🚀 go-pugleaf

"Rustam R. Ramaev" <rust@anet.infopac.ru> wrote:

>Who can mail me the full version of IB client-server? or were can i download
>it (not from borland site).
>Thanks for your attantion!

You are asking for something illegal here -- I seriously recommend
that you stop. 

Ken
---
Ken Mayer [TeamB]
Golden Stag Productions
http://www.mindspring.com/~hirschv/homepage.htm
http://www.mindspring.com/~hirschv/dbase/dbase.htm

I don't ask you to mail me the relise, i asc you to mail me the demo, not
the update or upgrate, what can we download from borland site.

>
>>Who can mail me the full version of IB client-server? or were can i
download
>>it (not from borland site).
>>Thanks for your attantion!
>
>You are asking for something illegal here -- I seriously recommend
>that you stop.
>
>Ken

"Rustam R. Ramaev" <rust@anet.infopac.ru> wrote:

>I don't ask you to mail me the relise, i asc you to mail me the demo, not
>the update or upgrate, what can we download from borland site.

There is a demo version, or at least was, of IntraBuilder -- not the
Client-Server version, however. 

Your message sounded like you were asking someone to email you the
Client-Server edition, which is illegal.

Check the Inprise web site (www.inprise.com).

Ken
---
Ken Mayer [TeamB]
Golden Stag Productions
http://www.mindspring.com/~hirschv/homepage.htm
http://www.mindspring.com/~hirschv/dbase/dbase.htm

Rustam R. Ramaev wrote:

> I don't ask you to mail me the relise, i asc you to mail me the demo, not
> the update or upgrate, what can we download from borland site.

Rustam,

There is no longer an evaluation copy of IntraBuilder for
you to download.  I recommend that you buy the product
to evaluate it.  Inprise has a 90-day money back guarantee
for IntraBuilder.  You may return it and get your money
back for any reason during the first 90 days you have it.
Please consider that 90 days your evaluation period.

Bill

I hope this message bring some rewards to all the people that ventured and believed in the
IntraBuilder product.

First, I wanna put some words to Mr. Ken Mayer: I believe you're a IB fan as you're giving
your volunteer time to participate in this forum. It's very confortable to us have contact
with someone from "inside" the company, rather than only talking between each of us,
users.

I've the impression that one team of Borland (that time) developed all the concept and
programming of the IB while another team was responsible to do the tutorials, help,
marketing and support.

This IB product is the very best tool to integrate databases and remote (inter/intra-net)
access. But it's only perceptible when you start messing with its core. I'll show you
ahead, that you can do everything with it, in every browser and with the best performance
attainable. But only if you ignore its easiness and do the hard work. 

The main problem with IB was how it was aimed to the users. Trying to make it friendly and
simple to use was its death sentence, but still there's hope to it if, the now in charge
Inprise consider a few, yes, just a few points to be re-addressed in it.

Using it now for the past full three months (let's consider 10 hours/day 7 days/week)
developing a big and complex application that will be deployed on-line in the next week, I
can tell you how wonderful it is.

This application is actually the version 2, and the previous one that I developed
following the IB manual, tutorials, and commercial books that I found in the stores,
directed me to a blind alley. It was terrible, ugly, inefficient and sluggish. But a
person that sometimes makes presence in this forum, once gave me the means and motivations
to go beyond the point which, probably, the "documentation" team of Borland would suppose
to be possible.

Many people in this forum, complain about browser compatibility, limitations in HTML
design, difficulties to manage the IB form's stack; and I could add: no-cacheable images,
no <TABLE> support, memory degradation and speed suffering when managing large databases.

I tell you what: This is all optional, assumed by default for the documentation experts
that directed all of us to that blind alley. You can take the other way where none of this
limitations do exist.

My current complain is only two or three things, that I'll put on the closing of this
missive, in the hope someone be moved in Inprise to ressurrect this wonderful tool called
IntraBuilder. 

