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