Organization: Research Foundation OF SUNY
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.dbase-l
Date:         Tue, 21 Jul 1992 12:42:39 EST
              dialects" <DBASE-L@NMSUVM1.BITNET>
From:         Joel Saunders <RJFS@SNYCENVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: dbaseIV v. Lotus
              21 Jul 1992 13:52:23 GMT from <mvore@FEDIX.FIE.COM>

On Tue, 21 Jul 1992 13:52:23 GMT Mike Vore W3CCV said:
>>
>>I am in the process of trying to get my office to purchase
>>a network version of dbaseIV.  However there is someone in
>>my office who believes that whatever I need to do in dbase I
>>can do in Lotus (which we already own).  I am not that familiar
>>with Lotus so I don't feel comfortable responding on this
>>question.
>>
>
>dBase is a database manager - Lotus (123) is a spreadsheet.  One
>difference is that if data fields are functions of other fields - even
>crossing records a spread sheet is more appropriate.  A crude analogy
>would be the Income Tax (YUCK) forms.
>
>But on the other hand a data base is made up of identical records, they
>may have _no_ functional interaction possibly other than running totals.
> By that I mean that a field in record 33 does not depend on a differing
>field in record 200, which depends on.....
>
>I have found that Lotus may be easier for entering data, but it should
>be in dBase when stored.
>
>>This is what I'm in need of:
>>
>>Ability to manipulate databases of 200-20,000 records with 10-30
>>fields.
>>
>>Obtain from the data statisitical information, labels, and
>>addresses I can convert for use in WP mail merges.
>>
>>Ability to compare information on several independent databases.
>>
>>Ability to customize data input environs.
>>
>>Ability to create programs that manipulate several databases.
>>
>
>Both dBase and Lotus could meet all these needs, but still dBase seems
>to me to more appropriate.  As to the programming, dBase is almost a
>second language to me, but I've seen Lotus programs that can do wonders.
>
>Another consideration, is that you will have a possibility of 600k
>fields, each of which probabbly will be some where between 5 and 20
>bytes long (??)  You are maybe talking about 6 meg of data.  dBase pages
>into memore records as needed and then flushes them back to disk when
>you are finished.  Lotus 1-2-3 (up through version 2.0) that I'm
>familiar with, attempts to read the entire data file into ram.  And will
>fail if there is not enough memory.  The limits as I remember lotus also
>is 2048 rows by 2048(?) columns.  Another reason for keeping a database
>in a data base program.  dBase has a limit of about 1,000,000,000
>records, and they can be an the order of 128 fields, of 64k bytes each.
>Newer versions of dBase (I've not worked with in in about a year ande
>that was dBase III+) have new limitations which are growing with each
>release.  Clipper and the other compilers also stretch the limitations
>also.
>
>- mike
>
>
>--
>/*--------------------------------------------------*/
>   Michael Vore
>   System Admin
>     mvore@fedix.fie.com   voice (301)-975-0103
>/*--------------------------------------------------*/

I'd like to propose another option.  How about storing the data in a DBASE, and
use other programs such as Lotus v3.X, Word Perfect, and other programs for
the functions that there good at.

Lotus 3.x can use DATALENS technology to access (update? and retrieve) the data
located in the DBASE file.  With the specs you gave, you would quickly overrun
Lotus' database storage specs.

I referred to Word Perfect because you might want to do form letters (merge
files) that could contain some of the database field contents as variables.

Dbase could be used to massage the data in a "batch" type mode.

I've always tried to use the best products for each part of the job.

I know this doesn't cover every angle.  I just wanted to give another
perspective.

.... Joel
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU