3 comments about Microsoft SQL Server 2000 Standard Edition (5-client).

1. Each time i did something on this new release of SQL Server within some first weeks i was saying two phrases: "Wow! How can i live without this cool thing?" and "It's should be done erlier! It's so simple!". Thousands of new features, improvements. Now i will go home, because i do my work faster than i could think.



2. Each time i did something on this new release of SQL Server within some first weeks i was saying two phrases: "Wow! How can i live without this cool thing?" and "It's should be done erlier! It's so simple!". Thousands of new features, improvements. Now i will go home, because i do my work faster than i could think.



3. There are some important additions, such as clustering and failover support, and a few niceties like user-defined functions and indexed views. Upgrading the data format from 7 to 8 was seamless, but replication was painful. Gone are the Enterprise Manager HTML-based pages at the machine level, replaced by a small maze of things to do to make replication happen. We finally had to reinstall the server to make replication happy. The help file on this topic is a joke. It reads something like "Step 1, configure replication. Step 2, start it up." with absolutely no detail.

   My bottom line: take your time in upgrading.

No comments about Microsoft Visual Studio Team System 2008 Team Foundation Server.

No comments about BDG PUBLISHING Mastering JSP(Java Server Pages).

No comments about Visual Studio .net Academic 2003.

5 comments about Microsoft Visual C# .NET Standard 2003.

1. Tis is the most powerful and Dynamic tool for programmers even JAVA or other platforms, Is so easy the OOP process and Web Services XML Creation



2. There is a typo in the feature list on this page...

   It mentions that this product supports development of Compact.NET applications for mobile phones and pocketpc's however this is incorrect. The standard edition does not support pocketpc development, only the professional edition that comes in visual studio supports it. I bought the product partially because i thought i could make programs for my ppc. :/ Other than lack of PPC support in this standard edition, visual C# standard seems like a decent program for web development or quickly making windows apps.




3. Microsoft Visual C# privides the ability to create applications, and web solutions - in short, it gets the job done.



4. For an amateur programmer like myself, C# provides an easy-to-use fun way to write professional-looking Windows applications with very little overhead. If you know Java and had played with Visual C++, C# will come naturally to you. It is completely object-oriented, there are no pointers (even though you may use them if you really need to), a very easy-to-understand object model, a powerful forms editor, and a sophisticated debugger. C++-like templates allow you to design and write any type of programs without worrying too much about necessary components. An extensive class library provides tools for anything you may think of. MSDN library included in the package provides great real-time help with a number of examples. Overall, C# is easier than Java, as powerful as C++, and is accessible to people who are not professional programmers. Great product!



5. We use this suite to build front-end Windows applications for exotic equity pricing models and we bought it because 1) we didn't need all the fancy, advanced libraries the more expensive packages include and 2) this is cheap. The package is easy to install and the environment easy to navigate. We are very happy with it and will buy the upgraded version to keep up with the latest .NET feature.

No comments about BDG PUBLISHING Mastering Visual Basic .NET (Windows/Macintosh).

5 comments about FileMaker Pro 7.

1. As a novice user, with practically no knowledge of computer programming and scripting, I would like to say that Filemaker is one of the easiest databases I have ever used. I started out using Filemaker4 - this had its limitations, but the fact that I could easily and efforlessly create a whole database with functional buttons and easy links to other layouts was so great!
   
   It is relatively foolproof for those who do not wish to overload their minds with programming data that they will probably never use (and they only need to pay the cost of the package instead of the programmers they would probably need to employ in order to keep their database up and running flawlessly; with no disrespect to you programmers out there - I wish I could BEGIN to understand the way it all works, but some of us are not blessed with the time or technological knowhow that some take for granted - but I do understand why you are frustrated by the simplicity - remember that for those who need it, Filemaker does the basic database job, in a more simplified manner).
   
   I give 4 stars because, although user friendly, there are annoying limitations that have been noted before - ie: multiple layouts for manual change each time IS annoying, auto saving with no "undo" option is dangerous for larger databases etc.
   
   In summary, I feel that Filemaker is an excellent ready-prepared database solution for any individual or business that requires the "quick-fix" Filemaker offers so easily.



