Sybase NNTP forums - End Of Life (EOL)

The NNTP forums from Sybase - forums.sybase.com - are now closed.

All new questions should be directed to the appropriate forum at the SAP Community Network (SCN).

Individual products have links to the respective forums on SCN, or you can go to SCN and search for your product in the search box (upper right corner) to find your specific developer center.

I Need Distributed PB Back

48 posts in PB Futures Discussion Last posting was on 2011-10-03 16:01:47.0Z
Chris Pollach Posted on 2011-09-26 03:23:07.0Z
From: "Chris Pollach" <cpollach.at.travel-net.dot.com>
Newsgroups: sybase.public.powerbuilder.futures.discussion
Subject: I Need Distributed PB Back
Lines: 334
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0040_01CC7BDA.116B3F70"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Importance: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Windows Live Mail 15.4.3538.513
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V15.4.3538.513
NNTP-Posting-Host: vip152.sybase.com
X-Original-NNTP-Posting-Host: vip152.sybase.com
Message-ID: <4e7ff01b@forums-1-dub>
Date: 25 Sep 2011 20:23:07 -0700
X-Trace: forums-1-dub 1317007387 10.22.241.152 (25 Sep 2011 20:23:07 -0700)
X-Original-Trace: 25 Sep 2011 20:23:07 -0700, vip152.sybase.com
Path: forums-1-dub!not-for-mail
Xref: forums-1-dub sybase.public.powerbuilder.futures.discussion:27759
Article PK: 452107

Hi all;

I just got a specification to build a server based reporting system that
would further automate PB and InfoMaker reports (see attached).
Unfortunately, with EAServer not an option (client wants to use WebLogic)
and the Application Server Plug-in going `nowhere` these days - I need a
simple, light weight and cost effective server to host NVUO`s and run
scheduled services in order to implement this application feature.

This is only one example of dozens of requirements I have had this year
that could have led to more PB work! if we only still had Distributed
PowerBuilder! How about it Sybase ... for PB15? :-)

Regards ... Chris


Brett Weaver Posted on 2011-09-26 08:58:23.0Z
From: Brett Weaver <bretnsp@weaversoft.com>
Newsgroups: sybase.public.powerbuilder.futures.discussion
Subject: Re: I Need Distributed PB Back
Message-ID: <2jf08718id9cd893gbqjs0eo7i7cc3u4p5@4ax.com>
References: <4e7ff01b@forums-1-dub>
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 6.00/32.1186
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
NNTP-Posting-Host: vip152.sybase.com
X-Original-NNTP-Posting-Host: vip152.sybase.com
Date: 26 Sep 2011 01:58:23 -0700
X-Trace: forums-1-dub 1317027503 10.22.241.152 (26 Sep 2011 01:58:23 -0700)
X-Original-Trace: 26 Sep 2011 01:58:23 -0700, vip152.sybase.com
Lines: 23
Path: forums-1-dub!not-for-mail
Xref: forums-1-dub sybase.public.powerbuilder.futures.discussion:27760
Article PK: 452099

I wrote something similar using Web Services..
Why can't you use those?

You cane even use "SOA" in your proposal :-)

On 25 Sep 2011 20:23:07 -0700, "Chris Pollach"

<cpollach.at.travel-net.dot.com> wrote:

>Hi all;
>
> I just got a specification to build a server based reporting system that
>would further automate PB and InfoMaker reports (see attached).
>Unfortunately, with EAServer not an option (client wants to use WebLogic)
>and the Application Server Plug-in going `nowhere` these days - I need a
>simple, light weight and cost effective server to host NVUO`s and run
>scheduled services in order to implement this application feature.
>
> This is only one example of dozens of requirements I have had this year
>that could have led to more PB work! if we only still had Distributed
>PowerBuilder! How about it Sybase ... for PB15? :-)
>
>Regards ... Chris


Chris Pollach Posted on 2011-09-26 11:17:09.0Z
From: "Chris Pollach" <cpollach@travel-net.com>
Newsgroups: sybase.public.powerbuilder.futures.discussion
References: <4e7ff01b@forums-1-dub> <2jf08718id9cd893gbqjs0eo7i7cc3u4p5@4ax.com>
Subject: Re: I Need Distributed PB Back
Lines: 43
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5931
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.6109
X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Original
NNTP-Posting-Host: vip152.sybase.com
X-Original-NNTP-Posting-Host: vip152.sybase.com
Message-ID: <4e805f35$1@forums-1-dub>
Date: 26 Sep 2011 04:17:09 -0700
X-Trace: forums-1-dub 1317035829 10.22.241.152 (26 Sep 2011 04:17:09 -0700)
X-Original-Trace: 26 Sep 2011 04:17:09 -0700, vip152.sybase.com
X-Authenticated-User: pb125beta
Path: forums-1-dub!not-for-mail
Xref: forums-1-dub sybase.public.powerbuilder.futures.discussion:27761
Article PK: 452101

Hi Brett;

That might be an option ... but I would need WS's hosted in WebLogic!
With WL I am forced back to needing ASP. IIs is out as far as this client is
concerned. If I could make a simple DPB EXE and deploy this to W2003/3008 I
would be "home free" on this project. Again, this is just one more example
of where PB is loosing out.

--
Regards ... Chris
Blog: http://chrispollach.blogspot.com
PBDJ: http://chrispollach.sys-con.com
SourceForge: http://sourceforge.net/projects/stdfndclass

"Brett Weaver" <bretnsp@weaversoft.com> wrote in message
news:2jf08718id9cd893gbqjs0eo7i7cc3u4p5@4ax.com...
>
> I wrote something similar using Web Services..
> Why can't you use those?
>
> You cane even use "SOA" in your proposal :-)
>
> On 25 Sep 2011 20:23:07 -0700, "Chris Pollach"
> <cpollach.at.travel-net.dot.com> wrote:
>
>>Hi all;
>>
>> I just got a specification to build a server based reporting system
>> that
>>would further automate PB and InfoMaker reports (see attached).
>>Unfortunately, with EAServer not an option (client wants to use WebLogic)
>>and the Application Server Plug-in going `nowhere` these days - I need a
>>simple, light weight and cost effective server to host NVUO`s and run
>>scheduled services in order to implement this application feature.
>>
>> This is only one example of dozens of requirements I have had this year
>>that could have led to more PB work! if we only still had Distributed
>>PowerBuilder! How about it Sybase ... for PB15? :-)
>>
>>Regards ... Chris


Jim O'Neil Posted on 2011-09-26 15:24:50.0Z
From: Jim O'Neil <jim.oneil@microsoft.com>
Newsgroups: sybase.public.powerbuilder.futures.discussion
Subject: Re: I Need Distributed PB Back
Message-ID: <r55187psbojr1p6crftb3apj1tt9gl3q9p@4ax.com>
References: <4e7ff01b@forums-1-dub> <2jf08718id9cd893gbqjs0eo7i7cc3u4p5@4ax.com> <4e805f35$1@forums-1-dub>
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 6.00/32.1186
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
NNTP-Posting-Host: vip152.sybase.com
X-Original-NNTP-Posting-Host: vip152.sybase.com
Date: 26 Sep 2011 08:24:50 -0700
X-Trace: forums-1-dub 1317050690 10.22.241.152 (26 Sep 2011 08:24:50 -0700)
X-Original-Trace: 26 Sep 2011 08:24:50 -0700, vip152.sybase.com
Lines: 42
X-Authenticated-User: TeamSybase
Path: forums-1-dub!not-for-mail
Xref: forums-1-dub sybase.public.powerbuilder.futures.discussion:27770
Article PK: 452113

So IIS, which is part of a Windows Server license is out, but it would
be ok to install a 3rd-party, proprietary server (DPB) and that same
Windows Server? I'm guessing WebLogic is NOT running on Windows?
Seems to me out of the gate you'd have trouble convincing them they
need a Windows machine at all.

And BTW you wouldn't need ASP, WCF services don't need to run in IIS.
And if you're using pre-PB 12.5, you could still create a wrapper WCF
service and P/Invoke (PBNI, or whatever) to your PB object.

DPB was a great proof-of-concept for distributed applications, but
there was a reason it was discontinued - and not just because Sybase
wanted to push EAServer (Jaguar at the time). The implementation had
some serious shortcomings in terms of scalability and durability
(remember, I was supporting the product then), and in many cases it
was pushed beyond its limits. In fact, those same shortcomings
plagued (and continue to plague) the PBVM implementation in EAServer.

DPB was great for demos and even ok for small departmental apps, but
building an app server just wasn't (and shouldn't have been) something
the PowerBuilder team took on. Interoperability is the path, and you
have that now. If you want a pure PB-play, it's not that hard to
write a DPB server yourself, I'd start with a C++ socket server, pull
in some PBNI, and open source it all - problem solved :)

Jim O'Neil
Developer Evangelist
Microsoft
@jimoneil - http://blogs.msdn.com/jimoneil

http://blogs.msdn.com/jimoneil | @jimoneil

On 26 Sep 2011 04:17:09 -0700, "Chris Pollach"

<cpollach@travel-net.com> wrote:

>Hi Brett;
>
> That might be an option ... but I would need WS's hosted in WebLogic!
>With WL I am forced back to needing ASP. IIs is out as far as this client is
>concerned. If I could make a simple DPB EXE and deploy this to W2003/3008 I
>would be "home free" on this project. Again, this is just one more example
>of where PB is loosing out.


Chris Pollach Posted on 2011-09-26 15:50:39.0Z
From: "Chris Pollach" <cpollach@travel-net.com>
Newsgroups: sybase.public.powerbuilder.futures.discussion
References: <4e7ff01b@forums-1-dub> <2jf08718id9cd893gbqjs0eo7i7cc3u4p5@4ax.com> <4e805f35$1@forums-1-dub> <r55187psbojr1p6crftb3apj1tt9gl3q9p@4ax.com>
Subject: Re: I Need Distributed PB Back
Lines: 83
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5931
X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Original
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.6109
NNTP-Posting-Host: vip152.sybase.com
X-Original-NNTP-Posting-Host: vip152.sybase.com
Message-ID: <4e809f4f$1@forums-1-dub>
Date: 26 Sep 2011 08:50:39 -0700
X-Trace: forums-1-dub 1317052239 10.22.241.152 (26 Sep 2011 08:50:39 -0700)
X-Original-Trace: 26 Sep 2011 08:50:39 -0700, vip152.sybase.com
X-Authenticated-User: pb125beta
Path: forums-1-dub!not-for-mail
Xref: forums-1-dub sybase.public.powerbuilder.futures.discussion:27771
Article PK: 452114

Hi Jim;

Just looking at you Techwave presentations ... very interesting! :-)

WL and its Web Server Apache can run on Linux or Windows. Yes, I would
need ASP to host the WS based NVUO's in WL (assuming the client would accept
running MS-Windows). Right now, they are favouring Linux for production -
based on cost and administration expertise. What I need is something
light-weight, simple, easy to deploy that could run on their older Windows
servers as an alternative.

FYI: I had DPD government client here in Ottawa running 800-1000
concurrent web sessions on DPB. Believe me, when your NVUO's are written
well - DPD scales nicely!!!!

I am not writing my own DPD. If the vendor does not natively support it
.. my clients will not accept it. As you suggest though - bringing back some
form of DPD should be child's play for Sybase if the average PB developer
can do it with PBNI and some sort of Socket support. :-)

Anyway - just showing that Sybase has painted PB into a corner in this
area. If you want developers to succeed with your product you have to look
at it as a tool chest - not just a single tool. With a variety of tools in
your tool chest - the PB developer can select the right combination. When
you are limited to the Harley Davidson tool set - Vise Grips and Hammer
<bg> - you can't get too far on those more finicky repairs! :-)


--
Regards ... Chris
Blog: http://chrispollach.blogspot.com
PBDJ: http://chrispollach.sys-con.com
SourceForge: http://sourceforge.net/projects/stdfndclass

"Jim O'Neil" <jim.oneil@microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:r55187psbojr1p6crftb3apj1tt9gl3q9p@4ax.com...
> So IIS, which is part of a Windows Server license is out, but it would
> be ok to install a 3rd-party, proprietary server (DPB) and that same
> Windows Server? I'm guessing WebLogic is NOT running on Windows?
> Seems to me out of the gate you'd have trouble convincing them they
> need a Windows machine at all.
>
> And BTW you wouldn't need ASP, WCF services don't need to run in IIS.
> And if you're using pre-PB 12.5, you could still create a wrapper WCF
> service and P/Invoke (PBNI, or whatever) to your PB object.
>
> DPB was a great proof-of-concept for distributed applications, but
> there was a reason it was discontinued - and not just because Sybase
> wanted to push EAServer (Jaguar at the time). The implementation had
> some serious shortcomings in terms of scalability and durability
> (remember, I was supporting the product then), and in many cases it
> was pushed beyond its limits. In fact, those same shortcomings
> plagued (and continue to plague) the PBVM implementation in EAServer.
>
> DPB was great for demos and even ok for small departmental apps, but
> building an app server just wasn't (and shouldn't have been) something
> the PowerBuilder team took on. Interoperability is the path, and you
> have that now. If you want a pure PB-play, it's not that hard to
> write a DPB server yourself, I'd start with a C++ socket server, pull
> in some PBNI, and open source it all - problem solved :)
>
> Jim O'Neil
> Developer Evangelist
> Microsoft
> @jimoneil - http://blogs.msdn.com/jimoneil
>
> http://blogs.msdn.com/jimoneil | @jimoneil
>
> On 26 Sep 2011 04:17:09 -0700, "Chris Pollach"
> <cpollach@travel-net.com> wrote:
>
>>Hi Brett;
>>
>> That might be an option ... but I would need WS's hosted in WebLogic!
>>With WL I am forced back to needing ASP. IIs is out as far as this client
>>is
>>concerned. If I could make a simple DPB EXE and deploy this to W2003/3008
>>I
>>would be "home free" on this project. Again, this is just one more example
>>of where PB is loosing out.


Bruce Armstrong Posted on 2011-09-26 16:24:15.0Z
User-Agent: NewsTap/3.2 (iPad)
From: Bruce Armstrong <NOCANSPAM_bruce.armstrong@yahoo.com>
Newsgroups: sybase.public.powerbuilder.futures.discussion
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Message-ID: <620070879338746838.716807NOCANSPAM_bruce.armstrong-yahoo.com@forums.sybase.com>
Subject: Re: I Need Distributed PB Back
References: <4e809f4f$1@forums-1-dub>
NNTP-Posting-Host: vip152.sybase.com
X-Original-NNTP-Posting-Host: vip152.sybase.com
Date: 26 Sep 2011 09:24:15 -0700
X-Trace: forums-1-dub 1317054255 10.22.241.152 (26 Sep 2011 09:24:15 -0700)
X-Original-Trace: 26 Sep 2011 09:24:15 -0700, vip152.sybase.com
Lines: 38
X-Authenticated-User: TeamSybase
Path: forums-1-dub!not-for-mail
Xref: forums-1-dub sybase.public.powerbuilder.futures.discussion:27772
Article PK: 452115

Jim wasn't suggesting that Sybase should put it back in though. If I
understood him correctly, he was suggesting that PB is a toolbox, and you
could use that toolbox to create the capability you are asking for. You
don't have to depend on Sybase to add it. There's nothing stopping you
from implementing your own solution now.

Also, you are aware that Jim works for Microsoft, and has for some time
now? In that context, it's unclear what you mean by 'your product' when
responding to him.

"Chris Pollach" <cpollach@travel-net.com> wrote:
> Hi Jim;
>
> Just looking at you Techwave presentations ... very interesting! :-)
>
> WL and its Web Server Apache can run on Linux or Windows. Yes, I would
> need ASP to host the WS based NVUO's in WL (assuming the client would accept
> running MS-Windows). Right now, they are favouring Linux for production -
> based on cost and administration expertise. What I need is something
> light-weight, simple, easy to deploy that could run on their older Windows
> servers as an alternative.
>
> FYI: I had DPD government client here in Ottawa running 800-1000
> concurrent web sessions on DPB. Believe me, when your NVUO's are written
> well - DPD scales nicely!!!!
>
> I am not writing my own DPD. If the vendor does not natively support it
> .. my clients will not accept it. As you suggest though - bringing back some
> form of DPD should be child's play for Sybase if the average PB developer
> can do it with PBNI and some sort of Socket support. :-)
>
> Anyway - just showing that Sybase has painted PB into a corner in this
> area. If you want developers to succeed with your product you have to look
> at it as a tool chest - not just a single tool. With a variety of tools in
> your tool chest - the PB developer can select the right combination. When
> you are limited to the Harley Davidson tool set - Vise Grips and Hammer
> <bg> - you can't get too far on those more finicky repairs! :-)
>


Chris Pollach Posted on 2011-09-26 16:49:28.0Z
From: "Chris Pollach" <cpollach@travel-net.com>
Newsgroups: sybase.public.powerbuilder.futures.discussion
References: <4e809f4f$1@forums-1-dub> <620070879338746838.716807NOCANSPAM_bruce.armstrong-yahoo.com@forums.sybase.com>
Subject: Re: I Need Distributed PB Back
Lines: 77
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5931
X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Original
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.6109
NNTP-Posting-Host: vip152.sybase.com
X-Original-NNTP-Posting-Host: vip152.sybase.com
Message-ID: <4e80ad18$1@forums-1-dub>
Date: 26 Sep 2011 09:49:28 -0700
X-Trace: forums-1-dub 1317055768 10.22.241.152 (26 Sep 2011 09:49:28 -0700)
X-Original-Trace: 26 Sep 2011 09:49:28 -0700, vip152.sybase.com
X-Authenticated-User: pb125beta
Path: forums-1-dub!not-for-mail
Xref: forums-1-dub sybase.public.powerbuilder.futures.discussion:27774
Article PK: 452116

Hi Bruce;

Yes, Jim "jumped ship" some time ago. :-)

I am afraid that many people at Sybase just consider PB a tool for C/S.
They need to "beef" it up significantly IMHO to become a "robust" tool
chest. That's what you get with Web/WinDev, VS, Delphi, etc and that (I
think) is what PB developers have been looking for many releases now. In
looking at myself as a PB developer, I write business applications to be
able to "enable" the business user. So for that I need more native features
in PB such as: more native GUI controls (like Brad's Power2theBuilder),
native SMTP support, native Sharepoint support, easy .Net Interop from
Win32, built-in Spell Checker, Windows Service capability, Server capability
(ie DPD), C# User objects, full web deployment with scalability, Testing
Tool (ie PBUnit or equivalent), SCM (look at Rolands SCM written in PB),
etc.

The more Sybase puts in my PB Tool Chest - the more I can sell this to
IT management, clients and business users because it shows off my "enabling"
capabilities. If the tool chest only contains a "basic" set it won't cut it
when comparing PB to the other tool chests out there - which I might add,
are often better priced in many cases.

Regards ... Chris

"Bruce Armstrong" <NOCANSPAM_bruce.armstrong@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:620070879338746838.716807NOCANSPAM_bruce.armstrong-yahoo.com@forums.sybase.com...
> Jim wasn't suggesting that Sybase should put it back in though. If I
> understood him correctly, he was suggesting that PB is a toolbox, and you
> could use that toolbox to create the capability you are asking for. You
> don't have to depend on Sybase to add it. There's nothing stopping you
> from implementing your own solution now.
>
> Also, you are aware that Jim works for Microsoft, and has for some time
> now? In that context, it's unclear what you mean by 'your product' when
> responding to him.
>
> "Chris Pollach" <cpollach@travel-net.com> wrote:
>> Hi Jim;
>>
>> Just looking at you Techwave presentations ... very interesting!
>> :-)
>>
>> WL and its Web Server Apache can run on Linux or Windows. Yes, I would
>> need ASP to host the WS based NVUO's in WL (assuming the client would
>> accept
>> running MS-Windows). Right now, they are favouring Linux for production -
>> based on cost and administration expertise. What I need is something
>> light-weight, simple, easy to deploy that could run on their older
>> Windows
>> servers as an alternative.
>>
>> FYI: I had DPD government client here in Ottawa running 800-1000
>> concurrent web sessions on DPB. Believe me, when your NVUO's are written
>> well - DPD scales nicely!!!!
>>
>> I am not writing my own DPD. If the vendor does not natively support
>> it
>> .. my clients will not accept it. As you suggest though - bringing back
>> some
>> form of DPD should be child's play for Sybase if the average PB developer
>> can do it with PBNI and some sort of Socket support. :-)
>>
>> Anyway - just showing that Sybase has painted PB into a corner in
>> this
>> area. If you want developers to succeed with your product you have to
>> look
>> at it as a tool chest - not just a single tool. With a variety of tools
>> in
>> your tool chest - the PB developer can select the right combination. When
>> you are limited to the Harley Davidson tool set - Vise Grips and Hammer
>> <bg> - you can't get too far on those more finicky repairs! :-)
>>


Bruce Armstrong Posted on 2011-09-26 17:00:36.0Z
User-Agent: NewsTap/3.2 (iPad)
From: Bruce Armstrong <NOCANSPAM_bruce.armstrong@yahoo.com>
Newsgroups: sybase.public.powerbuilder.futures.discussion
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Message-ID: <1081960112338749135.099769NOCANSPAM_bruce.armstrong-yahoo.com@forums.sybase.com>
Subject: Re: I Need Distributed PB Back
References: <4e80ad18$1@forums-1-dub>
NNTP-Posting-Host: vip152.sybase.com
X-Original-NNTP-Posting-Host: vip152.sybase.com
Date: 26 Sep 2011 10:00:36 -0700
X-Trace: forums-1-dub 1317056436 10.22.241.152 (26 Sep 2011 10:00:36 -0700)
X-Original-Trace: 26 Sep 2011 10:00:36 -0700, vip152.sybase.com
Lines: 79
X-Authenticated-User: TeamSybase
Path: forums-1-dub!not-for-mail
Xref: forums-1-dub sybase.public.powerbuilder.futures.discussion:27776
Article PK: 452120

Give in to the dark side (embrace PB.Net) and you will get many of the
features you say you need.

"Chris Pollach" <cpollach@travel-net.com> wrote:
> Hi Bruce;
>
> Yes, Jim "jumped ship" some time ago. :-)
>
> I am afraid that many people at Sybase just consider PB a tool for C/S.
> They need to "beef" it up significantly IMHO to become a "robust" tool
> chest. That's what you get with Web/WinDev, VS, Delphi, etc and that (I
> think) is what PB developers have been looking for many releases now. In
> looking at myself as a PB developer, I write business applications to be
> able to "enable" the business user. So for that I need more native features
> in PB such as: more native GUI controls (like Brad's Power2theBuilder),
> native SMTP support, native Sharepoint support, easy .Net Interop from
> Win32, built-in Spell Checker, Windows Service capability, Server capability
> (ie DPD), C# User objects, full web deployment with scalability, Testing
> Tool (ie PBUnit or equivalent), SCM (look at Rolands SCM written in PB),
> etc.
>
> The more Sybase puts in my PB Tool Chest - the more I can sell this to
> IT management, clients and business users because it shows off my "enabling"
> capabilities. If the tool chest only contains a "basic" set it won't cut it
> when comparing PB to the other tool chests out there - which I might add,
> are often better priced in many cases.
>
> Regards ... Chris
>
>
>
> "Bruce Armstrong" <NOCANSPAM_bruce.armstrong@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:620070879338746838.716807NOCANSPAM_bruce.armstrong-yahoo.com@forums.sybase.com...
>> Jim wasn't suggesting that Sybase should put it back in though. If I
>> understood him correctly, he was suggesting that PB is a toolbox, and you
>> could use that toolbox to create the capability you are asking for. You
>> don't have to depend on Sybase to add it. There's nothing stopping you
>> from implementing your own solution now.
>>
>> Also, you are aware that Jim works for Microsoft, and has for some time
>> now? In that context, it's unclear what you mean by 'your product' when
>> responding to him.
>>
>> "Chris Pollach" <cpollach@travel-net.com> wrote:
>>> Hi Jim;
>>>
>>> Just looking at you Techwave presentations ... very interesting!
>>> :-)
>>>
>>> WL and its Web Server Apache can run on Linux or Windows. Yes, I would
>>> need ASP to host the WS based NVUO's in WL (assuming the client would
>>> accept
>>> running MS-Windows). Right now, they are favouring Linux for production -
>>> based on cost and administration expertise. What I need is something
>>> light-weight, simple, easy to deploy that could run on their older
>>> Windows
>>> servers as an alternative.
>>>
>>> FYI: I had DPD government client here in Ottawa running 800-1000
>>> concurrent web sessions on DPB. Believe me, when your NVUO's are written
>>> well - DPD scales nicely!!!!
>>>
>>> I am not writing my own DPD. If the vendor does not natively support
>>> it
>>> .. my clients will not accept it. As you suggest though - bringing back
>>> some
>>> form of DPD should be child's play for Sybase if the average PB developer
>>> can do it with PBNI and some sort of Socket support. :-)
>>>
>>> Anyway - just showing that Sybase has painted PB into a corner in
>>> this
>>> area. If you want developers to succeed with your product you have to
>>> look
>>> at it as a tool chest - not just a single tool. With a variety of tools
>>> in
>>> your tool chest - the PB developer can select the right combination. When
>>> you are limited to the Harley Davidson tool set - Vise Grips and Hammer
>>> <bg> - you can't get too far on those more finicky repairs! :-)
>>>


Chris Pollach Posted on 2011-09-26 17:59:40.0Z
From: "Chris Pollach" <cpollach@travel-net.com>
Newsgroups: sybase.public.powerbuilder.futures.discussion
References: <4e80ad18$1@forums-1-dub> <1081960112338749135.099769NOCANSPAM_bruce.armstrong-yahoo.com@forums.sybase.com>
Subject: Re: I Need Distributed PB Back
Lines: 102
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5931
X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Original
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.6109
NNTP-Posting-Host: vip152.sybase.com
X-Original-NNTP-Posting-Host: vip152.sybase.com
Message-ID: <4e80bd8c$1@forums-1-dub>
Date: 26 Sep 2011 10:59:40 -0700
X-Trace: forums-1-dub 1317059980 10.22.241.152 (26 Sep 2011 10:59:40 -0700)
X-Original-Trace: 26 Sep 2011 10:59:40 -0700, vip152.sybase.com
X-Authenticated-User: pb125beta
Path: forums-1-dub!not-for-mail
Xref: forums-1-dub sybase.public.powerbuilder.futures.discussion:27778
Article PK: 452121

Even worse ... no web, have pay $$$ for any decent controls, no EAServer,
etc. :-(

"Bruce Armstrong" <NOCANSPAM_bruce.armstrong@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1081960112338749135.099769NOCANSPAM_bruce.armstrong-yahoo.com@forums.sybase.com...
> Give in to the dark side (embrace PB.Net) and you will get many of the
> features you say you need.
>
> "Chris Pollach" <cpollach@travel-net.com> wrote:
>> Hi Bruce;
>>
>> Yes, Jim "jumped ship" some time ago. :-)
>>
>> I am afraid that many people at Sybase just consider PB a tool for
>> C/S.
>> They need to "beef" it up significantly IMHO to become a "robust" tool
>> chest. That's what you get with Web/WinDev, VS, Delphi, etc and that (I
>> think) is what PB developers have been looking for many releases now. In
>> looking at myself as a PB developer, I write business applications to be
>> able to "enable" the business user. So for that I need more native
>> features
>> in PB such as: more native GUI controls (like Brad's Power2theBuilder),
>> native SMTP support, native Sharepoint support, easy .Net Interop from
>> Win32, built-in Spell Checker, Windows Service capability, Server
>> capability
>> (ie DPD), C# User objects, full web deployment with scalability, Testing
>> Tool (ie PBUnit or equivalent), SCM (look at Rolands SCM written in PB),
>> etc.
>>
>> The more Sybase puts in my PB Tool Chest - the more I can sell this
>> to
>> IT management, clients and business users because it shows off my
>> "enabling"
>> capabilities. If the tool chest only contains a "basic" set it won't cut
>> it
>> when comparing PB to the other tool chests out there - which I might add,
>> are often better priced in many cases.
>>
>> Regards ... Chris
>>
>>
>>
>> "Bruce Armstrong" <NOCANSPAM_bruce.armstrong@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> news:620070879338746838.716807NOCANSPAM_bruce.armstrong-yahoo.com@forums.sybase.com...
>>> Jim wasn't suggesting that Sybase should put it back in though. If I
>>> understood him correctly, he was suggesting that PB is a toolbox, and
>>> you
>>> could use that toolbox to create the capability you are asking for. You
>>> don't have to depend on Sybase to add it. There's nothing stopping you
>>> from implementing your own solution now.
>>>
>>> Also, you are aware that Jim works for Microsoft, and has for some time
>>> now? In that context, it's unclear what you mean by 'your product' when
>>> responding to him.
>>>
>>> "Chris Pollach" <cpollach@travel-net.com> wrote:
>>>> Hi Jim;
>>>>
>>>> Just looking at you Techwave presentations ... very interesting!
>>>> :-)
>>>>
>>>> WL and its Web Server Apache can run on Linux or Windows. Yes, I
>>>> would
>>>> need ASP to host the WS based NVUO's in WL (assuming the client would
>>>> accept
>>>> running MS-Windows). Right now, they are favouring Linux for
>>>> production -
>>>> based on cost and administration expertise. What I need is something
>>>> light-weight, simple, easy to deploy that could run on their older
>>>> Windows
>>>> servers as an alternative.
>>>>
>>>> FYI: I had DPD government client here in Ottawa running 800-1000
>>>> concurrent web sessions on DPB. Believe me, when your NVUO's are
>>>> written
>>>> well - DPD scales nicely!!!!
>>>>
>>>> I am not writing my own DPD. If the vendor does not natively
>>>> support
>>>> it
>>>> .. my clients will not accept it. As you suggest though - bringing back
>>>> some
>>>> form of DPD should be child's play for Sybase if the average PB
>>>> developer
>>>> can do it with PBNI and some sort of Socket support. :-)
>>>>
>>>> Anyway - just showing that Sybase has painted PB into a corner in
>>>> this
>>>> area. If you want developers to succeed with your product you have to
>>>> look
>>>> at it as a tool chest - not just a single tool. With a variety of tools
>>>> in
>>>> your tool chest - the PB developer can select the right combination.
>>>> When
>>>> you are limited to the Harley Davidson tool set - Vise Grips and Hammer
>>>> <bg> - you can't get too far on those more finicky repairs! :-)
>>>>


Jim O'Neil Posted on 2011-09-27 05:15:58.0Z
From: Jim O'Neil <jim.oneil@microsoft.com>
Newsgroups: sybase.public.powerbuilder.futures.discussion
Subject: Re: I Need Distributed PB Back
Message-ID: <0ek287h27nad6luq1nofulvf1dp3njkjka@4ax.com>
References: <4e809f4f$1@forums-1-dub> <620070879338746838.716807NOCANSPAM_bruce.armstrong-yahoo.com@forums.sybase.com> <4e80ad18$1@forums-1-dub>
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 6.00/32.1186
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
NNTP-Posting-Host: vip152.sybase.com
X-Original-NNTP-Posting-Host: vip152.sybase.com
Date: 26 Sep 2011 22:15:58 -0700
X-Trace: forums-1-dub 1317100558 10.22.241.152 (26 Sep 2011 22:15:58 -0700)
X-Original-Trace: 26 Sep 2011 22:15:58 -0700, vip152.sybase.com
Lines: 114
X-Authenticated-User: TeamSybase
Path: forums-1-dub!not-for-mail
Xref: forums-1-dub sybase.public.powerbuilder.futures.discussion:27788
Article PK: 452131


>>> What I need is something light-weight, simple, easy to deploy that could run on their older
>>> Windows servers as an alternative.

