> for a certain program that IEA does not/cannot/willnot support, you can
> program it yourself without problems - or ask a programmer to do so.
> That's what _I_ understand by a _completely_ open program design.
I'd have to say that since Emerald relies on MS-SQL, that it is not
completely open. I am forced into using NT in a situation where I would
much rather use a Unix or Oracle back-end, and there isn't a whole lot
that I can do about it.
So.. (I'm being nitpicky) I don't think Emerald is "completely open" as
you describe it. It is quite a bit farther along the path than others, and
it has many nice features that aren't available in other programs..
> The only thing I'm missing are 'user-definable' buttons in E where we
> can integrate our additions under the E user interface, but I think
> we'll have them when the browser interface is ready (Dale? :) ).
Again, to be truly open, the Browser interface should be prototyped in
portable ANSI C w/ specific declarations for the operating system it will
be used. It should provide the ability to easily slot in third party
"driver modules" to connect the CGI related programs into a Unix or Orable
I don't like being forced to use "cold fusion" and IIS, as these products
both suck raw eggs when it comes to scalability.
-- President of New Age Consulting Service, Inc. Cleveland Ohio SLIP/PPP/Unix Shell 28.8k / ISDN / Leased Line http://www.nacs.net email@example.com (216)-524-8414