2. FileMaker is perhaps the easiest application to use for creating a simple database. But, there are a few quirks about this software that really bug me:
   
   1. Danger of storing layouts, scripts, and data in the same file
   
   Layouts and scripts are stored in the same file as the data. If FileMaker crashes while editing a layout or modifying a script, the whole file including the data may become corrupt and unaccessible. A better design, in my opinion, would be to keep the data separate from the layouts and scripts, so the data would be protected in an event of a crash.
   
   2. Danger of linking to wrong external relational files
   
   Filemaker links to externally related files by an unusual search algorithm. If there exists copies of files with the same file name on the server, on the local hard disk, or hosted on other hosts, then which file is linked becomes ambiguous. The wrong external file may be linked.
   
   3. Danger of opening the wrong file
   
   Each Filemaker application can host files. If a user were to host a file that has the same name as a file hosted on the server, other users may open the wrong file.
   
   4. Danger of deleting your entire database
   
   The "Delete All Records..." option is one of the most dangerous features of FileMaker. Many databases were wiped out because a user accidently chose the "Delete All Records..." rather than the "Delete Record..." option -- the two options are placed next to each other in the menu, inviting disaster.
   
   5. Cumbersome queries
   
   The querying feature of FileMake can be a pain to use. To create a query such as (Field1 = "criterion1" and (Field2 = "criterion2" or Field3 = "criterion3" or FieldN = "criterionN")), FileMaker requires you to break down the above query as N-1 queries: (Field1 = "criterion1" and Field2="criterion2"), new query (Field1 = "criterion1" and Field3 = "criterion3"), ..., new query (Field1 = "criterion1" and FieldN = "criterionN"). There are other queries that can be easily posed as a SQL statement but not so easily done in FileMaker.
   
   6. Spaghetti code paradigm
   
   Variables for your scripts in FileMaker are stored in global fields. You'll have to keep track of which scripts are using what global fields -- the script and the variables are not kept together. Passing parameters to scripts is a cumbersome sequence of setting the global fields one-by-one, then calling the script. Most modern programming languages have procedures with calling convention such as p(x,y). In FileMaker it's set x, set y, perform p. To debug, you'll have to read the code of p to see that p really references x and y. Also, their is no hierarchy or encapsulation of scripts, so you'll have to devise your own way for organizing.



3. 
   A good deal of what people have written about this product simply isn't true, particularly negative observations such as not being able to import/export or that security is non-existent. Why people with only cursory knowledge speak with such authority has always puzzled me. So I offer an objective, if lengthy, review.
   
   I've been using FileMaker since 1990. Developing FileMaker applications has been my primary source of income for almost as long. I develop in Mac OS X (Virtual PC with Windows 2000 Pro for testing). I've also tech edited an upcoming advanced book on FileMaker 7.
   
   Version 7 is a huge upgrade over 6 (I'd call it a 'crossgrade', as in switching to similar but different product). As such, converting solutions from 6 to 7 can get really hairy, and it may be that a complete re-write is more efficient. That said, many FileMaker solutions that people have developed or inherited over the years weren't written following "correct" database rules (this is why IT types hate FileMaker), so a re-write may be a good thing. Generally, an upgrade to 7 is brought about by a need for larger file sizes, to increase the number of simultaneously open files or to consolidate data. If you've got a solution that works fine in 6 or earlier and you're not a developer, I'd think two or three times about upgrading; it's not something you want to do for the sake of it.
   
   For users, that is people who enter data, the changes in 7 aren't apparent. It's the back end, for us developers, where the changes are significant, plentiful, and very welcome. If you're just getting started in the world of FileMaker, forget all about any earlier versions. The rules have changed in 7, and it's almost more difficult to unlearn what you know from 6 than to start fresh in 7.
   
   FileMaker has a scalar learning curve. That is, it's easy to learn and get up and running in really no time at all (and there are plenty of free sample files to take apart and learn from). As your database becomes larger, more complex and gains a need for multiple simultaneous users or interaction with other systems, knowing the normalized rules of relational database structures becomes increasingly important, and that's where the learning curve steepens. But don't let anyone fool you, this is true of *any* database development software.
   
