Re: dBase runs poorly on WinXP

Tom Frey wrote: 
"No One" <aintnoway@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:bhuuv2-taa.ln1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Tom Frey wrote:

<<<<< snip>>>>>>

No, not 2, dBase 4 version 2.0, it was also released as versions 1.0 

and

1.5


as well. Huge difference. I like it becase it's as simple to use as an
extended batch language with a very servicable relational database file
handler. And it's also hard to walk away from something you have 25


years


experience with, especially when it still exceeds all your needs, and 

you


are not in the IT business.

Windoz 95, 98 and ME ran it very well. I'm getting by with running it 

in

full screen mode, hoping the next verson of Windoz might have a little
better DOS emulator.



Sorry, I missed read.

I used R:Base System V back in those days and there are times I think of
getting it back out.  It was the only SQL ANSI Level 2 DBMS that ran
under DOS back when dBase III+ programmers were refusing to use dBase
IV.  A few years later I also built some apps on FoxPro (both Windows
and Mac), but I liked R:Base better.  Over the years I've used Postgres
95, PostgreSQL, Informix, Oracle, Sybase and Micro$oft's toy SQL Server.
I do have PostgreSQL on my Winblows and Linux systems, but I don't do
much with it as I programme all day at work.

If you can get it to work and have Linux installed, WINE might work a
bit better at being a Windows 95 like system.


I do need to take a closer look at Linux, and some of my Visual Studio 

stuff

as well. But for now I think I will continue to experiment with XP, and 

keep

my other workstations on 98 and ME. Perhaps when we get a good look an 

the

next iteration of Windoz, required future directions will become a 

little

clearer. As long as the future computer and network hardware will run 98 

or

ME, I'll just stick with them if I have to. From what I have seen on the
web, that seems to be the decision a lot of folks have already accepted.



If you have that much need for DOS based programmes, I guess you can
continue with that setup.  Just remember that M$ does not support either
anymore, so these machines are open to attack on any holes not closed.
My last nostalgia machine (PIII - 1Ghz) is now my Linux server with 4
SCSI HDs.  XP has been out for 4 years and isn't too buggy considering
M$ software.

As for Wine, I've not looked at it in a few years, but I run Suse and
Fedora Linux on machines.  Check out http://www.winehq.com/ for Wine


stuff.

That's probably what I need to do, even if it means one day isolating my
network from the web and just keeping one MS Win machine for email and
surfing. I was loaned a Sun Sparc for a while back in my corporate days at
American Airlines (early 90s), and it was furnished with SCO Zenix and 32
bit dBase look alike from SCO, I can't rememer the name. But all my dBase
III+ code ported and ran without error, and of coarse very fast. We had a
DB3+ process that was taking 48 minutes in DOS on the 286/12 hardware, and
it immediatley cut the process to just under 7 minutes. But the IT folks
wouldn't support the required Ethernet architecture (or a bridge), they were
Arcnet biggots and purists at the time. But I was impressed. If I had
personally bought a copy of the SCO products at the time, I would probably
be running Unix or Linux today.


I don't understand why a Sun machine from that time wouldn't be running SunOS 4 or Solaris (SunOS 5). One place I worked back then did have Xenix running on Unisys PCs. Even a 386 was noticably faster running Xenix rather than DOS.
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Derivative effects.
    ... > windows comes from dos, which was designed for personal desktops. ... Thats distro specific, not linux specific. ... > scrollbar setup screens, and anyone who has ever installed an os knows ...
    (Debian-User)
  • Re: CRN is Outta Their Tree--DARL MCBRIDE?
    ... >Linux box, but I have done a moderate amount of reading) nor do I ... Apple's version of Unix. ... SCO has been about the most backward compatible company to ... that virtually all of the iNTEL based *n*x systems disappeared. ...
    (comp.unix.sco.misc)
  • Re: No longer supporting Unixware / Open Server
    ... In my experience Linux "crashes" are always due to: ... family PC, or rack-mounted server unit. ... Brian the rabid SCO fan recommends... ...
    (comp.unix.sco.misc)
  • Re: Anyone tried basiclinux?
    ... As a practical matter, since so few are still using dos, I dont worry ... my Linux internet logon. ... As for big drives, I work in text, not graphics. ...
    (alt.linux)
  • Re: The Scotts Valley Operation?
    ... I asked Doug flatly "why did you sell out to Caldera"? ... gotten everything that SCO had promised to ... non-paying Linux customers. ... More like desperation, attempted ...
    (comp.unix.sco.misc)