I think I can help here.
"wendy7" wrote in message
news:i0okf.63044$qw.48095@fed1read07...
Kathy, I am still following this thread & wouldn't it be easier just
to have a laptop with you?

For a program like this, this would be the smartest option. A relatively
new PC or laptop would certainly be capable of giving decent performance
with this kind of application.

As always, the trick is to design your application for a specific target
platform, and recognize that some platforms are totally inadequate for some
applications at a given time. A PDA may be totally inappropriate for an
application with the amount of data managed by OrchidWiz, right now, but the
PDA of 2015 may be well suited to such an application.

--
Cheers Wendy

Remove PETERPAN for email reply

K Barrett wrote:
Turns out a PDA type program was what Alex had been trying to make. I
guess the program is too big to run (with any functionality) on a PDA.
I've looked at PDAs since posting this (becasue I never believe anyone
had have to figure it out for myself) and I see that the processors
are very slow, and they have miserable memory. The OrchidWiz program
is big and a slow processor would only make it crawl at a snail's
pace, no?
That said there are a few HP iPAQs with large screens that work in
either portrait or landscape... or tablet PCs.

The graphics required for this kind of application are not likely the
problem, although they made need to be revised to better suite the platform.
The big problem will be the slow processor and pitiful memory. The only
time I would consider current PDAs for a database application is if the
database is maintained on the internet and the client application running on
the PDA used greatly simplified queries (processed largely on the server so
that only a single record is sent to the PDA). One MIGHT get acceptable
performance then, but I have my doubts.

The suggestion of porting it to a PDA, though, may well prove feasible a few
years down the road. A few years ago, I developed a simple GPS application
that served to collect data real time, and it ran on DOS with only 640K RAM,
and a 1 MB memory stick. If the database is kept tiny (less than 1 to 2 MB)
one can put a simple database application on an anemic machine. Mine even
had a pretty good graphical interface. It did not, though, do any
significant processing beyond displaying the interface and collecting and
storing data.

I'd guess you won't see OrchidWhiz on a PDA without significant refactoring
to optimize the program for a much smaller computer, improved programming
techniques, and improved hardware. Remember, there was a time when
databases existed only on mainframe computers. Years later, they could be
found on much smaller machines until they eventually made an appearance on
desktop machines, first high end workstations and then PCs. Early on in the
history, database software appeared for PCs, but that software was very
primitive and entirely unsuited for commercial use. Over the same period,
though, software technology, and programming techniques improved to the
point where now a decent desktop or notebook computer could easily handle a
commercial database, at least for small and medium sized businesses, as well
as web applications. Just as there were programs back in the 80's that
would only run on mainframes with acceptable speed, there are manay programs
right now that should not be run on anything less than a relatively new PC,
and I know of very specialized programs that, even today, need a
supercomputer or a cluster of compute servers in order to complete a task in
a reasonable amount of time (such as a week or two). Some environmental
simulation programs need a sizable cluster of compute servers (with the
dastest processors available), terabyte storage, and a few weeks to complete
one simulation.

PDA technology is too new and anemic for the kinds of software I presently
develop, but maybe that will change in five to ten years. While PDA
technology is interesting, I will not be porting any of my software to it
any time soon. Maybe I'll consider that when I can get a PDA that can
handle the same workload that my new desktop can handle (it has an Athlon 64
X2 3800+, with 1 GB RAM and an immense hard drive). I don't think I'll see
a PDA with that power any time soon.

Cheers,

Ted

--
R.E. (Ted) Byers, Ph.D., Ed.D.
R & D Decision Support Solutions
http://www.randddecisionsupportsolutions.com/
Healthy Living Through Informed Decision Making

On Sat, 3 Dec 2005 19:56:50 -0500 in Ted Byers wrote:

For a program like this, this would be the smartest option. A relatively
new PC or laptop would certainly be capable of giving decent performance
with this kind of application.

And a bit too bulky to carry around in someone else's greenhouse
complex.

As always, the trick is to design your application for a specific target
platform, and recognize that some platforms are totally inadequate for some
applications at a given time. A PDA may be totally inappropriate for an
application with the amount of data managed by OrchidWiz, right now, but the
PDA of 2015 may be well suited to such an application.