First I want to tell you all in brief words what I stopped doing with IB to get its
maximum power.

1) To make possible that ALL the images in my forms could be cached in the clients, I
stopped using the "Image object" and put all the images inside "HTML objects" as <img
src....>

2) To avoid any browser incompatibility I stopped using the IB events (onClick or
onServerClick) and just use SUBMIT() in every page of my applications. In the (onSubmit)
event I do what I need. And all {exported} functions were built as strings and exported by
myself through the headTag property, avoiding that IB replace something by itself.

3) The form stack & client's back-button limitations I bypassed stopping use the pageno
and multi-form schemes. In reality all this application that have almost 700Kb of code and
more than 30 different "pages" use only the pageno=1. I have multi-form archives (JFM) but
only one (the entry one) is accessed by the client and the others are just classes
definitions that the former load when necessary. With this orientation there is only one
"f.open()" - example :) - when the app is started by a session and only one "f.close()"
when (and if) the user clicks the "end session" button that I put in the Home Page (as the
banks do). In no part of the application there is a _sys.scripts.run.

4) The HTML limitations were bypassed stopping use the Form Designer. It's useful to do
tests, but for no more. I have only one object, a HTML(), that I use to export my true
HTML scripts. So every "page" of my application was designed in a up-to-date HTML editor
and then I cut the text off it and transfered it to a JS file in form of a big string.
Then when the app is running I fill the spaces (where I put parameters) with dynamic data,
and the objects that I need to receive the values posted (as in Text, Checkbox, etc) I
create them dynamicaly and fill the HTML with their names. When that form is submitted
there are "who" to receive the values. It's many times quickly than the forms that IB
generates on the fly. And I can do whatever in what position without the thing been messed
in the clients' browser window.

5) With the benefits of doing the iten 3 above, I could use as many frames as I did need.
There are also pop-up windows, automatically opened and closed windows, etc. And all of
them are updated with data came from IB and all of them can post data back, with no one
conflicting or been missed in the process. Can you imagine 3 frames plus 2 pop-up windows
operating in the same time from one IB application ? It works.

6) The problems with speed and memory no more exists, since I stopped to do queries like
"SELECT * FROM ..." in the constructor part of each form, and living it active forever.
Now I just order the queries in the just moment I'll use its data, I just ask for the
exactly amoun of information I need as "SELECT code,username,pword FROM client WHERE..."
and putting it off as soon as the data is transferred to vars, changing its "active"
property to false. In the previous version of this app I got 1 to 1.5 minutes in some
complex searchings when the database table had many thousands records, and now it's
instantaneous, no-time indeed!
   
Needless to say, this applications was developed by two teams put apart 600Km; one
resposible only for the design and the other (me) for the programming. So IB does support
remote team development too!

			*	*	*	*

I know that I abused from your time and patience with this so big text, but I need let you
know how wonderful IB is and that you can make whatever you desire with it. There are many
other good things I got doing with it, but I'll not bother you more.

I'll just close this one asking Inprise some little adjustments in IB:

If Mr.Ken endured in reading all this above, I will make an act of rooting that he becomes
our spokesman with the Inprise's managers. 

IntraBuilder or any other tool that intends to be a Internet Database Integrator would not
compete with the raw HTML of every day. They can't. But IB can do what it's better in
doing, that is support a live connection (session) in the memory of the server, making us
possible to sustain a dynamic situation in it (variables, classes, etc) as it does
already.

What it could do different are:

1) If instead of its form Designer, there is a HTML page designer (as ASP has) where we
could build our pages and just assigning names of objects to the "fields" we'd like to be
replaced by dynamic data. So after in the running, it would FILL those spaces with those
assigned names or values (as I'm doing by myself). My problem nowadays is that I had to
put the html script inside a string, and it's no more editable by a HTML editor. It was a
enormous effort to convert it to string, typing and typing forever. If I need to change
the pages design I'll need to do the conversion again. But if IB would have it's designer
and if IB would be directed only to FILL the script, rather than generating it, there
would be no problem anymore.