   Building a database is a lot like being the architect of a building. You have to have a good idea of what it's going to look like in the end, before you start. For example, if you know your one-story house is one day going to be a 4-story mansion, you want to have a good foundation. If you know you might want the ability to relocate a bathroom to the other side of a floor, you've got to build in some room at least for plumbing, electricity, maybe some windows. It's not a realistic analogy, but it usually helps people understand the thinking involved around creating a database.
   
   I firmly believe FileMaker is the easiest of any to learn, use and maintain, that can also handle whatever complexity you throw at it. Further, it's cross-platform and things like networking your databases and making structural changes (even remotely, without bringing down the system) are really a breeze compared to programs like Access.
   
   Lastly, one of the neatest things about FileMaker is its developer community, which is today thriving and strong. Almost like an open-source coummunity, we seem to really enjoy helping solve each other's problems (no one person knows everything about FileMaker, even at FileMaker, Inc), so we're always learning. There's plenty of free community support available that, I've found, is often better than the company's own tech support, although the folks at FileMaker are really great and genuinely into supporting the developer community. And...there's plenty of money to be made as a FileMaker developer the world over. We're certainly in demand and have been going strong for nearly two decades.
   
   You can read FileMaker's feature list to find out about all the new features. Here are my likes and dislikes:
   
   What I like most about 7:
   
   * Multiple tables in one file (with an 8 terabyte limit per file; formerly 2GB).
   * Multiple windows from the same file, and the ability to manage their placement dynamically, down to the pixel.
   * The ability to separate data from logic (for example, keep your data in one file, and all your scripts and interface elements in another...changes and solution upgrades to your clients are much easier to facilitate this way).
   * Much improved security and account management (that supposedly plays well in authenticated corporate environments...I'm just getting started in this area).
   * The ability to use PNG images with transparency, which greatly improves what you can do with your interface.
   
   
   What I DON'T like about 7:
   
   * All my complaints boil down to FileMaker's interface. I strongly believe a complete overhaul is way overdue (if it were like Omni Graffle, I'd be in heaven). There are plenty of little annoyances because I use a Mac. For example, I have a Microsoft 5-button optical mouse. The scroll wheel, which works in every single application (even on FileMaker for Windows using Virtual PC on my G5), doesn't work at all in FileMaker for OS X. This is ironic because FileMaker is wholly owned by Apple, but development for the Mac seems have been an afterthought. Much of this will change in the next version, just around the corner. I wouldn't dream of developing primarily in Windows, largely because of the way Windows OS handles windows and value lists within FileMaker; you have less room to work with.
   
   * The relationships graph, which sort of looks like an ER (entity relationship) diagram but is not, can get messy very quickly, and they've taken away the ability to look at relationships in a straight text list (I'd like both). This can get frustrating, especially if you've inherited someone else's mess. The fact that FileMaker has implemented a certification program for developers, and is working actively on releasing development standards will help reduce confusion and frustration in this area.
   
   * The inability to move tables, fields, script steps, etc. from one table or file to another. Improvements in this area are expected in the next version.
   
   * The inability to see how elements are related to each other. For example, it's not possible to see all the elements that call a script (i.e. a parent script or button, etc.). There are software tools that can analyze FileMaker files and expose this information, and they work great, but it would be nice if it were integrated into the program itself.
   
   * It's a minor complaint, but worth addressing here: A number of things don't work like you'd expect or want them to, so you have to create workarounds. This appeals to the geek in me; I usually like the challenge, but sometimes it's frustrating because you'll think it's silly that something simply doesn't work like you want. That said, over the years there is nothing, really nothing in terms of complexity that I have not been able to achieve with FileMaker by itself or with the help of a plug-in. People ask me "Is it possible in FileMaker to..." I always answer yes before they're finished. It's sometimes a "Yes, but..." answer. For the snotty programmer types, I challenge anyone to name database development software that is impervious to workarounds, OR that does not have a high learning curve. If you don't have a background in databases, FileMaker is a great path. If you do have such a background, open your mind and you'll find that no, FileMaker is not the end-all-be-all database app (such an app doesn't exist), but it really is a neat and productive tool, and if you can build good solutions that manage your client's data, they will loyally worship you.