IMHO, OrchidWiz currently has the shortcoming of the application
cannot be broken from the collection of data.
Given the data, a geek can kludge up an adequate interface to access
the relevant subsets of the data from a PDA.
I know that I could have used some remote access to genus description
and renaming tables Saturday and one or two pictures.
The bandwidth of the various PDAs with long distance wireless data
access would have been adequate to retrieve that information, even
though current generation PDAs would have been illsuited to
running the entire application.

[Various Snippage concerning power of PDAs]

One thing I'll never understand is why tasks
that could be done on the pocket computers of 20 years ago
now require almost the same resources as tasks that couldn't
be done on the pocket computers of 20 years ago...

--
Chris Dukes
Suspicion breeds confidence -- Brazil

"?" wrote in message
rg...
On Sat, 3 Dec 2005 19:56:50 -0500 in
Ted Byers
wrote:

For a program like this, this would be the smartest option. A relatively
new PC or laptop would certainly be capable of giving decent performance
with this kind of application.

And a bit too bulky to carry around in someone else's greenhouse
complex.

True, but that is a context where one could obtain good performance from a
client/server application in which most of the application resides on a SOHO
wireless LAN. In this conext, the LAN will have plenty of unused bandwidth,
so communication between the PDA and the desktop computer running the server
application would be almost instantaneous. The program running on the PDA
would be what we call a thin client with almost all processing being done by
the server application.


As always, the trick is to design your application for a specific target
platform, and recognize that some platforms are totally inadequate for
some
applications at a given time. A PDA may be totally inappropriate for an
application with the amount of data managed by OrchidWiz, right now, but
the
PDA of 2015 may be well suited to such an application.

IMHO, OrchidWiz currently has the shortcoming of the application
cannot be broken from the collection of data.

I am not sure I understand you here. A capable software engineer could
break a given application into any collection of components that he sees as
appropriate. One of the things I can see PDAs of today as being able to
handle well is that of data collection and storage. Coupled with a GPS
device, such as system would be priceless for field biologists who'd prefer
to do medium to long term studies on a selection of specimens using
non-destructive techniques and technologies. All it would take is a
software engineer to develop a little application to tie it all together
(probably about a man-year for a commercial quality data collection
application).

Given the data, a geek can kludge up an adequate interface to access
the relevant subsets of the data from a PDA.
I know that I could have used some remote access to genus description
and renaming tables Saturday and one or two pictures.
The bandwidth of the various PDAs with long distance wireless data
access would have been adequate to retrieve that information, even
though current generation PDAs would have been illsuited to
running the entire application.

Here it seems like you're visualizing the kind of client/server application
I was coemplating about.

[Various Snippage concerning power of PDAs]

One thing I'll never understand is why tasks
that could be done on the pocket computers of 20 years ago
now require almost the same resources as tasks that couldn't
be done on the pocket computers of 20 years ago...

This is a complex issue, but I can offer suggestions on a couple factors.
First, many software houses are too cheap to hire experienced software
engineers, engineers who know how to use available hardware well. After
all, one can get a kid who still doesn't know he's still wet behind the ears
for half the visible cost of an experienced software engineer. Some of
these kids will be a whiz for certain tasks, but most will flounder for a
while, taking several times as long to complete a task as an experienced
software engineer would take. They just don't have the experience. IMHO,
an ideal software development team will include both a number of these kids
and a few old guys like me. ;-) Then you'd get the enthusiasm and energy
of the young guided by the experience of the old. Second, many 'software
engineers' lack the discipline of delivering only what is needed. I have
seen plenty of applications in which the developer added features just
because he could, and largely for the purpose of impressing his peers.
Third, most applications, and operating systems, suffer bloating because of
feature creep and gold plating. Fourth, many of these programs are built to
run on Windows or the standard distributions of Linux. MS has provided a
stripped down version of Windows for portable devices, and one can strip
down a distribution of Linux to a similar degree, but I doubt that either OS
could be stripped down enough to run on an 8086 PC. Even a supercomputer of
20 years ago would have been hard pressed to run either OS as they exist
now. That said I have seen special, relatively modern versions of unix that
have been developed specifically to run on anemic processors such as the
8086, but this is for embedded applications that no consumer will ever use
directly. Some of the smart applicances use it, but more often the
applications control equipment in industrial settings. The companies that
specialize on this market have been developing such tiny versions of unix
for years specifically for embedded applications. I have talked with
hardware engineers who do this, and sometimes they will even forgo the OS
and embed those features of the OS that they need right in the application
they're developing, using either C or assembler. But you and I will never
start, or try to use, such applications. They are designed to run the
moment the smart device is powered up, and then run continuously, without
user input, until it is powered down.

