Edward V. POPKOV, Independent Developer wrote:

> To me, server in general, and DB server specifically, is a robust,

reliable

> and protected installation of hardware with as robust and reliable

software

> running on it. This installation must be connected to backup device, must
> have a hot-changeable RAID, UPS, a big boy with a gun at the door and a

whole

> lot of other things, barely possible for handheld, save the big boy :) Of
> course, this doesn't make it a server by itself. I see DB server as an
> appliance that provides every authorised person with possibilities to

access

> and manipulate data at any moment of time. As I said, this is hardly
> imaginable for handhelds and at the present time I don't realize why

someone

> wants to have a server on handheld.
> If I missed the point, please enlighten me, OK?

There is a school of thought that says that _everything_ on your computer
should be held in a database. With the advent of "object orientation" (see
discussions of JDataSource regarding use as an ad-hoc object
persistence/state maintenance mechanism) in modern databases, one can easily
see this as an attractive eventuality. Note that MS is making some
significant moves to enhance "storage" technology and services offered by
the operating system: descriptions of this technology use an lot of
"database-like" words.

Maybe the network isn't the computer: the database is...

2 years from now, handhelds will have 32 to 64MB of RAM, and enough
processing power to make a real database work. It might be an attractive
place for IB to be.

Kevin