Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!ns-mx!umaxc.weeg.uiowa.edu
From: byock@umaxc.weeg.uiowa.edu (Bill Yock)
Newsgroups: comp.databases
Subject: Re: PARADOX - am I missing something
Message-ID: <97@ns-mx.uiowa.edu>
Date: 11 Aug 89 18:07:09 GMT
References: <2086@dvinci.USask.CA>
Sender: news@ns-mx.uiowa.edu
Lines: 14

From article <2086@dvinci.USask.CA>, by reeves@dvinci.USask.CA (Malcolm Reeves):
> I have just started to work with Borland's PARADOX 3.0 - it appears to
> be a very flexible, reasonably fast, and very configurable DB with
> lots of features. It seems intuitive and easy to learn. I've used lots
> of DB programs on PC's and it appears to be one of the best. WHY DO I
> NEVER SEE ANY REFERENCE TO IT IN COMP.DATABASES. Does PARADOX have some
> fatal flaw I have yet to discover (I know it doesn't use SQL - yet) but
> am I missing something? 

Perhaps the lack of discussion indicates there are no fatal flaws.  I have been using Paradox for several years and have never found a problem that I could not overcome.  Compuserve has a very active Paradox forum if your are looking for
extra support.  I hear it is possible to send mail from the Internet to Compuserve and vice versa, but I am not sure how that is initiated.

Bill Yock, Weeg Computing Center, University of Iowa
Byock@umaxc.weeg.uiowa.edu