Yes, you're right in the trend you're seeing. It is not inevitable, but it
is understandable in terms of other trends in the industry, including the
fact that, in a sense, new applications carry the baggage of twenty years of
IT history to one extent or another. For consumer applications, that
baggage is embedded through the OS and would be outrageously expensive to
remove.

Does this help?

Cheers,

Ted

--
R.E. (Ted) Byers, Ph.D., Ed.D.
R & D Decision Support Solutions
http://www.randddecisionsupportsolutions.com/
Healthy Living Through Informed Decision Making

wendy7 wrote:
Kathy, I am still following this thread & wouldn't it be easier just
to have a laptop with you?


Well. yes, I have a laptop. I use it for shows where I have a table to
set it up at. And (dare I say this out loud?) I need to use a mouse
with it. I just can't get used to the dang finger board. So. That's
not the problem. One would (in a perfect world) like to have this at
one's fingertips, like a tricorder from Star Trek. Granted, if I was
into orchids when I was 9 yrs old I'd have the capacity to learn all
this stuff for myself and carry it in my brain, however I can't remember
anything anymore, so I need help.

Laptops - even today - weigh a ton. Sure there are ones that weigh 2.9
lbs, but imagine carrying around 1/2 a bag of sugar all day and imagine
what that would do for your arm or back. And they are bulky. You'd bump
inot plants and knock them off benches. PDAs weigh ounces and fit in a
pocket. Most require a stylus in order to operate their keyboards, and
I understand the screen gets dinged up from all the typing, but there
are ones with mini keyboards available.

I wonder about screen brightness in a GH situation (Lord knows the LCD
screen on my digital camera is worthless in a GH) - but that concern
would hold true for either a laptop or a PDA.

And as for whomever said a smaller version of OrchidWiz (or Wildcatt for
that matter) without pictures or most of the functions could indeed work
on a PDA. I'm pretty sure Alex has that (or can come up with it), since
he was working on a PDA type program to begin with. But the functions
are what you want in the first place.... so why bother?

As to whomever said any geek could take apart the program and work on it
themselves. Indeed. I know a person who has done that with Wildcatt.
I know 2 people who have done that with the old AOS award CD. No doubt
someone's already working on OrchidWiz, LOL!! That's not the problem.
The problem is being creative enough to know what functions one would
like and making it work. So then it becomes an exercise in 'what
features can you live without?" and then 'what features do you
absolutely need?' and one gets stymied and gives up to go get a glass of
wine. Let's face it, creativity takes brains and vision. I ain't got
neither.

I have asked out of work silicon valley programmers if they could
rewrite Wildcatt for a PDA and they have told me the operating systems
for a PDA, either PalmOS or microsoft's OS are a real bear. However if
one was dedicated one could write a program to allow Wildcatt to work on
a microsoft OS PDA. (There's that word again - dedicated...) I have
wondered, what with everything else getting outsourced to India, why I
couldn't hire a programmer to do this for me. Which got too
complicated, and I went and got a glass of wine. Probably some brie, too.

I understand the size of the program won't fit on a PDA. I understand
there's not enough memory in a PDA to move data around in order to make
it work in a rapid fashion. I understand the chips aren't fast enough
in a PDA to handle the speed at which one would want the data moved and
accessed. What I don't understand is why one can't carry OrchidWiz on a
512 memorystick and access it via the PDA. Like an outboard harddrive.
I think the answer is because PDAs don't have a USB port in which to
plug the memorystick. Even still, the computer runs so slowly you'd
probably die and vultures could pick your bones clean before you'd
access the data you want.

Ok, I've written enough and there are leaves to rake.

K Barrett

Kathy, this is getting scary! I can relate to almost everything you wrote.
The only differance is that you are younger than I by a decade!
I too could not get used to the fickle finger board and the laptop I
borrowed had a huge battery as well.

I poked the Palm III to death! (A cheapie, $29)
I could see the screen ok but just searching on my data base of about
2500 entries, I could run back to the house, grab a cup of coffee & get
back in time to just see the record I had called up appear.
I've got orchids to pot! *g*
--
Cheers Wendy

Remove PETERPAN for email reply

K Barrett wrote:
wendy7 wrote:
Kathy, I am still following this thread & wouldn't it be easier just
to have a laptop with you?


