AnsweredAssumed Answered

vrf Another X-Y Plot question

Question asked by fukui.yutaka on Aug 22, 2008
I can't argue with any of that.

What about something Star Office? It's supported by Sun, but I believe it is just Open Office with a different name. Would that be considered open source? Do you think that code would be just as bad?

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Shawn Fessenden []
> Sent: Friday, August 22, 2008 6:39 PM
> To: Drago, William @NARDAEAST; 'VRF'
> Subject: RE: [vrf] Open Office Database
> > Right, but you can't beat it for the price.
> True, but then again buyer beware! "Expecially" if the price is
> nuthin!
> > OTOH, there's Star Office by
> > Sun which is supposed to be a
> > commercial/enterprise grade
> > product, and it's only $70.
> I have two of 'em from ... um, about 2000 I think. Before Sun took it
> over (or maybe just after?). At that time it was very unimpressive (I
> often toy with the idea of replacing Office).
> Still, that's a great price. A token price, surely. I don't know
> anything about it lately. I'm sure it's changed a great deal since I
> saw it last.
> And now it's time for foot-in-mouth confessions. It's after five so I
> guess I'm ok.
> Apparently, there's another documentational "opinion" that the
> database engine used for "Base" is HSQLDB. Presently all I know is
> that there is a "zip file", so opening this bugger means first opening
> a zip file. And they're probably talking about bzip or gzip, or some
> other archive format rather than PK Zip: The OS community's absolute
> non-acceptance of anything commercial is legendary.
> Not to soap-box too much, but this is another reason I advise steering
> clear of OS: documentation. There isn't any. This seems to have been
> changing lately, but documentation is still practically non-existent.
> These folks have a completely different mind set in that if you're not
> a programmer you have no business using a computer in the first place,
> so (except in a few cases) the only technical documentation you get is
> the source code.
> In the real world, that attitude just doesn't fly. At least I wish it
> wouldn't. I've been dealing with this ever since I started working for
> ManageIQ. Microsoft parts are more or less easy to recreate due to the
> plethora of MSDN documentation. I can look up a structure and be
> absolutely certain I'll find it. And I always know what I'm looking
> for thanks to exhaustive API documentation.
> Not so Open Source. Most times internal details are not even
> summarized much less documented. There's no API documentation, and the
> source code is hideous. Finding a specific structure can be a complete
> nightmare in a large project. And the worst part is you usually have
> no idea what it's called in the first place. Just some vague
> description in comments like /* initialize a cursor */, then you get
> to see a variable name & a function that's supposed to do the
> initializing. If you're really lucky and there's not too much
> typedeffing going on, and conditional compilation and macros don't
> mess with what you're looking for then you don't have to set up a
> trace scenario & sit there all afternoon pressing <step>, <step>...
> These people do NOT adhere to any kind of code standards at all...
> I don't want to be tagged as a Microsoft Rah Rah but Microsoft code is
> INFINITELY superior to anything I've seen yet from Open Source.
> Ok I soap-boxed too much. Signing off.

You are currently subscribed to vrf as:
To subscribe please send an email to: "" with the word subscribe in the message body.
To unsubscribe send a blank email to "".
To send messages to this mailing list,  email "". 
If you need help with the mailing list send a message to
Search the "unofficial vrf archive" at "".
Search the Agilent vrf archive at "".