2) Relating to the session timeout, could be a way of sending a "message" to IB server
(something as a special SUBMIT) only to tell IB that the client is still active, extending
its timeout session, but without IB sending back any form. Imagine that the user is in a
very big hybrid site (as the one of my app where there are a lot of parts in HTML pages -
not IB forms). When that user is browsing the static HTML sections of the site even the 20
min. timeout limit could expire. But if I could make an applet or js function to
automatically send a kind of PING while the user's browser is active (in that site) to the
IB server only to tell it "I'm alive - please don't kill my connection" it would be great.
Currently I'm doing exactly this, but I need to re-direct the reply form that IB sends
back to a kind of hidden waste can frame. Yes, as you guessed I always put
"session.sequenceNumber = -1" and I have also a lot of HTML pages (menus, etc) disguised
as IB forms that fool IB in finding it's one of the current session form. Sure, it works
fine.

3) Besides the option "ALT-F4 close", each "IntraBuilder Agent" could have a option
"Reset" that would only zap all of the classes of its memory. Imagine the suffer of
developers (as me) that for each test of changings in the code, has to close the agent and
call it back. 

There are some bugs that I could address, but the three points above would make the enough
difference in the IB life for Inprise and us all.

Thanks for "hearing", and sorry the bad english of this brazilian guy.


Regards,
MMM
-- 
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       "Who is General Failure, and why is he reading my drive?"

"Marcelo M. Marques" <mmmrqs@unisys.com.br> wrote:

>First, I wanna put some words to Mr. Ken Mayer: I believe you're a IB fan as you're giving
>your volunteer time to participate in this forum. It's very confortable to us have contact
>with someone from "inside" the company, rather than only talking between each of us,
>users.

Well, actually I'm part of a volunteer tech support crew ("TeamB") --
and I was on the development team as a Quality Assurance engineer
during the development of the product ...

>I've the impression that one team of Borland (that time) developed all the concept and
>programming of the IB while another team was responsible to do the tutorials, help,
>marketing and support.

Actually it was a group effort, but there were about 8-10 (I can never
remember) developers, and the rest of us did the QA (one group), some
folk did docs, and someone else did the samples ... marketing .. well
... whatever. <G>

Ken
---
Ken Mayer [TeamB]
Golden Stag Productions
http://www.mindspring.com/~hirschv/homepage.htm
http://www.mindspring.com/~hirschv/dbase/dbase.htm

> 3) The form stack & client's back-button limitations I bypassed stopping use the pageno
> and multi-form schemes. In reality all this application that have almost 700Kb of code and
> more than 30 different "pages" use only the pageno=1. I have multi-form archives (JFM) but
> only one (the entry one) is accessed by the client and the others are just classes
> definitions that the former load when necessary. With this orientation there is only one
> "f.open()" - example :) - when the app is started by a session and only one "f.close()"
> when (and if) the user clicks the "end session" button that I put in the Home Page (as the
> banks do). In no part of the application there is a _sys.scripts.run.

Here my question:
I thought, that form stack is created evary time - just because You open
new form - am I wrong?

> 5) With the benefits of doing the iten 3 above, I could use as many frames as I did need.
> There are also pop-up windows, automatically opened and closed windows, etc. And all of
> them are updated with data came from IB and all of them can post data back, with no one
> conflicting or been missed in the process. Can you imagine 3 frames plus 2 pop-up windows
> operating in the same time from one IB application ? It works.

Here next question:
What about security - or may be You doesn't use it?
In my applications I use security objects from built-in solutions of
Borland - it is very hard use it in frames because of authentication
should be made only once and here it will be for every frame. 
Have You any of such features in Your app?