Well. yes, I have a laptop. I use it for shows where I have a table
to set it up at. And (dare I say this out loud?) I need to use a
mouse with it. I just can't get used to the dang finger board. So.
That's
not the problem. One would (in a perfect world) like to have this at
one's fingertips, like a tricorder from Star Trek. Granted, if I was
into orchids when I was 9 yrs old I'd have the capacity to learn all
this stuff for myself and carry it in my brain, however I can't
remember anything anymore, so I need help.

Laptops - even today - weigh a ton. Sure there are ones that weigh
2.9 lbs, but imagine carrying around 1/2 a bag of sugar all day and
imagine what that would do for your arm or back. And they are bulky.
You'd bump inot plants and knock them off benches. PDAs weigh ounces
and fit in a pocket. Most require a stylus in order to operate their
keyboards, and I understand the screen gets dinged up from all the typing,
but there
are ones with mini keyboards available.

I wonder about screen brightness in a GH situation (Lord knows the LCD
screen on my digital camera is worthless in a GH) - but that concern
would hold true for either a laptop or a PDA.

And as for whomever said a smaller version of OrchidWiz (or Wildcatt
for that matter) without pictures or most of the functions could
indeed work on a PDA. I'm pretty sure Alex has that (or can come up
with it), since he was working on a PDA type program to begin with. But
the functions are what you want in the first place.... so why
bother?
As to whomever said any geek could take apart the program and work on
it themselves. Indeed. I know a person who has done that with
Wildcatt. I know 2 people who have done that with the old AOS award CD. No
doubt
someone's already working on OrchidWiz, LOL!! That's not the problem.
The problem is being creative enough to know what functions one would
like and making it work. So then it becomes an exercise in 'what
features can you live without?" and then 'what features do you
absolutely need?' and one gets stymied and gives up to go get a glass
of wine. Let's face it, creativity takes brains and vision. I ain't
got neither.

I have asked out of work silicon valley programmers if they could
rewrite Wildcatt for a PDA and they have told me the operating systems
for a PDA, either PalmOS or microsoft's OS are a real bear. However
if one was dedicated one could write a program to allow Wildcatt to
work on a microsoft OS PDA. (There's that word again - dedicated...)
I have wondered, what with everything else getting outsourced to
India, why I couldn't hire a programmer to do this for me. Which got
too complicated, and I went and got a glass of wine. Probably some brie,
too.
I understand the size of the program won't fit on a PDA. I understand
there's not enough memory in a PDA to move data around in order to
make it work in a rapid fashion. I understand the chips aren't fast
enough in a PDA to handle the speed at which one would want the data moved
and accessed. What I don't understand is why one can't carry
OrchidWiz on a 512 memorystick and access it via the PDA. Like an
outboard harddrive. I think the answer is because PDAs don't have a USB
port in which to
plug the memorystick. Even still, the computer runs so slowly you'd
probably die and vultures could pick your bones clean before you'd
access the data you want.

Ok, I've written enough and there are leaves to rake.

K Barrett

On Sun, 04 Dec 2005 09:27:19 -0800 in K Barrett wrote:
[Great snippage]
Two paradigm shifts for you.
1) Yes, some PDAs can have oodles of persistant storage via some sort of
removable memory or flash device. But for this sort of task, it's sort of
like transferring 50lbs of fertilizer with a teaspoon.
2) There are PDAs on the market with long distance wireless access (Usually
data over the same networks that your cell phone uses).
The PDA doesn't have to have enough oomph to search all the data.
It needs enough oomph to be able to send out to some server "Hey, I'm
looking for information on X" and receive a couple screenfuls (80x24
text) of response.

Now back on topic... who was the twisted person that came up with
Oncidium Twinkle, and has that person done anything similar?
There's just something cute about having a plant with more pseudobulbs
than I can count and 7 spikes in a 4" pot.


--
Chris Dukes
Suspicion breeds confidence -- Brazil

Oncidium Twinkle was registered by W.W.Goodale Moir in 1958. He was one of
the more prolific breeders out there, so there's bound so be something else
worth having from him. He focused a lot on tolumnias and their
intergenerics, but worked pretty much in the entire onciidinae group.

--

Ray Barkalow - First Rays Orchids - www.firstrays.com
Plants, Supplies, Artwork, Books and Lots of Free Info!


