From: mike@pyrite.SOM.CWRU.Edu (Michael Kerner)
Newsgroups: comp.client-server
Subject: Re: client/server -implementations
Date: 15 Oct 1992 13:27:25 GMT
Organization: WSOM CSG, CWRU, Cleve. OH
Distribution: usa
NNTP-Posting-Host: pyrite.som.cwru.edu
X-Post-Machine: pyrite.som.cwru.edu


> 1. Costs ?
>    Lan backbone to support the clients (40 to 50 needed).
>    Lan based PC servers to support office automation procedures
>     and upgrade of the PC office H-WARE
>    Mainframe connectivity
>    Lan to Lan connectivity
>    X-window costs vs PM/os2 or MS-windows
>    Upgrade of department's PC environment

Do some research.

> Is c/s really cheaper?

It really depends.  I mean, if you have an HP3000 and a bunch of ADDS
terminals and you want to know if buying a bunch of PC's and scrapping
the 3000 is going to be cheaper the answer is obvious.  If you've got
PC's the solution changes, etc.  You gotta be a little more specific.
How do you rate interface?  That's a lot of what you buy with c/s - a
more attractive, more usable, more flexible interface for the user
'cause the tools are pretty good.

> 2. Connectivity interfaces ?
>    Novell 's implementation of RPC ? Is this good or bad?

Why are you thinking of going this route?

>
> 3. Client software reliability ?
>    Windows 3.1 is it really better than Windows 3.0 ?
>    How about X-windows as an alternative ?

You've forgotten Macintosh.  If you want ease of development, sorry,
you won't get it from any of the Windows environments aside from
PowerBuilder (which is very nice, by the way).  Omnis just generally
blows (it is very funky and counterintuitive - most of my clients shy
away from it unless they absolutely have to have cross-platform apps).
If you're going to use X you're going to spend lots of $ for a lot of
power that you probably won't use and development is still going to be
a pain.

>
>    This application really requires a truly non procedural ad hoc query
>    tool. I have seen prototypes using "Powerbuilder" under Windows. Its not
>    powerful enough. Too much syntax. This customer requires a query system
>    with no syntax. I haven't found any , yet?

Looks like Macintosh again - when I was at TRW we spend a lot of money
hiring a firm to build an ad-hoc query tool that we didn't like and
then stumbled upon GQL (I forget who the maker is at the moment) which
is very nice for ad-hoc queries.  It uses the server database quite
nicely and doesn't complain about the topology (TCP/IP, DecNet, etc.).
Basically users have a graphical way of making queries and they don't
have to know much about RDBMS's - only that if they want some data
that is split between two tables that there will be some field in
common.  The objects are all drawn and they just draw the link with
the mouse and away they go.  We trained a bunch of administrative
assistants in using it with very little effort.

If you have any questions on my or NewMedia's experience with c/s development
(that's our core business), please contact me via EMAIL.

Mikey.
Engineer-NewMedia Corp. Cleveland, OH / Where Client-Server development has
been happening since before it was called client-server.
Also with offices in Columbus, Indianapolis, Lexington and Chicago.




















--
Mikey.
Mac Admin "Emeritus"-WSOM CSG - CWRU / 	Engineer-NewMedia Corp. Cleveland, OH
"I looked up the word 'Basketball Player' in the dictionary and you know what
it said?  NOT YOU." - Sydney, White Men Can't Jump
Newsgroups: comp.client-server