Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site uwmcsd1.UUCP
Path: utzoo!decvax!harpo!whuxlm!whuxl!houxm!ihnp4!uwmcsd1!jerry
From: jerry@uwmcsd1.UUCP (Jerry Lieberthal)
Newsgroups: net.database
Subject: Re: UNIX dbms
Message-ID: <400@uwmcsd1.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 23-Aug-85 03:29:57 EDT
Article-I.D.: uwmcsd1.400
Posted: Fri Aug 23 03:29:57 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 24-Aug-85 05:54:31 EDT
References: <589@hlwpc.UUCP> <393@uwmcsd1.UUCP> <691@cybvax0.UUCP>
Distribution: na
Organization: U of Wi-Milwaukee, Computing Services Div
Lines: 22

> In article <393@uwmcsd1.UUCP> jerry@uwmcsd1.UUCP (Jerry Lieberthal) writes:
> > ...  At any rate, for ease
> >of use and non-programmability (for non-programmers) I vote for UNIFY at
> >the present time.
> 
>     It may be good for users, but have you seen all of the low level toys ?
> They include just about all of the basic hooks into the system you could
> want.  That is a lot more than be said of most systems (that I have seen).

That is precisely what I meant.  I am developing some applications for
production center (operations) people.  It takes very little time to develope
reasonabily sophisticated entry screens and reports.  It also has neat C
language features for those of us that need more power.  But, UNIFY does have
its limitations.  I suppose I shouldn't complain, since it cost the University
very little.

I have just started to use UNIFY, so in the next few weeks I will probably be
asking some questions of those of you who do use it (especially to its limit).
I am also interested in UNIFY users opinions as to its good and bad points..

	- jerry		University Of Wisconsin-Milwaukee
			ihnp4!uwmcsd1!jerry