"?" wrote in message
rg...
On Sun, 04 Dec 2005 09:27:19 -0800 in
K Barrett wrote:
[Great snippage]
Two paradigm shifts for you.
1) Yes, some PDAs can have oodles of persistant storage via some sort of
removable memory or flash device. But for this sort of task, it's sort of
like transferring 50lbs of fertilizer with a teaspoon.
2) There are PDAs on the market with long distance wireless access
(Usually
data over the same networks that your cell phone uses).
The PDA doesn't have to have enough oomph to search all the data.
It needs enough oomph to be able to send out to some server "Hey, I'm
looking for information on X" and receive a couple screenfuls (80x24
text) of response.

Now back on topic... who was the twisted person that came up with
Oncidium Twinkle, and has that person done anything similar?
There's just something cute about having a plant with more pseudobulbs
than I can count and 7 spikes in a 4" pot.


--
Chris Dukes
Suspicion breeds confidence -- Brazil

If you've seen the parents, there's nothing twisted about it. This was a
rather obvious cross for someone to try. Both parents are small with
branching spikes. The colors that came out of it were probably a surprise.
-danny

"?" wrote in message
rg...
Now back on topic... who was the twisted person that came up with
Oncidium Twinkle, and has that person done anything similar?
There's just something cute about having a plant with more pseudobulbs
than I can count and 7 spikes in a 4" pot.


--
Chris Dukes
Suspicion breeds confidence -- Brazil

"K Barrett" wrote in message
...
wendy7 wrote:
I wonder about screen brightness in a GH situation (Lord knows the LCD
screen on my digital camera is worthless in a GH) - but that concern would
hold true for either a laptop or a PDA.

This is a valid concern. I have an excellent notebook, but the screen on it
can not be used unless the light is very subdued (as happens at dawn or
dusk). However, there are improvements coming For example, I have an Acer
AL1913 flat screen, thin panel monitor. It is amazing. I can easily read
it in the brightest of light. Once the technology used in it has been
adopted in PDAs, this won't be an issue any more.

And as for whomever said a smaller version of OrchidWiz (or Wildcatt for
that matter) without pictures or most of the functions could indeed work
on a PDA. I'm pretty sure Alex has that (or can come up with it), since he
was working on a PDA type program to begin with. But the functions are
what you want in the first place.... so why bother?

Stripping down the application would be a mistake, IMHO as a software
developer. A smarter approach would be to transform the application into a
combination of client and server applications. This would be routine for an
experienced software engineer, taken almost automatically when there is a
need to use an application on an under-powered machine. The idea is to have
a thin client application which handles almost nothing but data transfers to
and from the server, and displaying it on the screen. It is my
understanding that many PDAs have a stripped down version of Windows. If
they have a standard Internet Explorer binary, they don't need anything else
on the PDA, and the application developer can use standard web programming
techniques to provide all the expected functionality using probably a blend
of web pages and applets. Of course, the program will still probably be
slow because of the need for bandwidth across the Internet, but it should be
usable if the developer has done his homework in optimizing his database
access for performance across a heavily used network.

As to whomever said any geek could take apart the program and work on it
themselves. Indeed. I know a person who has done that with Wildcatt. I
know 2 people who have done that with the old AOS award CD. No doubt
someone's already working on OrchidWiz, LOL!! That's not the problem. The
problem is being creative enough to know what functions one would like and
making it work. So then it becomes an exercise in 'what features can you
live without?" and then 'what features do you absolutely need?' and one
gets stymied and gives up to go get a glass of wine. Let's face it,
creativity takes brains and vision. I ain't got neither.

As I said, if I were hired to work on such a project, I would not look at
stripping away some of the functionality. Instead, I'd work on a
client/server web application with the thinest client interface that I can
deliver.

BTW, if one of my students slandered themselves in the way you did, they
would have received a scolding like they never experienced before! You are
respected and valued, and I hope you won't slander yourself again. Besides,
I am probably the only one here who has cause to say depricating things
about myself! ;-)

I have asked out of work silicon valley programmers if they could rewrite
Wildcatt for a PDA and they have told me the operating systems for a PDA,
either PalmOS or microsoft's OS are a real bear. However if one was
dedicated one could write a program to allow Wildcatt to work on a
microsoft OS PDA. (There's that word again - dedicated...) I have
wondered, what with everything else getting outsourced to India, why I
couldn't hire a programmer to do this for me. Which got too complicated,
and I went and got a glass of wine. Probably some brie, too.

