Re: suggestions please
From: éric (eric_at_westgen.com)
Date: 03/30/04
- Next message: William Ryan eMVP: "Re: form load/activated best practices"
- Previous message: Lloyd Dupont: "Re: form load/activated best practices"
- In reply to: éric: "Re: suggestions please"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2004 16:07:28 -0800
appologies for the dislexia Bill!
"éric" <eric@westgen.com> wrote in message
news:ePeBBqdFEHA.3252@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
> Ryan,
>
> Thanks for your excellent reply.
> I think you are right... stability is important.
>
> > BTW, what specific features are you thinking about right now?
>
> I am mostly interested in what SQLCE 3.0 had to offer... direct table
> access, linking controls to queries etc. Also any speed improvement would
be
> great!
> Replication with the ability to display a status bar would be a big plus!
>
> On the designer side it seems like there are some nice options for
> developing sqlce appsbut I can live without those as long as the app
> performs.
>
> Displaying in landscape and anchoring are not necessary but any app coming
> out a year from now whithout those features will likely have to be
reworked
> with that in mind.
>
> That is all I can think of for now... but I remember watching a sqlce 3
and
> a cf2 demo online a little while back and more than once I was thinking
that
> feature would be perfect for my application.
>
> Thanks again
>
> éric
>
> "William Ryan eMVP" <dotnetguru@comcast.nospam.net> wrote in message
> news:%23JSWpQcFEHA.4008@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> > Eric:
> >
> > Personally, I think the new stuff is going to rock based on the demos
I've
> > seen, and in the newer builds of VS 2005, some of the new CF tools are
> > unreal. However, a lot is going to change. VS2005 isn't even in Beta
> yet,
> > so stuff you build could conceivably not exist or be very different from
> > when the final version is released. Moreover, VS 2005 isn't going to be
> > ready in January and the most optimistic stuff I've heard for the RTM
> > version is in the mid part of next year. That's pretty far off. The
> > features will be great, but I don't know that they'll be that much
better.
> > I'd really focus on developing a robust product that meets the customers
> > needs very well. once I had this, I'd start planning a build based on
the
> > new stuff, by then the official beta should be out and the chances of
> > something changing notably will be much less. It's possible that
nothing
> > will change significantly and all this is moot. However, it may change
a
> > bunch and if it does, any work you did may be wasted depending on the
> > changes. As such, I'd build my product and get it bullet
proof...building
> a
> > disconnected app like you mention will take some work and fine tuning so
> you
> > make sure it has no rough edges. Then, later on this year, start
building
> > with the newer version but don't couple anything too tightly b/c some
> change
> > may still be made (but a beta is a lot less likely to change
dramatically
> > than an alpha is) As a matter of fact, I was looking at a build of
> WHidbey
> > last week that didn't resemble the whidbey I've been using for the last
> > month...it had tons of changes and improvements. Anyway, you'll be able
> to
> > upgrade your app and take advantage of the new features pretty easy (the
> > difference between 1.1 and 2.0 is going to be much bigger than 1.0 and
1.1
> > but you can still do it and there will be backward compatibility). I'd
> hold
> > off a while and then upgrade when it was feasible. Building a product
> that's
> > robust and stable is the most important thing b/c even if it's really
fast
> > if it's not stable users are going to be mad.
> >
> > I'm currently playing with the 2.0 framework extensively b/c I want to
> learn
> > it early on but as much as I use it, I'm defintiely not planning on
> building
> > anything with it that'll be used in production until the later part of
> this
> > year or early next year. (During a MS demo, there was a pretty bad
error
> in
> > the IDE and the quote was "If it didn't still have a lot of bugs, we'd
> have
> > released it already"). The comment was said jokingly but the point was
> that
> > the IDE still needs a lot of work. I think that says it all.
> >
> > BTW, what specific features are you thinking about right now?
> >
> > HTH,
> >
> > Bill
> > "éric" <eric@westgen.com> wrote in message
> > news:uzQD2gbFEHA.1840@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> > > I completed, about 10 months ago, a point of sale application for a
> dairy
> > > genetics company in Canada. They now want me to create another
> application
> > > which helps Technicians in the field determine the best bull to breed
> > their
> > > cows and determine what potential genetic attributes the offspring
will
> > have
> > > (mostly regarding potential milk production)
> > >
> > > This application has to be disconnected since the users usually
operate
> > even
> > > out of cell phone range.
> > >
> > > The database will contain all the cows in Western Canada (2 million
> > records)
> > >
> > > The genetic calculations can take quite a while to generate and can be
> > > improved on, in some cases, by rapid data access as well as cpu speed
> > >
> > > The project deadline is Jan 1st or a bit beyond
> > >
> > > I read some of the benefits of SQLCE 3.0 and CF 2.0 online. I know
this
> > will
> > > not be out for a while but I think that this technology would make
this
> > > future application much more functional than building on CF 1 and
SQLCE
> > 2.0.
> > >
> > > What do you think? Should I work through the alpha and beta builds of
> > sqlce3
> > > and cf2 to get the best possible performance for my project release
> date?
> > >
> > > Should I just stick with CF1 and sqlce2?
> > >
> > > Thanks for taking the time to answer my questions
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > éric
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
- Next message: William Ryan eMVP: "Re: form load/activated best practices"
- Previous message: Lloyd Dupont: "Re: form load/activated best practices"
- In reply to: éric: "Re: suggestions please"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
