3 ms·

Similar to https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30414068 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30414068: FoxPro Imagine what all that "low-code" apps pretend t

by mamcx 5y ago

Similar to https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30414068 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30414068: FoxPro Imagine what all that "low-code" apps pretend to do, but do it better, faster, far more powerful. And in DOS 2.6. You can do all: Forms, Reports, Apps, utilities, code the database (queries, stored procedures, etc) all with the SAME language and 0 impedance mismatch. And the Form/Report Builder rival what Delphi do it later. --- My dream is to resurrect the spirit of it (https://tablam.org https://tablam.org). One thing that make this apart from the "low-code" of today: These were tools made for run in YOURS devices, not in a "cloud" where you are at mercy, not only of overlords, but of the latency. This kind of tool feel way faster than moderns because this little thing: Run local is way faster! So, If I could get the way to dedicate it, this could be the major advantage: Local First, Cloud capable.

ASalazarMX 5y ago
ForPro was a fantastic improvement over dBase. It was rumored that Microsoft bought it to put it to pasture because it was competing with MS Access. Seeing how Visual FoxPro quickly stalled, I tend to agree.
- mamcx 5y ago
  > It was rumored that Microsoft bought it to put it to pasture because it was competing with MS Access And certainly, Fox was the more capable. Also, MS Access as UI builder was fine (a few nicer here and there) but scripting with VB was a joke. Is clear that the Fox language is a better match, and that is NOT "imho"!. But that was not the only competition: Sql Server. With Fox around, the need for Sql Server is near zero for a lot of small business. Contrast: The Engine of Access not only is a joke: is actively bad (corruptible) so is very fast you need a "proper" db! --- I know a good replacement was needed since the end of support from MS, but keep waiting for a replacement, thinking it was a no-brainer product to make. How foolish...
  - ASalazarMX 5y ago
    You're completely right, it was to push SQL Server. Small businesses could get away with an Access database, but they were more likely to just use Excel. Maybe I mixed the two because FoxPro could service both markets, but SQL Server wasn't a good fit for small businesses, and Access was supposed to fill that niche.

by mamcx 5y ago

ASalazarMX 5y ago

ForPro was a fantastic improvement over dBase. It was rumored that Microsoft bought it to put it to pasture because it was competing with MS Access. Seeing how Visual FoxPro quickly stalled, I tend to agree.

mamcx 5y ago
> It was rumored that Microsoft bought it to put it to pasture because it was competing with MS Access And certainly, Fox was the more capable. Also, MS Access as UI builder was fine (a few nicer here and there) but scripting with VB was a joke. Is clear that the Fox language is a better match, and that is NOT "imho"!. But that was not the only competition: Sql Server. With Fox around, the need for Sql Server is near zero for a lot of small business. Contrast: The Engine of Access not only is a joke: is actively bad (corruptible) so is very fast you need a "proper" db! --- I know a good replacement was needed since the end of support from MS, but keep waiting for a replacement, thinking it was a no-brainer product to make. How foolish...
- ASalazarMX 5y ago
  You're completely right, it was to push SQL Server. Small businesses could get away with an Access database, but they were more likely to just use Excel. Maybe I mixed the two because FoxPro could service both markets, but SQL Server wasn't a good fit for small businesses, and Access was supposed to fill that niche.