Based on what I saw in India, you are not likely to save much, and there are
countless "developers" there I would not consider hiring. While I met some
outstanding developers there, your problem would be how to distinguish
between those who know what they're doing and those that don't. My approach
would be to offer software engineering courses to kids whose only
qualification would be that they can read and write English well (and if
they have more skills, so much the better). Then I can teach them everything
they need to now about software engineering. There are two ways to gain
employees who are capable and useful: try to hire them, or train them in
house. I prefer the latter.

I'd suggest that your least expensive, and yet most reliable, option is to
go to the nearest, good quality college or university, and arrange with the
IT faculty to hire a student to work on your project under the supervision
of one of the faculty. In that way, you get the enthusiasm of a kid who
still loves IT, but working under the guidance of an expert who presumably
understands how to get an application developed. And students will work for
a small fraction of te cost of a software development consultant.

I understand the size of the program won't fit on a PDA. I understand
there's not enough memory in a PDA to move data around in order to make it
work in a rapid fashion. I understand the chips aren't fast enough in a
PDA to handle the speed at which one would want the data moved and
accessed. What I don't understand is why one can't carry OrchidWiz on a
512 memorystick and access it via the PDA. Like an outboard harddrive. I
think the answer is because PDAs don't have a USB port in which to plug
the memorystick. Even still, the computer runs so slowly you'd probably
die and vultures could pick your bones clean before you'd access the data
you want.

The reason for all you've noted here in this paragraph is that the processor
has to handle all the processing involved in the application. You can
accomplish what you're after by offloading most of the required processing
to a server, resulting in a thin client. What you lose in the cost of
transfering data over the Internet will be more than compensated for by the
power of server side computation. That said, the developer has to get a
good handle on the demands placed on the server so that he can ensure that
his server machine can handle the load. This is relatively easy if the
program is accessed only through an Intranet (a network that exists only
within an office or building). It can be challenging, though, if the
program is configured to be accessed through, or from the Internet.

Does this help?

Cheers,

Ted

--
R.E. (Ted) Byers, Ph.D., Ed.D.
R & D Decision Support Solutions
http://www.randddecisionsupportsolutions.com/
Healthy Living Through Informed Decision Making

Ted Byers wrote:
"K Barrett" wrote in message
...

wendy7 wrote:
I wonder about screen brightness in a GH situation (Lord knows the LCD
screen on my digital camera is worthless in a GH) - but that concern would
hold true for either a laptop or a PDA.


This is a valid concern. I have an excellent notebook, but the screen on it
can not be used unless the light is very subdued (as happens at dawn or
dusk). However, there are improvements coming For example, I have an Acer
AL1913 flat screen, thin panel monitor. It is amazing. I can easily read
it in the brightest of light. Once the technology used in it has been
adopted in PDAs, this won't be an issue any more.


And as for whomever said a smaller version of OrchidWiz (or Wildcatt for
that matter) without pictures or most of the functions could indeed work
on a PDA. I'm pretty sure Alex has that (or can come up with it), since he
was working on a PDA type program to begin with. But the functions are
what you want in the first place.... so why bother?


Stripping down the application would be a mistake, IMHO as a software
developer. A smarter approach would be to transform the application into a
combination of client and server applications. This would be routine for an
experienced software engineer, taken almost automatically when there is a
need to use an application on an under-powered machine. The idea is to have
a thin client application which handles almost nothing but data transfers to
and from the server, and displaying it on the screen. It is my
understanding that many PDAs have a stripped down version of Windows. If
they have a standard Internet Explorer binary, they don't need anything else
on the PDA, and the application developer can use standard web programming
techniques to provide all the expected functionality using probably a blend
of web pages and applets. Of course, the program will still probably be
slow because of the need for bandwidth across the Internet, but it should be
usable if the developer has done his homework in optimizing his database
access for performance across a heavily used network.


As to whomever said any geek could take apart the program and work on it
themselves. Indeed. I know a person who has done that with Wildcatt. I
know 2 people who have done that with the old AOS award CD. No doubt
someone's already working on OrchidWiz, LOL!! That's not the problem. The
problem is being creative enough to know what functions one would like and
making it work. So then it becomes an exercise in 'what features can you
live without?" and then 'what features do you absolutely need?' and one
gets stymied and gives up to go get a glass of wine. Let's face it,
creativity takes brains and vision. I ain't got neither.


