🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1992Aug02.031954.19785@DIALix.oz.au> dent@DIALix.oz.au 
(Andrew Dent) writes:
>In <1992Jul31.174147.22204@elroy.jpl.nasa.gov> sgrenander@NASAMAIL.JPL.NASA.G
(Sven Grenander) writes:
>
>>In article <1992Jul31.011004.3052@cornerstone.com>, aefron@cornerstone.com 
(Andrew Efron) writes:
>>> 
>>> Anyone have experience using both FoxBase and 4D?  Even better, has anyone 
>>> switched from one to the other?  My company is a heavy user of Foxbase but 
>>> I'd like to get them to look at something else--I find Foxbase rather 
>>> quirky 
>>> rest deleted...
>

Some statements I completely agree...

>
>As far as the comparison goes, 4D is undoubtedly better for quickly putting
>together a good-looking application of moderate size and complex interface,
>provided you can put up with their runtime pricing (per unit instead of the 
>Fox one-off), lousy runtime reportwriter and quirky language.

More statements which I agree with about the downside of using 4D...

Further, 4D can't do multi-window apps!  ON A MACINTOSH!!!  I don't understand 
how anyone can hold up 4D as the database interface champ when it can't do 
windows.  Why do those people use Macs, if not for the interface?  Despite 
it's highly touted abilities, I've yet to see a 4D database with an elegant 
interface.  FoxBASE+/Mac may have a quirky language, but I can do more with 
it than with 4D.

>Andy Dent (A.D. Software - Mac & VAX programming)
>94 Bermuda Dve, BALLAJURA  Western Australia  6066
>Phone/Fax: 09 249 2719 (local)  +619 249 2719 (International)
>       Internet: dent@DIALix.oz.au    Compuserve: 100033,3241
>

Eric
-- 
===================================================================
               Eric Weidl    e-weidl@uchicago.edu
      University of Chicago -- Academic and Public Computing
===================================================================