[U-L] The Future of Uniface ?!
Francoi...@prasahewitt.ch
I want to suggest another else ...
8.a) Uniface is the most bugged 4GL.
8.b) We must spend on time more to search how do something without having
problems
than spend on time how do or analyse really our application.
8.c) We must spend on time to install new version or services patchs or single
patchs
for the same reason instead really working on what we should !
8.d) Uniface is offering a large range of things but not all could be really
used.
UVCS / ROSE / UBB 1 / WEB enabler ...This list could be extended.
8.e) etc...
It's a great pity.
I was working since 1989 with Uniface 5 too...
We are really surprised to see Compuware is growing. may be it's not about
Uniface department.
It must have very much effort and money to abandon Uniface if you are using it
...and a lot of comitee director wont never admit their mistakes.
That 's one reason why a lot of company are still working with uniface today.
It's not a mean of my company.
F.Moritz
"Suresh Bhise" <sab...@hotmail.com> on 21.07.2000 07:35:21
Please respond to unif...@uug.org
To: unif...@uug.org
cc: (bcc: Francois Moritz/PRASA)
Subject: Re: [U-L] The Future of Uniface ?!
Hi,
Good thinking !!
But we forget many good points because there is no commitment, no
understanding, no time.
Uniface offers:
1. The component paradigm
2. Multi-tier architecture
Data Access Layer
object service components
Business logic layer
Business Objects
Control and Process objects
Presentation Layer
System Services Layer
3. Design by contract
4. Information Hiding
5. Interfaces
6. Separation
7. Re-use
8. what else, if you know add it ________________??
Committment means training, emphasis on understanding architecture,
knowledge of standards, guidlines, knowledge of re-use, take this points
into consideration and evaluate against any estimation techniques.
and therefore, the position will improve in coming days, a traditional, with
solid, strong background, I foresee a rise.
Well, I am developer a since 5.2f2,
Take a case, it is easy to achieve a two-phase commit in uniface, what about
in other SW ? how much code ? how much efforts ?
I will appreciate your comments, please do not take it personally, as you
expressed your thoughts, I value, I am expressing my thoughts for
comments/suggession, may be I will improve mine.
Regards,
Suresh Bhise
>From: "Paul" <pher...@Ifrance.com>
>Reply-To: unif...@uug.org
>To: unif...@uug.org
>Subject: [U-L] The Future of Uniface ?!
>Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2000 01:21:17 +0200
>
>I'm well aware that Compuware is more then only Uniface, but looking at the
>(neverending ?) diminishing price at NASDAQ, and looking at the comments
>on
>the message boards, I'm asking myself: what is the future of Uniface ?
>
>Surely, people can point out Ford (together with IBM), but Boeing went
>along
>with BAAN. And what is BAAN now ?!
>
>I agree (almost) when someone said that the Microsoft.net-iniative
>ressembles the URB-architecture of Uniface. It has the potential as a
>product. No question about that. But license-costs might not be the same.
>And also Java has a big potential (even if SUN doesn' t push it the right
>way ...).
>
>So, are they any people, still reading this newsgroup, who have make up
>their mind to choose otherwise ? Others, considering it. Or even
>people, who are determined to choose Uniface and not COM or EJB (or E2JEE)
>....
>
>What is the future of URB-architecture of Uniface in present times ? Or, as
>someone else stated it earlier: why should I buy Uniface at the moment.
>
>kr
>Paul Hermans
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com
Francoi...@prasahewitt.ch
F.Moritz
PrasaHewitt
"Martin Jones" <martin...@bigfoot.com> on 22.07.2000 06:46:56
Please respond to unif...@uug.org
To: unif...@uug.org
cc: (bcc: Francois Moritz/PRASA)
Subject: Re: [U-L] The Future of Uniface ?!
The major downside of Uniface is the price.
As a developer, you have to pay for a development license.
When you want to install your product, you have to pay for a deployment
licence.
Compuware seem to be making money from everyone.
With other products like VB, VC++, Delphi etc, you buy your product, then
develop. You can then sell your product, and don't have to buy any more
licenses.
I approached Compuware regarding developing a small application for a small
business. I was told by the sales manager....'Use VB - Compuware don't
really want sales like that'. What kind of attitude is this?
Uniface is a great product (well.. ok - it has it's bugs like everything
else) and can do most things well. (although it has been caught up by the
rest of the marketplace of late - I'll have to wait and see that 8 offers).
If you ask me, Compuware's whole marketing strategy is wrong. Yes - pay for
the development license, but don't charge for the ongoing maintenance. This
would let the rest of the world get to see what Uniface can do.
--
Martin