scandal@venus.lerc.nasa.gov (Renee Krakau (ANALEX)) (06/07/91)
Does anyone have any suggestions on a database that would best provide inventory tracking? Which is better: Dbase IV, Clarion, or RBASE 3.1? Renee *************************************************************************** SCANDAL@lims01.lerc.nasa.gov My apinions are my own Darlings, anyone who agrees with me is scandalous. ***************************************************************************
glenn@welch.jhu.edu (Glenn M. Mason) (06/07/91)
In article <1991Jun6.191505.23166@eagle.lerc.nasa.gov> scandal@venus.lerc.nasa.gov writes: > >Does anyone have any suggestions on a database that would best >provide inventory tracking? > >Which is better: Dbase IV, Clarion, or RBASE 3.1? Far too general a question. These packages are not the only choices out there also. The best suggestion I can give is to refer you to the May or June issue of PC-World magazine, which has an article titled "Database Clout". It gives comprehensive breakdowns covering price, performance, functionality, support, etc. on most of the PC-based database packages out there. There is enough detailed comparison data to make a decision based on what is important for your particular needs. Some of the competitors evaluated where Paradox, FoxPro, R:base, dBASE IV, PC-Ingres, DataEase, Clarion, and others. There were two best buys chosen, and one was Paradox (I can't recall the other). I remember that overall, FoxPro and Paradox looked really good, and DataEase and dBASE IV were busted out and brought up the rear in the standings. BTW - there are some excellent accounting packages out there that handle inventory (as well as invoicing, payroll, etc., etc.) really well such as PeachTree, Pacioli, DAC-Easy and Computer Associates. Of these Pacioli is only $49 and is really complete, including payroll module and video tutorial; Computer Associates puts out several accounting packages and are probably the most complete packages (and costly). If you go with a database package, you will have to write your own custom application to handle your needs as there isn't a database package out there that I know of that has any built- in inventory-control functionality (although some packages have built-in functions that will handle much of the complicated processing needs of your app.) Glenn
dhartung@chinet.chi.il.us (Dan Hartung) (06/07/91)
scandal@venus.lerc.nasa.gov writes: > >Does anyone have any suggestions on a database that would best >provide inventory tracking? > >Which is better: Dbase IV, Clarion, or RBASE 3.1? All of those packages could do the job. More efficient would be to look at existing inventory packages and select the platform it runs on. A good one is SBT Accounting's inventory package, which runs on either dBase or FoxPro. FoxPro is fastest and most flexible. For developing a custom app in-house, Clarion is good at whipping out basic applications, but it has limitations that can be quickly reached. RBase is good if you know SQL and relational theory pretty well, but it does not have a powerful programming language, and can be pretty slow on any but the fastest PCs. (3.1 was a big improvement over 3.0) It's more geared toward a highly-knowledgeable end-user than to app development, unfortunately. -- Daniel A. Hartung | "What's the difference anyway, between being dhartung@chinet.chi.il.us | safe and being rad, the joke's on us, we've Birch Grove Software | all been had." -- John Wesley Harding
onder@ISI.EDU (Bruce Onder) (06/12/91)
In article <1991Jun6.191505.23166@eagle.lerc.nasa.gov> scandal@venus.lerc.nasa.gov (Renee Krakau (ANALEX)) writes: >Which is better: Dbase IV, Clarion, or RBASE 3.1? Well, R:Base has a very loyal following for a product I find to be quite frustrating and limited. Slower than hell. Clunky to write error-checking code. Lacks some very basic features of a database management system. Years ago, R:Base was all there is is you had to have SQL. These days, the product is nowhere near the only choice, and Microrim hasn't taken the trouble to upgrade R:Base to compete effectively. And yet, you wouldn't believe how some people rally to its defense. Bruce -- Bruce W. Onder onder@isi.edu (He's not your everyday-type prankster!) I'm Ice-T: Original Gangster (O.G.: Original Gangster)