JBASE COMPARISON

[CLIF]

My assumption is that several of your from this user group used to be
jBASE users. After making the switch from jBASE to Cache do you
believe Cache is the better product and why?

[Jim Idle]

Traitor! :-)

Clif - just download it and give it a try :-)

Jim

[CLIF]

Not really a traitor just a bit curious. Besides how could you
consider me a traitor, your wrote both systems?

[Doug Golder]

Clif,
We are in the process of conversion from 3.4.10. We have done many
test comparing jbase, Universe, and Cache. We know Cache will give us the
tools we need for the future.

[Lee Burstein]

Hi Clif,

I know I'm a product manager for InterSystems (with primary responsibility for MV) and I used to work for jBASE and have been on my own (as a consultant) for several years, so please excuse anything that may sound like marketing stuff. However, I do believe that we have a compelling solution for the MV world.

First of all, we can import your application into Cache and run it as is. You will find the mv editor (not jed), retrieval language, dictionary support, and basic programming language are all supported. That's the stuff you are familiar with and is just the beginning of our story.

Once you app is in Cache, you can take advantage of a variety of projections of your data. SQL is just the starting point.

You will also have objects access to your data. This is not limited to jRCS type of access (although one of our Sales Engineers has written a set of classes to look like jRCS), but projects direct object references to your mv data file and any additional methods you include in those classes (yes, Cache is an Object Oriented environment). You can also write your own classes that include nothing but mv basic code and access them via Object Oriented front end development environments.

This makes mvbasic a server side scripting language as well as the development platform supporting your legacy application. To extend this a bit further, you can now write web service methods and SQL stored procedure methods in mvbasic.

Out of the box, Cache includes a library of classes, all accessible from mvbasic, that provide XML projections of your data, sockets interface, smtp classes, etc. You get this for the price of admission (yes, all this is in the download from the internet).

InterSystems offers only one kind of support, 24/7. The phone is answered by a knowledgeable person, not a first line of defense. Our development team is constantly looking for ways to improve our product; performance, features, innovations. We are not resting on yesterday's success but looking for tomorrow's opportunities (ok, I know I lapsed into market-speak on that one).

We also offer an integration platform build on Cache as well as embedded BI. All this on our high performance database.

If you are interested, let us know so we can prove all this to you.

Lee H. Burstein
Product Manager
InterSystems Corporation
Office: 302-477-0180
Mobile: 302-345-0810
FAX: 270-494-0180

-----Original Message-----
From: InterSy...@googlegroups.com [mailto:InterSy...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of CLIF
Sent: Friday, July 11, 2008 6:53 PM
To: InterSystems: MV Community
Subject: [InterSystems-MV] Re: JBASE COMPARISON

[CLIF]

Thanks Lee. We run on a windows 2003 server platform, are there any
limitations to what you wrote if its running on windows such as the
socket interface, smtp classes, sql, or web services?

On Jul 14, 7:53 pm, "Lee Burstein" <Lee.Burst...@intersystems.com>
wrote:

[Lee Burstein]

Hi Clif,

Cache runs on *nix, Windows and Mac. You get the same functionality on all platforms.

[Benjamin Spead]

Don't forget OpenVMS ...

[Lee Burstein]

And OpenVMS

[Lee Burstein]

Sorry all. We do not support OpenVMS for MV.

[Dawn Wolthuis]

I would think it more important to apologize if you HAD decided to support OpenVMS for MV.  smiles.  --dawn

[Greg Baryza]

That is a common misconception.

There is also one that says MV was a system that passed from productive use before the turn of the last century. 

Both, it turns out, are demonstrably false.  ;-)

At 01:48 PM 7/15/2008, Dawn Wolthuis wrote:

I would think it more important to apologize if you HAD decided to support OpenVMS for MV.  smiles.  --dawn

On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 11:58 AM, Lee Burstein <Lee.Bu...@intersystems.com> wrote:

[Dawn Wolthuis]

I have no objections to OpenVMS, nor to MV, but I personally know no
one running any flavor of MV on OpenVMS right now (there might very
well be some, but all of those I knew running MV on VMS in the 90's
have migrated to a *nix OS or Windows). So, I would have been quite
surprised if it were a good business decision to make that port. It
sounds like you have arrived at that same conclusion??

cheers! --dawn
P.S. And, no, I don't know everyone in the MV space, so maybe there is
a pocket of VMS folks that I've missed.

[Ed Clark]

That's pretty much why we decided not to support it for mv, though in fact
quite a large number of people are running Cache on vms and it is well
supported--just not for mv.
I'd be very interested in hearing from anyone who IS running mv on vms or
other "exotic" platforms.

[Greg Baryza]

Yes, at least I think so. However, it is a "mere matter of programming"
should the demand arise.

<G>

At 03:04 PM 7/15/2008, Dawn Wolthuis wrote:

>I have no objections to OpenVMS, nor to MV, but I personally know no
>one running any flavor of MV on OpenVMS right now (there might very
>well be some, but all of those I knew running MV on VMS in the 90's
>have migrated to a *nix OS or Windows). So, I would have been quite
>surprised if it were a good business decision to make that port. It
>sounds like you have arrived at that same conclusion??
>
>cheers! --dawn
>P.S. And, no, I don't know everyone in the MV space, so maybe there is
>a pocket of VMS folks that I've missed.
>
>On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 2:40 PM, Greg Baryza <bar...@intersystems.com> wrote:

[Ross Ferris]

I think there still may be some UD/OpenVMS sites running around

Ross Ferris
Stamina Software
Visage > Better by Design!