4. I just upgraded to version 7. Every other negative comment made by others here is true, plus they just do NOT answer e-mails. I was unable to register my upgrade copy. I sent four e-mails and not a single one was answered. I finally called and was told there was a bug in the registraion of "some" copies and not to type my name in the name field, but my company name and leave the company field blank. Yup, that worked.
   
   Now, if the registration is that buggy, they have no e-mail customer support, and the upgrades are OUTRAGEOUSLY expensive (and see other reviews for lack of fit and finnish), why would you buy it? I'm very sorry I did.
   
   File Maker 8 is coming out and the upgrade is $179. I'd rather use shareware.



5. I just upgraded to version 7. Every other negative comment made by others here is true, plus they just do NOT answer e-mails. I was unable to register my upgrade copy. I sent four e-mails and not a single one was answered. I finally called and was told there was a bug in the registraion of "some" copies and not to type my name in the name field, but my company name and leave the company field blank. Yup, that worked.
   
   Now, if the registration is that buggy, they have no e-mail customer support, and the upgrades are OUTRAGEOUSLY expensive (and see other reviews for lack of fit and finnish), why would you buy it? I'm very sorry I did.
   
   File Maker 8 is coming out and the upgrade is $179. I'd rather use shareware.

No comments about Microsoft SQL Server 2000 Standard Edition (Single Processor License).

5 comments about FileMaker Pro 7 (Mac).

1. This Filemaker is the best version yet! Highly recommended!



2. I have been using Filemaker 7 for Mac for 2 motnhs now. I am so happy with all the improvements they have made. Hands down this is the best database program (Mac or PC) ever made. A must buy!



3. The improvements made over version 6 are monumental! A must have for database users and users of previous versions! A+++++



4. I'm a database professional, one of the few MySQL Certified Professionals in the country. I've been familiar with dBase, InfoFile, Clarion, Microsoft Access, FoxPro, Oracle, SQL Server and PostgreSQL, most since their earliest incarnations.
   
   I've been tinkering with FileMaker since version 3 (1995). It never seemed much more than an oh-so-slightly souped-up version of the database in ClarisWorks/AppleWorks.
   
   I've always evaluated FileMaker's time-limited downloads, but was never impressed.
   
   But version 7 is a quantum leap, highly matured. If you want a replacement for the buggy and unstable Microsoft Access, here it is.
   
   On a note, I bought a copy of FileMaker 7 on eBay. When I registered it, FileMaker told me that it was a pirated copy, which diminished my opinion of that online service.
   
   I believe that if "a software is good enough to use, it's good enough to pay for". On a shoestring budget, I needed to find the best price, and it was here on Amazon.



5. FileMaker Pro 7 (and it's new version 8) have one leg up on Microsoft Access: the are cross-platform. You can use FileMaker on Macs and PCs. Microsoft doesn't make an Access for Mac, either stand-alone or bundled with Office.
   
   If you don't know how to use Access, if you don't know too much about relational database management systems, FileMaker is probably for you. It's much easier to use than Access. But if you have invested the time to learn Access enough to do the basics - create tables, complex queries, and forms, and to produce useful reports - stick with Access.
   
   Switching to FileMaker means learning a whole new system, and once you do, you will not be any more productive than you already are.

2 comments about Seagate Crystal Reports 8.0 User Manual.

1. it's really usefull & a wonderfull reference



2. Seagate's User's Guide does what any good manual is supposed to do... provide you with a good enough starting point to create powerful and customizable reports with relative ease. While it provides a fair amount of screen shots, I found that it was lacking in this area at some crucial points which left me wondering how to accomplish and follow instructions provided for the creation of some reports.

   If you are a Seagate Info and Seagate Analysis user, complimentary software to Crystal Reports provided by Seagate, it provides you with no instruction on their use, advantages disadvantages and differences in their functionality. For a better description of both Info and Analysis you may want to look at Osborne's: The Complete Reference - Seagate Crystal Reports 8 by G. Peck. Finally, the manual does not adequately cover how to address applications geared for the Web or using VB. These topics are better addressed elsewhere.

   The manual is bundled with the software so therefore, if you purchased a copy you are likely to own a copy already. However, if you are looking for another reference to supplement your understanding of the true functionality and power of this program, it may be better to refer to Peck for a more in-depth view.