[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       mumps-l
Subject:    Re: ComputerWorld April 21 p. 60---ARRRRRGH!
From:       ERN0 <ern0 () uniontext ! arrabonet ! gyor ! hu>
Date:       1997-04-30 15:29:30
[Download RAW message or body]


> a great database product this is.  How come no vendor ever publishes
> results of M transaction processing versus oracle or sybase????  I'm
> sure it would blow them away - the same for number of concurrent
> interactive users - the same for number of database hits from a web
> server, etc.

I don't understand M vendors that they never tells to the folx
the main advantage of Mumps: the low costs.

Say, if I have 5-user workplace, which hardware and database
platform may I choose? If I choose M, I need only a PC-server,
say, a Pentium with 32M of RAM (it's a notebook category today),
and some old AT for terminals.

If there's a cheaper conception, tell me about.

--

Why the standard Mumps does not contain the following utilities
library:
- GET/READ (dBase)-like user input handler,
- Riport generator, List manager.

Without these stuffz, no one will develop M code.
And no one will buy a package for additional price,
they will buy a drag-and-drop 99GL instead.

--

ERN0

Sorry, signature file is under construction...

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]