Again - Windows Server -> ASMX/WCF - there's your solution. Once you
concede need for a the Windows platform there isn't a compelling
argument for DPB today other than nostalgia. Using your analogy, I
often feel DPB is your hammer.

I'd agree with some of your other points, but definitely not all.. and
if you take a look at how software is being developed today, it's not
one tool. It's best of breed, and even Microsoft is just now waking
up to that. GenX, Yers are building applications with Python, Mongo,
RabbitMQ, Varnish, memcached, and a host of other open source projects
that have no single neck to choke. For a good read check out
http://blogs.hbr.org/cs/2011/03/open_source_software_hits_a_st.html
where it's becoming clear that Open Source is now being viewed as a
competitive advantage versus just a cost-saving measure. That's why I
said that interoperability is the key to building next-generation
applications, not everything in the box. Granted the more you get
from OSS the more you have to justify the pricetag on your app dev
tool :). Visual Studio does that value-add through app lifecycle
management not widgets in your drag-and-drop toolbox pane.

Unfortunately, I'd say that PowerBuilder does lag interop-wise - JSON,
REST, .NET Interop - but those (mostly) are the areas that they are
pursuing actively and I really do believe they are making the right
choice to do so. Do them correctly and thoroughly and the rest will
come (maybe not as fast as we'd all like), but it's incumbent on
developers making the choices and being aware of what's out there to
complement what PowerBuilder provides.

Lastly, I also had to admit, WebLogic - really? I thought that J2EE
was nearly as legacy as PowerBuilder <GD&R> but perhaps WebLogic has
more to it than when I touched it.


On 26 Sep 2011 09:49:28 -0700, "Chris Pollach"
<cpollach@travel-net.com> wrote:

>Hi Bruce;
>
> Yes, Jim "jumped ship" some time ago. :-)
>
> I am afraid that many people at Sybase just consider PB a tool for C/S.
>They need to "beef" it up significantly IMHO to become a "robust" tool
>chest. That's what you get with Web/WinDev, VS, Delphi, etc and that (I
>think) is what PB developers have been looking for many releases now. In
>looking at myself as a PB developer, I write business applications to be
>able to "enable" the business user. So for that I need more native features
>in PB such as: more native GUI controls (like Brad's Power2theBuilder),
>native SMTP support, native Sharepoint support, easy .Net Interop from
>Win32, built-in Spell Checker, Windows Service capability, Server capability
>(ie DPD), C# User objects, full web deployment with scalability, Testing
>Tool (ie PBUnit or equivalent), SCM (look at Rolands SCM written in PB),
>etc.
>
> The more Sybase puts in my PB Tool Chest - the more I can sell this to
>IT management, clients and business users because it shows off my "enabling"
>capabilities. If the tool chest only contains a "basic" set it won't cut it
>when comparing PB to the other tool chests out there - which I might add,
>are often better priced in many cases.
>
>Regards ... Chris
>
>
>
>"Bruce Armstrong" <NOCANSPAM_bruce.armstrong@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>news:620070879338746838.716807NOCANSPAM_bruce.armstrong-yahoo.com@forums.sybase.com...
>> Jim wasn't suggesting that Sybase should put it back in though. If I
>> understood him correctly, he was suggesting that PB is a toolbox, and you
>> could use that toolbox to create the capability you are asking for. You
>> don't have to depend on Sybase to add it. There's nothing stopping you
>> from implementing your own solution now.
>>
>> Also, you are aware that Jim works for Microsoft, and has for some time
>> now? In that context, it's unclear what you mean by 'your product' when
>> responding to him.
>>
>> "Chris Pollach" <cpollach@travel-net.com> wrote:
>>> Hi Jim;
>>>
>>> Just looking at you Techwave presentations ... very interesting!
>>> :-)
>>>
>>> WL and its Web Server Apache can run on Linux or Windows. Yes, I would
>>> need ASP to host the WS based NVUO's in WL (assuming the client would
>>> accept
>>> running MS-Windows). Right now, they are favouring Linux for production -
>>> based on cost and administration expertise. What I need is something
>>> light-weight, simple, easy to deploy that could run on their older
>>> Windows
>>> servers as an alternative.
>>>
>>> FYI: I had DPD government client here in Ottawa running 800-1000
>>> concurrent web sessions on DPB. Believe me, when your NVUO's are written
>>> well - DPD scales nicely!!!!
>>>
>>> I am not writing my own DPD. If the vendor does not natively support
>>> it
>>> .. my clients will not accept it. As you suggest though - bringing back
>>> some
>>> form of DPD should be child's play for Sybase if the average PB developer
>>> can do it with PBNI and some sort of Socket support. :-)
>>>
>>> Anyway - just showing that Sybase has painted PB into a corner in
>>> this
>>> area. If you want developers to succeed with your product you have to
>>> look
>>> at it as a tool chest - not just a single tool. With a variety of tools
>>> in
>>> your tool chest - the PB developer can select the right combination. When
>>> you are limited to the Harley Davidson tool set - Vise Grips and Hammer
>>> <bg> - you can't get too far on those more finicky repairs! :-)
>>>
>


Chris Pollach Posted on 2011-09-27 11:46:52.0Z
From: "Chris Pollach" <cpollach@travel-net.com>
Newsgroups: sybase.public.powerbuilder.futures.discussion
References: <4e809f4f$1@forums-1-dub> <620070879338746838.716807NOCANSPAM_bruce.armstrong-yahoo.com@forums.sybase.com> <4e80ad18$1@forums-1-dub> <0ek287h27nad6luq1nofulvf1dp3njkjka@4ax.com>
Subject: Re: I Need Distributed PB Back
Lines: 165
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5931
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.6109
X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Original
NNTP-Posting-Host: vip152.sybase.com
X-Original-NNTP-Posting-Host: vip152.sybase.com
Message-ID: <4e81b7ac@forums-1-dub>
Date: 27 Sep 2011 04:46:52 -0700
X-Trace: forums-1-dub 1317124012 10.22.241.152 (27 Sep 2011 04:46:52 -0700)
X-Original-Trace: 27 Sep 2011 04:46:52 -0700, vip152.sybase.com
X-Authenticated-User: pb125beta
Path: forums-1-dub!not-for-mail
Xref: forums-1-dub sybase.public.powerbuilder.futures.discussion:27792
Article PK: 452133

Hi Jim;

There are "tons" of WebLogic and WebSphere application servers around
the Canadian Federal Government. I am not sure how that statistic stacks up
around NA and globally - but these are the two main ones I see in my area. I
would say that in the small departments and private industry that jBoss has
a good following as well. I would love it (and I am sure so would Sybase) if
everything they were building in the current PB versions were based on .Net
and IIs. However, in reality MS only rules about 45% of IT shops (at least
in my area). I think that your "interoperability" statement is an excellent
point and the key for PB developers as we often have to interface to many
worlds in a business application. That is why I have been on about native
support for LDAP, SMTP, SharePoint, etc.

If Sybase cannot develop their own light weight "C" based application
server, and they are not developing & promoting EAServer / Application
Server Plug-In - then what can we reply on as application developers for
n-tier development? Also, even though PB can deploy to IIs, Sybase does not
support NVUO multi-threading (no Activate/deactivate events), service
objects, data caching, instance pooling, session management, security, 64
bit operations, etc in the II environment. Unless these type of things is
addressed deployment to IIs for large production systems is not viable
(IMHO).

I appreciate your feedback - though I do consider it a little biased
towards MS. :-)

--
Regards ... Chris
Blog: http://chrispollach.blogspot.com
PBDJ: http://chrispollach.sys-con.com
SourceForge: http://sourceforge.net/projects/stdfndclass

"Jim O'Neil" <jim.oneil@microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:0ek287h27nad6luq1nofulvf1dp3njkjka@4ax.com...
>>>> What I need is something light-weight, simple, easy to deploy that
>>>> could run on their older
>>>> Windows servers as an alternative.
> Again - Windows Server -> ASMX/WCF - there's your solution. Once you
> concede need for a the Windows platform there isn't a compelling
> argument for DPB today other than nostalgia. Using your analogy, I
> often feel DPB is your hammer.
>
> I'd agree with some of your other points, but definitely not all.. and
> if you take a look at how software is being developed today, it's not
> one tool. It's best of breed, and even Microsoft is just now waking
> up to that. GenX, Yers are building applications with Python, Mongo,
> RabbitMQ, Varnish, memcached, and a host of other open source projects
> that have no single neck to choke. For a good read check out
> http://blogs.hbr.org/cs/2011/03/open_source_software_hits_a_st.html
> where it's becoming clear that Open Source is now being viewed as a
> competitive advantage versus just a cost-saving measure. That's why I
> said that interoperability is the key to building next-generation
> applications, not everything in the box. Granted the more you get
> from OSS the more you have to justify the pricetag on your app dev
> tool :). Visual Studio does that value-add through app lifecycle
> management not widgets in your drag-and-drop toolbox pane.
>
> Unfortunately, I'd say that PowerBuilder does lag interop-wise - JSON,
> REST, .NET Interop - but those (mostly) are the areas that they are
> pursuing actively and I really do believe they are making the right
> choice to do so. Do them correctly and thoroughly and the rest will
> come (maybe not as fast as we'd all like), but it's incumbent on
> developers making the choices and being aware of what's out there to
> complement what PowerBuilder provides.
>
> Lastly, I also had to admit, WebLogic - really? I thought that J2EE
> was nearly as legacy as PowerBuilder <GD&R> but perhaps WebLogic has
> more to it than when I touched it.
>
>
> On 26 Sep 2011 09:49:28 -0700, "Chris Pollach"
> <cpollach@travel-net.com> wrote:
>
>>Hi Bruce;
>>
>> Yes, Jim "jumped ship" some time ago. :-)
>>
>> I am afraid that many people at Sybase just consider PB a tool for
>> C/S.
>>They need to "beef" it up significantly IMHO to become a "robust" tool
>>chest. That's what you get with Web/WinDev, VS, Delphi, etc and that (I
>>think) is what PB developers have been looking for many releases now. In
>>looking at myself as a PB developer, I write business applications to be
>>able to "enable" the business user. So for that I need more native
>>features
>>in PB such as: more native GUI controls (like Brad's Power2theBuilder),
>>native SMTP support, native Sharepoint support, easy .Net Interop from
>>Win32, built-in Spell Checker, Windows Service capability, Server
>>capability
>>(ie DPD), C# User objects, full web deployment with scalability, Testing
>>Tool (ie PBUnit or equivalent), SCM (look at Rolands SCM written in PB),
>>etc.
>>
>> The more Sybase puts in my PB Tool Chest - the more I can sell this to
>>IT management, clients and business users because it shows off my
>>"enabling"
>>capabilities. If the tool chest only contains a "basic" set it won't cut
>>it
>>when comparing PB to the other tool chests out there - which I might add,
>>are often better priced in many cases.
>>
>>Regards ... Chris
>>
>>
>>
>>"Bruce Armstrong" <NOCANSPAM_bruce.armstrong@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>news:620070879338746838.716807NOCANSPAM_bruce.armstrong-yahoo.com@forums.sybase.com...
>>> Jim wasn't suggesting that Sybase should put it back in though. If I
>>> understood him correctly, he was suggesting that PB is a toolbox, and
>>> you
>>> could use that toolbox to create the capability you are asking for. You
>>> don't have to depend on Sybase to add it. There's nothing stopping you
>>> from implementing your own solution now.
>>>
>>> Also, you are aware that Jim works for Microsoft, and has for some time
>>> now? In that context, it's unclear what you mean by 'your product' when
>>> responding to him.
>>>
>>> "Chris Pollach" <cpollach@travel-net.com> wrote:
>>>> Hi Jim;
>>>>
>>>> Just looking at you Techwave presentations ... very interesting!
>>>> :-)
>>>>
>>>> WL and its Web Server Apache can run on Linux or Windows. Yes, I
>>>> would
>>>> need ASP to host the WS based NVUO's in WL (assuming the client would
>>>> accept
>>>> running MS-Windows). Right now, they are favouring Linux for
>>>> production -
>>>> based on cost and administration expertise. What I need is something
>>>> light-weight, simple, easy to deploy that could run on their older
>>>> Windows
>>>> servers as an alternative.
>>>>
>>>> FYI: I had DPD government client here in Ottawa running 800-1000
>>>> concurrent web sessions on DPB. Believe me, when your NVUO's are
>>>> written
>>>> well - DPD scales nicely!!!!
>>>>
>>>> I am not writing my own DPD. If the vendor does not natively
>>>> support
>>>> it
>>>> .. my clients will not accept it. As you suggest though - bringing back
>>>> some
>>>> form of DPD should be child's play for Sybase if the average PB
>>>> developer
>>>> can do it with PBNI and some sort of Socket support. :-)
>>>>
>>>> Anyway - just showing that Sybase has painted PB into a corner in
>>>> this
>>>> area. If you want developers to succeed with your product you have to
>>>> look
>>>> at it as a tool chest - not just a single tool. With a variety of tools
>>>> in
>>>> your tool chest - the PB developer can select the right combination.
>>>> When
>>>> you are limited to the Harley Davidson tool set - Vise Grips and Hammer
>>>> <bg> - you can't get too far on those more finicky repairs! :-)
>>>>
>>


Jason 'Bug' Fenter [TeamSybase] Posted on 2011-09-26 16:25:00.0Z
From: "Jason 'Bug' Fenter [TeamSybase]" <jason.fenter@teamsybase.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:6.0.2) Gecko/20110902 Thunderbird/6.0.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: sybase.public.powerbuilder.futures.discussion
Subject: Re: I Need Distributed PB Back
References: <4e7ff01b@forums-1-dub> <2jf08718id9cd893gbqjs0eo7i7cc3u4p5@4ax.com> <4e805f35$1@forums-1-dub> <r55187psbojr1p6crftb3apj1tt9gl3q9p@4ax.com> <4e809f4f$1@forums-1-dub>
In-Reply-To: <4e809f4f$1@forums-1-dub>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
NNTP-Posting-Host: vip152.sybase.com
X-Original-NNTP-Posting-Host: vip152.sybase.com
Message-ID: <4e80a75c$1@forums-1-dub>
Date: 26 Sep 2011 09:25:00 -0700
X-Trace: forums-1-dub 1317054300 10.22.241.152 (26 Sep 2011 09:25:00 -0700)
X-Original-Trace: 26 Sep 2011 09:25:00 -0700, vip152.sybase.com
Lines: 44
X-Authenticated-User: TeamSybase
Path: forums-1-dub!not-for-mail
Xref: forums-1-dub sybase.public.powerbuilder.futures.discussion:27773
Article PK: 452118

Wait... wait. Let me make sure I understand this right. Sybase released
a proof-of-concept. One vocal customer used it extensively. Sybase
decided that they did not have the resources to fully develop that
proof-of-concept. Thus, according to one vocal customer, Sybase has
"painted PB into a corner".

Would it be "child's play" for Sybase to re-implement a basic
proof-of-concept again? Maybe. The difference is that Sybase would have
to create a generic solution that satisfies EVERYONE while someone like
you could create a small context-specific server that fits *your*
requirements and doesn't need to do anything else. I think the scope of
those two projects are quite different.

On 09/26/2011 10:50 AM, Chris Pollach wrote:
> Hi Jim;
>
> Just looking at you Techwave presentations ... very interesting! :-)
>
> WL and its Web Server Apache can run on Linux or Windows. Yes, I would
> need ASP to host the WS based NVUO's in WL (assuming the client would accept
> running MS-Windows). Right now, they are favouring Linux for production -
> based on cost and administration expertise. What I need is something
> light-weight, simple, easy to deploy that could run on their older Windows
> servers as an alternative.
>
> FYI: I had DPD government client here in Ottawa running 800-1000
> concurrent web sessions on DPB. Believe me, when your NVUO's are written
> well - DPD scales nicely!!!!
>
> I am not writing my own DPD. If the vendor does not natively support it
> .. my clients will not accept it. As you suggest though - bringing back some
> form of DPD should be child's play for Sybase if the average PB developer
> can do it with PBNI and some sort of Socket support. :-)
>
> Anyway - just showing that Sybase has painted PB into a corner in this
> area. If you want developers to succeed with your product you have to look
> at it as a tool chest - not just a single tool. With a variety of tools in
> your tool chest - the PB developer can select the right combination. When
> you are limited to the Harley Davidson tool set - Vise Grips and Hammer
> <bg> - you can't get too far on those more finicky repairs! :-)
>
>


Chris Pollach Posted on 2011-09-26 16:54:25.0Z
From: "Chris Pollach" <cpollach@travel-net.com>
Newsgroups: sybase.public.powerbuilder.futures.discussion
References: <4e7ff01b@forums-1-dub> <2jf08718id9cd893gbqjs0eo7i7cc3u4p5@4ax.com> <4e805f35$1@forums-1-dub> <r55187psbojr1p6crftb3apj1tt9gl3q9p@4ax.com> <4e809f4f$1@forums-1-dub> <4e80a75c$1@forums-1-dub>
Subject: Re: I Need Distributed PB Back
Lines: 76
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5931
X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Response
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.6109
NNTP-Posting-Host: vip152.sybase.com
X-Original-NNTP-Posting-Host: vip152.sybase.com
Message-ID: <4e80ae41@forums-1-dub>
Date: 26 Sep 2011 09:54:25 -0700
X-Trace: forums-1-dub 1317056065 10.22.241.152 (26 Sep 2011 09:54:25 -0700)
X-Original-Trace: 26 Sep 2011 09:54:25 -0700, vip152.sybase.com
X-Authenticated-User: pb125beta
Path: forums-1-dub!not-for-mail
Xref: forums-1-dub sybase.public.powerbuilder.futures.discussion:27775
Article PK: 452117

Jason;

DPD was NOT a proof of concept. In its hay day (PB 5 through 8) I could
point to a few dozen DPD systems running mission critical applications in
the Canadian government. I know because I taught the courses and helped many
IT shops implement it. We even had server farms running using round-robin
load balancing!

This continued until Sybase brought out EAServer (Jaguar) and then DPD
was deemed ob$olete! Come on Get Real - did you Rip Van Winkle past those
days? :-)

--
Regards ... Chris
Blog: http://chrispollach.blogspot.com
PBDJ: http://chrispollach.sys-con.com
SourceForge: http://sourceforge.net/projects/stdfndclass

"Jason 'Bug' Fenter [TeamSybase]" <jason.fenter@teamsybase.com> wrote in
message news:4e80a75c$1@forums-1-dub...
> Wait... wait. Let me make sure I understand this right. Sybase released a
> proof-of-concept. One vocal customer used it extensively. Sybase decided
> that they did not have the resources to fully develop that
> proof-of-concept. Thus, according to one vocal customer, Sybase has
> "painted PB into a corner".
>
> Would it be "child's play" for Sybase to re-implement a basic
> proof-of-concept again? Maybe. The difference is that Sybase would have to
> create a generic solution that satisfies EVERYONE while someone like you
> could create a small context-specific server that fits *your* requirements
> and doesn't need to do anything else. I think the scope of those two
> projects are quite different.
>
>
>
> On 09/26/2011 10:50 AM, Chris Pollach wrote:
>> Hi Jim;
>>
>> Just looking at you Techwave presentations ... very interesting!
>> :-)
>>
>> WL and its Web Server Apache can run on Linux or Windows. Yes, I
>> would
>> need ASP to host the WS based NVUO's in WL (assuming the client would
>> accept
>> running MS-Windows). Right now, they are favouring Linux for production -
>> based on cost and administration expertise. What I need is something
>> light-weight, simple, easy to deploy that could run on their older
>> Windows
>> servers as an alternative.
>>
>> FYI: I had DPD government client here in Ottawa running 800-1000
>> concurrent web sessions on DPB. Believe me, when your NVUO's are written
>> well - DPD scales nicely!!!!
>>
>> I am not writing my own DPD. If the vendor does not natively support
>> it
>> .. my clients will not accept it. As you suggest though - bringing back
>> some
>> form of DPD should be child's play for Sybase if the average PB developer
>> can do it with PBNI and some sort of Socket support. :-)
>>
>> Anyway - just showing that Sybase has painted PB into a corner in
>> this
>> area. If you want developers to succeed with your product you have to
>> look
>> at it as a tool chest - not just a single tool. With a variety of tools
>> in
>> your tool chest - the PB developer can select the right combination. When
>> you are limited to the Harley Davidson tool set - Vise Grips and Hammer
>> <bg> - you can't get too far on those more finicky repairs! :-)
>>
>>


Jason 'Bug' Fenter [TeamSybase] Posted on 2011-09-26 17:19:02.0Z
From: "Jason 'Bug' Fenter [TeamSybase]" <jason.fenter@teamsybase.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:6.0.2) Gecko/20110902 Thunderbird/6.0.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: sybase.public.powerbuilder.futures.discussion
Subject: Re: I Need Distributed PB Back
References: <4e7ff01b@forums-1-dub> <2jf08718id9cd893gbqjs0eo7i7cc3u4p5@4ax.com> <4e805f35$1@forums-1-dub> <r55187psbojr1p6crftb3apj1tt9gl3q9p@4ax.com> <4e809f4f$1@forums-1-dub> <4e80a75c$1@forums-1-dub> <4e80ae41@forums-1-dub>
In-Reply-To: <4e80ae41@forums-1-dub>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
NNTP-Posting-Host: vip152.sybase.com
X-Original-NNTP-Posting-Host: vip152.sybase.com
Message-ID: <4e80b406@forums-1-dub>
Date: 26 Sep 2011 10:19:02 -0700
X-Trace: forums-1-dub 1317057542 10.22.241.152 (26 Sep 2011 10:19:02 -0700)
X-Original-Trace: 26 Sep 2011 10:19:02 -0700, vip152.sybase.com
Lines: 26
Path: forums-1-dub!not-for-mail
Xref: forums-1-dub sybase.public.powerbuilder.futures.discussion:27777
Article PK: 452119

No, I didn't Van Winkle. I seem to remember DPB getting released (I
thought it was PB6). Then in the next version, it was stated to be EOL'd
with plans to be removed. Then two releases later, it *was* removed. I
never remember Sybase adding features to it or enhancing it or anything
along those lines.

And just because people used it, that doesn't mean that Sybase didn't
consider it a proof-of-concept. Also remember, that phrase is in this
conversation because a person that was internal during this time said
that this was the internal view of the feature.

On 09/26/2011 11:54 AM, Chris Pollach wrote:
> Jason;
>
> DPD was NOT a proof of concept. In its hay day (PB 5 through 8) I could
> point to a few dozen DPD systems running mission critical applications in
> the Canadian government. I know because I taught the courses and helped many
> IT shops implement it. We even had server farms running using round-robin
> load balancing!
>
> This continued until Sybase brought out EAServer (Jaguar) and then DPD
> was deemed ob$olete! Come on Get Real - did you Rip Van Winkle past those
> days? :-)
>


Chris Pollach Posted on 2011-09-26 18:01:36.0Z
From: "Chris Pollach" <cpollach@travel-net.com>
Newsgroups: sybase.public.powerbuilder.futures.discussion
References: <4e7ff01b@forums-1-dub> <2jf08718id9cd893gbqjs0eo7i7cc3u4p5@4ax.com> <4e805f35$1@forums-1-dub> <r55187psbojr1p6crftb3apj1tt9gl3q9p@4ax.com> <4e809f4f$1@forums-1-dub> <4e80a75c$1@forums-1-dub> <4e80ae41@forums-1-dub> <4e80b406@forums-1-dub>
Subject: Re: I Need Distributed PB Back
Lines: 42
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5931
X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Response
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.6109
NNTP-Posting-Host: vip152.sybase.com
X-Original-NNTP-Posting-Host: vip152.sybase.com
Message-ID: <4e80be00$1@forums-1-dub>
Date: 26 Sep 2011 11:01:36 -0700
X-Trace: forums-1-dub 1317060096 10.22.241.152 (26 Sep 2011 11:01:36 -0700)
X-Original-Trace: 26 Sep 2011 11:01:36 -0700, vip152.sybase.com
X-Authenticated-User: pb125beta
Path: forums-1-dub!not-for-mail
Xref: forums-1-dub sybase.public.powerbuilder.futures.discussion:27779
Article PK: 452122

Right ... your taking the Bill Clinton => "I smoked it but never inhaled"
route.