As I said, if I were hired to work on such a project, I would not look at
stripping away some of the functionality. Instead, I'd work on a
client/server web application with the thinest client interface that I can
deliver.

BTW, if one of my students slandered themselves in the way you did, they
would have received a scolding like they never experienced before! You are
respected and valued, and I hope you won't slander yourself again. Besides,
I am probably the only one here who has cause to say depricating things
about myself! ;-)


I have asked out of work silicon valley programmers if they could rewrite
Wildcatt for a PDA and they have told me the operating systems for a PDA,
either PalmOS or microsoft's OS are a real bear. However if one was
dedicated one could write a program to allow Wildcatt to work on a
microsoft OS PDA. (There's that word again - dedicated...) I have
wondered, what with everything else getting outsourced to India, why I
couldn't hire a programmer to do this for me. Which got too complicated,
and I went and got a glass of wine. Probably some brie, too.


Based on what I saw in India, you are not likely to save much, and there are
countless "developers" there I would not consider hiring. While I met some
outstanding developers there, your problem would be how to distinguish
between those who know what they're doing and those that don't. My approach
would be to offer software engineering courses to kids whose only
qualification would be that they can read and write English well (and if
they have more skills, so much the better). Then I can teach them everything
they need to now about software engineering. There are two ways to gain
employees who are capable and useful: try to hire them, or train them in
house. I prefer the latter.

I'd suggest that your least expensive, and yet most reliable, option is to
go to the nearest, good quality college or university, and arrange with the
IT faculty to hire a student to work on your project under the supervision
of one of the faculty. In that way, you get the enthusiasm of a kid who
still loves IT, but working under the guidance of an expert who presumably
understands how to get an application developed. And students will work for
a small fraction of te cost of a software development consultant.


I understand the size of the program won't fit on a PDA. I understand
there's not enough memory in a PDA to move data around in order to make it
work in a rapid fashion. I understand the chips aren't fast enough in a
PDA to handle the speed at which one would want the data moved and
accessed. What I don't understand is why one can't carry OrchidWiz on a
512 memorystick and access it via the PDA. Like an outboard harddrive. I
think the answer is because PDAs don't have a USB port in which to plug
the memorystick. Even still, the computer runs so slowly you'd probably
die and vultures could pick your bones clean before you'd access the data
you want.


The reason for all you've noted here in this paragraph is that the processor
has to handle all the processing involved in the application. You can
accomplish what you're after by offloading most of the required processing
to a server, resulting in a thin client. What you lose in the cost of
transfering data over the Internet will be more than compensated for by the
power of server side computation. That said, the developer has to get a
good handle on the demands placed on the server so that he can ensure that
his server machine can handle the load. This is relatively easy if the
program is accessed only through an Intranet (a network that exists only
within an office or building). It can be challenging, though, if the
program is configured to be accessed through, or from the Internet.

Does this help?

Cheers,

Ted



Wow! Now there's an explainantion I can understand, LOL!!

Ted, all I can say is you must be a very fast typist and have a clear
train of thought in order to say as much as you do in one post. My
hat's off to you. I probably take 20 minutes to type *anything* even
this little missive.

Thank you and yes it does help.

K Barrett

In article ,
says...


Well, I bought it and it came two days ago, but for some reason, it does
not like me and is refusing to start. Alex, poor guy, is on his
Thanksgiving vacation and trying to help me in spite of it! We'll get it
fixed once he gets back to his office.
The screen saver is nice, though.
--

Well, we got OrchidWiz up and running. Alex realized that the program
was not finding the database because my standard folder for programs is
C:\Programme (German Windows version), not C:\Program files. I moved the
folder to "Programme" and it works fine. Alex was so concerned about my
troubles getting the program to work that he refunded my money. Wow! All
of this, and free, too!

I love it already. It is really easy to use and has such great features.
The pie charts of the genealogy are great. And so many pictures! Being
able to look up the images of the parents is neat. For example, I looked
up Onc. Twinkle. Danny is right, that was a no-brainer as far as flower
count! And to answer Chris' question, Moir has hybridized 1205 Oncidium
alliance plants. Go ahead, check them all out! ;-)

And I have only been browsing for about half an hour! Lord knows what
other features I will discover when I stop oohing and aahing over the
pics! I may just stay up all night ...

