page. However, upon deployment, I see the following behavior: 1. POST request goes out looking for MyForm.aspx 2. GET request for MyForm.aspx 3. GET request for MyForm.aspx 4. ... X. GET request Sometimes, the page finally loads. Other times, it just ends up blank. Many times, it doesn't load at ALL the first POST - I just get a "The pa...

WRONG WRONG WRONG #2
Name: ROZ mandelcorn Email: thunderstaratearthlinkdotnet Product: Firefox Summary: WRONG WRONG WRONG Comments: as a long-time user, first of netscape and, mozilla firefox, i must say i DO NOT LIKE THE PLACEMENT of TABS in version 4. nor do i like the whole rearrangement of the upper/navigation portion of firefox. I NEED/WANT MY TABS DIRECTLY ABOVE MY WINDOWS AS IT IS NOW....NOT ON TOP OF THE BROWSER. I WANT MY FILE-EDIT-ETC-MENU on TOP. ETC. AT LEAST GIVE US THE CHOICE AS TO WHICH FORMAT WE WANT....CAN YOU SAY CUSTOMIZATION! I WILL NOT USE 4 IF THIS IS THE WAY IT IS. [just ...

POWERBUILDER FUTURE?
i am in Powerbuilder for past 4 Years.....currently i am in india. But my projects are in my last 4 years almost maintenance & migration to advanced techniques...almost zero development and the sad news is ,powerbuilder developers are very less when compared to advance techniques... u know the PB versions are also coming yearly once & introducing new concepts also almost not useful(i discussed with lot of PB developers almost they are not using the advance techniques) so everybody is going slowly out of PB technology... In india last few years Pb usage is re...

PowerBuilder future
I wonder what is the future of PB. I have just saw an article which Jhon Chen (Sybase CEO) says the following: According to Chen the company had become over-diversified, and lost sight of its core competencies. "A lot of our businesses were very inefficient," he explains. "I was asking, 'why are you doing this?' You know we had an SAP consulting business - what for? We had a product that competed with Microsoft Visual Basic - what for? I had to get rid of some bits and pieces." In my understanding, the only Sybase product that have competed with VB is...

Future of Powerbuilder
Hello Every one!!, Could any body tell me for how long the demand for powerbuilder programmer exists... the recent trend shows everything is going on to be web dependendent. I'm bit worried ab't security of my job.. i'm with PB since the release of Ver.4.0.. and bit reluctant to leave PB now. could anybody suggest me whether should i move on to Java or simillar techonologies or should i get along with PB?? Please respond to me... Thanks!! Regards, Dhawan. It never hurts to expand your skillset by picking up new languages. PowerBuilder is still going strong, Syb...

Where am I getting wrong?
Hi Experts I have been following a Tutorial of ASP.net using C# which I am not good at, below is the code behind, my problem is that it seems I am missing a NameSpace or similar. As I try to retrieve the Current User with line of Code.. MembershipUser myObject = MemberShip.GetUser(); It gets underlined with red saying (The type or namespace name 'MembershipUser' could not be found (are you missing a using directive or an assembly reference?) I tried to search the forum but could not get any thing to help me. Please can you help. using System; using System.Data; using System.Data....

The Future of PowerBuilder
Hello! Earlier this year, I came across an article in one of the weekly industry newspapers that stated that Sybase was telling major customers that PowerBuilder will be discontinued after version 8.0. (I can't remember which newspaper had the story and I can't seem locate it by doing a Google search. But I'm not making this up - I really did see it.) At the PowerBuilder Information Site ( www.justpbinfo.com ) I came across the following article: ------------------------------------------------ The Future of PowerBuilder Is there life after PowerBuilder 8? Rum...

Future of Powerbuilder
Hi, Has anyone seen the article in computerworld issue of sep 27th 1999 - The Future of Powerbuilder? Looks like it is time to jump out of the ship! Thanks Bala wrote in message <#AImoYME$GA.270@forums.sybase.com>... >Hi, > >Has anyone seen the article in computerworld issue of sep 27th 1999 - >The Future of Powerbuilder? >Looks like it is time to jump out of the ship! Except you should not believe everything you read. I remember the mutterings after PB 6.5 and currently Sybase is shipping EAS which PB 7.0 forms part of. Again I was at Sybase TechW...

The future of PowerBuilder...
That subject line should get your attention. <g> I'm very pleased with the participation in this group. We've obviously provided a well for a very thirsty group of developers! As you may or may not know, PB 9 is about to go into Beta and the feature set has pretty much been frozen. I know a lot of these requests are for very useful features and hopefully many will some day be incorporated into PB. I don't know what can be done for PB 9 at this point. Just don't want to falsely get people's hopes up. What I would like to do, is raise the discussion to a h...

The future of Powerbuilder
I am looking for opinions and viewpoints. I think Powerbuilder has 2 distinct and quite different markets. The small to medium sized software market and corporate IT market. In the software market where results are easy to measure on the bottom line I think PB is doing just fine. The productivity, efficiency and swift development process suites that market just fine. Just keep your customers happy. I am amazed at what I have seen in PB based software packages considering the total lack of documentation. That speaks volume on the capabilities of PB if you just get into it. O...

Future of Powerbuilder
Hi, Has anyone seen the article in computerworld issue of sep 27th 1999 - The Future of Powerbuilder? Looks like it is time to jump out of the ship! Thanks ComputerWorld!!! What a piece of .... I haven't read the article, but I don't have to. I had a subscription to ComputerWorld once. ComputerWorld was one of the biggest fans of the Apple is dead movement. Guess they were wrong there... The journalism in that magazine is terrible. Over the course of a year subscription, I read most of the articles for about six months. Then I threw it away until the subscription ...

Web resources about - Why the customer gets it wrong... - sybase.powerbuilder.futures

Customers ROCK! The Hidden Power of Your Customers Book
Social Media CRM, or Social CRM, is getting a lot of air time these days. But where does it fit?

Customer service - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Customer service is the provision of service to customers before, during and after a purchase. According to Turban et al. (2002), "Customer service ...

Snapchat deceived its customers, FTC says
Popular mobile messaging app agrees to settlement, will be monitored for 20 years. By Benjamin Snyder, reporter FORTUNE Since it launched in ...

Facebook-Connected App Users Are More Likely To Be Paying Customers
Mobile applications that have easy, one-tap Facebook login buttons have made it easier for users to sign up and interact. The social network ...

Double whammy for home loan customers
MANY banks have hit customers with a double whammy in 2015 by failing to pass on the two cash rate drops in full and by hiking rates in recent ...

Around 20 percent of US customers would prefer an ‘iPhone 6c’
Amid rumors stating that a four-inch “iPhone 6c” is incoming from Apple, a new report explains that just over 20 percent of U.S. customers might ...

Smallest wireless carriers beat the big four in customer satisfaction
... between T-Mobile, Verizon Wireless, AT&T, and Sprint weren't very large, as the big four all lagged far behind the smallest carriers in customer ...

JD Wetherspoon's customer details leaked after cyber attack
Personal details of hundreds of thousands of JD Wetherspoon customers have been accessed and leaked following a hack of its database. The cyber ...

Analysts: Sprint could lasso 50,000 T-Mobile customers
Sprint Corp. could be ringing up 50,000 customers from T-Mobile this holiday season. That's according to financial analysts at Jefferies LLC, ...

​Is it OK to shame late-paying customers on Facebook?​
One cable company turned to social media to post the names of delinquent bill payers one more reason to hate the cable guy

Resources last updated: 12/8/2015 1:07:58 PM