ROFL

"Jason 'Bug' Fenter [TeamSybase]" <jason.fenter@teamsybase.com> wrote in
message news:4e80b406@forums-1-dub...
> No, I didn't Van Winkle. I seem to remember DPB getting released (I
> thought it was PB6). Then in the next version, it was stated to be EOL'd
> with plans to be removed. Then two releases later, it *was* removed. I
> never remember Sybase adding features to it or enhancing it or anything
> along those lines.
>
> And just because people used it, that doesn't mean that Sybase didn't
> consider it a proof-of-concept. Also remember, that phrase is in this
> conversation because a person that was internal during this time said that
> this was the internal view of the feature.
>
>
>
> On 09/26/2011 11:54 AM, Chris Pollach wrote:
>> Jason;
>>
>> DPD was NOT a proof of concept. In its hay day (PB 5 through 8) I
>> could
>> point to a few dozen DPD systems running mission critical applications in
>> the Canadian government. I know because I taught the courses and helped
>> many
>> IT shops implement it. We even had server farms running using round-robin
>> load balancing!
>>
>> This continued until Sybase brought out EAServer (Jaguar) and then
>> DPD
>> was deemed ob$olete! Come on Get Real - did you Rip Van Winkle past
>> those
>> days? :-)
>>


Jason 'Bug' Fenter [TeamSybase] Posted on 2011-09-26 18:17:37.0Z
From: "Jason 'Bug' Fenter [TeamSybase]" <jason.fenter@teamsybase.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:6.0.2) Gecko/20110902 Thunderbird/6.0.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: sybase.public.powerbuilder.futures.discussion
Subject: Re: I Need Distributed PB Back
References: <4e7ff01b@forums-1-dub> <2jf08718id9cd893gbqjs0eo7i7cc3u4p5@4ax.com> <4e805f35$1@forums-1-dub> <r55187psbojr1p6crftb3apj1tt9gl3q9p@4ax.com> <4e809f4f$1@forums-1-dub> <4e80a75c$1@forums-1-dub> <4e80ae41@forums-1-dub> <4e80b406@forums-1-dub> <4e80be00$1@forums-1-dub>
In-Reply-To: <4e80be00$1@forums-1-dub>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
NNTP-Posting-Host: vip152.sybase.com
X-Original-NNTP-Posting-Host: vip152.sybase.com
Message-ID: <4e80c1c1$1@forums-1-dub>
Date: 26 Sep 2011 11:17:37 -0700
X-Trace: forums-1-dub 1317061057 10.22.241.152 (26 Sep 2011 11:17:37 -0700)
X-Original-Trace: 26 Sep 2011 11:17:37 -0700, vip152.sybase.com
Lines: 49
Path: forums-1-dub!not-for-mail
Xref: forums-1-dub sybase.public.powerbuilder.futures.discussion:27780
Article PK: 452123

Not sure where that reference ties in here. I claimed neither; I've used
PB for a long time but, like Sybase, never needed DPB for anything
beyond a proof of concept. I'm simply trying to make sure that the
landscape of the past is painted accurately.

On 09/26/2011 1:01 PM, Chris Pollach wrote:
> Right ... your taking the Bill Clinton => "I smoked it but never inhaled"
> route.
>
> ROFL
>
>
>
> "Jason 'Bug' Fenter [TeamSybase]"<jason.fenter@teamsybase.com> wrote in
> message news:4e80b406@forums-1-dub...
>> No, I didn't Van Winkle. I seem to remember DPB getting released (I
>> thought it was PB6). Then in the next version, it was stated to be EOL'd
>> with plans to be removed. Then two releases later, it *was* removed. I
>> never remember Sybase adding features to it or enhancing it or anything
>> along those lines.
>>
>> And just because people used it, that doesn't mean that Sybase didn't
>> consider it a proof-of-concept. Also remember, that phrase is in this
>> conversation because a person that was internal during this time said that
>> this was the internal view of the feature.
>>
>>
>>
>> On 09/26/2011 11:54 AM, Chris Pollach wrote:
>>> Jason;
>>>
>>> DPD was NOT a proof of concept. In its hay day (PB 5 through 8) I
>>> could
>>> point to a few dozen DPD systems running mission critical applications in
>>> the Canadian government. I know because I taught the courses and helped
>>> many
>>> IT shops implement it. We even had server farms running using round-robin
>>> load balancing!
>>>
>>> This continued until Sybase brought out EAServer (Jaguar) and then
>>> DPD
>>> was deemed ob$olete! Come on Get Real - did you Rip Van Winkle past
>>> those
>>> days? :-)
>>>
>
>


Chris Pollach Posted on 2011-09-27 12:00:56.0Z
From: "Chris Pollach" <cpollach@travel-net.com>
Newsgroups: sybase.public.powerbuilder.futures.discussion
References: <4e7ff01b@forums-1-dub> <2jf08718id9cd893gbqjs0eo7i7cc3u4p5@4ax.com> <4e805f35$1@forums-1-dub> <r55187psbojr1p6crftb3apj1tt9gl3q9p@4ax.com> <4e809f4f$1@forums-1-dub> <4e80a75c$1@forums-1-dub> <4e80ae41@forums-1-dub> <4e80b406@forums-1-dub> <4e80be00$1@forums-1-dub> <4e80c1c1$1@forums-1-dub>
Subject: Re: I Need Distributed PB Back
Lines: 63
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5931
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.6109
X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Response
NNTP-Posting-Host: vip152.sybase.com
X-Original-NNTP-Posting-Host: vip152.sybase.com
Message-ID: <4e81baf8@forums-1-dub>
Date: 27 Sep 2011 05:00:56 -0700
X-Trace: forums-1-dub 1317124856 10.22.241.152 (27 Sep 2011 05:00:56 -0700)
X-Original-Trace: 27 Sep 2011 05:00:56 -0700, vip152.sybase.com
X-Authenticated-User: pb125beta
Path: forums-1-dub!not-for-mail
Xref: forums-1-dub sybase.public.powerbuilder.futures.discussion:27795
Article PK: 452138

Too bad ... you missed a great PB feature. Maybe that's why you cannot
appreciate it. :-)

"Jason 'Bug' Fenter [TeamSybase]" <jason.fenter@teamsybase.com> wrote in
message news:4e80c1c1$1@forums-1-dub...
> Not sure where that reference ties in here. I claimed neither; I've used
> PB for a long time but, like Sybase, never needed DPB for anything beyond
> a proof of concept. I'm simply trying to make sure that the landscape of
> the past is painted accurately.
>
>
>
> On 09/26/2011 1:01 PM, Chris Pollach wrote:
>> Right ... your taking the Bill Clinton => "I smoked it but never
>> inhaled"
>> route.
>>
>> ROFL
>>
>>
>>
>> "Jason 'Bug' Fenter [TeamSybase]"<jason.fenter@teamsybase.com> wrote in
>> message news:4e80b406@forums-1-dub...
>>> No, I didn't Van Winkle. I seem to remember DPB getting released (I
>>> thought it was PB6). Then in the next version, it was stated to be EOL'd
>>> with plans to be removed. Then two releases later, it *was* removed. I
>>> never remember Sybase adding features to it or enhancing it or anything
>>> along those lines.
>>>
>>> And just because people used it, that doesn't mean that Sybase didn't
>>> consider it a proof-of-concept. Also remember, that phrase is in this
>>> conversation because a person that was internal during this time said
>>> that
>>> this was the internal view of the feature.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 09/26/2011 11:54 AM, Chris Pollach wrote:
>>>> Jason;
>>>>
>>>> DPD was NOT a proof of concept. In its hay day (PB 5 through 8) I
>>>> could
>>>> point to a few dozen DPD systems running mission critical applications
>>>> in
>>>> the Canadian government. I know because I taught the courses and helped
>>>> many
>>>> IT shops implement it. We even had server farms running using
>>>> round-robin
>>>> load balancing!
>>>>
>>>> This continued until Sybase brought out EAServer (Jaguar) and
>>>> then
>>>> DPD
>>>> was deemed ob$olete! Come on Get Real - did you Rip Van Winkle past
>>>> those
>>>> days? :-)
>>>>
>>
>>


Jim O'Neil Posted on 2011-09-27 05:32:45.0Z
From: Jim O'Neil <jim.oneil@microsoft.com>
Newsgroups: sybase.public.powerbuilder.futures.discussion
Subject: Re: I Need Distributed PB Back
Message-ID: <04n2879sc0j8um2i9vvmf6lt7dckpl60vb@4ax.com>
References: <4e7ff01b@forums-1-dub> <2jf08718id9cd893gbqjs0eo7i7cc3u4p5@4ax.com> <4e805f35$1@forums-1-dub> <r55187psbojr1p6crftb3apj1tt9gl3q9p@4ax.com> <4e809f4f$1@forums-1-dub> <4e80a75c$1@forums-1-dub>
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 6.00/32.1186
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
NNTP-Posting-Host: vip152.sybase.com
X-Original-NNTP-Posting-Host: vip152.sybase.com
Date: 26 Sep 2011 22:32:45 -0700
X-Trace: forums-1-dub 1317101565 10.22.241.152 (26 Sep 2011 22:32:45 -0700)
X-Original-Trace: 26 Sep 2011 22:32:45 -0700, vip152.sybase.com
Lines: 74
X-Authenticated-User: TeamSybase
Path: forums-1-dub!not-for-mail
Xref: forums-1-dub sybase.public.powerbuilder.futures.discussion:27789
Article PK: 452135

Jason, et. al.,

My apologies... I was a bit too loose with wording - and didnt'
realize I'd actually said that until I re-reviewed my post :(. DPB
was NOT a "proof-of-concept" it was a supported part of the product,
introduced with PowerBuilder 5. That was an absolutely unfair
characterization; I meant it more as a statement on its relative level
of capability in comparison to other technologies we have today.

I'm not sure what the usage uptick really was, it was 1996 and at the
time definitely ahead of the game, frankly, in what it was doing. My
cavalier categorization is primarily because - and this is not a dig -
it just wasn't technically robust or mature enough to live on,
especially as from-the-ground-up app server technology (like EAServer)
was arriving on the scene. In some ways it was a competing offering,
and a choice had to be made for future effort.

Was DPB great for a segment of the audience, sure, but was it worth a
long term investment, esp. with EAServer in the fold. No. Could your
app grow with it? Up to a point, but not far enough. Could there
have been a free EAServer Sybase called DPB, yeah maybe, but that
would have been primarily a business decision not a technical one (and
something that I vaguely think may have been discussed). I know,
let's open source EAServer - problem solved :)



On 26 Sep 2011 09:25:00 -0700, "Jason 'Bug' Fenter [TeamSybase]"

<jason.fenter@teamsybase.com> wrote:

>Wait... wait. Let me make sure I understand this right. Sybase released
>a proof-of-concept. One vocal customer used it extensively. Sybase
>decided that they did not have the resources to fully develop that
>proof-of-concept. Thus, according to one vocal customer, Sybase has
>"painted PB into a corner".
>
>Would it be "child's play" for Sybase to re-implement a basic
>proof-of-concept again? Maybe. The difference is that Sybase would have
>to create a generic solution that satisfies EVERYONE while someone like
>you could create a small context-specific server that fits *your*
>requirements and doesn't need to do anything else. I think the scope of
>those two projects are quite different.
>
>
>
>On 09/26/2011 10:50 AM, Chris Pollach wrote:
>> Hi Jim;
>>
>> Just looking at you Techwave presentations ... very interesting! :-)
>>
>> WL and its Web Server Apache can run on Linux or Windows. Yes, I would
>> need ASP to host the WS based NVUO's in WL (assuming the client would accept
>> running MS-Windows). Right now, they are favouring Linux for production -
>> based on cost and administration expertise. What I need is something
>> light-weight, simple, easy to deploy that could run on their older Windows
>> servers as an alternative.
>>
>> FYI: I had DPD government client here in Ottawa running 800-1000
>> concurrent web sessions on DPB. Believe me, when your NVUO's are written
>> well - DPD scales nicely!!!!
>>
>> I am not writing my own DPD. If the vendor does not natively support it
>> .. my clients will not accept it. As you suggest though - bringing back some
>> form of DPD should be child's play for Sybase if the average PB developer
>> can do it with PBNI and some sort of Socket support. :-)
>>
>> Anyway - just showing that Sybase has painted PB into a corner in this
>> area. If you want developers to succeed with your product you have to look
>> at it as a tool chest - not just a single tool. With a variety of tools in
>> your tool chest - the PB developer can select the right combination. When
>> you are limited to the Harley Davidson tool set - Vise Grips and Hammer
>> <bg> - you can't get too far on those more finicky repairs! :-)
>>
>>


Chris Pollach Posted on 2011-09-27 12:13:18.0Z
From: "Chris Pollach" <cpollach@travel-net.com>
Newsgroups: sybase.public.powerbuilder.futures.discussion
References: <4e7ff01b@forums-1-dub> <2jf08718id9cd893gbqjs0eo7i7cc3u4p5@4ax.com> <4e805f35$1@forums-1-dub> <r55187psbojr1p6crftb3apj1tt9gl3q9p@4ax.com> <4e809f4f$1@forums-1-dub> <4e80a75c$1@forums-1-dub> <04n2879sc0j8um2i9vvmf6lt7dckpl60vb@4ax.com>
Subject: Re: I Need Distributed PB Back
Lines: 124
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5931
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.6109
X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Original
NNTP-Posting-Host: vip152.sybase.com
X-Original-NNTP-Posting-Host: vip152.sybase.com
Message-ID: <4e81bdde$1@forums-1-dub>
Date: 27 Sep 2011 05:13:18 -0700
X-Trace: forums-1-dub 1317125598 10.22.241.152 (27 Sep 2011 05:13:18 -0700)
X-Original-Trace: 27 Sep 2011 05:13:18 -0700, vip152.sybase.com
X-Authenticated-User: pb125beta
Path: forums-1-dub!not-for-mail
Xref: forums-1-dub sybase.public.powerbuilder.futures.discussion:27796
Article PK: 452137

Hi Jim;

Thanks for the correction. It certainly was a well supported PB feature
by PowerSoft and later Sybase. I have built many n-tier systems with the
product and even had a framework for the "little engine that could".
:-)

Yes, EAS was supposed to be the "industrial strength" version of DPD and
to that aspect it did live up to its promise. One has to remember though
that EAS was not built for PB. It was built for Java developers and tuned to
tools like jBuilder, PowerJ etc. PB was only an after thought - however, the
implementation in PB 8 through 10 was brilliant (IMHO). Unfortunately, EAS
seems to have drifted well below the radar both in the IT realm and
Sybase's. Since EAS 6.x architecture is at the heart of the Application
Server Plug-in - EAS's stagnation will also probably affect ASP which in
turn diminishes PB's tool chest (again). I was hoping that Sybase would
address this issue and even bring back DPD as the "light" Application Server
and have EAS + ASP as the "big gun" thus giving PB developers a better
choice for n-tier support.

Like the PFC, I do not believe Open Sourcing would do anything for EAS
other than keep it lingering on with no real development. A good thought
though if there was a "vibrant" EAS community. I think that aspect though
has come and gone. :-(

Sooooooo ... what would you do if Microsoft bought PB? :-)

--
Regards ... Chris
Blog: http://chrispollach.blogspot.com
PBDJ: http://chrispollach.sys-con.com
SourceForge: http://sourceforge.net/projects/stdfndclass

"Jim O'Neil" <jim.oneil@microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:04n2879sc0j8um2i9vvmf6lt7dckpl60vb@4ax.com...
> Jason, et. al.,
>
> My apologies... I was a bit too loose with wording - and didnt'
> realize I'd actually said that until I re-reviewed my post :(. DPB
> was NOT a "proof-of-concept" it was a supported part of the product,
> introduced with PowerBuilder 5. That was an absolutely unfair
> characterization; I meant it more as a statement on its relative level
> of capability in comparison to other technologies we have today.
>
> I'm not sure what the usage uptick really was, it was 1996 and at the
> time definitely ahead of the game, frankly, in what it was doing. My
> cavalier categorization is primarily because - and this is not a dig -
> it just wasn't technically robust or mature enough to live on,
> especially as from-the-ground-up app server technology (like EAServer)
> was arriving on the scene. In some ways it was a competing offering,
> and a choice had to be made for future effort.
>
> Was DPB great for a segment of the audience, sure, but was it worth a
> long term investment, esp. with EAServer in the fold. No. Could your
> app grow with it? Up to a point, but not far enough. Could there
> have been a free EAServer Sybase called DPB, yeah maybe, but that
> would have been primarily a business decision not a technical one (and
> something that I vaguely think may have been discussed). I know,
> let's open source EAServer - problem solved :)
>
>
>
> On 26 Sep 2011 09:25:00 -0700, "Jason 'Bug' Fenter [TeamSybase]"
> <jason.fenter@teamsybase.com> wrote:
>
>>Wait... wait. Let me make sure I understand this right. Sybase released
>>a proof-of-concept. One vocal customer used it extensively. Sybase
>>decided that they did not have the resources to fully develop that
>>proof-of-concept. Thus, according to one vocal customer, Sybase has
>>"painted PB into a corner".
>>
>>Would it be "child's play" for Sybase to re-implement a basic
>>proof-of-concept again? Maybe. The difference is that Sybase would have
>>to create a generic solution that satisfies EVERYONE while someone like
>>you could create a small context-specific server that fits *your*
>>requirements and doesn't need to do anything else. I think the scope of
>>those two projects are quite different.
>>
>>
>>
>>On 09/26/2011 10:50 AM, Chris Pollach wrote:
>>> Hi Jim;
>>>
>>> Just looking at you Techwave presentations ... very interesting!
>>> :-)
>>>
>>> WL and its Web Server Apache can run on Linux or Windows. Yes, I
>>> would
>>> need ASP to host the WS based NVUO's in WL (assuming the client would
>>> accept
>>> running MS-Windows). Right now, they are favouring Linux for
>>> production -
>>> based on cost and administration expertise. What I need is something
>>> light-weight, simple, easy to deploy that could run on their older
>>> Windows
>>> servers as an alternative.
>>>
>>> FYI: I had DPD government client here in Ottawa running 800-1000
>>> concurrent web sessions on DPB. Believe me, when your NVUO's are written
>>> well - DPD scales nicely!!!!
>>>
>>> I am not writing my own DPD. If the vendor does not natively
>>> support it
>>> .. my clients will not accept it. As you suggest though - bringing back
>>> some
>>> form of DPD should be child's play for Sybase if the average PB
>>> developer
>>> can do it with PBNI and some sort of Socket support. :-)
>>>
>>> Anyway - just showing that Sybase has painted PB into a corner in
>>> this
>>> area. If you want developers to succeed with your product you have to
>>> look
>>> at it as a tool chest - not just a single tool. With a variety of tools
>>> in
>>> your tool chest - the PB developer can select the right combination.
>>> When
>>> you are limited to the Harley Davidson tool set - Vise Grips and Hammer
>>> <bg> - you can't get too far on those more finicky repairs! :-)
>>>
>>>


Jonathan Baker [Sybase] Posted on 2011-09-28 02:43:05.0Z
From: "Jonathan Baker [Sybase]" <lastnamefirstinitial@sybase.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:6.0.2) Gecko/20110902 Thunderbird/6.0.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: sybase.public.powerbuilder.futures.discussion
Subject: Re: I Need Distributed PB Back
References: <4e7ff01b@forums-1-dub> <2jf08718id9cd893gbqjs0eo7i7cc3u4p5@4ax.com> <4e805f35$1@forums-1-dub> <r55187psbojr1p6crftb3apj1tt9gl3q9p@4ax.com> <4e809f4f$1@forums-1-dub> <4e80a75c$1@forums-1-dub> <04n2879sc0j8um2i9vvmf6lt7dckpl60vb@4ax.com> <4e81bdde$1@forums-1-dub>
In-Reply-To: <4e81bdde$1@forums-1-dub>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
NNTP-Posting-Host: vip152.sybase.com
X-Original-NNTP-Posting-Host: vip152.sybase.com
Message-ID: <4e8289b9$1@forums-1-dub>
Date: 27 Sep 2011 19:43:05 -0700
X-Trace: forums-1-dub 1317177785 10.22.241.152 (27 Sep 2011 19:43:05 -0700)
X-Original-Trace: 27 Sep 2011 19:43:05 -0700, vip152.sybase.com
Lines: 68
X-Authenticated-User: NGSysop
Path: forums-1-dub!not-for-mail
Xref: forums-1-dub sybase.public.powerbuilder.futures.discussion:27833
Article PK: 452169

EAS was not "built for Java developers".

EAServer was built around the CORBA ORB concept. It used, as it's
underlying framework, a C++ developed engine that took in IIOP requests
and translated them directly in to any language that was plugged in to
the server component. In this case, the server language could be C,
Java, or PB. All of those were considered equal by the ORB, which
didn't care what language was doing the processing.

In other words, the core of EAServer could take a request from any front
end (Java, C, PB, etc.) and send it to any server component (again,
Java, C, PB, etc.). The ORB managed the communications, and the
protocol meant the client never knew anything about the server language.

This was perfect for the designs of the time. The server could be PB,
or if PB wasn't scaling well (or if you wanted the server to run on a
non-windows machine) it could be rewritten in Java, C, or anything else
that would talk to the ORB. The PB front end would never know the
difference.

Perhaps you are confusing EAServer with WebLogic and it's siblings.
WebLogic was a pure Java J2EE play, and was written from the ground up
in Java. EAServer competed with WebLogic but never used the same
underlying design concept.

Since EAServer was a CORBA based design, it was determined that it would
serve both the PB and Java markets equally well. And the ORB
infrastructure was light-years ahead of the DPB code (mostly in
scalability, but also because it used industry-standard protocols).
These were some of the reasons that DPB was mothballed and EAS was it's
replacement.



Cheers,
Jonathan

On 9/27/2011 8:13 AM, Chris Pollach wrote:
> Hi Jim;
>
> Thanks for the correction. It certainly was a well supported PB feature
> by PowerSoft and later Sybase. I have built many n-tier systems with the
> product and even had a framework for the "little engine that could".
> :-)
>
> Yes, EAS was supposed to be the "industrial strength" version of DPD and
> to that aspect it did live up to its promise. One has to remember though
> that EAS was not built for PB. It was built for Java developers and tuned to
> tools like jBuilder, PowerJ etc. PB was only an after thought - however, the
> implementation in PB 8 through 10 was brilliant (IMHO). Unfortunately, EAS
> seems to have drifted well below the radar both in the IT realm and
> Sybase's. Since EAS 6.x architecture is at the heart of the Application
> Server Plug-in - EAS's stagnation will also probably affect ASP which in
> turn diminishes PB's tool chest (again). I was hoping that Sybase would
> address this issue and even bring back DPD as the "light" Application Server
> and have EAS + ASP as the "big gun" thus giving PB developers a better
> choice for n-tier support.
>
> Like the PFC, I do not believe Open Sourcing would do anything for EAS
> other than keep it lingering on with no real development. A good thought
> though if there was a "vibrant" EAS community. I think that aspect though
> has come and gone. :-(
>
> Sooooooo ... what would you do if Microsoft bought PB? :-)
>


Chris Pollach Posted on 2011-09-28 11:43:24.0Z
From: "Chris Pollach" <cpollach@travel-net.com>
Newsgroups: sybase.public.powerbuilder.futures.discussion
References: <4e7ff01b@forums-1-dub> <2jf08718id9cd893gbqjs0eo7i7cc3u4p5@4ax.com> <4e805f35$1@forums-1-dub> <r55187psbojr1p6crftb3apj1tt9gl3q9p@4ax.com> <4e809f4f$1@forums-1-dub> <4e80a75c$1@forums-1-dub> <04n2879sc0j8um2i9vvmf6lt7dckpl60vb@4ax.com> <4e81bdde$1@forums-1-dub> <4e8289b9$1@forums-1-dub>
Subject: Re: I Need Distributed PB Back
Lines: 98
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5931
X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.6109
X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Response
NNTP-Posting-Host: vip152.sybase.com
X-Original-NNTP-Posting-Host: vip152.sybase.com
Message-ID: <4e83085c$1@forums-1-dub>
Date: 28 Sep 2011 04:43:24 -0700
X-Trace: forums-1-dub 1317210204 10.22.241.152 (28 Sep 2011 04:43:24 -0700)
X-Original-Trace: 28 Sep 2011 04:43:24 -0700, vip152.sybase.com
X-Authenticated-User: pb125beta
Path: forums-1-dub!not-for-mail
Xref: forums-1-dub sybase.public.powerbuilder.futures.discussion:27836
Article PK: 452167

Hi Jonathan;

So ... for what ever reason we "think" DPB was no good. The main
question becomes ...

Since EAS and ASP are basically coming to the end of their life (if
Sybase does not address these product's development) and you have no
intention of bringing back DPB, and IIS's implementation is not suited for
heavy production loads nor as functional as most J2EE application servers -
"What is Sybase planning to do to address this major n-tier development
gap?".

--
Regards ... Chris
Blog: http://chrispollach.blogspot.com
PBDJ: http://chrispollach.sys-con.com
SourceForge: http://sourceforge.net/projects/stdfndclass

"Jonathan Baker [Sybase]" <lastnamefirstinitial@sybase.com> wrote in message
news:4e8289b9$1@forums-1-dub...
> EAS was not "built for Java developers".
>
> EAServer was built around the CORBA ORB concept. It used, as it's
> underlying framework, a C++ developed engine that took in IIOP requests
> and translated them directly in to any language that was plugged in to the
> server component. In this case, the server language could be C, Java, or
> PB. All of those were considered equal by the ORB, which didn't care what
> language was doing the processing.
>
> In other words, the core of EAServer could take a request from any front
> end (Java, C, PB, etc.) and send it to any server component (again, Java,
> C, PB, etc.). The ORB managed the communications, and the protocol meant
> the client never knew anything about the server language.
>
> This was perfect for the designs of the time. The server could be PB, or
> if PB wasn't scaling well (or if you wanted the server to run on a
> non-windows machine) it could be rewritten in Java, C, or anything else
> that would talk to the ORB. The PB front end would never know the
> difference.
>
> Perhaps you are confusing EAServer with WebLogic and it's siblings.
> WebLogic was a pure Java J2EE play, and was written from the ground up in
> Java. EAServer competed with WebLogic but never used the same underlying
> design concept.
>
> Since EAServer was a CORBA based design, it was determined that it would
> serve both the PB and Java markets equally well. And the ORB
> infrastructure was light-years ahead of the DPB code (mostly in
> scalability, but also because it used industry-standard protocols). These
> were some of the reasons that DPB was mothballed and EAS was it's
> replacement.
>
>
>
> Cheers,
> Jonathan
>
>
>
>
> On 9/27/2011 8:13 AM, Chris Pollach wrote:
>> Hi Jim;
>>
>> Thanks for the correction. It certainly was a well supported PB
>> feature
>> by PowerSoft and later Sybase. I have built many n-tier systems with the
>> product and even had a framework for the "little engine that could".
>> :-)
>>
>> Yes, EAS was supposed to be the "industrial strength" version of DPD
>> and
>> to that aspect it did live up to its promise. One has to remember though
>> that EAS was not built for PB. It was built for Java developers and tuned
>> to
>> tools like jBuilder, PowerJ etc. PB was only an after thought - however,
>> the
>> implementation in PB 8 through 10 was brilliant (IMHO). Unfortunately,
>> EAS
>> seems to have drifted well below the radar both in the IT realm and
>> Sybase's. Since EAS 6.x architecture is at the heart of the Application
>> Server Plug-in - EAS's stagnation will also probably affect ASP which in
>> turn diminishes PB's tool chest (again). I was hoping that Sybase would
>> address this issue and even bring back DPD as the "light" Application
>> Server
>> and have EAS + ASP as the "big gun" thus giving PB developers a better
>> choice for n-tier support.
>>
>> Like the PFC, I do not believe Open Sourcing would do anything for
>> EAS
>> other than keep it lingering on with no real development. A good thought
>> though if there was a "vibrant" EAS community. I think that aspect though
>> has come and gone. :-(
>>
>> Sooooooo ... what would you do if Microsoft bought PB? :-)
>>


Jonathan Baker [Sybase] Posted on 2011-09-28 14:08:30.0Z
From: "Jonathan Baker [Sybase]" <lastnamefirstinitial@sybase.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:6.0.2) Gecko/20110902 Thunderbird/6.0.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: sybase.public.powerbuilder.futures.discussion
Subject: Re: I Need Distributed PB Back
References: <4e7ff01b@forums-1-dub> <2jf08718id9cd893gbqjs0eo7i7cc3u4p5@4ax.com> <4e805f35$1@forums-1-dub> <r55187psbojr1p6crftb3apj1tt9gl3q9p@4ax.com> <4e809f4f$1@forums-1-dub> <4e80a75c$1@forums-1-dub> <04n2879sc0j8um2i9vvmf6lt7dckpl60vb@4ax.com> <4e81bdde$1@forums-1-dub> <4e8289b9$1@forums-1-dub> <4e83085c$1@forums-1-dub>
In-Reply-To: <4e83085c$1@forums-1-dub>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
NNTP-Posting-Host: vip152.sybase.com
X-Original-NNTP-Posting-Host: vip152.sybase.com
Message-ID: <4e832a5e$1@forums-1-dub>
Date: 28 Sep 2011 07:08:30 -0700
X-Trace: forums-1-dub 1317218910 10.22.241.152 (28 Sep 2011 07:08:30 -0700)
X-Original-Trace: 28 Sep 2011 07:08:30 -0700, vip152.sybase.com
Lines: 21
X-Authenticated-User: NGSysop
Path: forums-1-dub!not-for-mail
Xref: forums-1-dub sybase.public.powerbuilder.futures.discussion:27840
Article PK: 452177

Is there any answer I could give that would be both honest and satisfy you?



