Running 2.0Dos. Worth upgrading?

[SM777]

I'm more than happy with FP 2.0Dos running on Win 98. It aint broken so I see no need to fix it.

Just wondering what I could be missing out on though.

Is it worth upgrading to say 2.6Dos or a windows version?

Will my prg files need major overhaul?

Will the windows version run faster than the corresponding dos version?

Cheers.

 

[ramani]

Hi
I dont know how long you can be happy with your FPD2.0. Now the machines are getting faster and faster, soon you will be without units which can run fpd2.0. If such a situation arises, and MS is not around to support it any more, you will land in trouble. So better to get ready with upgraded version, before the Last Day comes.

And which version to proceed?. I would suggest get ready with VFP version. NO point in upgrading to FPD2.6 at this stage. HOwever, most of the things will run as it is in FPD2.6. That is a welcome sign to that version. But not worth venturing now, since the suggestion is to go for VFP.


ramani
(Subramanian.G),FoxAcc, ramani_g@yahoo.com

 

[JRB-Bldr]

If you want to do a full re-write to utilize the enhanced functionality available with Visual Foxpro, go for it. The new features are well worth it. And you would get the opportunity to learn a modern programming language.

However, if you want to merely get a Windows GUI user interface and be able to utilize Windows printers (instead of being limited to LPT1: and COM1: printers) along with running in Win 2K & XP you might want to consider upgrading to FPW 2.6.

As I have said before - it is a programatic dinosaur but it keeps working and you don't have to modify much FPD code. You won't get the new features of VFP, but you might make users who are familiar with Windows more happy.

Typically old FPD screens are written with the @GET/SAY style of programming. This will continue to work, but you might want to re-create them by using Foxpro's Screen Designer (I don't remember if there is a screen conversion tool out there somewhere).

Good Luck,
JRB-Bldr
VisionQuest Consulting
Business Analyst & CIO Consulting Services
CIOServices@yahoo.com

 

[SM777]

No need for bells and whistles, looking more for squeezing extra speed.

The code I have is really basic and is just used for updating databases, extracting data for other applications etc.

I was just wondering if the a) 2.6 had better use of Rushmore (I believe 2.0 has, well its x times faster than Clipper anyway), b) if a Windows version would better use 32bit disk accessing or something.

Believe me, the PC's are staying as Win98! No way upgrading to XP/2K.

 

[DSummZZZ]

FoxPro for Windows has basically the same internal workings as FoxPro DOS. So there are no real performance enhancements going from DOS to Windows. They are both built around 16 bit systems. Going from 2.0 to 2.5 or 2.6 may increase some speed here and there, but you probably won't think it was worth the trouble of getting a 'newer' version of the old stuff.
The code will run unmodified though.
Dave S.

 

[JRB-Bldr]

As has been said above, by itself, you most likely won't see much performance (speed) difference between FP 2.0 DOS and FP 2.6 Windows. Especially if you left the code and tables 100% the same.

One of the benefits of a conversion or re-write is to very critically examine the application architecture, code, and table structures to look for optional ways of approaching the desired result. Often during re-writes of other people's applications or even my own older applications I have found ways in which I could improve things and enhance performance.

If your code is already "as good as it gets" then the conversion or re-write effort might not be worth the time. But if, as is often the case, your code evolved over-time into "spagetti" or was created during a "learning curve" time, there might be benefits from the effort.

If I can be of any further assistance, feel free to ask.

Good Luck,
JRB-Bldr
VisionQuest Consulting
Business Analyst & CIO Consulting Services
CIOServices@yahoo.com

 

[culleoka]

I have been programming in FoxPro since ver 2.0 and have had to make adjustments all along the way. Versions 2.5, 2.6, 2.6(W), 3.0, 5.0a and soon 8.0.

Each version had its own problems.

My first consideration would be, 'What if I have to re-install FoxPro after upgrading to Windows 2000?'

Fox 2.6(D) will not install under Windows 2000. The work around for that is to record the folder where the FoxPro program is installed to CD. Copy this folder to another hard drive and it will work fine, and so will your applications. Remember, this is a DOS prog, fully self-contained. I know this since some of my legacy progs are still running under v2.6(D) on Windows 2k machines and I have had to adapt.

It's scary to take the plunge in to an upgrade, especially one as far as you are facing, but there is plenty of help out here, this site being my favorite.

Micorsoft has published new support criteria for its progs. The norm is five years from release date. In the case of Fox 2.5, this is long past.

When was the last time you saw a forum on dBase III+?

With the quantum leap you are facing, you will probably have to rewrite most of your app's. However, with the RAD development tools in Visual FoxPro, it isn't as bad as it sounds.

Projects are still projects, but screens are now forms.

Reports are still reports and labels are still labels(but far easier to create).

The wizards in VFP will knock your socks off! compared to FoxPro(D).

Your .exe's will be smaller. If you have numerous app's out there on the same machine, you only need to do a full install once. The windows files only need to be there once.

Then you can install the numerous .exe's by just copying them in the folder they need to be in. My .exe's range from 350k to over 2.5M. These are still relatively 'small' app's.

You also have the advantage of 32-bit with VFP. And yes, the same app running on a 32-bit system will run faster than the DOS app running 8 or 16-bit.

My suggestion is to upgrade to ver 7.0 or download the free eta that is available from microsoft. You will need Windows XP or Windows 2000 to run it and make sure you back up properly before installing.

I know I sound like an advertisement for Microsoft, but there is a whole new world out there, untapped. And NO, I don't work for Microsoft!

Use your own judgment, and good luck!

Pat

 

[SM777]

many thanks for the comments guys.

I think I'll stick with the version I got.

Basically, I'm just using it for browsing large databases. There is code for really basic reports, database extraction etc. Its code for my own use so it doesnt have to be snazzy.

Just one other thing. I can't compile the .prg into .exe file. Should I be able to do this? I'm sure there would be speed advantage in doing this, but again, most of the code is just basic looping, filtering, indexing etc. so maybe not.

 

[DSummZZZ]

You need the Developers Kit. It is an add-on that needs to be purchased separately. If you can find it.
These folks may still have one:

http://www.emsps.com/oldtools/msfox.htm

You won't find any speed advantages there though. It still uses the same data engine as the run-time. It only allows you to distribute your app without puchasing another license or copy of FoxPro.

If you are looking to improve performance, then take into consideration the prior posts. Tweak your code and make sure it is optimized.
Dave S.