It still needs pictures, though. Can you imagine how much time you would
need to photograph *all* the hybrids and species? Al, he has no pics of
any of your crosses. What about it?

--
Reka

This is LIFE! It's not a rehearsal. Don't miss it!
http://www.rolbox.it/hukari/index.html

"Reka" wrote in message
.. .
In article ,
says...


Well, I bought it and it came two days ago, but for some reason, it does
not like me and is refusing to start. Alex, poor guy, is on his
Thanksgiving vacation and trying to help me in spite of it! We'll get it
fixed once he gets back to his office.
The screen saver is nice, though.
--

Well, we got OrchidWiz up and running. Alex realized that the program
was not finding the database because my standard folder for programs is
C:\Programme (German Windows version), not C:\Program files. I moved the
folder to "Programme" and it works fine. Alex was so concerned about my
troubles getting the program to work that he refunded my money. Wow! All
of this, and free, too!

Sounds like Alex is a good developer/businessman! From what you have said,
if he wants to support PDAs, optimally using a web application, feel free to
pass my email address, or the URL for my website, to him with the comment
that because of your experience, I am willing to help him as time allows. I
like to encourage developers with his attitude toward service as much as I
am able.

Cheers,

Ted


--
R.E. (Ted) Byers, Ph.D., Ed.D.
R & D Decision Support Solutions
http://www.randddecisionsupportsolutions.com/
Healthy Living Through Informed Decision Making

"K Barrett" wrote in message
. ..
Ted Byers wrote:
"K Barrett" wrote in message [snip]
Does this help?

Cheers,

Ted



Wow! Now there's an explainantion I can understand, LOL!!

Ted, all I can say is you must be a very fast typist and have a clear
train of thought in order to say as much as you do in one post. My hat's
off to you. I probably take 20 minutes to type *anything* even this
little missive.

Thank you and yes it does help.

I am glad I could help. The little skill you see in my post is due to more
than 25 years of computer programming, and plenty of experience both doing
research and teaching. It is certainly not due to fast typing. I am rather
slow because of a diabetes related neuropathy. It makes my hands hurt so
much it feels like my fingers are being crushed in vicegrips. They hurt
alomst as much as my feet and ankles. Pain does tend to slow me down, but I
am determined not to let it stop me! This is one reason I appreciate the
images posted in abpo, especially those taken in the field. My health has
pretty much made it impossible for me to do fieldwork. :-)

Cheers,

Ted

--
R.E. (Ted) Byers, Ph.D., Ed.D.
R & D Decision Support Solutions
http://www.randddecisionsupportsolutions.com/
Healthy Living Through Informed Decision Making

Thanks for the info Reka, I think I will go ahead & get it too.
Keep posting, would love to hear more about it.
--
Cheers Wendy

Remove PETERPAN for email reply

Reka wrote:
In article ,
says...


Well, I bought it and it came two days ago, but for some reason, it
does not like me and is refusing to start. Alex, poor guy, is on his
Thanksgiving vacation and trying to help me in spite of it! We'll
get it fixed once he gets back to his office.
The screen saver is nice, though.
--

Well, we got OrchidWiz up and running. Alex realized that the program
was not finding the database because my standard folder for programs
is C:\Programme (German Windows version), not C:\Program files. I
moved the folder to "Programme" and it works fine. Alex was so
concerned about my troubles getting the program to work that he
refunded my money. Wow! All of this, and free, too!

I love it already. It is really easy to use and has such great
features. The pie charts of the genealogy are great. And so many
pictures! Being able to look up the images of the parents is neat.
For example, I looked up Onc. Twinkle. Danny is right, that was a
no-brainer as far as flower count! And to answer Chris' question,
Moir has hybridized 1205 Oncidium alliance plants. Go ahead, check
them all out! ;-)

And I have only been browsing for about half an hour! Lord knows what
other features I will discover when I stop oohing and aahing over the
pics! I may just stay up all night ...

It still needs pictures, though. Can you imagine how much time you
would need to photograph *all* the hybrids and species? Al, he has no
pics of any of your crosses. What about it?

wendy7 wrote:
Thanks for the info Reka, I think I will go ahead & get it too.
Keep posting, would love to hear more about it.

better hurry, price goes up jan 1.

K