Cheers,
Jonathan

On 9/28/2011 7:43 AM, Chris Pollach wrote:
> Hi Jonathan;
>
> So ... for what ever reason we "think" DPB was no good. The main
> question becomes ...
>
> Since EAS and ASP are basically coming to the end of their life (if
> Sybase does not address these product's development) and you have no
> intention of bringing back DPB, and IIS's implementation is not suited for
> heavy production loads nor as functional as most J2EE application servers -
> "What is Sybase planning to do to address this major n-tier development
> gap?".
>


Chris Pollach Posted on 2011-09-28 15:50:10.0Z
From: "Chris Pollach" <cpollach@travel-net.com>
Newsgroups: sybase.public.powerbuilder.futures.discussion
References: <4e7ff01b@forums-1-dub> <2jf08718id9cd893gbqjs0eo7i7cc3u4p5@4ax.com> <4e805f35$1@forums-1-dub> <r55187psbojr1p6crftb3apj1tt9gl3q9p@4ax.com> <4e809f4f$1@forums-1-dub> <4e80a75c$1@forums-1-dub> <04n2879sc0j8um2i9vvmf6lt7dckpl60vb@4ax.com> <4e81bdde$1@forums-1-dub> <4e8289b9$1@forums-1-dub> <4e83085c$1@forums-1-dub> <4e832a5e$1@forums-1-dub>
Subject: Re: I Need Distributed PB Back
Lines: 35
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5931
X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.6109
X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Response
NNTP-Posting-Host: vip152.sybase.com
X-Original-NNTP-Posting-Host: vip152.sybase.com
Message-ID: <4e834232$1@forums-1-dub>
Date: 28 Sep 2011 08:50:10 -0700
X-Trace: forums-1-dub 1317225010 10.22.241.152 (28 Sep 2011 08:50:10 -0700)
X-Original-Trace: 28 Sep 2011 08:50:10 -0700, vip152.sybase.com
X-Authenticated-User: pb125beta
Path: forums-1-dub!not-for-mail
Xref: forums-1-dub sybase.public.powerbuilder.futures.discussion:27843
Article PK: 452181

Ahhh .. the "truth" maybe? :-)

A simple "yes" we have these basic plans (bla, bla, bla) or "no", this is
not in scope for PB currently.

"Jonathan Baker [Sybase]" <lastnamefirstinitial@sybase.com> wrote in message
news:4e832a5e$1@forums-1-dub...
> Is there any answer I could give that would be both honest and satisfy
> you?
>
>
>
> Cheers,
> Jonathan
>
>
> On 9/28/2011 7:43 AM, Chris Pollach wrote:
>> Hi Jonathan;
>>
>> So ... for what ever reason we "think" DPB was no good. The main
>> question becomes ...
>>
>> Since EAS and ASP are basically coming to the end of their life (if
>> Sybase does not address these product's development) and you have no
>> intention of bringing back DPB, and IIS's implementation is not suited
>> for
>> heavy production loads nor as functional as most J2EE application
>> servers -
>> "What is Sybase planning to do to address this major n-tier development
>> gap?".
>>


Jonathan Baker [Sybase] Posted on 2011-09-28 16:30:06.0Z
From: "Jonathan Baker [Sybase]" <lastnamefirstinitial@sybase.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:7.0) Gecko/20110922 Thunderbird/7.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: sybase.public.powerbuilder.futures.discussion
Subject: Re: I Need Distributed PB Back
References: <4e7ff01b@forums-1-dub> <2jf08718id9cd893gbqjs0eo7i7cc3u4p5@4ax.com> <4e805f35$1@forums-1-dub> <r55187psbojr1p6crftb3apj1tt9gl3q9p@4ax.com> <4e809f4f$1@forums-1-dub> <4e80a75c$1@forums-1-dub> <04n2879sc0j8um2i9vvmf6lt7dckpl60vb@4ax.com> <4e81bdde$1@forums-1-dub> <4e8289b9$1@forums-1-dub> <4e83085c$1@forums-1-dub> <4e832a5e$1@forums-1-dub> <4e834232$1@forums-1-dub>
In-Reply-To: <4e834232$1@forums-1-dub>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
NNTP-Posting-Host: vip152.sybase.com
X-Original-NNTP-Posting-Host: vip152.sybase.com
Message-ID: <4e834b8e$1@forums-1-dub>
Date: 28 Sep 2011 09:30:06 -0700
X-Trace: forums-1-dub 1317227406 10.22.241.152 (28 Sep 2011 09:30:06 -0700)
X-Original-Trace: 28 Sep 2011 09:30:06 -0700, vip152.sybase.com
Lines: 46
X-Authenticated-User: NGSysop
Path: forums-1-dub!not-for-mail
Xref: forums-1-dub sybase.public.powerbuilder.futures.discussion:27848
Article PK: 452184

Only product management can comment on future directions.

You already knew that.



Cheers,
Jonathan

On 9/28/2011 11:50 AM, Chris Pollach wrote:
> Ahhh .. the "truth" maybe? :-)
>
> A simple "yes" we have these basic plans (bla, bla, bla) or "no", this is
> not in scope for PB currently.
>
>
> "Jonathan Baker [Sybase]"<lastnamefirstinitial@sybase.com> wrote in message
> news:4e832a5e$1@forums-1-dub...
>> Is there any answer I could give that would be both honest and satisfy
>> you?
>>
>>
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Jonathan
>>
>>
>> On 9/28/2011 7:43 AM, Chris Pollach wrote:
>>> Hi Jonathan;
>>>
>>> So ... for what ever reason we "think" DPB was no good. The main
>>> question becomes ...
>>>
>>> Since EAS and ASP are basically coming to the end of their life (if
>>> Sybase does not address these product's development) and you have no
>>> intention of bringing back DPB, and IIS's implementation is not suited
>>> for
>>> heavy production loads nor as functional as most J2EE application
>>> servers -
>>> "What is Sybase planning to do to address this major n-tier development
>>> gap?".
>>>
>
>


Chris Pollach Posted on 2011-09-28 16:44:37.0Z
From: "Chris Pollach" <cpollach@travel-net.com>
Newsgroups: sybase.public.powerbuilder.futures.discussion
References: <4e7ff01b@forums-1-dub> <2jf08718id9cd893gbqjs0eo7i7cc3u4p5@4ax.com> <4e805f35$1@forums-1-dub> <r55187psbojr1p6crftb3apj1tt9gl3q9p@4ax.com> <4e809f4f$1@forums-1-dub> <4e80a75c$1@forums-1-dub> <04n2879sc0j8um2i9vvmf6lt7dckpl60vb@4ax.com> <4e81bdde$1@forums-1-dub> <4e8289b9$1@forums-1-dub> <4e83085c$1@forums-1-dub> <4e832a5e$1@forums-1-dub> <4e834232$1@forums-1-dub> <4e834b8e$1@forums-1-dub>
Subject: Re: I Need Distributed PB Back
Lines: 58
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5931
X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.6109
X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Response
NNTP-Posting-Host: vip152.sybase.com
X-Original-NNTP-Posting-Host: vip152.sybase.com
Message-ID: <4e834ef5$1@forums-1-dub>
Date: 28 Sep 2011 09:44:37 -0700
X-Trace: forums-1-dub 1317228277 10.22.241.152 (28 Sep 2011 09:44:37 -0700)
X-Original-Trace: 28 Sep 2011 09:44:37 -0700, vip152.sybase.com
X-Authenticated-User: pb125beta
Path: forums-1-dub!not-for-mail
Xref: forums-1-dub sybase.public.powerbuilder.futures.discussion:27850
Article PK: 452186

Please feel free when you see them ... to tap them on the shoulder and
mention that the PB Community is waiting for an n-tier futures direction
statement(s) on the roadmap. :-)))

"Jonathan Baker [Sybase]" <lastnamefirstinitial@sybase.com> wrote in message
news:4e834b8e$1@forums-1-dub...
> Only product management can comment on future directions.
>
> You already knew that.
>
>
>
> Cheers,
> Jonathan
>
>
>
> On 9/28/2011 11:50 AM, Chris Pollach wrote:
>> Ahhh .. the "truth" maybe? :-)
>>
>> A simple "yes" we have these basic plans (bla, bla, bla) or "no", this is
>> not in scope for PB currently.
>>
>>
>> "Jonathan Baker [Sybase]"<lastnamefirstinitial@sybase.com> wrote in
>> message
>> news:4e832a5e$1@forums-1-dub...
>>> Is there any answer I could give that would be both honest and satisfy
>>> you?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Jonathan
>>>
>>>
>>> On 9/28/2011 7:43 AM, Chris Pollach wrote:
>>>> Hi Jonathan;
>>>>
>>>> So ... for what ever reason we "think" DPB was no good. The main
>>>> question becomes ...
>>>>
>>>> Since EAS and ASP are basically coming to the end of their life
>>>> (if
>>>> Sybase does not address these product's development) and you have no
>>>> intention of bringing back DPB, and IIS's implementation is not suited
>>>> for
>>>> heavy production loads nor as functional as most J2EE application
>>>> servers -
>>>> "What is Sybase planning to do to address this major n-tier development
>>>> gap?".
>>>>
>>
>>


Brett Weaver Posted on 2011-09-28 08:30:56.0Z
From: Brett Weaver <bretnsp@weaversoft.com>
Newsgroups: sybase.public.powerbuilder.futures.discussion
Subject: Re: I Need Distributed PB Back
Message-ID: <23m587t6iqti06vmodsj46eociknef1qm9@4ax.com>
References: <4e7ff01b@forums-1-dub> <2jf08718id9cd893gbqjs0eo7i7cc3u4p5@4ax.com> <4e805f35$1@forums-1-dub> <r55187psbojr1p6crftb3apj1tt9gl3q9p@4ax.com> <4e809f4f$1@forums-1-dub> <4e80a75c$1@forums-1-dub> <04n2879sc0j8um2i9vvmf6lt7dckpl60vb@4ax.com> <4e81bdde$1@forums-1-dub> <4e8289b9$1@forums-1-dub>
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 6.00/32.1186
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
NNTP-Posting-Host: vip152.sybase.com
X-Original-NNTP-Posting-Host: vip152.sybase.com
Date: 28 Sep 2011 01:30:56 -0700
X-Trace: forums-1-dub 1317198656 10.22.241.152 (28 Sep 2011 01:30:56 -0700)
X-Original-Trace: 28 Sep 2011 01:30:56 -0700, vip152.sybase.com
Lines: 97
Path: forums-1-dub!not-for-mail
Xref: forums-1-dub sybase.public.powerbuilder.futures.discussion:27834
Article PK: 452172

Hi Jonathon

I would not suggest you are wrong, but my reality was different.
I had so much trouble getting EAS to work with PB that when I heard in
2003 that Sybase was bringing some EAServer experts to New Zealand I
gladly went to Sybase to see them.
I ended up buying a new PC and giving it to the engineers along with
EAServer and PB Software and asking them to implement the demo.
It took a lot of hours in which we discovered:
1.. The "demo" instructions were useless
2.. The EAServer experts knew nothing about PB and did not know anyone
who did.

I never touched EAServer again.

Chris and others may have had training and engineers who knew but
support for EAServer was Java only in Asia Pacific as far as I knew.

There are a few companies in Australia still on Jaguar. Needless to
say they have some difficulty recruiting.

..anyway back to watching the rugby...




On 27 Sep 2011 19:43:05 -0700, "Jonathan Baker [Sybase]"

<lastnamefirstinitial@sybase.com> wrote:

>EAS was not "built for Java developers".
>
>EAServer was built around the CORBA ORB concept. It used, as it's
>underlying framework, a C++ developed engine that took in IIOP requests
>and translated them directly in to any language that was plugged in to
>the server component. In this case, the server language could be C,
>Java, or PB. All of those were considered equal by the ORB, which
>didn't care what language was doing the processing.
>
>In other words, the core of EAServer could take a request from any front
>end (Java, C, PB, etc.) and send it to any server component (again,
>Java, C, PB, etc.). The ORB managed the communications, and the
>protocol meant the client never knew anything about the server language.
>
>This was perfect for the designs of the time. The server could be PB,
>or if PB wasn't scaling well (or if you wanted the server to run on a
>non-windows machine) it could be rewritten in Java, C, or anything else
>that would talk to the ORB. The PB front end would never know the
>difference.
>
>Perhaps you are confusing EAServer with WebLogic and it's siblings.
>WebLogic was a pure Java J2EE play, and was written from the ground up
>in Java. EAServer competed with WebLogic but never used the same
>underlying design concept.
>
>Since EAServer was a CORBA based design, it was determined that it would
>serve both the PB and Java markets equally well. And the ORB
>infrastructure was light-years ahead of the DPB code (mostly in
>scalability, but also because it used industry-standard protocols).
>These were some of the reasons that DPB was mothballed and EAS was it's
>replacement.
>
>
>
>Cheers,
>Jonathan
>
>
>
>
>On 9/27/2011 8:13 AM, Chris Pollach wrote:
>> Hi Jim;
>>
>> Thanks for the correction. It certainly was a well supported PB feature
>> by PowerSoft and later Sybase. I have built many n-tier systems with the
>> product and even had a framework for the "little engine that could".
>> :-)
>>
>> Yes, EAS was supposed to be the "industrial strength" version of DPD and
>> to that aspect it did live up to its promise. One has to remember though
>> that EAS was not built for PB. It was built for Java developers and tuned to
>> tools like jBuilder, PowerJ etc. PB was only an after thought - however, the
>> implementation in PB 8 through 10 was brilliant (IMHO). Unfortunately, EAS
>> seems to have drifted well below the radar both in the IT realm and
>> Sybase's. Since EAS 6.x architecture is at the heart of the Application
>> Server Plug-in - EAS's stagnation will also probably affect ASP which in
>> turn diminishes PB's tool chest (again). I was hoping that Sybase would
>> address this issue and even bring back DPD as the "light" Application Server
>> and have EAS + ASP as the "big gun" thus giving PB developers a better
>> choice for n-tier support.
>>
>> Like the PFC, I do not believe Open Sourcing would do anything for EAS
>> other than keep it lingering on with no real development. A good thought
>> though if there was a "vibrant" EAS community. I think that aspect though
>> has come and gone. :-(
>>
>> Sooooooo ... what would you do if Microsoft bought PB? :-)
>>


Chris Pollach Posted on 2011-09-28 11:36:56.0Z
From: "Chris Pollach" <cpollach@travel-net.com>
Newsgroups: sybase.public.powerbuilder.futures.discussion
References: <4e7ff01b@forums-1-dub> <2jf08718id9cd893gbqjs0eo7i7cc3u4p5@4ax.com> <4e805f35$1@forums-1-dub> <r55187psbojr1p6crftb3apj1tt9gl3q9p@4ax.com> <4e809f4f$1@forums-1-dub> <4e80a75c$1@forums-1-dub> <04n2879sc0j8um2i9vvmf6lt7dckpl60vb@4ax.com> <4e81bdde$1@forums-1-dub> <4e8289b9$1@forums-1-dub> <23m587t6iqti06vmodsj46eociknef1qm9@4ax.com>
Subject: Re: I Need Distributed PB Back
Lines: 120
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5931
X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.6109
X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Original
NNTP-Posting-Host: vip152.sybase.com
X-Original-NNTP-Posting-Host: vip152.sybase.com
Message-ID: <4e8306d8$1@forums-1-dub>
Date: 28 Sep 2011 04:36:56 -0700
X-Trace: forums-1-dub 1317209816 10.22.241.152 (28 Sep 2011 04:36:56 -0700)
X-Original-Trace: 28 Sep 2011 04:36:56 -0700, vip152.sybase.com
X-Authenticated-User: pb125beta
Path: forums-1-dub!not-for-mail
Xref: forums-1-dub sybase.public.powerbuilder.futures.discussion:27835
Article PK: 452171

Hi Brett;

Right on mate!

--
Regards ... Chris
Blog: http://chrispollach.blogspot.com
PBDJ: http://chrispollach.sys-con.com
Source: http://sourceforge.net/projects/stdfndclass

"Brett Weaver" <bretnsp@weaversoft.com> wrote in message
news:23m587t6iqti06vmodsj46eociknef1qm9@4ax.com...
> Hi Jonathon
>
> I would not suggest you are wrong, but my reality was different.
> I had so much trouble getting EAS to work with PB that when I heard in
> 2003 that Sybase was bringing some EAServer experts to New Zealand I
> gladly went to Sybase to see them.
> I ended up buying a new PC and giving it to the engineers along with
> EAServer and PB Software and asking them to implement the demo.
> It took a lot of hours in which we discovered:
> 1.. The "demo" instructions were useless
> 2.. The EAServer experts knew nothing about PB and did not know anyone
> who did.
>
> I never touched EAServer again.
>
> Chris and others may have had training and engineers who knew but
> support for EAServer was Java only in Asia Pacific as far as I knew.
>
> There are a few companies in Australia still on Jaguar. Needless to
> say they have some difficulty recruiting.
>
> ..anyway back to watching the rugby...
>
>
>
>
> On 27 Sep 2011 19:43:05 -0700, "Jonathan Baker [Sybase]"
> <lastnamefirstinitial@sybase.com> wrote:
>
>>EAS was not "built for Java developers".
>>
>>EAServer was built around the CORBA ORB concept. It used, as it's
>>underlying framework, a C++ developed engine that took in IIOP requests
>>and translated them directly in to any language that was plugged in to
>>the server component. In this case, the server language could be C,
>>Java, or PB. All of those were considered equal by the ORB, which
>>didn't care what language was doing the processing.
>>
>>In other words, the core of EAServer could take a request from any front
>>end (Java, C, PB, etc.) and send it to any server component (again,
>>Java, C, PB, etc.). The ORB managed the communications, and the
>>protocol meant the client never knew anything about the server language.
>>
>>This was perfect for the designs of the time. The server could be PB,
>>or if PB wasn't scaling well (or if you wanted the server to run on a
>>non-windows machine) it could be rewritten in Java, C, or anything else
>>that would talk to the ORB. The PB front end would never know the
>>difference.
>>
>>Perhaps you are confusing EAServer with WebLogic and it's siblings.
>>WebLogic was a pure Java J2EE play, and was written from the ground up
>>in Java. EAServer competed with WebLogic but never used the same
>>underlying design concept.
>>
>>Since EAServer was a CORBA based design, it was determined that it would
>>serve both the PB and Java markets equally well. And the ORB
>>infrastructure was light-years ahead of the DPB code (mostly in
>>scalability, but also because it used industry-standard protocols).
>>These were some of the reasons that DPB was mothballed and EAS was it's
>>replacement.
>>
>>
>>
>>Cheers,
>>Jonathan
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>On 9/27/2011 8:13 AM, Chris Pollach wrote:
>>> Hi Jim;
>>>
>>> Thanks for the correction. It certainly was a well supported PB
>>> feature
>>> by PowerSoft and later Sybase. I have built many n-tier systems with the
>>> product and even had a framework for the "little engine that could".
>>> :-)
>>>
>>> Yes, EAS was supposed to be the "industrial strength" version of
>>> DPD and
>>> to that aspect it did live up to its promise. One has to remember though
>>> that EAS was not built for PB. It was built for Java developers and
>>> tuned to
>>> tools like jBuilder, PowerJ etc. PB was only an after thought - however,
>>> the
>>> implementation in PB 8 through 10 was brilliant (IMHO). Unfortunately,
>>> EAS
>>> seems to have drifted well below the radar both in the IT realm and
>>> Sybase's. Since EAS 6.x architecture is at the heart of the Application
>>> Server Plug-in - EAS's stagnation will also probably affect ASP which in
>>> turn diminishes PB's tool chest (again). I was hoping that Sybase would
>>> address this issue and even bring back DPD as the "light" Application
>>> Server
>>> and have EAS + ASP as the "big gun" thus giving PB developers a better
>>> choice for n-tier support.
>>>
>>> Like the PFC, I do not believe Open Sourcing would do anything for
>>> EAS
>>> other than keep it lingering on with no real development. A good thought
>>> though if there was a "vibrant" EAS community. I think that aspect
>>> though
>>> has come and gone. :-(
>>>
>>> Sooooooo ... what would you do if Microsoft bought PB? :-)
>>>


Jonathan Baker [Sybase] Posted on 2011-09-28 14:02:31.0Z
From: "Jonathan Baker [Sybase]" <lastnamefirstinitial@sybase.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:6.0.2) Gecko/20110902 Thunderbird/6.0.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: sybase.public.powerbuilder.futures.discussion
Subject: Re: I Need Distributed PB Back
References: <4e7ff01b@forums-1-dub> <2jf08718id9cd893gbqjs0eo7i7cc3u4p5@4ax.com> <4e805f35$1@forums-1-dub> <r55187psbojr1p6crftb3apj1tt9gl3q9p@4ax.com> <4e809f4f$1@forums-1-dub> <4e80a75c$1@forums-1-dub> <04n2879sc0j8um2i9vvmf6lt7dckpl60vb@4ax.com> <4e81bdde$1@forums-1-dub> <4e8289b9$1@forums-1-dub> <23m587t6iqti06vmodsj46eociknef1qm9@4ax.com>
In-Reply-To: <23m587t6iqti06vmodsj46eociknef1qm9@4ax.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
NNTP-Posting-Host: vip152.sybase.com
X-Original-NNTP-Posting-Host: vip152.sybase.com
Message-ID: <4e8328f7@forums-1-dub>
Date: 28 Sep 2011 07:02:31 -0700
X-Trace: forums-1-dub 1317218551 10.22.241.152 (28 Sep 2011 07:02:31 -0700)
X-Original-Trace: 28 Sep 2011 07:02:31 -0700, vip152.sybase.com
Lines: 118
X-Authenticated-User: NGSysop
Path: forums-1-dub!not-for-mail
Xref: forums-1-dub sybase.public.powerbuilder.futures.discussion:27839
Article PK: 452176

I understand. And I'm sure that not finding help with PB was frustrating.

But the point I was making was not that PB would have trouble finding
consultants who were moving past two-tier programming with PB in to a
distributed model. In 2003 there were only a very small number of
people worldwide who were attempting to take PB in to n-tier systems.
The lack of talent in your area, however, does not equate to "the
product could not do that".

I'm also absolutely certain that you were not having a core problem with
EAServer. Because the best EAServer resource in the entire world is in
New Zealand.



Cheers,
Jonathan

On 9/28/2011 4:30 AM, Brett Weaver wrote:
> Hi Jonathon
>
> I would not suggest you are wrong, but my reality was different.
> I had so much trouble getting EAS to work with PB that when I heard in
> 2003 that Sybase was bringing some EAServer experts to New Zealand I
> gladly went to Sybase to see them.
> I ended up buying a new PC and giving it to the engineers along with
> EAServer and PB Software and asking them to implement the demo.
> It took a lot of hours in which we discovered:
> 1.. The "demo" instructions were useless
> 2.. The EAServer experts knew nothing about PB and did not know anyone
> who did.
>
> I never touched EAServer again.
>
> Chris and others may have had training and engineers who knew but
> support for EAServer was Java only in Asia Pacific as far as I knew.
>
> There are a few companies in Australia still on Jaguar. Needless to
> say they have some difficulty recruiting.
>
> ...anyway back to watching the rugby...
>
>
>
>
> On 27 Sep 2011 19:43:05 -0700, "Jonathan Baker [Sybase]"
> <lastnamefirstinitial@sybase.com> wrote:
>
>> EAS was not "built for Java developers".
>>
>> EAServer was built around the CORBA ORB concept. It used, as it's
>> underlying framework, a C++ developed engine that took in IIOP requests
>> and translated them directly in to any language that was plugged in to
>> the server component. In this case, the server language could be C,
>> Java, or PB. All of those were considered equal by the ORB, which
>> didn't care what language was doing the processing.
>>
>> In other words, the core of EAServer could take a request from any front
>> end (Java, C, PB, etc.) and send it to any server component (again,
>> Java, C, PB, etc.). The ORB managed the communications, and the
>> protocol meant the client never knew anything about the server language.
>>
>> This was perfect for the designs of the time. The server could be PB,
>> or if PB wasn't scaling well (or if you wanted the server to run on a
>> non-windows machine) it could be rewritten in Java, C, or anything else
>> that would talk to the ORB. The PB front end would never know the
>> difference.
>>
>> Perhaps you are confusing EAServer with WebLogic and it's siblings.
>> WebLogic was a pure Java J2EE play, and was written from the ground up
>> in Java. EAServer competed with WebLogic but never used the same
>> underlying design concept.
>>
>> Since EAServer was a CORBA based design, it was determined that it would
>> serve both the PB and Java markets equally well. And the ORB
>> infrastructure was light-years ahead of the DPB code (mostly in
>> scalability, but also because it used industry-standard protocols).
>> These were some of the reasons that DPB was mothballed and EAS was it's
>> replacement.
>>
>>
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Jonathan
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 9/27/2011 8:13 AM, Chris Pollach wrote:
>>> Hi Jim;
>>>
>>> Thanks for the correction. It certainly was a well supported PB feature
>>> by PowerSoft and later Sybase. I have built many n-tier systems with the
>>> product and even had a framework for the "little engine that could".
>>> :-)
>>>
>>> Yes, EAS was supposed to be the "industrial strength" version of DPD and
>>> to that aspect it did live up to its promise. One has to remember though
>>> that EAS was not built for PB. It was built for Java developers and tuned to
>>> tools like jBuilder, PowerJ etc. PB was only an after thought - however, the
>>> implementation in PB 8 through 10 was brilliant (IMHO). Unfortunately, EAS
>>> seems to have drifted well below the radar both in the IT realm and
>>> Sybase's. Since EAS 6.x architecture is at the heart of the Application
>>> Server Plug-in - EAS's stagnation will also probably affect ASP which in
>>> turn diminishes PB's tool chest (again). I was hoping that Sybase would
>>> address this issue and even bring back DPD as the "light" Application Server
>>> and have EAS + ASP as the "big gun" thus giving PB developers a better
>>> choice for n-tier support.
>>>
>>> Like the PFC, I do not believe Open Sourcing would do anything for EAS
>>> other than keep it lingering on with no real development. A good thought
>>> though if there was a "vibrant" EAS community. I think that aspect though
>>> has come and gone. :-(
>>>
>>> Sooooooo ... what would you do if Microsoft bought PB? :-)
>>>


Chris Pollach Posted on 2011-09-28 15:53:43.0Z
From: "Chris Pollach" <cpollach@travel-net.com>
Newsgroups: sybase.public.powerbuilder.futures.discussion
References: <4e7ff01b@forums-1-dub> <2jf08718id9cd893gbqjs0eo7i7cc3u4p5@4ax.com> <4e805f35$1@forums-1-dub> <r55187psbojr1p6crftb3apj1tt9gl3q9p@4ax.com> <4e809f4f$1@forums-1-dub> <4e80a75c$1@forums-1-dub> <04n2879sc0j8um2i9vvmf6lt7dckpl60vb@4ax.com> <4e81bdde$1@forums-1-dub> <4e8289b9$1@forums-1-dub> <23m587t6iqti06vmodsj46eociknef1qm9@4ax.com> <4e8328f7@forums-1-dub>
Subject: Re: I Need Distributed PB Back
Lines: 143
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5931
X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.6109
X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Response
NNTP-Posting-Host: vip152.sybase.com
X-Original-NNTP-Posting-Host: vip152.sybase.com
Message-ID: <4e834307$1@forums-1-dub>
Date: 28 Sep 2011 08:53:43 -0700
X-Trace: forums-1-dub 1317225223 10.22.241.152 (28 Sep 2011 08:53:43 -0700)
X-Original-Trace: 28 Sep 2011 08:53:43 -0700, vip152.sybase.com
X-Authenticated-User: pb125beta
Path: forums-1-dub!not-for-mail
Xref: forums-1-dub sybase.public.powerbuilder.futures.discussion:27844
Article PK: 452180

FWIW: Another good case for DPB ... a very simple Application Server that
could be given out free (IMHO) to let PB developers practice or implement
"light weight" n-tier development before getting their hands really into
industrial AS's like EAS, jBoss, GlassFish, WebSphere, WebLogic, etc. Sort
of like a "stepping stone" is what I am thinking here.