I find that there is some possibility to provide security from application
using frames by using second hidden field - there is stored session id -
it can be passed to next forms and this way it is recognizeable where is
client. But I don't know if there is a posssibility to use objects from
this session in others sessions by refferencing to them

Any way I'm impressed by Your work and think Your notes will be very
helpful.
	Greetings
	Rem

 

------------------------------------------- 
Remigiusz Sokolowski      
e-mail: rems@gdansk.sprint.pl
-------------------------------------------

Dear Remigiusz,

Are you from Poland, aren't you ?  Glad to talk with someone from there :)
See my answers between the following points you put:

Remigiusz Sokolowski wrote:
> 
> > 3) The form stack & client's back-button limitations I bypassed stopping use the pageno
> > and multi-form schemes. In reality all this application that have almost 700Kb of code and
> > more than 30 different "pages" use only the pageno=1. I have multi-form archives (JFM) but
> > only one (the entry one) is accessed by the client and the others are just classes
> > definitions that the former load when necessary. With this orientation there is only one
> > "f.open()" - example :) - when the app is started by a session and only one "f.close()"
> > when (and if) the user clicks the "end session" button that I put in the Home Page (as the
> > banks do). In no part of the application there is a _sys.scripts.run.
> 
> Here my question:
> I thought, that form stack is created evary time - just because You open
> new form - am I wrong?
> 

You're right. Yes, it's created indeed, but what I am doing is not been attained
to the complications that this stack imposes to us designers, only not giving to
it any other form to be put in its (stack) top. The application has only one
opened form, let's call it "Starting.jfo" (I never use the JFMs! - but it's not
relevant now). When the user asks the Starting.jfo (first entry) it's runned by
IB server and then for this session is created a new brand form's stack. The top
form in the stack is Starting.jfo. Inside this form I load (once only) each
additional form I need (and just when it's first need), for example "login.jfo",
but not calling _sys.scripts.run("login.jfo") which will put it in the stack
top. I first load it with _sys.scripts.load("login.jfo") and then I instantiate
a new object of the class that is inside the "login.jfo". From this point now I
can use whatever is inside the login class without concern about who is in the
stack top. Always the "Starting.jfo" is in the top. I could "paginate" to the
login "screen" only changing the pageno property and letting IB send it back to
the user's browser.


> > 5) With the benefits of doing the iten 3 above, I could use as many frames as I did need.
> > There are also pop-up windows, automatically opened and closed windows, etc. And all of
> > them are updated with data came from IB and all of them can post data back, with no one
> > conflicting or been missed in the process. Can you imagine 3 frames plus 2 pop-up windows
> > operating in the same time from one IB application ? It works.
> 
> Here next question:
> What about security - or may be You doesn't use it?
> In my applications I use security objects from built-in solutions of
> Borland - it is very hard use it in frames because of authentication
> should be made only once and here it will be for every frame.
> Have You any of such features in Your app?
> 

I don't guess what kind of security are you talking about. I don't use database
security. But this application has two security levels. First it's divided in
two access areas, a Public one where people can browse a products catalog and
ask to be registered, and the other area is a Restricted one. To gain access in
the restricted area the user has to pass through the login "screen" where he has
to inform his company's pin number, his personal login-name and his password.
>From that point on the application knows who is accessing it (because for each
user request is opened a new session in the IB server and IB controls whose
session pertains to who). The second security level is that for each user can be
assigned an "access level", so there are users that can only send orders while
other users can edit data files, etc... I really don't know what is "security
objects". I never did need them. We're using other protection layer in the
access that is a https protocol.

> I find that there is some possibility to provide security from application
> using frames by using second hidden field - there is stored session id -
> it can be passed to next forms and this way it is recognizeable where is
> client. 

