Subject | Re: [firebird-support] Is Firebird a hoax? |
---|---|
Author | Daniel Rail |
Post date | 2004-01-08T23:46:01Z |
Hi,
At January 8, 2004, 18:31, chiaraprc wrote:
smoothly on Linux.
have to be changed in Win2003(namely disk shadowing).
RC5.
shipping coordination and other applications)
serious enough that can't be taken care of by other means.
This bug probably occurred when correcting another one.
reports in regards to it.
project and almost all the developers are volunteers. There are only
a few that are sponsored to do some development.
our clients. And, I'm sure some others on this list can say the same
about their experience and usage of Firebird.
And, as someone else pointed out, nobody is forcing you to use
Firebird and you are free to choose the RDBMS of your choice.
--
Best regards,
Daniel Rail
Senior System Engineer
ACCRA Group Inc. (www.accra.ca)
ACCRA Med Software Inc. (www.filopto.com)
At January 8, 2004, 18:31, chiaraprc wrote:
> The only stable release of Firebird, (1.03) is praticallyTrue for the superserver version on Windows. Apparently it runs quite
> inusable on newest PC's, HT is not supported,
smoothly on Linux.
> W2k3 isSome users have recently demonstrated that it works, but some settings
> not supported,
have to be changed in Win2003(namely disk shadowing).
> latest XP are not supported,It works if you disable the system restore option in WinXP.
> W2k SP4I can't comment here, because I went from FB 1.0 directly to FB 1.5
> are not supported,
RC5.
> ODBC are inusable,Which one have you tried? There are several ODBC drivers that exists.
> i need to installActually, it's preferable to use Windows 98 and up.
> windows95 on my old Pentium to use Firebird???
> I toke a look at Firebird 1.5I have multiple clients using it in production(medical application,
> is it a real release??
shipping coordination and other applications)
> the rc8 seem to introduce more bugI can't argue that there is some security issues, but none that are
> the any other previous relase since 1976: a serious security bug,
serious enough that can't be taken care of by other means.
> a computed fields bug,FB 1.5 is still in RC stage, so bugs can happen and are being fixed.
This bug probably occurred when correcting another one.
> an installer bug,FB 1.5 has a new installer, that's the reason why you are seeing bug
reports in regards to it.
> the 1.5 are in this state since a year, (as stated in developer ng)True, but you got to also notice that Firebird is an open-source
project and almost all the developers are volunteers. There are only
a few that are sponsored to do some development.
> but all are "exiting" building FB2, is Firebird a lab for gurus? orIt's a product and I find it more stable than Interbase.
> it is a product?
> Is Firebird a choice today?It is a choice.
> or I need to search some thing more reliable? When we can aspect aAs I stated before, my company uses it in production for ourselves and
> runnable Firebird?
our clients. And, I'm sure some others on this list can say the same
about their experience and usage of Firebird.
And, as someone else pointed out, nobody is forcing you to use
Firebird and you are free to choose the RDBMS of your choice.
--
Best regards,
Daniel Rail
Senior System Engineer
ACCRA Group Inc. (www.accra.ca)
ACCRA Med Software Inc. (www.filopto.com)