"Jonathan Baker [Sybase]" <lastnamefirstinitial@sybase.com> wrote in message
news:4e8328f7@forums-1-dub...
>I understand. And I'm sure that not finding help with PB was frustrating.
>
> But the point I was making was not that PB would have trouble finding
> consultants who were moving past two-tier programming with PB in to a
> distributed model. In 2003 there were only a very small number of people
> worldwide who were attempting to take PB in to n-tier systems. The lack of
> talent in your area, however, does not equate to "the product could not do
> that".
>
> I'm also absolutely certain that you were not having a core problem with
> EAServer. Because the best EAServer resource in the entire world is in
> New Zealand.
>
>
>
> Cheers,
> Jonathan
>
>
>
> On 9/28/2011 4:30 AM, Brett Weaver wrote:
>> Hi Jonathon
>>
>> I would not suggest you are wrong, but my reality was different.
>> I had so much trouble getting EAS to work with PB that when I heard in
>> 2003 that Sybase was bringing some EAServer experts to New Zealand I
>> gladly went to Sybase to see them.
>> I ended up buying a new PC and giving it to the engineers along with
>> EAServer and PB Software and asking them to implement the demo.
>> It took a lot of hours in which we discovered:
>> 1.. The "demo" instructions were useless
>> 2.. The EAServer experts knew nothing about PB and did not know anyone
>> who did.
>>
>> I never touched EAServer again.
>>
>> Chris and others may have had training and engineers who knew but
>> support for EAServer was Java only in Asia Pacific as far as I knew.
>>
>> There are a few companies in Australia still on Jaguar. Needless to
>> say they have some difficulty recruiting.
>>
>> ...anyway back to watching the rugby...
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 27 Sep 2011 19:43:05 -0700, "Jonathan Baker [Sybase]"
>> <lastnamefirstinitial@sybase.com> wrote:
>>
>>> EAS was not "built for Java developers".
>>>
>>> EAServer was built around the CORBA ORB concept. It used, as it's
>>> underlying framework, a C++ developed engine that took in IIOP requests
>>> and translated them directly in to any language that was plugged in to
>>> the server component. In this case, the server language could be C,
>>> Java, or PB. All of those were considered equal by the ORB, which
>>> didn't care what language was doing the processing.
>>>
>>> In other words, the core of EAServer could take a request from any front
>>> end (Java, C, PB, etc.) and send it to any server component (again,
>>> Java, C, PB, etc.). The ORB managed the communications, and the
>>> protocol meant the client never knew anything about the server language.
>>>
>>> This was perfect for the designs of the time. The server could be PB,
>>> or if PB wasn't scaling well (or if you wanted the server to run on a
>>> non-windows machine) it could be rewritten in Java, C, or anything else
>>> that would talk to the ORB. The PB front end would never know the
>>> difference.
>>>
>>> Perhaps you are confusing EAServer with WebLogic and it's siblings.
>>> WebLogic was a pure Java J2EE play, and was written from the ground up
>>> in Java. EAServer competed with WebLogic but never used the same
>>> underlying design concept.
>>>
>>> Since EAServer was a CORBA based design, it was determined that it would
>>> serve both the PB and Java markets equally well. And the ORB
>>> infrastructure was light-years ahead of the DPB code (mostly in
>>> scalability, but also because it used industry-standard protocols).
>>> These were some of the reasons that DPB was mothballed and EAS was it's
>>> replacement.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Jonathan
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 9/27/2011 8:13 AM, Chris Pollach wrote:
>>>> Hi Jim;
>>>>
>>>> Thanks for the correction. It certainly was a well supported PB
>>>> feature
>>>> by PowerSoft and later Sybase. I have built many n-tier systems with
>>>> the
>>>> product and even had a framework for the "little engine that could".
>>>> :-)
>>>>
>>>> Yes, EAS was supposed to be the "industrial strength" version of
>>>> DPD and
>>>> to that aspect it did live up to its promise. One has to remember
>>>> though
>>>> that EAS was not built for PB. It was built for Java developers and
>>>> tuned to
>>>> tools like jBuilder, PowerJ etc. PB was only an after thought -
>>>> however, the
>>>> implementation in PB 8 through 10 was brilliant (IMHO). Unfortunately,
>>>> EAS
>>>> seems to have drifted well below the radar both in the IT realm and
>>>> Sybase's. Since EAS 6.x architecture is at the heart of the Application
>>>> Server Plug-in - EAS's stagnation will also probably affect ASP which
>>>> in
>>>> turn diminishes PB's tool chest (again). I was hoping that Sybase would
>>>> address this issue and even bring back DPD as the "light" Application
>>>> Server
>>>> and have EAS + ASP as the "big gun" thus giving PB developers a better
>>>> choice for n-tier support.
>>>>
>>>> Like the PFC, I do not believe Open Sourcing would do anything
>>>> for EAS
>>>> other than keep it lingering on with no real development. A good
>>>> thought
>>>> though if there was a "vibrant" EAS community. I think that aspect
>>>> though
>>>> has come and gone. :-(
>>>>
>>>> Sooooooo ... what would you do if Microsoft bought PB? :-)
>>>>


Jonathan Baker [Sybase] Posted on 2011-09-28 16:17:29.0Z
From: "Jonathan Baker [Sybase]" <lastnamefirstinitial@sybase.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:7.0) Gecko/20110922 Thunderbird/7.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: sybase.public.powerbuilder.futures.discussion
Subject: Re: I Need Distributed PB Back
References: <4e7ff01b@forums-1-dub> <2jf08718id9cd893gbqjs0eo7i7cc3u4p5@4ax.com> <4e805f35$1@forums-1-dub> <r55187psbojr1p6crftb3apj1tt9gl3q9p@4ax.com> <4e809f4f$1@forums-1-dub> <4e80a75c$1@forums-1-dub> <04n2879sc0j8um2i9vvmf6lt7dckpl60vb@4ax.com> <4e81bdde$1@forums-1-dub> <4e8289b9$1@forums-1-dub> <23m587t6iqti06vmodsj46eociknef1qm9@4ax.com> <4e8328f7@forums-1-dub> <4e834307$1@forums-1-dub>
In-Reply-To: <4e834307$1@forums-1-dub>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
NNTP-Posting-Host: vip152.sybase.com
X-Original-NNTP-Posting-Host: vip152.sybase.com
Message-ID: <4e834899@forums-1-dub>
Date: 28 Sep 2011 09:17:29 -0700
X-Trace: forums-1-dub 1317226649 10.22.241.152 (28 Sep 2011 09:17:29 -0700)
X-Original-Trace: 28 Sep 2011 09:17:29 -0700, vip152.sybase.com
Lines: 166
X-Authenticated-User: NGSysop
Path: forums-1-dub!not-for-mail
Xref: forums-1-dub sybase.public.powerbuilder.futures.discussion:27845
Article PK: 452182

I suspect, if there was a market for it, an entrepreneur would develop a
version of DPB for the market.

Free versions, like everything else, are paid for somehow. So, we must
examine where the revenue is. Everyone in the world wants things. The
question is "what will they pay to get what they want"? Capitalism is
the efficient allocation of resources to needs. If there is a huge
demand for DPB, then there is a huge paying market out there for DPB.

If that were true, the entrepreneur should already be in place.

Since it is not, there are only two conclusions left. Either the space
is open for an entrepreneur to develop a DPB version, or there is no
market drive for such a product.





Cheers,
Jonathan

On 9/28/2011 11:53 AM, Chris Pollach wrote:
> FWIW: Another good case for DPB ... a very simple Application Server that
> could be given out free (IMHO) to let PB developers practice or implement
> "light weight" n-tier development before getting their hands really into
> industrial AS's like EAS, jBoss, GlassFish, WebSphere, WebLogic, etc. Sort
> of like a "stepping stone" is what I am thinking here.
>
>
>
> "Jonathan Baker [Sybase]"<lastnamefirstinitial@sybase.com> wrote in message
> news:4e8328f7@forums-1-dub...
>> I understand. And I'm sure that not finding help with PB was frustrating.
>>
>> But the point I was making was not that PB would have trouble finding
>> consultants who were moving past two-tier programming with PB in to a
>> distributed model. In 2003 there were only a very small number of people
>> worldwide who were attempting to take PB in to n-tier systems. The lack of
>> talent in your area, however, does not equate to "the product could not do
>> that".
>>
>> I'm also absolutely certain that you were not having a core problem with
>> EAServer. Because the best EAServer resource in the entire world is in
>> New Zealand.
>>
>>
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Jonathan
>>
>>
>>
>> On 9/28/2011 4:30 AM, Brett Weaver wrote:
>>> Hi Jonathon
>>>
>>> I would not suggest you are wrong, but my reality was different.
>>> I had so much trouble getting EAS to work with PB that when I heard in
>>> 2003 that Sybase was bringing some EAServer experts to New Zealand I
>>> gladly went to Sybase to see them.
>>> I ended up buying a new PC and giving it to the engineers along with
>>> EAServer and PB Software and asking them to implement the demo.
>>> It took a lot of hours in which we discovered:
>>> 1.. The "demo" instructions were useless
>>> 2.. The EAServer experts knew nothing about PB and did not know anyone
>>> who did.
>>>
>>> I never touched EAServer again.
>>>
>>> Chris and others may have had training and engineers who knew but
>>> support for EAServer was Java only in Asia Pacific as far as I knew.
>>>
>>> There are a few companies in Australia still on Jaguar. Needless to
>>> say they have some difficulty recruiting.
>>>
>>> ...anyway back to watching the rugby...
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 27 Sep 2011 19:43:05 -0700, "Jonathan Baker [Sybase]"
>>> <lastnamefirstinitial@sybase.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> EAS was not "built for Java developers".
>>>>
>>>> EAServer was built around the CORBA ORB concept. It used, as it's
>>>> underlying framework, a C++ developed engine that took in IIOP requests
>>>> and translated them directly in to any language that was plugged in to
>>>> the server component. In this case, the server language could be C,
>>>> Java, or PB. All of those were considered equal by the ORB, which
>>>> didn't care what language was doing the processing.
>>>>
>>>> In other words, the core of EAServer could take a request from any front
>>>> end (Java, C, PB, etc.) and send it to any server component (again,
>>>> Java, C, PB, etc.). The ORB managed the communications, and the
>>>> protocol meant the client never knew anything about the server language.
>>>>
>>>> This was perfect for the designs of the time. The server could be PB,
>>>> or if PB wasn't scaling well (or if you wanted the server to run on a
>>>> non-windows machine) it could be rewritten in Java, C, or anything else
>>>> that would talk to the ORB. The PB front end would never know the
>>>> difference.
>>>>
>>>> Perhaps you are confusing EAServer with WebLogic and it's siblings.
>>>> WebLogic was a pure Java J2EE play, and was written from the ground up
>>>> in Java. EAServer competed with WebLogic but never used the same
>>>> underlying design concept.
>>>>
>>>> Since EAServer was a CORBA based design, it was determined that it would
>>>> serve both the PB and Java markets equally well. And the ORB
>>>> infrastructure was light-years ahead of the DPB code (mostly in
>>>> scalability, but also because it used industry-standard protocols).
>>>> These were some of the reasons that DPB was mothballed and EAS was it's
>>>> replacement.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> Jonathan
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 9/27/2011 8:13 AM, Chris Pollach wrote:
>>>>> Hi Jim;
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks for the correction. It certainly was a well supported PB
>>>>> feature
>>>>> by PowerSoft and later Sybase. I have built many n-tier systems with
>>>>> the
>>>>> product and even had a framework for the "little engine that could".
>>>>> :-)
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes, EAS was supposed to be the "industrial strength" version of
>>>>> DPD and
>>>>> to that aspect it did live up to its promise. One has to remember
>>>>> though
>>>>> that EAS was not built for PB. It was built for Java developers and
>>>>> tuned to
>>>>> tools like jBuilder, PowerJ etc. PB was only an after thought -
>>>>> however, the
>>>>> implementation in PB 8 through 10 was brilliant (IMHO). Unfortunately,
>>>>> EAS
>>>>> seems to have drifted well below the radar both in the IT realm and
>>>>> Sybase's. Since EAS 6.x architecture is at the heart of the Application
>>>>> Server Plug-in - EAS's stagnation will also probably affect ASP which
>>>>> in
>>>>> turn diminishes PB's tool chest (again). I was hoping that Sybase would
>>>>> address this issue and even bring back DPD as the "light" Application
>>>>> Server
>>>>> and have EAS + ASP as the "big gun" thus giving PB developers a better
>>>>> choice for n-tier support.
>>>>>
>>>>> Like the PFC, I do not believe Open Sourcing would do anything
>>>>> for EAS
>>>>> other than keep it lingering on with no real development. A good
>>>>> thought
>>>>> though if there was a "vibrant" EAS community. I think that aspect
>>>>> though
>>>>> has come and gone. :-(
>>>>>
>>>>> Sooooooo ... what would you do if Microsoft bought PB? :-)
>>>>>
>
>


Chris Pollach Posted on 2011-09-28 16:27:12.0Z
From: "Chris Pollach" <cpollach@travel-net.com>
Newsgroups: sybase.public.powerbuilder.futures.discussion
References: <4e7ff01b@forums-1-dub> <2jf08718id9cd893gbqjs0eo7i7cc3u4p5@4ax.com> <4e805f35$1@forums-1-dub> <r55187psbojr1p6crftb3apj1tt9gl3q9p@4ax.com> <4e809f4f$1@forums-1-dub> <4e80a75c$1@forums-1-dub> <04n2879sc0j8um2i9vvmf6lt7dckpl60vb@4ax.com> <4e81bdde$1@forums-1-dub> <4e8289b9$1@forums-1-dub> <23m587t6iqti06vmodsj46eociknef1qm9@4ax.com> <4e8328f7@forums-1-dub> <4e834307$1@forums-1-dub> <4e834899@forums-1-dub>
Subject: Re: I Need Distributed PB Back
Lines: 194
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5931
X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.6109
X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Response
NNTP-Posting-Host: vip152.sybase.com
X-Original-NNTP-Posting-Host: vip152.sybase.com
Message-ID: <4e834ae0$1@forums-1-dub>
Date: 28 Sep 2011 09:27:12 -0700
X-Trace: forums-1-dub 1317227232 10.22.241.152 (28 Sep 2011 09:27:12 -0700)
X-Original-Trace: 28 Sep 2011 09:27:12 -0700, vip152.sybase.com
X-Authenticated-User: pb125beta
Path: forums-1-dub!not-for-mail
Xref: forums-1-dub sybase.public.powerbuilder.futures.discussion:27846
Article PK: 452187

A good "polling" of the PB developer community for a need like DPB might be
an interesting activity. :-)

"Jonathan Baker [Sybase]" <lastnamefirstinitial@sybase.com> wrote in message
news:4e834899@forums-1-dub...
>I suspect, if there was a market for it, an entrepreneur would develop a
>version of DPB for the market.
>
> Free versions, like everything else, are paid for somehow. So, we must
> examine where the revenue is. Everyone in the world wants things. The
> question is "what will they pay to get what they want"? Capitalism is the
> efficient allocation of resources to needs. If there is a huge demand for
> DPB, then there is a huge paying market out there for DPB.
>
> If that were true, the entrepreneur should already be in place.
>
> Since it is not, there are only two conclusions left. Either the space is
> open for an entrepreneur to develop a DPB version, or there is no market
> drive for such a product.
>
>
>
>
>
> Cheers,
> Jonathan
>
>
> On 9/28/2011 11:53 AM, Chris Pollach wrote:
>> FWIW: Another good case for DPB ... a very simple Application Server that
>> could be given out free (IMHO) to let PB developers practice or implement
>> "light weight" n-tier development before getting their hands really into
>> industrial AS's like EAS, jBoss, GlassFish, WebSphere, WebLogic, etc.
>> Sort
>> of like a "stepping stone" is what I am thinking here.
>>
>>
>>
>> "Jonathan Baker [Sybase]"<lastnamefirstinitial@sybase.com> wrote in
>> message
>> news:4e8328f7@forums-1-dub...
>>> I understand. And I'm sure that not finding help with PB was
>>> frustrating.
>>>
>>> But the point I was making was not that PB would have trouble finding
>>> consultants who were moving past two-tier programming with PB in to a
>>> distributed model. In 2003 there were only a very small number of
>>> people
>>> worldwide who were attempting to take PB in to n-tier systems. The lack
>>> of
>>> talent in your area, however, does not equate to "the product could not
>>> do
>>> that".
>>>
>>> I'm also absolutely certain that you were not having a core problem with
>>> EAServer. Because the best EAServer resource in the entire world is in
>>> New Zealand.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Jonathan
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 9/28/2011 4:30 AM, Brett Weaver wrote:
>>>> Hi Jonathon
>>>>
>>>> I would not suggest you are wrong, but my reality was different.
>>>> I had so much trouble getting EAS to work with PB that when I heard in
>>>> 2003 that Sybase was bringing some EAServer experts to New Zealand I
>>>> gladly went to Sybase to see them.
>>>> I ended up buying a new PC and giving it to the engineers along with
>>>> EAServer and PB Software and asking them to implement the demo.
>>>> It took a lot of hours in which we discovered:
>>>> 1.. The "demo" instructions were useless
>>>> 2.. The EAServer experts knew nothing about PB and did not know anyone
>>>> who did.
>>>>
>>>> I never touched EAServer again.
>>>>
>>>> Chris and others may have had training and engineers who knew but
>>>> support for EAServer was Java only in Asia Pacific as far as I knew.
>>>>
>>>> There are a few companies in Australia still on Jaguar. Needless to
>>>> say they have some difficulty recruiting.
>>>>
>>>> ...anyway back to watching the rugby...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 27 Sep 2011 19:43:05 -0700, "Jonathan Baker [Sybase]"
>>>> <lastnamefirstinitial@sybase.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> EAS was not "built for Java developers".
>>>>>
>>>>> EAServer was built around the CORBA ORB concept. It used, as it's
>>>>> underlying framework, a C++ developed engine that took in IIOP
>>>>> requests
>>>>> and translated them directly in to any language that was plugged in to
>>>>> the server component. In this case, the server language could be C,
>>>>> Java, or PB. All of those were considered equal by the ORB, which
>>>>> didn't care what language was doing the processing.
>>>>>
>>>>> In other words, the core of EAServer could take a request from any
>>>>> front
>>>>> end (Java, C, PB, etc.) and send it to any server component (again,
>>>>> Java, C, PB, etc.). The ORB managed the communications, and the
>>>>> protocol meant the client never knew anything about the server
>>>>> language.
>>>>>
>>>>> This was perfect for the designs of the time. The server could be PB,
>>>>> or if PB wasn't scaling well (or if you wanted the server to run on a
>>>>> non-windows machine) it could be rewritten in Java, C, or anything
>>>>> else
>>>>> that would talk to the ORB. The PB front end would never know the
>>>>> difference.
>>>>>
>>>>> Perhaps you are confusing EAServer with WebLogic and it's siblings.
>>>>> WebLogic was a pure Java J2EE play, and was written from the ground up
>>>>> in Java. EAServer competed with WebLogic but never used the same
>>>>> underlying design concept.
>>>>>
>>>>> Since EAServer was a CORBA based design, it was determined that it
>>>>> would
>>>>> serve both the PB and Java markets equally well. And the ORB
>>>>> infrastructure was light-years ahead of the DPB code (mostly in
>>>>> scalability, but also because it used industry-standard protocols).
>>>>> These were some of the reasons that DPB was mothballed and EAS was
>>>>> it's
>>>>> replacement.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>> Jonathan
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 9/27/2011 8:13 AM, Chris Pollach wrote:
>>>>>> Hi Jim;
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks for the correction. It certainly was a well supported
>>>>>> PB
>>>>>> feature
>>>>>> by PowerSoft and later Sybase. I have built many n-tier systems with
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> product and even had a framework for the "little engine that could".
>>>>>> :-)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yes, EAS was supposed to be the "industrial strength" version
>>>>>> of
>>>>>> DPD and
>>>>>> to that aspect it did live up to its promise. One has to remember
>>>>>> though
>>>>>> that EAS was not built for PB. It was built for Java developers and
>>>>>> tuned to
>>>>>> tools like jBuilder, PowerJ etc. PB was only an after thought -
>>>>>> however, the
>>>>>> implementation in PB 8 through 10 was brilliant (IMHO).
>>>>>> Unfortunately,
>>>>>> EAS
>>>>>> seems to have drifted well below the radar both in the IT realm and
>>>>>> Sybase's. Since EAS 6.x architecture is at the heart of the
>>>>>> Application
>>>>>> Server Plug-in - EAS's stagnation will also probably affect ASP which
>>>>>> in
>>>>>> turn diminishes PB's tool chest (again). I was hoping that Sybase
>>>>>> would
>>>>>> address this issue and even bring back DPD as the "light" Application
>>>>>> Server
>>>>>> and have EAS + ASP as the "big gun" thus giving PB developers a
>>>>>> better
>>>>>> choice for n-tier support.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Like the PFC, I do not believe Open Sourcing would do anything
>>>>>> for EAS
>>>>>> other than keep it lingering on with no real development. A good
>>>>>> thought
>>>>>> though if there was a "vibrant" EAS community. I think that aspect
>>>>>> though
>>>>>> has come and gone. :-(
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Sooooooo ... what would you do if Microsoft bought PB? :-)
>>>>>>
>>
>>


Jonathan Baker [Sybase] Posted on 2011-09-28 16:33:03.0Z
From: "Jonathan Baker [Sybase]" <lastnamefirstinitial@sybase.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:7.0) Gecko/20110922 Thunderbird/7.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: sybase.public.powerbuilder.futures.discussion
Subject: Re: I Need Distributed PB Back
References: <4e7ff01b@forums-1-dub> <2jf08718id9cd893gbqjs0eo7i7cc3u4p5@4ax.com> <4e805f35$1@forums-1-dub> <r55187psbojr1p6crftb3apj1tt9gl3q9p@4ax.com> <4e809f4f$1@forums-1-dub> <4e80a75c$1@forums-1-dub> <04n2879sc0j8um2i9vvmf6lt7dckpl60vb@4ax.com> <4e81bdde$1@forums-1-dub> <4e8289b9$1@forums-1-dub> <23m587t6iqti06vmodsj46eociknef1qm9@4ax.com> <4e8328f7@forums-1-dub> <4e834307$1@forums-1-dub> <4e834899@forums-1-dub> <4e834ae0$1@forums-1-dub>
In-Reply-To: <4e834ae0$1@forums-1-dub>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
NNTP-Posting-Host: vip152.sybase.com
X-Original-NNTP-Posting-Host: vip152.sybase.com
Message-ID: <4e834c3f@forums-1-dub>
Date: 28 Sep 2011 09:33:03 -0700
X-Trace: forums-1-dub 1317227583 10.22.241.152 (28 Sep 2011 09:33:03 -0700)
X-Original-Trace: 28 Sep 2011 09:33:03 -0700, vip152.sybase.com
Lines: 203
X-Authenticated-User: NGSysop
Path: forums-1-dub!not-for-mail
Xref: forums-1-dub sybase.public.powerbuilder.futures.discussion:27849
Article PK: 452185

Validate the market. It would be one of the first thing any
entrepreneur would do.



