One other alternative (sort of) is to use Query (he suggested with a quaver in his voice).

I know, I know...very, very "70's", yet one of Quasar's selling points was that it was ..."easier to use than Query", which it was.

Bob Graham
Director of AMISYS Computing Support

"To secure ourselves against defeat lies in our own hands, but the
opportunity of defeating the enemy is provided by the enemy himself." -
Sun T'zu, "The Art of War"



-----Original Message-----
From: Penney, John
Sent: Wednesday, May 24, 2000 11:31 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Help !!! with alternate Cognos


Nick:

You forgot to add that to develop anything larger than a one program screen
in Transact et al takes about (aboot) the same length of time as in Cobol.
In fact, I would prefer to do it in Cobol but a craftsman never blames his
tools....

And, after all, this is the 3rd millennium, or will be soon.

John M  Penney
Department of Licensing
State of Washington
Olympia, WA
(360)664-1392
(360)586-1919 (Fax)
[log in to unmask]
"Opinions expressed do not necessarily reflect those of my employer..."

> ----------
> From:         Nick Demos[SMTP:[log in to unmask]]
> Reply To:     Nick Demos
> Sent:         Wednesday, May 24, 2000 10:22 AM
> To:   [log in to unmask]
> Subject:      Re: Help !!! with alternate Cognos
>
> Ted Ashton wrote:
> >
> > The anti-Cognos sentiment, at least on my part is due to two things:
> >   1) The predatory pricing, about which we've heard much.
> >   2) That using the Cognos products tends to be programmer-friendly and
> >      machine unfriendly (resource hogging) and in an environment where
> we have
> >      5 good programmers and 1 small 3000, that's not generally a good
> thing.
> >   3) I don't know that I can blame it on Cognos, really, but the other
> >      disadvantage is that since Powerhouse *is* VERY easy to use for
> rapid
> >      development, it tends to suck in projects whose scope is beyond
> what
> >      Powerhouse was designed to handle, making for some rather amazing
> (and
> >      not too pretty) code.
> >
> For those dissatisfied with COGNOS, You should try HP Transact.
> Advantages are:
>
> 1.  It will (probably) be around as long as the 3000.
> 2.  Easy to learn.
> 3.  Supports Image, VPlus and the 3000 dictionary.
> 4.  Reasonably priced.
> 5. Supported by HP.
> 6.  Not a machine hog, any more than Cobol is.
>
> No plug here because I have no financial interest.
>
> Regards,
>
> Nick D.
>