This point is in the core of the subject I'm exposing to you (all). I don't need
to care about passing stuff to other forms, just because I'm processing every
form inside the entry one. All state variables and data I need are there
everytime for every "form" (class) to access. So, in every moment any of the
application's modules (there are about 20 of them - different JFOs) can know
everything that happened before (and that I feel worth of keeping safe in
memory). Everyone (classes) can talk each other and I never have to concern who
is in the stack's top and neither I need to pass it as parameters to others
forms. So, Remigiusz, I believe I am doing the security you talked about, but no
frame need to know that and then there is no difficulties. The application knows
who is accessing it and know also that user's access level, so if he asks for a
non-authorized option, let's say the "Edit Company's File" option, the
application sends to him a "Sorry, you can't!" screen - and he continues from
there to other authorized options. I'll tell a secret... I have a frame where is
the site's menu that it's not even a IB form, but I edited the HTML of this page
adding something usual from IB forms, that it fools IB thinking that it's one of
his form and he replies the requests happy :)

This is the shinning point in using IB other than InterDev. The session is
there, active, with all the running situation of that user available to the
application. 

** Please, Inprise, don't kill this so powerful tool. You can put in the fame's
podium only doing some adjustments. Let's make M$ eat dirty. **


>But I don't know if there is a posssibility to use objects from
>this session in others sessions by refferencing to them
> 

Ok. If you change the way your forms are calling each other (or even the links
that go to the browser) and they always SUBMIT the form back to IB (from any
frame that it is) you can integrate your application in a way that there'll be
only one session for each user access. In doing that there's no reason in "using
objects from
other sessions", that is a real impossibility; or are you planning to let the
users talk to each other through IB server ?


Regards,
MMM
-- 
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       "Who is General Failure, and why is he reading my drive?"

> Dear Remigiusz,
> 
> Are you from Poland, aren't you ?  Glad to talk with someone from there :)
Yea, I come from Poland. Your country is Brasil, isn't it? :-)

> See my answers between the following points you put:
> 
> > Here my question:
> > I thought, that form stack is created evary time - just because You open
> > new form - am I wrong?

> 
> > Here next question:
> > What about security - or may be You doesn't use it?
> > In my applications I use security objects from built-in solutions of
> > Borland - it is very hard use it in frames because of authentication
> > should be made only once and here it will be for every frame.
> > Have You any of such features in Your app?

> 
> I don't guess what kind of security are you talking about. I don't use
> database security. But this application has two security levels. First
> it's divided in two access areas, a Public one where people can browse
> a products catalog and ask to be registered, and the other area is a
> Restricted one. To gain access in the restricted area the user has to
> pass through the login "screen" where he has to inform his company's
> pin number, his personal login-name and his password. >From that point
> on the application knows who is accessing it (because for each user
> request is opened a new session in the IB server and IB controls whose
> session pertains to who). The second security level is that for each
> user can be assigned an "access level", so there are users that can
> only send orders while other users can edit data files, etc... I
> really don't know what is "security objects". I never did need them.
> We're using other protection layer in the access that is a https
> protocol.

WIth IB distribution there are some applications as examples - I use some
of them. For my tests I use Borland Web Server and this one has no
protection layer, so only way was to use security objects designed by
Borland people.

Your application is great, I think:-)
Could You send me address (You wrote there is a part with access for all
users)?
Greetings 
	Rem

-------------------------------------------
Remigiusz Sokolowski      
e-mail: rems@gdansk.sprint.pl
-------------------------------------------

Hi, Rem

>Yea, I come from Poland. Your country is Brasil, isn't it? :-)

Yes, and from that Brasil with "S" as you wrote. Thanks.

>Could You send me address (You wrote there is a part with access for 
>all users)?

Ok. I'll send it to you as soon as it go on-line, probably next week. Until
there do some studies in portuguese idiom, cause the site isn't in english :) 
But it's intuitive, don't bother with the language. And portuguese is a latin
idiom so it has the same roots as many languages of your neighbors there. I
believe you could guess the ways. 

Regards,
MMM
-- 
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       "Who is General Failure, and why is he reading my drive?"