Cheers,
Jonathan

On 9/28/2011 12:27 PM, Chris Pollach wrote:
> A good "polling" of the PB developer community for a need like DPB might be
> an interesting activity. :-)
>
>
>
> "Jonathan Baker [Sybase]"<lastnamefirstinitial@sybase.com> wrote in message
> news:4e834899@forums-1-dub...
>> I suspect, if there was a market for it, an entrepreneur would develop a
>> version of DPB for the market.
>>
>> Free versions, like everything else, are paid for somehow. So, we must
>> examine where the revenue is. Everyone in the world wants things. The
>> question is "what will they pay to get what they want"? Capitalism is the
>> efficient allocation of resources to needs. If there is a huge demand for
>> DPB, then there is a huge paying market out there for DPB.
>>
>> If that were true, the entrepreneur should already be in place.
>>
>> Since it is not, there are only two conclusions left. Either the space is
>> open for an entrepreneur to develop a DPB version, or there is no market
>> drive for such a product.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Jonathan
>>
>>
>> On 9/28/2011 11:53 AM, Chris Pollach wrote:
>>> FWIW: Another good case for DPB ... a very simple Application Server that
>>> could be given out free (IMHO) to let PB developers practice or implement
>>> "light weight" n-tier development before getting their hands really into
>>> industrial AS's like EAS, jBoss, GlassFish, WebSphere, WebLogic, etc.
>>> Sort
>>> of like a "stepping stone" is what I am thinking here.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> "Jonathan Baker [Sybase]"<lastnamefirstinitial@sybase.com> wrote in
>>> message
>>> news:4e8328f7@forums-1-dub...
>>>> I understand. And I'm sure that not finding help with PB was
>>>> frustrating.
>>>>
>>>> But the point I was making was not that PB would have trouble finding
>>>> consultants who were moving past two-tier programming with PB in to a
>>>> distributed model. In 2003 there were only a very small number of
>>>> people
>>>> worldwide who were attempting to take PB in to n-tier systems. The lack
>>>> of
>>>> talent in your area, however, does not equate to "the product could not
>>>> do
>>>> that".
>>>>
>>>> I'm also absolutely certain that you were not having a core problem with
>>>> EAServer. Because the best EAServer resource in the entire world is in
>>>> New Zealand.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> Jonathan
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 9/28/2011 4:30 AM, Brett Weaver wrote:
>>>>> Hi Jonathon
>>>>>
>>>>> I would not suggest you are wrong, but my reality was different.
>>>>> I had so much trouble getting EAS to work with PB that when I heard in
>>>>> 2003 that Sybase was bringing some EAServer experts to New Zealand I
>>>>> gladly went to Sybase to see them.
>>>>> I ended up buying a new PC and giving it to the engineers along with
>>>>> EAServer and PB Software and asking them to implement the demo.
>>>>> It took a lot of hours in which we discovered:
>>>>> 1.. The "demo" instructions were useless
>>>>> 2.. The EAServer experts knew nothing about PB and did not know anyone
>>>>> who did.
>>>>>
>>>>> I never touched EAServer again.
>>>>>
>>>>> Chris and others may have had training and engineers who knew but
>>>>> support for EAServer was Java only in Asia Pacific as far as I knew.
>>>>>
>>>>> There are a few companies in Australia still on Jaguar. Needless to
>>>>> say they have some difficulty recruiting.
>>>>>
>>>>> ...anyway back to watching the rugby...
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 27 Sep 2011 19:43:05 -0700, "Jonathan Baker [Sybase]"
>>>>> <lastnamefirstinitial@sybase.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> EAS was not "built for Java developers".
>>>>>>
>>>>>> EAServer was built around the CORBA ORB concept. It used, as it's
>>>>>> underlying framework, a C++ developed engine that took in IIOP
>>>>>> requests
>>>>>> and translated them directly in to any language that was plugged in to
>>>>>> the server component. In this case, the server language could be C,
>>>>>> Java, or PB. All of those were considered equal by the ORB, which
>>>>>> didn't care what language was doing the processing.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> In other words, the core of EAServer could take a request from any
>>>>>> front
>>>>>> end (Java, C, PB, etc.) and send it to any server component (again,
>>>>>> Java, C, PB, etc.). The ORB managed the communications, and the
>>>>>> protocol meant the client never knew anything about the server
>>>>>> language.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This was perfect for the designs of the time. The server could be PB,
>>>>>> or if PB wasn't scaling well (or if you wanted the server to run on a
>>>>>> non-windows machine) it could be rewritten in Java, C, or anything
>>>>>> else
>>>>>> that would talk to the ORB. The PB front end would never know the
>>>>>> difference.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Perhaps you are confusing EAServer with WebLogic and it's siblings.
>>>>>> WebLogic was a pure Java J2EE play, and was written from the ground up
>>>>>> in Java. EAServer competed with WebLogic but never used the same
>>>>>> underlying design concept.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Since EAServer was a CORBA based design, it was determined that it
>>>>>> would
>>>>>> serve both the PB and Java markets equally well. And the ORB
>>>>>> infrastructure was light-years ahead of the DPB code (mostly in
>>>>>> scalability, but also because it used industry-standard protocols).
>>>>>> These were some of the reasons that DPB was mothballed and EAS was
>>>>>> it's
>>>>>> replacement.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>> Jonathan
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 9/27/2011 8:13 AM, Chris Pollach wrote:
>>>>>>> Hi Jim;
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks for the correction. It certainly was a well supported
>>>>>>> PB
>>>>>>> feature
>>>>>>> by PowerSoft and later Sybase. I have built many n-tier systems with
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>> product and even had a framework for the "little engine that could".
>>>>>>> :-)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Yes, EAS was supposed to be the "industrial strength" version
>>>>>>> of
>>>>>>> DPD and
>>>>>>> to that aspect it did live up to its promise. One has to remember
>>>>>>> though
>>>>>>> that EAS was not built for PB. It was built for Java developers and
>>>>>>> tuned to
>>>>>>> tools like jBuilder, PowerJ etc. PB was only an after thought -
>>>>>>> however, the
>>>>>>> implementation in PB 8 through 10 was brilliant (IMHO).
>>>>>>> Unfortunately,
>>>>>>> EAS
>>>>>>> seems to have drifted well below the radar both in the IT realm and
>>>>>>> Sybase's. Since EAS 6.x architecture is at the heart of the
>>>>>>> Application
>>>>>>> Server Plug-in - EAS's stagnation will also probably affect ASP which
>>>>>>> in
>>>>>>> turn diminishes PB's tool chest (again). I was hoping that Sybase
>>>>>>> would
>>>>>>> address this issue and even bring back DPD as the "light" Application
>>>>>>> Server
>>>>>>> and have EAS + ASP as the "big gun" thus giving PB developers a
>>>>>>> better
>>>>>>> choice for n-tier support.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Like the PFC, I do not believe Open Sourcing would do anything
>>>>>>> for EAS
>>>>>>> other than keep it lingering on with no real development. A good
>>>>>>> thought
>>>>>>> though if there was a "vibrant" EAS community. I think that aspect
>>>>>>> though
>>>>>>> has come and gone. :-(
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Sooooooo ... what would you do if Microsoft bought PB? :-)
>>>>>>>
>>>
>>>
>
>


Brett Weaver Posted on 2011-09-29 08:45:19.0Z
From: Brett Weaver <bretnsp@weaversoft.com>
Newsgroups: sybase.public.powerbuilder.futures.discussion
Subject: Re: I Need Distributed PB Back
Message-ID: <08b887tjtsqh3ftoeijqrvv5mevvmnj5cp@4ax.com>
References: <4e7ff01b@forums-1-dub> <2jf08718id9cd893gbqjs0eo7i7cc3u4p5@4ax.com> <4e805f35$1@forums-1-dub> <r55187psbojr1p6crftb3apj1tt9gl3q9p@4ax.com> <4e809f4f$1@forums-1-dub> <4e80a75c$1@forums-1-dub> <04n2879sc0j8um2i9vvmf6lt7dckpl60vb@4ax.com> <4e81bdde$1@forums-1-dub> <4e8289b9$1@forums-1-dub> <23m587t6iqti06vmodsj46eociknef1qm9@4ax.com> <4e8328f7@forums-1-dub>
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 6.00/32.1186
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
NNTP-Posting-Host: vip152.sybase.com
X-Original-NNTP-Posting-Host: vip152.sybase.com
Date: 29 Sep 2011 01:45:19 -0700
X-Trace: forums-1-dub 1317285919 10.22.241.152 (29 Sep 2011 01:45:19 -0700)
X-Original-Trace: 29 Sep 2011 01:45:19 -0700, vip152.sybase.com
Lines: 143
Path: forums-1-dub!not-for-mail
Xref: forums-1-dub sybase.public.powerbuilder.futures.discussion:27856
Article PK: 452191

Evan is not a PB Programmer of course!
He's a bright (and helpful) cookie though. We have had a few chats at
Sybase events.
It was a continuing frustration that one of the authors of the product
was less than 5km from the local Sybase office but support was missing
completely.
But.. We had two "experts" from the Hong Kong (or Singapore can't
remember now) who had difficulty configuring EAS for PB - for the demo
software... I didn't say they couldn't do it in the end (hours later),
just that their focus and entire knowledge was Java, not PB. That is
my reality..
Does not matter now... If anything things have got worse. Thats not
the fault of the products, just Asia Pacific Management. There is no
support of any tools in Australasia.
No education or support is available for any PB customers wanting to
go .Net in Australia or NZ. Marketing is always a mix. SAP/Sybase is
not interested in marketing tools in Australasia..

OK Readers - How prepared are your local offices to support and train
in PB?


On 28 Sep 2011 07:02:31 -0700, "Jonathan Baker [Sybase]"

<lastnamefirstinitial@sybase.com> wrote:

>I understand. And I'm sure that not finding help with PB was frustrating.
>
>But the point I was making was not that PB would have trouble finding
>consultants who were moving past two-tier programming with PB in to a
>distributed model. In 2003 there were only a very small number of
>people worldwide who were attempting to take PB in to n-tier systems.
>The lack of talent in your area, however, does not equate to "the
>product could not do that".
>
>I'm also absolutely certain that you were not having a core problem with
>EAServer. Because the best EAServer resource in the entire world is in
>New Zealand.
>
>
>
>Cheers,
>Jonathan
>
>
>
>On 9/28/2011 4:30 AM, Brett Weaver wrote:
>> Hi Jonathon
>>
>> I would not suggest you are wrong, but my reality was different.
>> I had so much trouble getting EAS to work with PB that when I heard in
>> 2003 that Sybase was bringing some EAServer experts to New Zealand I
>> gladly went to Sybase to see them.
>> I ended up buying a new PC and giving it to the engineers along with
>> EAServer and PB Software and asking them to implement the demo.
>> It took a lot of hours in which we discovered:
>> 1.. The "demo" instructions were useless
>> 2.. The EAServer experts knew nothing about PB and did not know anyone
>> who did.
>>
>> I never touched EAServer again.
>>
>> Chris and others may have had training and engineers who knew but
>> support for EAServer was Java only in Asia Pacific as far as I knew.
>>
>> There are a few companies in Australia still on Jaguar. Needless to
>> say they have some difficulty recruiting.
>>
>> ...anyway back to watching the rugby...
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 27 Sep 2011 19:43:05 -0700, "Jonathan Baker [Sybase]"
>> <lastnamefirstinitial@sybase.com> wrote:
>>
>>> EAS was not "built for Java developers".
>>>
>>> EAServer was built around the CORBA ORB concept. It used, as it's
>>> underlying framework, a C++ developed engine that took in IIOP requests
>>> and translated them directly in to any language that was plugged in to
>>> the server component. In this case, the server language could be C,
>>> Java, or PB. All of those were considered equal by the ORB, which
>>> didn't care what language was doing the processing.
>>>
>>> In other words, the core of EAServer could take a request from any front
>>> end (Java, C, PB, etc.) and send it to any server component (again,
>>> Java, C, PB, etc.). The ORB managed the communications, and the
>>> protocol meant the client never knew anything about the server language.
>>>
>>> This was perfect for the designs of the time. The server could be PB,
>>> or if PB wasn't scaling well (or if you wanted the server to run on a
>>> non-windows machine) it could be rewritten in Java, C, or anything else
>>> that would talk to the ORB. The PB front end would never know the
>>> difference.
>>>
>>> Perhaps you are confusing EAServer with WebLogic and it's siblings.
>>> WebLogic was a pure Java J2EE play, and was written from the ground up
>>> in Java. EAServer competed with WebLogic but never used the same
>>> underlying design concept.
>>>
>>> Since EAServer was a CORBA based design, it was determined that it would
>>> serve both the PB and Java markets equally well. And the ORB
>>> infrastructure was light-years ahead of the DPB code (mostly in
>>> scalability, but also because it used industry-standard protocols).
>>> These were some of the reasons that DPB was mothballed and EAS was it's
>>> replacement.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Jonathan
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 9/27/2011 8:13 AM, Chris Pollach wrote:
>>>> Hi Jim;
>>>>
>>>> Thanks for the correction. It certainly was a well supported PB feature
>>>> by PowerSoft and later Sybase. I have built many n-tier systems with the
>>>> product and even had a framework for the "little engine that could".
>>>> :-)
>>>>
>>>> Yes, EAS was supposed to be the "industrial strength" version of DPD and
>>>> to that aspect it did live up to its promise. One has to remember though
>>>> that EAS was not built for PB. It was built for Java developers and tuned to
>>>> tools like jBuilder, PowerJ etc. PB was only an after thought - however, the
>>>> implementation in PB 8 through 10 was brilliant (IMHO). Unfortunately, EAS
>>>> seems to have drifted well below the radar both in the IT realm and
>>>> Sybase's. Since EAS 6.x architecture is at the heart of the Application
>>>> Server Plug-in - EAS's stagnation will also probably affect ASP which in
>>>> turn diminishes PB's tool chest (again). I was hoping that Sybase would
>>>> address this issue and even bring back DPD as the "light" Application Server
>>>> and have EAS + ASP as the "big gun" thus giving PB developers a better
>>>> choice for n-tier support.
>>>>
>>>> Like the PFC, I do not believe Open Sourcing would do anything for EAS
>>>> other than keep it lingering on with no real development. A good thought
>>>> though if there was a "vibrant" EAS community. I think that aspect though
>>>> has come and gone. :-(
>>>>
>>>> Sooooooo ... what would you do if Microsoft bought PB? :-)
>>>>


Chris Pollach Posted on 2011-09-29 11:28:47.0Z
From: "Chris Pollach" <cpollach@travel-net.com>
Newsgroups: sybase.public.powerbuilder.futures.discussion
References: <4e7ff01b@forums-1-dub> <2jf08718id9cd893gbqjs0eo7i7cc3u4p5@4ax.com> <4e805f35$1@forums-1-dub> <r55187psbojr1p6crftb3apj1tt9gl3q9p@4ax.com> <4e809f4f$1@forums-1-dub> <4e80a75c$1@forums-1-dub> <04n2879sc0j8um2i9vvmf6lt7dckpl60vb@4ax.com> <4e81bdde$1@forums-1-dub> <4e8289b9$1@forums-1-dub> <23m587t6iqti06vmodsj46eociknef1qm9@4ax.com> <4e8328f7@forums-1-dub> <08b887tjtsqh3ftoeijqrvv5mevvmnj5cp@4ax.com>
Subject: Re: I Need Distributed PB Back
Lines: 181
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5931
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.6109
X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Original
NNTP-Posting-Host: vip152.sybase.com
X-Original-NNTP-Posting-Host: vip152.sybase.com
Message-ID: <4e84566f$1@forums-1-dub>
Date: 29 Sep 2011 04:28:47 -0700
X-Trace: forums-1-dub 1317295727 10.22.241.152 (29 Sep 2011 04:28:47 -0700)
X-Original-Trace: 29 Sep 2011 04:28:47 -0700, vip152.sybase.com
X-Authenticated-User: pb125beta
Path: forums-1-dub!not-for-mail
Xref: forums-1-dub sybase.public.powerbuilder.futures.discussion:27857
Article PK: 452196

Hi Brett;

FYI: Evan and EAS's former product manager Loren Corbridge are now
working on SUP. In fact, I was just talking to Loren yesterday. :-)

Q: How prepared are your local offices to support and train in PB?
A: Zero here in Canada's national capital. They stopped giving any Sybase
courses just about two years ago.
Sign of the times I guess. :-(

--
Regards ... Chris
Blog: http://chrispollach.blogspot.com
PBDJ: http://chrispollach.sys-con.com
SourceForge: http://sourceforge.net/projects/stdfndclass

"Brett Weaver" <bretnsp@weaversoft.com> wrote in message
news:08b887tjtsqh3ftoeijqrvv5mevvmnj5cp@4ax.com...
> Evan is not a PB Programmer of course!
> He's a bright (and helpful) cookie though. We have had a few chats at
> Sybase events.
> It was a continuing frustration that one of the authors of the product
> was less than 5km from the local Sybase office but support was missing
> completely.
> But.. We had two "experts" from the Hong Kong (or Singapore can't
> remember now) who had difficulty configuring EAS for PB - for the demo
> software... I didn't say they couldn't do it in the end (hours later),
> just that their focus and entire knowledge was Java, not PB. That is
> my reality..
> Does not matter now... If anything things have got worse. Thats not
> the fault of the products, just Asia Pacific Management. There is no
> support of any tools in Australasia.
> No education or support is available for any PB customers wanting to
> go .Net in Australia or NZ. Marketing is always a mix. SAP/Sybase is
> not interested in marketing tools in Australasia..
>
> OK Readers - How prepared are your local offices to support and train
> in PB?
>
>
> On 28 Sep 2011 07:02:31 -0700, "Jonathan Baker [Sybase]"
> <lastnamefirstinitial@sybase.com> wrote:
>
>>I understand. And I'm sure that not finding help with PB was frustrating.
>>
>>But the point I was making was not that PB would have trouble finding
>>consultants who were moving past two-tier programming with PB in to a
>>distributed model. In 2003 there were only a very small number of
>>people worldwide who were attempting to take PB in to n-tier systems.
>>The lack of talent in your area, however, does not equate to "the
>>product could not do that".
>>
>>I'm also absolutely certain that you were not having a core problem with
>>EAServer. Because the best EAServer resource in the entire world is in
>>New Zealand.
>>
>>
>>
>>Cheers,
>>Jonathan
>>
>>
>>
>>On 9/28/2011 4:30 AM, Brett Weaver wrote:
>>> Hi Jonathon
>>>
>>> I would not suggest you are wrong, but my reality was different.
>>> I had so much trouble getting EAS to work with PB that when I heard in
>>> 2003 that Sybase was bringing some EAServer experts to New Zealand I
>>> gladly went to Sybase to see them.
>>> I ended up buying a new PC and giving it to the engineers along with
>>> EAServer and PB Software and asking them to implement the demo.
>>> It took a lot of hours in which we discovered:
>>> 1.. The "demo" instructions were useless
>>> 2.. The EAServer experts knew nothing about PB and did not know anyone
>>> who did.
>>>
>>> I never touched EAServer again.
>>>
>>> Chris and others may have had training and engineers who knew but
>>> support for EAServer was Java only in Asia Pacific as far as I knew.
>>>
>>> There are a few companies in Australia still on Jaguar. Needless to
>>> say they have some difficulty recruiting.
>>>
>>> ...anyway back to watching the rugby...
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 27 Sep 2011 19:43:05 -0700, "Jonathan Baker [Sybase]"
>>> <lastnamefirstinitial@sybase.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> EAS was not "built for Java developers".
>>>>
>>>> EAServer was built around the CORBA ORB concept. It used, as it's
>>>> underlying framework, a C++ developed engine that took in IIOP requests
>>>> and translated them directly in to any language that was plugged in to
>>>> the server component. In this case, the server language could be C,
>>>> Java, or PB. All of those were considered equal by the ORB, which
>>>> didn't care what language was doing the processing.
>>>>
>>>> In other words, the core of EAServer could take a request from any
>>>> front
>>>> end (Java, C, PB, etc.) and send it to any server component (again,
>>>> Java, C, PB, etc.). The ORB managed the communications, and the
>>>> protocol meant the client never knew anything about the server
>>>> language.
>>>>
>>>> This was perfect for the designs of the time. The server could be PB,
>>>> or if PB wasn't scaling well (or if you wanted the server to run on a
>>>> non-windows machine) it could be rewritten in Java, C, or anything else
>>>> that would talk to the ORB. The PB front end would never know the
>>>> difference.
>>>>
>>>> Perhaps you are confusing EAServer with WebLogic and it's siblings.
>>>> WebLogic was a pure Java J2EE play, and was written from the ground up
>>>> in Java. EAServer competed with WebLogic but never used the same
>>>> underlying design concept.
>>>>
>>>> Since EAServer was a CORBA based design, it was determined that it
>>>> would
>>>> serve both the PB and Java markets equally well. And the ORB
>>>> infrastructure was light-years ahead of the DPB code (mostly in
>>>> scalability, but also because it used industry-standard protocols).
>>>> These were some of the reasons that DPB was mothballed and EAS was it's
>>>> replacement.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> Jonathan
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 9/27/2011 8:13 AM, Chris Pollach wrote:
>>>>> Hi Jim;
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks for the correction. It certainly was a well supported PB
>>>>> feature
>>>>> by PowerSoft and later Sybase. I have built many n-tier systems with
>>>>> the
>>>>> product and even had a framework for the "little engine that could".
>>>>> :-)
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes, EAS was supposed to be the "industrial strength" version of
>>>>> DPD and
>>>>> to that aspect it did live up to its promise. One has to remember
>>>>> though
>>>>> that EAS was not built for PB. It was built for Java developers and
>>>>> tuned to
>>>>> tools like jBuilder, PowerJ etc. PB was only an after thought -
>>>>> however, the
>>>>> implementation in PB 8 through 10 was brilliant (IMHO). Unfortunately,
>>>>> EAS
>>>>> seems to have drifted well below the radar both in the IT realm and
>>>>> Sybase's. Since EAS 6.x architecture is at the heart of the
>>>>> Application
>>>>> Server Plug-in - EAS's stagnation will also probably affect ASP which
>>>>> in
>>>>> turn diminishes PB's tool chest (again). I was hoping that Sybase
>>>>> would
>>>>> address this issue and even bring back DPD as the "light" Application
>>>>> Server
>>>>> and have EAS + ASP as the "big gun" thus giving PB developers a better
>>>>> choice for n-tier support.
>>>>>
>>>>> Like the PFC, I do not believe Open Sourcing would do anything
>>>>> for EAS
>>>>> other than keep it lingering on with no real development. A good
>>>>> thought
>>>>> though if there was a "vibrant" EAS community. I think that aspect
>>>>> though
>>>>> has come and gone. :-(
>>>>>
>>>>> Sooooooo ... what would you do if Microsoft bought PB? :-)
>>>>>


Dave Fish [Sybase] Posted on 2011-09-29 21:14:52.0Z
From: "Dave Fish [Sybase]" <n0Spam__dfish@sybase.com>
Newsgroups: sybase.public.powerbuilder.futures.discussion
Subject: Re: I Need Distributed PB Back
Organization: Sybase
Reply-To: n0Spam__dfish@sybase.com
Message-ID: <3on987daosrh0k7re0b7uvkivfu2g4pdh0@4ax.com>
References: <4e7ff01b@forums-1-dub> <2jf08718id9cd893gbqjs0eo7i7cc3u4p5@4ax.com> <4e805f35$1@forums-1-dub> <r55187psbojr1p6crftb3apj1tt9gl3q9p@4ax.com> <4e809f4f$1@forums-1-dub> <4e80a75c$1@forums-1-dub> <04n2879sc0j8um2i9vvmf6lt7dckpl60vb@4ax.com> <4e81bdde$1@forums-1-dub> <4e8289b9$1@forums-1-dub> <23m587t6iqti06vmodsj46eociknef1qm9@4ax.com> <4e8328f7@forums-1-dub> <08b887tjtsqh3ftoeijqrvv5mevvmnj5cp@4ax.com> <4e84566f$1@forums-1-dub>
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 4.2/32.1118
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
NNTP-Posting-Host: vip152.sybase.com
X-Original-NNTP-Posting-Host: vip152.sybase.com
Date: 29 Sep 2011 14:14:52 -0700
X-Trace: forums-1-dub 1317330892 10.22.241.152 (29 Sep 2011 14:14:52 -0700)
X-Original-Trace: 29 Sep 2011 14:14:52 -0700, vip152.sybase.com
Lines: 23
X-Authenticated-User: TeamSybase
Path: forums-1-dub!not-for-mail
Xref: forums-1-dub sybase.public.powerbuilder.futures.discussion:27871
Article PK: 452204

That's not what David Gates (PowerBuilder instructor at Sybase) told
me. He was traveling to Ottawa once or twice a month to teach Fast
Track to PowerBuilder classes. I haven't talked to him in awhile so I
don't know what his schedule is like these days, but given the fact
that there were 33 students in the PowerBuilder 12.5 Boot Camp
pre-conference training class in Las Vegas I'd say there is still
demand for PowerBuilder training.

With over the web training and travel relatively inexpensive you don't
need to have trained resources on every product in each office.

On 29 Sep 2011 04:28:47 -0700, "Chris Pollach"

<cpollach@travel-net.com> wrote:

>Hi Brett;
>
> FYI: Evan and EAS's former product manager Loren Corbridge are now
>working on SUP. In fact, I was just talking to Loren yesterday. :-)
>
>Q: How prepared are your local offices to support and train in PB?
>A: Zero here in Canada's national capital. They stopped giving any Sybase
>courses just about two years ago.
> Sign of the times I guess. :-(


Chris Pollach Posted on 2011-09-30 03:13:54.0Z
From: "Chris Pollach" <cpollach.at.travel-net.dot.com>
Newsgroups: sybase.public.powerbuilder.futures.discussion
References: <4e7ff01b@forums-1-dub> <2jf08718id9cd893gbqjs0eo7i7cc3u4p5@4ax.com> <4e805f35$1@forums-1-dub> <r55187psbojr1p6crftb3apj1tt9gl3q9p@4ax.com> <4e809f4f$1@forums-1-dub> <4e80a75c$1@forums-1-dub> <04n2879sc0j8um2i9vvmf6lt7dckpl60vb@4ax.com> <4e81bdde$1@forums-1-dub> <4e8289b9$1@forums-1-dub> <23m587t6iqti06vmodsj46eociknef1qm9@4ax.com> <4e8328f7@forums-1-dub> <08b887tjtsqh3ftoeijqrvv5mevvmnj5cp@4ax.com> <4e84566f$1@forums-1-dub> <3on987daosrh0k7re0b7uvkivfu2g4pdh0@4ax.com>
In-Reply-To: <3on987daosrh0k7re0b7uvkivfu2g4pdh0@4ax.com>
Subject: Re: I Need Distributed PB Back
Lines: 1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Importance: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Windows Live Mail 15.4.3538.513
X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V15.4.3538.513
NNTP-Posting-Host: vip152.sybase.com
X-Original-NNTP-Posting-Host: vip152.sybase.com
Message-ID: <4e8533f2$1@forums-1-dub>
Date: 29 Sep 2011 20:13:54 -0700
X-Trace: forums-1-dub 1317352434 10.22.241.152 (29 Sep 2011 20:13:54 -0700)
X-Original-Trace: 29 Sep 2011 20:13:54 -0700, vip152.sybase.com
Path: forums-1-dub!not-for-mail
Xref: forums-1-dub sybase.public.powerbuilder.futures.discussion:27874
Article PK: 452209

Hi Dave;

Nope ... hasn't been a PB course here in many moons. Sybase education
removed PB from the curriculum almost two years ago ...
http://sed.sybase.com/Osiris/osiris_location_NAA1.htm#OTT

They still run PB in Toronto - but a) only the FastTrack and b) with
government restrictions on travel - that's not an option from Ottawa. Add to
that ... most of the PB licenses are here in Ottawa (probably higher than
Toronto and Montreal put together) - removing PB from the Ottawa roster
seemed strange to me.

Say hello to David for me ... long time - no see! :-(

Regards ... Chris
PS: The last instructor I saw here in Ottawa was Yakov - but, Sybase let him
go some time ago. That's how long its been since we have had a course here!
:-(



"Dave Fish [Sybase]" wrote in message
news:3on987daosrh0k7re0b7uvkivfu2g4pdh0@4ax.com...

That's not what David Gates (PowerBuilder instructor at Sybase) told
me. He was traveling to Ottawa once or twice a month to teach Fast
Track to PowerBuilder classes. I haven't talked to him in awhile so I
don't know what his schedule is like these days, but given the fact
that there were 33 students in the PowerBuilder 12.5 Boot Camp
pre-conference training class in Las Vegas I'd say there is still
demand for PowerBuilder training.

With over the web training and travel relatively inexpensive you don't
need to have trained resources on every product in each office.

On 29 Sep 2011 04:28:47 -0700, "Chris Pollach"

<cpollach@travel-net.com> wrote:

>Hi Brett;
>
> FYI: Evan and EAS's former product manager Loren Corbridge are now
>working on SUP. In fact, I was just talking to Loren yesterday. :-)
>
>Q: How prepared are your local offices to support and train in PB?
>A: Zero here in Canada's national capital. They stopped giving any Sybase
>courses just about two years ago.
> Sign of the times I guess. :-(


Zachary Posted on 2011-10-03 16:01:47.0Z
From: "Zachary" <zahari@onepixel.com.my>
Newsgroups: sybase.public.powerbuilder.futures.discussion
References: <4e7ff01b@forums-1-dub> <2jf08718id9cd893gbqjs0eo7i7cc3u4p5@4ax.com> <4e805f35$1@forums-1-dub> <r55187psbojr1p6crftb3apj1tt9gl3q9p@4ax.com> <4e809f4f$1@forums-1-dub> <4e80a75c$1@forums-1-dub> <04n2879sc0j8um2i9vvmf6lt7dckpl60vb@4ax.com> <4e81bdde$1@forums-1-dub> <4e8289b9$1@forums-1-dub> <23m587t6iqti06vmodsj46eociknef1qm9@4ax.com> <4e8328f7@forums-1-dub> <08b887tjtsqh3ftoeijqrvv5mevvmnj5cp@4ax.com>
In-Reply-To: <08b887tjtsqh3ftoeijqrvv5mevvmnj5cp@4ax.com>
Subject: Re: I Need Distributed PB Back
Lines: 12
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Importance: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Windows Live Mail 15.4.3508.1109
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V15.4.3508.1109
NNTP-Posting-Host: vip152.sybase.com
X-Original-NNTP-Posting-Host: vip152.sybase.com
Message-ID: <4e89dc6b@forums-1-dub>
Date: 3 Oct 2011 09:01:47 -0700
X-Trace: forums-1-dub 1317657707 10.22.241.152 (3 Oct 2011 09:01:47 -0700)
X-Original-Trace: 3 Oct 2011 09:01:47 -0700, vip152.sybase.com
Path: forums-1-dub!not-for-mail
Xref: forums-1-dub sybase.public.powerbuilder.futures.discussion:27879
Article PK: 452217

Hi Brett, slightly more than a decade ago PB developers here in South East
Asia (Singapore, Malaysia, Thailand, Indonesia, Philippines) were in great
demand, making tons of money developing small, medium and large business
applications. Nowadays, well.. almost every fresh graduate has never heard
of PB. Support is practically zero and PB12 is not selling well at all. PB
trainings? Other than the FastTrack, I've heard nothing else on PB.

Regards

"Brett Weaver" wrote in message
news:08b887tjtsqh3ftoeijqrvv5mevvmnj5cp@4ax.com...

Evan is not a PB Programmer of course!
He's a bright (and helpful) cookie though. We have had a few chats at
Sybase events.
It was a continuing frustration that one of the authors of the product
was less than 5km from the local Sybase office but support was missing
completely.
But.. We had two "experts" from the Hong Kong (or Singapore can't
remember now) who had difficulty configuring EAS for PB - for the demo
software... I didn't say they couldn't do it in the end (hours later),
just that their focus and entire knowledge was Java, not PB. That is
my reality..
Does not matter now... If anything things have got worse. Thats not
the fault of the products, just Asia Pacific Management. There is no
support of any tools in Australasia.
No education or support is available for any PB customers wanting to
go .Net in Australia or NZ. Marketing is always a mix. SAP/Sybase is
not interested in marketing tools in Australasia..

OK Readers - How prepared are your local offices to support and train
in PB?


On 28 Sep 2011 07:02:31 -0700, "Jonathan Baker [Sybase]"

<lastnamefirstinitial@sybase.com> wrote:

>I understand. And I'm sure that not finding help with PB was frustrating.
>
>But the point I was making was not that PB would have trouble finding
>consultants who were moving past two-tier programming with PB in to a
>distributed model. In 2003 there were only a very small number of
>people worldwide who were attempting to take PB in to n-tier systems.
>The lack of talent in your area, however, does not equate to "the
>product could not do that".
>
>I'm also absolutely certain that you were not having a core problem with
>EAServer. Because the best EAServer resource in the entire world is in
>New Zealand.
>
>
>
>Cheers,
>Jonathan
>
>
>
>On 9/28/2011 4:30 AM, Brett Weaver wrote:
>> Hi Jonathon
>>
>> I would not suggest you are wrong, but my reality was different.
>> I had so much trouble getting EAS to work with PB that when I heard in
>> 2003 that Sybase was bringing some EAServer experts to New Zealand I
>> gladly went to Sybase to see them.
>> I ended up buying a new PC and giving it to the engineers along with
>> EAServer and PB Software and asking them to implement the demo.
>> It took a lot of hours in which we discovered:
>> 1.. The "demo" instructions were useless
>> 2.. The EAServer experts knew nothing about PB and did not know anyone
>> who did.
>>
>> I never touched EAServer again.
>>
>> Chris and others may have had training and engineers who knew but
>> support for EAServer was Java only in Asia Pacific as far as I knew.
>>
>> There are a few companies in Australia still on Jaguar. Needless to
>> say they have some difficulty recruiting.
>>
>> ...anyway back to watching the rugby...
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 27 Sep 2011 19:43:05 -0700, "Jonathan Baker [Sybase]"
>> <lastnamefirstinitial@sybase.com> wrote:
>>
>>> EAS was not "built for Java developers".
>>>
>>> EAServer was built around the CORBA ORB concept. It used, as it's
>>> underlying framework, a C++ developed engine that took in IIOP requests
>>> and translated them directly in to any language that was plugged in to
>>> the server component. In this case, the server language could be C,
>>> Java, or PB. All of those were considered equal by the ORB, which
>>> didn't care what language was doing the processing.
>>>
>>> In other words, the core of EAServer could take a request from any front
>>> end (Java, C, PB, etc.) and send it to any server component (again,
>>> Java, C, PB, etc.). The ORB managed the communications, and the
>>> protocol meant the client never knew anything about the server language.
>>>
>>> This was perfect for the designs of the time. The server could be PB,
>>> or if PB wasn't scaling well (or if you wanted the server to run on a
>>> non-windows machine) it could be rewritten in Java, C, or anything else
>>> that would talk to the ORB. The PB front end would never know the
>>> difference.
>>>
>>> Perhaps you are confusing EAServer with WebLogic and it's siblings.
>>> WebLogic was a pure Java J2EE play, and was written from the ground up
>>> in Java. EAServer competed with WebLogic but never used the same
>>> underlying design concept.
>>>
>>> Since EAServer was a CORBA based design, it was determined that it would
>>> serve both the PB and Java markets equally well. And the ORB
>>> infrastructure was light-years ahead of the DPB code (mostly in
>>> scalability, but also because it used industry-standard protocols).
>>> These were some of the reasons that DPB was mothballed and EAS was it's
>>> replacement.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Jonathan
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 9/27/2011 8:13 AM, Chris Pollach wrote:
>>>> Hi Jim;
>>>>
>>>> Thanks for the correction. It certainly was a well supported PB
>>>> feature
>>>> by PowerSoft and later Sybase. I have built many n-tier systems with
>>>> the
>>>> product and even had a framework for the "little engine that could".
>>>> :-)
>>>>
>>>> Yes, EAS was supposed to be the "industrial strength" version of
>>>> DPD and
>>>> to that aspect it did live up to its promise. One has to remember
>>>> though
>>>> that EAS was not built for PB. It was built for Java developers and
>>>> tuned to
>>>> tools like jBuilder, PowerJ etc. PB was only an after thought -
>>>> however, the
>>>> implementation in PB 8 through 10 was brilliant (IMHO). Unfortunately,
>>>> EAS
>>>> seems to have drifted well below the radar both in the IT realm and
>>>> Sybase's. Since EAS 6.x architecture is at the heart of the Application
>>>> Server Plug-in - EAS's stagnation will also probably affect ASP which
>>>> in
>>>> turn diminishes PB's tool chest (again). I was hoping that Sybase would
>>>> address this issue and even bring back DPD as the "light" Application
>>>> Server
>>>> and have EAS + ASP as the "big gun" thus giving PB developers a better
>>>> choice for n-tier support.
>>>>
>>>> Like the PFC, I do not believe Open Sourcing would do anything
>>>> for EAS
>>>> other than keep it lingering on with no real development. A good
>>>> thought
>>>> though if there was a "vibrant" EAS community. I think that aspect
>>>> though
>>>> has come and gone. :-(
>>>>
>>>> Sooooooo ... what would you do if Microsoft bought PB? :-)
>>>>


Roland Smith [TeamSybase] Posted on 2011-09-27 12:51:04.0Z
From: "Roland Smith [TeamSybase]" <rsmith@trusthss.com>
Newsgroups: sybase.public.powerbuilder.futures.discussion
References: <4e7ff01b@forums-1-dub> <2jf08718id9cd893gbqjs0eo7i7cc3u4p5@4ax.com> <4e805f35$1@forums-1-dub> <r55187psbojr1p6crftb3apj1tt9gl3q9p@4ax.com> <4e809f4f$1@forums-1-dub> <4e80a75c$1@forums-1-dub> <04n2879sc0j8um2i9vvmf6lt7dckpl60vb@4ax.com>
Subject: Re: I Need Distributed PB Back
Lines: 99
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5931
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.6109
X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Original
NNTP-Posting-Host: vip152.sybase.com
X-Original-NNTP-Posting-Host: vip152.sybase.com
Message-ID: <4e81c6b8$1@forums-1-dub>
Date: 27 Sep 2011 05:51:04 -0700
X-Trace: forums-1-dub 1317127864 10.22.241.152 (27 Sep 2011 05:51:04 -0700)
X-Original-Trace: 27 Sep 2011 05:51:04 -0700, vip152.sybase.com
Path: forums-1-dub!not-for-mail
Xref: forums-1-dub sybase.public.powerbuilder.futures.discussion:27801
Article PK: 452146

I think that Sybase should take the EAServer 5.5 codebase and strip out all
the Java crap and turn it into a robust application server whose sole
capability is to run PowerBuilder components.

It should be obvious that EAServer 6 isn't going to be a big seller to non
PowerBuilder shops so before they end up killing it altogether they need to
do something bold. Admit version 6 is a disaster, bring back version 5 and
make it an included feature of PowerBuilder instead of a separate product.

"Jim O'Neil" <jim.oneil@microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:04n2879sc0j8um2i9vvmf6lt7dckpl60vb@4ax.com...
> Jason, et. al.,
>
> My apologies... I was a bit too loose with wording - and didnt'
> realize I'd actually said that until I re-reviewed my post :(. DPB
> was NOT a "proof-of-concept" it was a supported part of the product,
> introduced with PowerBuilder 5. That was an absolutely unfair
> characterization; I meant it more as a statement on its relative level
> of capability in comparison to other technologies we have today.
>
> I'm not sure what the usage uptick really was, it was 1996 and at the
> time definitely ahead of the game, frankly, in what it was doing. My
> cavalier categorization is primarily because - and this is not a dig -
> it just wasn't technically robust or mature enough to live on,
> especially as from-the-ground-up app server technology (like EAServer)
> was arriving on the scene. In some ways it was a competing offering,
> and a choice had to be made for future effort.
>
> Was DPB great for a segment of the audience, sure, but was it worth a
> long term investment, esp. with EAServer in the fold. No. Could your
> app grow with it? Up to a point, but not far enough. Could there
> have been a free EAServer Sybase called DPB, yeah maybe, but that
> would have been primarily a business decision not a technical one (and
> something that I vaguely think may have been discussed). I know,
> let's open source EAServer - problem solved :)
>
>
>
> On 26 Sep 2011 09:25:00 -0700, "Jason 'Bug' Fenter [TeamSybase]"
> <jason.fenter@teamsybase.com> wrote:
>
>>Wait... wait. Let me make sure I understand this right. Sybase released
>>a proof-of-concept. One vocal customer used it extensively. Sybase
>>decided that they did not have the resources to fully develop that
>>proof-of-concept. Thus, according to one vocal customer, Sybase has
>>"painted PB into a corner".
>>
>>Would it be "child's play" for Sybase to re-implement a basic
>>proof-of-concept again? Maybe. The difference is that Sybase would have
>>to create a generic solution that satisfies EVERYONE while someone like
>>you could create a small context-specific server that fits *your*
>>requirements and doesn't need to do anything else. I think the scope of
>>those two projects are quite different.
>>
>>
>>
>>On 09/26/2011 10:50 AM, Chris Pollach wrote:
>>> Hi Jim;
>>>
>>> Just looking at you Techwave presentations ... very interesting!
>>> :-)
>>>
>>> WL and its Web Server Apache can run on Linux or Windows. Yes, I
>>> would
>>> need ASP to host the WS based NVUO's in WL (assuming the client would
>>> accept
>>> running MS-Windows). Right now, they are favouring Linux for
>>> production -
>>> based on cost and administration expertise. What I need is something
>>> light-weight, simple, easy to deploy that could run on their older
>>> Windows
>>> servers as an alternative.
>>>
>>> FYI: I had DPD government client here in Ottawa running 800-1000
>>> concurrent web sessions on DPB. Believe me, when your NVUO's are written
>>> well - DPD scales nicely!!!!
>>>
>>> I am not writing my own DPD. If the vendor does not natively
>>> support it
>>> .. my clients will not accept it. As you suggest though - bringing back
>>> some
>>> form of DPD should be child's play for Sybase if the average PB
>>> developer
>>> can do it with PBNI and some sort of Socket support. :-)
>>>
>>> Anyway - just showing that Sybase has painted PB into a corner in
>>> this
>>> area. If you want developers to succeed with your product you have to
>>> look
>>> at it as a tool chest - not just a single tool. With a variety of tools
>>> in
>>> your tool chest - the PB developer can select the right combination.
>>> When
>>> you are limited to the Harley Davidson tool set - Vise Grips and Hammer
>>> <bg> - you can't get too far on those more finicky repairs! :-)
>>>
>>>


Chris Pollach Posted on 2011-09-27 13:10:18.0Z
From: "Chris Pollach" <cpollach@travel-net.com>
Newsgroups: sybase.public.powerbuilder.futures.discussion
References: <4e7ff01b@forums-1-dub> <2jf08718id9cd893gbqjs0eo7i7cc3u4p5@4ax.com> <4e805f35$1@forums-1-dub> <r55187psbojr1p6crftb3apj1tt9gl3q9p@4ax.com> <4e809f4f$1@forums-1-dub> <4e80a75c$1@forums-1-dub> <04n2879sc0j8um2i9vvmf6lt7dckpl60vb@4ax.com> <4e81c6b8$1@forums-1-dub>
Subject: Re: I Need Distributed PB Back
Lines: 116
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5931
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.6109
X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Response
NNTP-Posting-Host: vip152.sybase.com
X-Original-NNTP-Posting-Host: vip152.sybase.com
Message-ID: <4e81cb3a$1@forums-1-dub>
Date: 27 Sep 2011 06:10:18 -0700
X-Trace: forums-1-dub 1317129018 10.22.241.152 (27 Sep 2011 06:10:18 -0700)
X-Original-Trace: 27 Sep 2011 06:10:18 -0700, vip152.sybase.com
X-Authenticated-User: pb125beta
Path: forums-1-dub!not-for-mail
Xref: forums-1-dub sybase.public.powerbuilder.futures.discussion:27802
Article PK: 452145

FWIW: All my large EAS server Canadian government clients are still
running EAS 5.5 as its the best performer. I would consider that also to be
EAS's best release that I have worked with.

Roland: By accepting EAS 5.x as the Application Server platform - what
would happen to the Application Server Plug-in? Should Sybase just "toss"
that puppy to you think?

"Roland Smith [TeamSybase]" <rsmith@trusthss.com> wrote in message
news:4e81c6b8$1@forums-1-dub...
>I think that Sybase should take the EAServer 5.5 codebase and strip out all
>the Java crap and turn it into a robust application server whose sole
>capability is to run PowerBuilder components.
>
> It should be obvious that EAServer 6 isn't going to be a big seller to non
> PowerBuilder shops so before they end up killing it altogether they need
> to do something bold. Admit version 6 is a disaster, bring back version 5
> and make it an included feature of PowerBuilder instead of a separate
> product.
>
> "Jim O'Neil" <jim.oneil@microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:04n2879sc0j8um2i9vvmf6lt7dckpl60vb@4ax.com...
>> Jason, et. al.,
>>
>> My apologies... I was a bit too loose with wording - and didnt'
>> realize I'd actually said that until I re-reviewed my post :(. DPB
>> was NOT a "proof-of-concept" it was a supported part of the product,
>> introduced with PowerBuilder 5. That was an absolutely unfair
>> characterization; I meant it more as a statement on its relative level
>> of capability in comparison to other technologies we have today.
>>
>> I'm not sure what the usage uptick really was, it was 1996 and at the
>> time definitely ahead of the game, frankly, in what it was doing. My
>> cavalier categorization is primarily because - and this is not a dig -
>> it just wasn't technically robust or mature enough to live on,
>> especially as from-the-ground-up app server technology (like EAServer)
>> was arriving on the scene. In some ways it was a competing offering,
>> and a choice had to be made for future effort.
>>
>> Was DPB great for a segment of the audience, sure, but was it worth a
>> long term investment, esp. with EAServer in the fold. No. Could your
>> app grow with it? Up to a point, but not far enough. Could there
>> have been a free EAServer Sybase called DPB, yeah maybe, but that
>> would have been primarily a business decision not a technical one (and
>> something that I vaguely think may have been discussed). I know,
>> let's open source EAServer - problem solved :)
>>
>>
>>
>> On 26 Sep 2011 09:25:00 -0700, "Jason 'Bug' Fenter [TeamSybase]"
>> <jason.fenter@teamsybase.com> wrote:
>>
>>>Wait... wait. Let me make sure I understand this right. Sybase released
>>>a proof-of-concept. One vocal customer used it extensively. Sybase
>>>decided that they did not have the resources to fully develop that
>>>proof-of-concept. Thus, according to one vocal customer, Sybase has
>>>"painted PB into a corner".
>>>
>>>Would it be "child's play" for Sybase to re-implement a basic
>>>proof-of-concept again? Maybe. The difference is that Sybase would have
>>>to create a generic solution that satisfies EVERYONE while someone like
>>>you could create a small context-specific server that fits *your*
>>>requirements and doesn't need to do anything else. I think the scope of
>>>those two projects are quite different.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>On 09/26/2011 10:50 AM, Chris Pollach wrote:
>>>> Hi Jim;
>>>>
>>>> Just looking at you Techwave presentations ... very interesting!
>>>> :-)
>>>>
>>>> WL and its Web Server Apache can run on Linux or Windows. Yes, I
>>>> would
>>>> need ASP to host the WS based NVUO's in WL (assuming the client would
>>>> accept
>>>> running MS-Windows). Right now, they are favouring Linux for
>>>> production -
>>>> based on cost and administration expertise. What I need is something
>>>> light-weight, simple, easy to deploy that could run on their older
>>>> Windows
>>>> servers as an alternative.
>>>>
>>>> FYI: I had DPD government client here in Ottawa running 800-1000
>>>> concurrent web sessions on DPB. Believe me, when your NVUO's are
>>>> written
>>>> well - DPD scales nicely!!!!
>>>>
>>>> I am not writing my own DPD. If the vendor does not natively
>>>> support it
>>>> .. my clients will not accept it. As you suggest though - bringing back
>>>> some
>>>> form of DPD should be child's play for Sybase if the average PB
>>>> developer
>>>> can do it with PBNI and some sort of Socket support. :-)
>>>>
>>>> Anyway - just showing that Sybase has painted PB into a corner in
>>>> this
>>>> area. If you want developers to succeed with your product you have to
>>>> look
>>>> at it as a tool chest - not just a single tool. With a variety of tools
>>>> in
>>>> your tool chest - the PB developer can select the right combination.
>>>> When
>>>> you are limited to the Harley Davidson tool set - Vise Grips and Hammer
>>>> <bg> - you can't get too far on those more finicky repairs! :-)
>>>>
>>>>
>
>


Roland Smith [TeamSybase] Posted on 2011-09-27 13:36:16.0Z
From: "Roland Smith [TeamSybase]" <rsmith@trusthss.com>
Newsgroups: sybase.public.powerbuilder.futures.discussion
References: <4e7ff01b@forums-1-dub> <2jf08718id9cd893gbqjs0eo7i7cc3u4p5@4ax.com> <4e805f35$1@forums-1-dub> <r55187psbojr1p6crftb3apj1tt9gl3q9p@4ax.com> <4e809f4f$1@forums-1-dub> <4e80a75c$1@forums-1-dub> <04n2879sc0j8um2i9vvmf6lt7dckpl60vb@4ax.com> <4e81c6b8$1@forums-1-dub> <4e81cb3a$1@forums-1-dub>
Subject: Re: I Need Distributed PB Back
Lines: 126
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5931
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.6109
X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Response
NNTP-Posting-Host: vip152.sybase.com
X-Original-NNTP-Posting-Host: vip152.sybase.com
Message-ID: <4e81d150$1@forums-1-dub>
Date: 27 Sep 2011 06:36:16 -0700
X-Trace: forums-1-dub 1317130576 10.22.241.152 (27 Sep 2011 06:36:16 -0700)
X-Original-Trace: 27 Sep 2011 06:36:16 -0700, vip152.sybase.com
Path: forums-1-dub!not-for-mail
Xref: forums-1-dub sybase.public.powerbuilder.futures.discussion:27805
Article PK: 452154

If this "Lite" version of EAServer were included with PB at no extra charge
then I suppose there would be no need for the App Server Plugin. On the
other hand, if it is working well and people are using it then there is no
reason to drop it.

"Chris Pollach" <cpollach@travel-net.com> wrote in message
news:4e81cb3a$1@forums-1-dub...
>
> FWIW: All my large EAS server Canadian government clients are still
> running EAS 5.5 as its the best performer. I would consider that also to
> be EAS's best release that I have worked with.
>
> Roland: By accepting EAS 5.x as the Application Server platform - what
> would happen to the Application Server Plug-in? Should Sybase just "toss"
> that puppy to you think?
>
>
>
> "Roland Smith [TeamSybase]" <rsmith@trusthss.com> wrote in message
> news:4e81c6b8$1@forums-1-dub...
>>I think that Sybase should take the EAServer 5.5 codebase and strip out
>>all the Java crap and turn it into a robust application server whose sole
>>capability is to run PowerBuilder components.
>>
>> It should be obvious that EAServer 6 isn't going to be a big seller to
>> non PowerBuilder shops so before they end up killing it altogether they
>> need to do something bold. Admit version 6 is a disaster, bring back
>> version 5 and make it an included feature of PowerBuilder instead of a
>> separate product.
>>
>> "Jim O'Neil" <jim.oneil@microsoft.com> wrote in message
>> news:04n2879sc0j8um2i9vvmf6lt7dckpl60vb@4ax.com...
>>> Jason, et. al.,
>>>
>>> My apologies... I was a bit too loose with wording - and didnt'
>>> realize I'd actually said that until I re-reviewed my post :(. DPB
>>> was NOT a "proof-of-concept" it was a supported part of the product,
>>> introduced with PowerBuilder 5. That was an absolutely unfair
>>> characterization; I meant it more as a statement on its relative level
>>> of capability in comparison to other technologies we have today.
>>>
>>> I'm not sure what the usage uptick really was, it was 1996 and at the
>>> time definitely ahead of the game, frankly, in what it was doing. My
>>> cavalier categorization is primarily because - and this is not a dig -
>>> it just wasn't technically robust or mature enough to live on,
>>> especially as from-the-ground-up app server technology (like EAServer)
>>> was arriving on the scene. In some ways it was a competing offering,
>>> and a choice had to be made for future effort.
>>>
>>> Was DPB great for a segment of the audience, sure, but was it worth a
>>> long term investment, esp. with EAServer in the fold. No. Could your
>>> app grow with it? Up to a point, but not far enough. Could there
>>> have been a free EAServer Sybase called DPB, yeah maybe, but that
>>> would have been primarily a business decision not a technical one (and
>>> something that I vaguely think may have been discussed). I know,
>>> let's open source EAServer - problem solved :)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 26 Sep 2011 09:25:00 -0700, "Jason 'Bug' Fenter [TeamSybase]"
>>> <jason.fenter@teamsybase.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>Wait... wait. Let me make sure I understand this right. Sybase released
>>>>a proof-of-concept. One vocal customer used it extensively. Sybase
>>>>decided that they did not have the resources to fully develop that
>>>>proof-of-concept. Thus, according to one vocal customer, Sybase has
>>>>"painted PB into a corner".
>>>>
>>>>Would it be "child's play" for Sybase to re-implement a basic
>>>>proof-of-concept again? Maybe. The difference is that Sybase would have
>>>>to create a generic solution that satisfies EVERYONE while someone like
>>>>you could create a small context-specific server that fits *your*
>>>>requirements and doesn't need to do anything else. I think the scope of
>>>>those two projects are quite different.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>On 09/26/2011 10:50 AM, Chris Pollach wrote:
>>>>> Hi Jim;
>>>>>
>>>>> Just looking at you Techwave presentations ... very interesting!
>>>>> :-)
>>>>>
>>>>> WL and its Web Server Apache can run on Linux or Windows. Yes, I
>>>>> would
>>>>> need ASP to host the WS based NVUO's in WL (assuming the client would
>>>>> accept
>>>>> running MS-Windows). Right now, they are favouring Linux for
>>>>> production -
>>>>> based on cost and administration expertise. What I need is something
>>>>> light-weight, simple, easy to deploy that could run on their older
>>>>> Windows
>>>>> servers as an alternative.
>>>>>
>>>>> FYI: I had DPD government client here in Ottawa running 800-1000
>>>>> concurrent web sessions on DPB. Believe me, when your NVUO's are
>>>>> written
>>>>> well - DPD scales nicely!!!!
>>>>>
>>>>> I am not writing my own DPD. If the vendor does not natively
>>>>> support it
>>>>> .. my clients will not accept it. As you suggest though - bringing
>>>>> back some
>>>>> form of DPD should be child's play for Sybase if the average PB
>>>>> developer
>>>>> can do it with PBNI and some sort of Socket support. :-)
>>>>>
>>>>> Anyway - just showing that Sybase has painted PB into a corner in
>>>>> this
>>>>> area. If you want developers to succeed with your product you have to
>>>>> look
>>>>> at it as a tool chest - not just a single tool. With a variety of
>>>>> tools in
>>>>> your tool chest - the PB developer can select the right combination.
>>>>> When
>>>>> you are limited to the Harley Davidson tool set - Vise Grips and
>>>>> Hammer
>>>>> <bg> - you can't get too far on those more finicky repairs! :-)
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>
>>
>
>


"Paul Horan[Sybase]" Posted on 2011-09-26 21:53:38.0Z
From: "Paul Horan[Sybase]" <phoran AT sybase DOT com>
Newsgroups: sybase.public.powerbuilder.futures.discussion
References: <4e7ff01b@forums-1-dub> <2jf08718id9cd893gbqjs0eo7i7cc3u4p5@4ax.com> <4e805f35$1@forums-1-dub> <r55187psbojr1p6crftb3apj1tt9gl3q9p@4ax.com> <4e809f4f$1@forums-1-dub>
Subject: Re: I Need Distributed PB Back
Lines: 94
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5931
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.5994
X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Response
NNTP-Posting-Host: vip152.sybase.com
X-Original-NNTP-Posting-Host: vip152.sybase.com
Message-ID: <4e80f462$1@forums-1-dub>
Date: 26 Sep 2011 14:53:38 -0700
X-Trace: forums-1-dub 1317074018 10.22.241.152 (26 Sep 2011 14:53:38 -0700)
X-Original-Trace: 26 Sep 2011 14:53:38 -0700, vip152.sybase.com
X-Authenticated-User: teamsybase
Path: forums-1-dub!not-for-mail
Xref: forums-1-dub sybase.public.powerbuilder.futures.discussion:27785
Article PK: 452126

DPD = Distributed Power Drill??

--
Paul Horan[Sybase]
http://paulhoran.ulitzer.com

"Chris Pollach" <cpollach@travel-net.com> wrote in message
news:4e809f4f$1@forums-1-dub...
> Hi Jim;
>
> Just looking at you Techwave presentations ... very interesting! :-)
>
> WL and its Web Server Apache can run on Linux or Windows. Yes, I would
> need ASP to host the WS based NVUO's in WL (assuming the client would
> accept running MS-Windows). Right now, they are favouring Linux for
> production - based on cost and administration expertise. What I need is
> something light-weight, simple, easy to deploy that could run on their
> older Windows servers as an alternative.
>
> FYI: I had DPD government client here in Ottawa running 800-1000
> concurrent web sessions on DPB. Believe me, when your NVUO's are written
> well - DPD scales nicely!!!!
>
> I am not writing my own DPD. If the vendor does not natively support it
> .. my clients will not accept it. As you suggest though - bringing back
> some form of DPD should be child's play for Sybase if the average PB
> developer can do it with PBNI and some sort of Socket support. :-)
>
> Anyway - just showing that Sybase has painted PB into a corner in this
> area. If you want developers to succeed with your product you have to look
> at it as a tool chest - not just a single tool. With a variety of tools in
> your tool chest - the PB developer can select the right combination. When
> you are limited to the Harley Davidson tool set - Vise Grips and Hammer
> <bg> - you can't get too far on those more finicky repairs! :-)
>
>
> --
> Regards ... Chris
> Blog: http://chrispollach.blogspot.com
> PBDJ: http://chrispollach.sys-con.com
> SourceForge: http://sourceforge.net/projects/stdfndclass
>
>
> "Jim O'Neil" <jim.oneil@microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:r55187psbojr1p6crftb3apj1tt9gl3q9p@4ax.com...
>> So IIS, which is part of a Windows Server license is out, but it would
>> be ok to install a 3rd-party, proprietary server (DPB) and that same
>> Windows Server? I'm guessing WebLogic is NOT running on Windows?
>> Seems to me out of the gate you'd have trouble convincing them they
>> need a Windows machine at all.
>>
>> And BTW you wouldn't need ASP, WCF services don't need to run in IIS.
>> And if you're using pre-PB 12.5, you could still create a wrapper WCF
>> service and P/Invoke (PBNI, or whatever) to your PB object.
>>
>> DPB was a great proof-of-concept for distributed applications, but
>> there was a reason it was discontinued - and not just because Sybase
>> wanted to push EAServer (Jaguar at the time). The implementation had
>> some serious shortcomings in terms of scalability and durability
>> (remember, I was supporting the product then), and in many cases it
>> was pushed beyond its limits. In fact, those same shortcomings
>> plagued (and continue to plague) the PBVM implementation in EAServer.
>>
>> DPB was great for demos and even ok for small departmental apps, but
>> building an app server just wasn't (and shouldn't have been) something
>> the PowerBuilder team took on. Interoperability is the path, and you
>> have that now. If you want a pure PB-play, it's not that hard to
>> write a DPB server yourself, I'd start with a C++ socket server, pull
>> in some PBNI, and open source it all - problem solved :)
>>
>> Jim O'Neil
>> Developer Evangelist
>> Microsoft
>> @jimoneil - http://blogs.msdn.com/jimoneil
>>
>> http://blogs.msdn.com/jimoneil | @jimoneil
>>
>> On 26 Sep 2011 04:17:09 -0700, "Chris Pollach"
>> <cpollach@travel-net.com> wrote:
>>
>>>Hi Brett;
>>>
>>> That might be an option ... but I would need WS's hosted in WebLogic!
>>>With WL I am forced back to needing ASP. IIs is out as far as this client
>>>is
>>>concerned. If I could make a simple DPB EXE and deploy this to W2003/3008
>>>I
>>>would be "home free" on this project. Again, this is just one more
>>>example
>>>of where PB is loosing out.
>
>


Chris Pollach Posted on 2011-09-27 12:15:03.0Z
From: "Chris Pollach" <cpollach@travel-net.com>
Newsgroups: sybase.public.powerbuilder.futures.discussion
References: <4e7ff01b@forums-1-dub> <2jf08718id9cd893gbqjs0eo7i7cc3u4p5@4ax.com> <4e805f35$1@forums-1-dub> <r55187psbojr1p6crftb3apj1tt9gl3q9p@4ax.com> <4e809f4f$1@forums-1-dub> <4e80f462$1@forums-1-dub>
Subject: Re: I Need Distributed PB Back
Lines: 105
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5931
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.6109
X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Response
NNTP-Posting-Host: vip152.sybase.com
X-Original-NNTP-Posting-Host: vip152.sybase.com
Message-ID: <4e81be47$1@forums-1-dub>
Date: 27 Sep 2011 05:15:03 -0700
X-Trace: forums-1-dub 1317125703 10.22.241.152 (27 Sep 2011 05:15:03 -0700)
X-Original-Trace: 27 Sep 2011 05:15:03 -0700, vip152.sybase.com
X-Authenticated-User: pb125beta
Path: forums-1-dub!not-for-mail
Xref: forums-1-dub sybase.public.powerbuilder.futures.discussion:27797
Article PK: 452141

Paul ... that type of statement really highlights your naivety on what DPD
could really do.

"Paul Horan[Sybase]" <phoran AT sybase DOT com> wrote in message
news:4e80f462$1@forums-1-dub...
> DPD = Distributed Power Drill??
>
> --
> Paul Horan[Sybase]
> http://paulhoran.ulitzer.com
>
> "Chris Pollach" <cpollach@travel-net.com> wrote in message
> news:4e809f4f$1@forums-1-dub...
>> Hi Jim;
>>
>> Just looking at you Techwave presentations ... very interesting! :-)
>>
>> WL and its Web Server Apache can run on Linux or Windows. Yes, I would
>> need ASP to host the WS based NVUO's in WL (assuming the client would
>> accept running MS-Windows). Right now, they are favouring Linux for
>> production - based on cost and administration expertise. What I need is
>> something light-weight, simple, easy to deploy that could run on their
>> older Windows servers as an alternative.
>>
>> FYI: I had DPD government client here in Ottawa running 800-1000
>> concurrent web sessions on DPB. Believe me, when your NVUO's are written
>> well - DPD scales nicely!!!!
>>
>> I am not writing my own DPD. If the vendor does not natively support
>> it .. my clients will not accept it. As you suggest though - bringing
>> back some form of DPD should be child's play for Sybase if the average PB
>> developer can do it with PBNI and some sort of Socket support. :-)
>>
>> Anyway - just showing that Sybase has painted PB into a corner in this
>> area. If you want developers to succeed with your product you have to
>> look at it as a tool chest - not just a single tool. With a variety of
>> tools in your tool chest - the PB developer can select the right
>> combination. When you are limited to the Harley Davidson tool set - Vise
>> Grips and Hammer <bg> - you can't get too far on those more finicky
>> repairs! :-)
>>
>>
>> --
>> Regards ... Chris
>> Blog: http://chrispollach.blogspot.com
>> PBDJ: http://chrispollach.sys-con.com
>> SourceForge: http://sourceforge.net/projects/stdfndclass
>>
>>
>> "Jim O'Neil" <jim.oneil@microsoft.com> wrote in message
>> news:r55187psbojr1p6crftb3apj1tt9gl3q9p@4ax.com...
>>> So IIS, which is part of a Windows Server license is out, but it would
>>> be ok to install a 3rd-party, proprietary server (DPB) and that same
>>> Windows Server? I'm guessing WebLogic is NOT running on Windows?
>>> Seems to me out of the gate you'd have trouble convincing them they
>>> need a Windows machine at all.
>>>
>>> And BTW you wouldn't need ASP, WCF services don't need to run in IIS.
>>> And if you're using pre-PB 12.5, you could still create a wrapper WCF
>>> service and P/Invoke (PBNI, or whatever) to your PB object.
>>>
>>> DPB was a great proof-of-concept for distributed applications, but
>>> there was a reason it was discontinued - and not just because Sybase
>>> wanted to push EAServer (Jaguar at the time). The implementation had
>>> some serious shortcomings in terms of scalability and durability
>>> (remember, I was supporting the product then), and in many cases it
>>> was pushed beyond its limits. In fact, those same shortcomings
>>> plagued (and continue to plague) the PBVM implementation in EAServer.
>>>
>>> DPB was great for demos and even ok for small departmental apps, but
>>> building an app server just wasn't (and shouldn't have been) something
>>> the PowerBuilder team took on. Interoperability is the path, and you
>>> have that now. If you want a pure PB-play, it's not that hard to
>>> write a DPB server yourself, I'd start with a C++ socket server, pull
>>> in some PBNI, and open source it all - problem solved :)
>>>
>>> Jim O'Neil
>>> Developer Evangelist
>>> Microsoft
>>> @jimoneil - http://blogs.msdn.com/jimoneil
>>>
>>> http://blogs.msdn.com/jimoneil | @jimoneil
>>>
>>> On 26 Sep 2011 04:17:09 -0700, "Chris Pollach"
>>> <cpollach@travel-net.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>Hi Brett;
>>>>
>>>> That might be an option ... but I would need WS's hosted in
>>>> WebLogic!
>>>>With WL I am forced back to needing ASP. IIs is out as far as this
>>>>client is
>>>>concerned. If I could make a simple DPB EXE and deploy this to
>>>>W2003/3008 I
>>>>would be "home free" on this project. Again, this is just one more
>>>>example
>>>>of where PB is loosing out.
>>
>>
>
>


Roland Smith [TeamSybase] Posted on 2011-09-27 12:36:10.0Z
From: "Roland Smith [TeamSybase]" <rsmith@trusthss.com>
Newsgroups: sybase.public.powerbuilder.futures.discussion
References: <4e7ff01b@forums-1-dub> <2jf08718id9cd893gbqjs0eo7i7cc3u4p5@4ax.com> <4e805f35$1@forums-1-dub> <r55187psbojr1p6crftb3apj1tt9gl3q9p@4ax.com> <4e809f4f$1@forums-1-dub> <4e80f462$1@forums-1-dub> <4e81be47$1@forums-1-dub>
Subject: Re: I Need Distributed PB Back
Lines: 112
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5931
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.6109
X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Response
NNTP-Posting-Host: vip152.sybase.com
X-Original-NNTP-Posting-Host: vip152.sybase.com
Message-ID: <4e81c33a$1@forums-1-dub>
Date: 27 Sep 2011 05:36:10 -0700
X-Trace: forums-1-dub 1317126970 10.22.241.152 (27 Sep 2011 05:36:10 -0700)
X-Original-Trace: 27 Sep 2011 05:36:10 -0700, vip152.sybase.com
Path: forums-1-dub!not-for-mail
Xref: forums-1-dub sybase.public.powerbuilder.futures.discussion:27799
Article PK: 452139

He was pointing out that you misspelled DPB as DPD.

"Chris Pollach" <cpollach@travel-net.com> wrote in message
news:4e81be47$1@forums-1-dub...
>
> Paul ... that type of statement really highlights your naivety on what DPD
> could really do.
>
>
> "Paul Horan[Sybase]" <phoran AT sybase DOT com> wrote in message
> news:4e80f462$1@forums-1-dub...
>> DPD = Distributed Power Drill??
>>
>> --
>> Paul Horan[Sybase]
>> http://paulhoran.ulitzer.com
>>
>> "Chris Pollach" <cpollach@travel-net.com> wrote in message
>> news:4e809f4f$1@forums-1-dub...
>>> Hi Jim;
>>>
>>> Just looking at you Techwave presentations ... very interesting!
>>> :-)
>>>
>>> WL and its Web Server Apache can run on Linux or Windows. Yes, I would
>>> need ASP to host the WS based NVUO's in WL (assuming the client would
>>> accept running MS-Windows). Right now, they are favouring Linux for
>>> production - based on cost and administration expertise. What I need is
>>> something light-weight, simple, easy to deploy that could run on their
>>> older Windows servers as an alternative.
>>>
>>> FYI: I had DPD government client here in Ottawa running 800-1000
>>> concurrent web sessions on DPB. Believe me, when your NVUO's are written
>>> well - DPD scales nicely!!!!
>>>
>>> I am not writing my own DPD. If the vendor does not natively support
>>> it .. my clients will not accept it. As you suggest though - bringing
>>> back some form of DPD should be child's play for Sybase if the average
>>> PB developer can do it with PBNI and some sort of Socket support. :-)
>>>
>>> Anyway - just showing that Sybase has painted PB into a corner in
>>> this area. If you want developers to succeed with your product you have
>>> to look at it as a tool chest - not just a single tool. With a variety
>>> of tools in your tool chest - the PB developer can select the right
>>> combination. When you are limited to the Harley Davidson tool set - Vise
>>> Grips and Hammer <bg> - you can't get too far on those more finicky
>>> repairs! :-)
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Regards ... Chris
>>> Blog: http://chrispollach.blogspot.com
>>> PBDJ: http://chrispollach.sys-con.com
>>> SourceForge: http://sourceforge.net/projects/stdfndclass
>>>
>>>
>>> "Jim O'Neil" <jim.oneil@microsoft.com> wrote in message
>>> news:r55187psbojr1p6crftb3apj1tt9gl3q9p@4ax.com...
>>>> So IIS, which is part of a Windows Server license is out, but it would
>>>> be ok to install a 3rd-party, proprietary server (DPB) and that same
>>>> Windows Server? I'm guessing WebLogic is NOT running on Windows?
>>>> Seems to me out of the gate you'd have trouble convincing them they
>>>> need a Windows machine at all.
>>>>
>>>> And BTW you wouldn't need ASP, WCF services don't need to run in IIS.
>>>> And if you're using pre-PB 12.5, you could still create a wrapper WCF
>>>> service and P/Invoke (PBNI, or whatever) to your PB object.
>>>>
>>>> DPB was a great proof-of-concept for distributed applications, but
>>>> there was a reason it was discontinued - and not just because Sybase
>>>> wanted to push EAServer (Jaguar at the time). The implementation had
>>>> some serious shortcomings in terms of scalability and durability
>>>> (remember, I was supporting the product then), and in many cases it
>>>> was pushed beyond its limits. In fact, those same shortcomings
>>>> plagued (and continue to plague) the PBVM implementation in EAServer.
>>>>
>>>> DPB was great for demos and even ok for small departmental apps, but
>>>> building an app server just wasn't (and shouldn't have been) something
>>>> the PowerBuilder team took on. Interoperability is the path, and you
>>>> have that now. If you want a pure PB-play, it's not that hard to
>>>> write a DPB server yourself, I'd start with a C++ socket server, pull
>>>> in some PBNI, and open source it all - problem solved :)
>>>>
>>>> Jim O'Neil
>>>> Developer Evangelist
>>>> Microsoft
>>>> @jimoneil - http://blogs.msdn.com/jimoneil
>>>>
>>>> http://blogs.msdn.com/jimoneil | @jimoneil
>>>>
>>>> On 26 Sep 2011 04:17:09 -0700, "Chris Pollach"
>>>> <cpollach@travel-net.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>Hi Brett;
>>>>>
>>>>> That might be an option ... but I would need WS's hosted in
>>>>> WebLogic!
>>>>>With WL I am forced back to needing ASP. IIs is out as far as this
>>>>>client is
>>>>>concerned. If I could make a simple DPB EXE and deploy this to
>>>>>W2003/3008 I
>>>>>would be "home free" on this project. Again, this is just one more
>>>>>example
>>>>>of where PB is loosing out.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>


Chris Pollach Posted on 2011-09-27 12:40:21.0Z
From: "Chris Pollach" <cpollach@travel-net.com>
Newsgroups: sybase.public.powerbuilder.futures.discussion
References: <4e7ff01b@forums-1-dub> <2jf08718id9cd893gbqjs0eo7i7cc3u4p5@4ax.com> <4e805f35$1@forums-1-dub> <r55187psbojr1p6crftb3apj1tt9gl3q9p@4ax.com> <4e809f4f$1@forums-1-dub> <4e80f462$1@forums-1-dub> <4e81be47$1@forums-1-dub> <4e81c33a$1@forums-1-dub>
Subject: Re: I Need Distributed PB Back
Lines: 120
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5931
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.6109
X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Response
NNTP-Posting-Host: vip152.sybase.com
X-Original-NNTP-Posting-Host: vip152.sybase.com
Message-ID: <4e81c435@forums-1-dub>
Date: 27 Sep 2011 05:40:21 -0700
X-Trace: forums-1-dub 1317127221 10.22.241.152 (27 Sep 2011 05:40:21 -0700)
X-Original-Trace: 27 Sep 2011 05:40:21 -0700, vip152.sybase.com
X-Authenticated-User: pb125beta
Path: forums-1-dub!not-for-mail
Xref: forums-1-dub sybase.public.powerbuilder.futures.discussion:27800
Article PK: 452142

Thanks Roland ... &#$#0^ spell checker! :-)

"Roland Smith [TeamSybase]" <rsmith@trusthss.com> wrote in message
news:4e81c33a$1@forums-1-dub...
> He was pointing out that you misspelled DPB as DPD.
>
> "Chris Pollach" <cpollach@travel-net.com> wrote in message
> news:4e81be47$1@forums-1-dub...
>>
>> Paul ... that type of statement really highlights your naivety on what
>> DPD could really do.
>>
>>
>> "Paul Horan[Sybase]" <phoran AT sybase DOT com> wrote in message
>> news:4e80f462$1@forums-1-dub...
>>> DPD = Distributed Power Drill??
>>>
>>> --
>>> Paul Horan[Sybase]
>>> http://paulhoran.ulitzer.com
>>>
>>> "Chris Pollach" <cpollach@travel-net.com> wrote in message
>>> news:4e809f4f$1@forums-1-dub...
>>>> Hi Jim;
>>>>
>>>> Just looking at you Techwave presentations ... very interesting! :-)
>>>>
>>>> WL and its Web Server Apache can run on Linux or Windows. Yes, I
>>>> would need ASP to host the WS based NVUO's in WL (assuming the client
>>>> would accept running MS-Windows). Right now, they are favouring Linux
>>>> for production - based on cost and administration expertise. What I
>>>> need is something light-weight, simple, easy to deploy that could run
>>>> on their older Windows servers as an alternative.
>>>>
>>>> FYI: I had DPD government client here in Ottawa running 800-1000
>>>> concurrent web sessions on DPB. Believe me, when your NVUO's are
>>>> written well - DPD scales nicely!!!!
>>>>
>>>> I am not writing my own DPD. If the vendor does not natively support
>>>> it .. my clients will not accept it. As you suggest though - bringing
>>>> back some form of DPD should be child's play for Sybase if the average
>>>> PB developer can do it with PBNI and some sort of Socket support.
>>>> :-)
>>>>
>>>> Anyway - just showing that Sybase has painted PB into a corner in
>>>> this area. If you want developers to succeed with your product you have
>>>> to look at it as a tool chest - not just a single tool. With a variety
>>>> of tools in your tool chest - the PB developer can select the right
>>>> combination. When you are limited to the Harley Davidson tool set -
>>>> Vise Grips and Hammer <bg> - you can't get too far on those more
>>>> finicky repairs! :-)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Regards ... Chris
>>>> Blog: http://chrispollach.blogspot.com
>>>> PBDJ: http://chrispollach.sys-con.com
>>>> SourceForge: http://sourceforge.net/projects/stdfndclass
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "Jim O'Neil" <jim.oneil@microsoft.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:r55187psbojr1p6crftb3apj1tt9gl3q9p@4ax.com...
>>>>> So IIS, which is part of a Windows Server license is out, but it would
>>>>> be ok to install a 3rd-party, proprietary server (DPB) and that same
>>>>> Windows Server? I'm guessing WebLogic is NOT running on Windows?
>>>>> Seems to me out of the gate you'd have trouble convincing them they
>>>>> need a Windows machine at all.
>>>>>
>>>>> And BTW you wouldn't need ASP, WCF services don't need to run in IIS.
>>>>> And if you're using pre-PB 12.5, you could still create a wrapper WCF
>>>>> service and P/Invoke (PBNI, or whatever) to your PB object.
>>>>>
>>>>> DPB was a great proof-of-concept for distributed applications, but
>>>>> there was a reason it was discontinued - and not just because Sybase
>>>>> wanted to push EAServer (Jaguar at the time). The implementation had
>>>>> some serious shortcomings in terms of scalability and durability
>>>>> (remember, I was supporting the product then), and in many cases it
>>>>> was pushed beyond its limits. In fact, those same shortcomings
>>>>> plagued (and continue to plague) the PBVM implementation in EAServer.
>>>>>
>>>>> DPB was great for demos and even ok for small departmental apps, but
>>>>> building an app server just wasn't (and shouldn't have been) something
>>>>> the PowerBuilder team took on. Interoperability is the path, and you
>>>>> have that now. If you want a pure PB-play, it's not that hard to
>>>>> write a DPB server yourself, I'd start with a C++ socket server, pull
>>>>> in some PBNI, and open source it all - problem solved :)
>>>>>
>>>>> Jim O'Neil
>>>>> Developer Evangelist
>>>>> Microsoft
>>>>> @jimoneil - http://blogs.msdn.com/jimoneil
>>>>>
>>>>> http://blogs.msdn.com/jimoneil | @jimoneil
>>>>>
>>>>> On 26 Sep 2011 04:17:09 -0700, "Chris Pollach"
>>>>> <cpollach@travel-net.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>Hi Brett;
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That might be an option ... but I would need WS's hosted in
>>>>>> WebLogic!
>>>>>>With WL I am forced back to needing ASP. IIs is out as far as this
>>>>>>client is
>>>>>>concerned. If I could make a simple DPB EXE and deploy this to
>>>>>>W2003/3008 I
>>>>>>would be "home free" on this project. Again, this is just one more
>>>>>>example
>>>>>>of where PB is loosing out.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>


Roland Smith [TeamSybase] Posted on 2011-09-26 12:39:49.0Z
From: "Roland Smith [TeamSybase]" <rsmith@trusthss.com>
Newsgroups: sybase.public.powerbuilder.futures.discussion
References: <4e7ff01b@forums-1-dub>
Subject: Re: I Need Distributed PB Back
Lines: 25
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5931
X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Original
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.6109
NNTP-Posting-Host: vip152.sybase.com
X-Original-NNTP-Posting-Host: vip152.sybase.com
Message-ID: <4e807295$1@forums-1-dub>
Date: 26 Sep 2011 05:39:49 -0700
X-Trace: forums-1-dub 1317040789 10.22.241.152 (26 Sep 2011 05:39:49 -0700)
X-Original-Trace: 26 Sep 2011 05:39:49 -0700, vip152.sybase.com
Path: forums-1-dub!not-for-mail
Xref: forums-1-dub sybase.public.powerbuilder.futures.discussion:27762
Article PK: 452105

Perhaps you could develop it as a Windows Service using PBNIServ. It has an
example that uses Winsock to receive messages from client apps.

http://www.topwizprogramming.com/pbniserv.html

"Chris Pollach" <cpollach.at.travel-net.dot.com> wrote in message
news:4e7ff01b@forums-1-dub...
> Hi all;
>
> I just got a specification to build a server based reporting system that
> would further automate PB and InfoMaker reports (see attached).
> Unfortunately, with EAServer not an option (client wants to use WebLogic)
> and the Application Server Plug-in going `nowhere` these days - I need a
> simple, light weight and cost effective server to host NVUO`s and run
> scheduled services in order to implement this application feature.
>
> This is only one example of dozens of requirements I have had this year
> that could have led to more PB work! if we only still had Distributed
> PowerBuilder! How about it Sybase ... for PB15? :-)
>
> Regards ... Chris
>
>


Chris Pollach Posted on 2011-09-26 12:57:11.0Z
From: "Chris Pollach" <cpollach@travel-net.com>
Newsgroups: sybase.public.powerbuilder.futures.discussion
References: <4e7ff01b@forums-1-dub> <4e807295$1@forums-1-dub>
Subject: Re: I Need Distributed PB Back
Lines: 36
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5931
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.6109
X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Response
NNTP-Posting-Host: vip152.sybase.com
X-Original-NNTP-Posting-Host: vip152.sybase.com
Message-ID: <4e8076a7$1@forums-1-dub>
Date: 26 Sep 2011 05:57:11 -0700
X-Trace: forums-1-dub 1317041831 10.22.241.152 (26 Sep 2011 05:57:11 -0700)
X-Original-Trace: 26 Sep 2011 05:57:11 -0700, vip152.sybase.com
X-Authenticated-User: pb125beta
Path: forums-1-dub!not-for-mail
Xref: forums-1-dub sybase.public.powerbuilder.futures.discussion:27763
Article PK: 452104

No .. this needs to be "Server" based.
Good thought though ...thanks Roland!

"Roland Smith [TeamSybase]" <rsmith@trusthss.com> wrote in message
news:4e807295$1@forums-1-dub...
> Perhaps you could develop it as a Windows Service using PBNIServ. It has
> an example that uses Winsock to receive messages from client apps.
>
> http://www.topwizprogramming.com/pbniserv.html
>
> "Chris Pollach" <cpollach.at.travel-net.dot.com> wrote in message
> news:4e7ff01b@forums-1-dub...
>> Hi all;
>>
>> I just got a specification to build a server based reporting system
>> that
>> would further automate PB and InfoMaker reports (see attached).
>> Unfortunately, with EAServer not an option (client wants to use WebLogic)
>> and the Application Server Plug-in going `nowhere` these days - I need a
>> simple, light weight and cost effective server to host NVUO`s and run
>> scheduled services in order to implement this application feature.
>>
>> This is only one example of dozens of requirements I have had this year
>> that could have led to more PB work! if we only still had Distributed
>> PowerBuilder! How about it Sybase ... for PB15? :-)
>>
>> Regards ... Chris
>>
>>
>
>


"Paul Horan[Sybase]" Posted on 2011-09-26 13:07:14.0Z
From: "Paul Horan[Sybase]" <phoran AT sybase DOT com>
Newsgroups: sybase.public.powerbuilder.futures.discussion
References: <4e7ff01b@forums-1-dub>
Subject: Re: I Need Distributed PB Back
Lines: 30
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5931
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.5994
X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Original
NNTP-Posting-Host: vip152.sybase.com
X-Original-NNTP-Posting-Host: vip152.sybase.com
Message-ID: <4e807902@forums-1-dub>
Date: 26 Sep 2011 06:07:14 -0700
X-Trace: forums-1-dub 1317042434 10.22.241.152 (26 Sep 2011 06:07:14 -0700)
X-Original-Trace: 26 Sep 2011 06:07:14 -0700, vip152.sybase.com
X-Authenticated-User: teamsybase
Path: forums-1-dub!not-for-mail
Xref: forums-1-dub sybase.public.powerbuilder.futures.discussion:27764
Article PK: 452106

The entire PB community - maybe even the entire planet - knows how you feel
about DPB, but how would that help here, if the client is demanding WebLogic
as the app server tier? I see this more as a job for the PB App Server
plugin... It is/was the only way to have PB NVOs running as EJBs inside
WebLogic.

--
Paul Horan[Sybase]
http://paulhoran.ulitzer.com

"Chris Pollach" <cpollach.at.travel-net.dot.com> wrote in message
news:4e7ff01b@forums-1-dub...
> Hi all;
>
> I just got a specification to build a server based reporting system that
> would further automate PB and InfoMaker reports (see attached).
> Unfortunately, with EAServer not an option (client wants to use WebLogic)
> and the Application Server Plug-in going `nowhere` these days - I need a
> simple, light weight and cost effective server to host NVUO`s and run
> scheduled services in order to implement this application feature.
>
> This is only one example of dozens of requirements I have had this year
> that could have led to more PB work! if we only still had Distributed
> PowerBuilder! How about it Sybase ... for PB15? :-)
>
> Regards ... Chris
>
>


Chris Pollach Posted on 2011-09-26 13:21:32.0Z
From: "Chris Pollach" <cpollach@travel-net.com>
Newsgroups: sybase.public.powerbuilder.futures.discussion
References: <4e7ff01b@forums-1-dub> <4e807902@forums-1-dub>
Subject: Re: I Need Distributed PB Back
Lines: 45
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5931
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.6109
X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Response
NNTP-Posting-Host: vip152.sybase.com
X-Original-NNTP-Posting-Host: vip152.sybase.com
Message-ID: <4e807c5c@forums-1-dub>
Date: 26 Sep 2011 06:21:32 -0700
X-Trace: forums-1-dub 1317043292 10.22.241.152 (26 Sep 2011 06:21:32 -0700)
X-Original-Trace: 26 Sep 2011 06:21:32 -0700, vip152.sybase.com
X-Authenticated-User: pb125beta
Path: forums-1-dub!not-for-mail
Xref: forums-1-dub sybase.public.powerbuilder.futures.discussion:27765
Article PK: 452108

That's what I said in the 1st place. :-)

Unfortunately, the lack of development and support for the ASP plus its cost
and administration makes it a hard pill for many smaller clients to swallow.
What worries me too is recommending something that is basically stagnant as
there seems to be no plans to enhance EAS and thus ASP. Hopefully, you can
shed some positive news on this from the Sybase perspective!

"Paul Horan[Sybase]" <phoran AT sybase DOT com> wrote in message
news:4e807902@forums-1-dub...
> The entire PB community - maybe even the entire planet - knows how you
> feel about DPB, but how would that help here, if the client is demanding
> WebLogic as the app server tier? I see this more as a job for the PB App
> Server plugin... It is/was the only way to have PB NVOs running as EJBs
> inside WebLogic.
>
> --
> Paul Horan[Sybase]
> http://paulhoran.ulitzer.com
>
> "Chris Pollach" <cpollach.at.travel-net.dot.com> wrote in message
> news:4e7ff01b@forums-1-dub...
>> Hi all;
>>
>> I just got a specification to build a server based reporting system
>> that
>> would further automate PB and InfoMaker reports (see attached).
>> Unfortunately, with EAServer not an option (client wants to use WebLogic)
>> and the Application Server Plug-in going `nowhere` these days - I need a
>> simple, light weight and cost effective server to host NVUO`s and run
>> scheduled services in order to implement this application feature.
>>
>> This is only one example of dozens of requirements I have had this year
>> that could have led to more PB work! if we only still had Distributed
>> PowerBuilder! How about it Sybase ... for PB15? :-)
>>
>> Regards ... Chris
>>
>>
>
>