Trail of Tears: MySQL, ODBC, & OpenOffice 1.0

Joe Barr writes " I found a wonderful "how-to" piece called "OpenOffice.org 1.0, ODBC and MySQL," by John McCreesh. In the introduction, McCreesh writes about OpenOffice.org 1.0's "best kept secret" -- that secret being the fact that hidden away inside, completely unknown to most OpenOffice users, is a user-friendly front end for databases that is "a Microsoft Access (and more) equivalent." That may be so, but there is a very good reason why it's a secret: it's too damn hard getting OpenOffice and ODBC wired up correctly."

Comments

Huh?

[BoomerSooner]

The "journalist" who wrote the article said his friend was having a hard time getting MySQL, OpenOffice and Linux (Suse) to work. He then lists that his friend can 1) network computers 2) make anything work in DOS and Windows and 3) simply installed the RPMs.

I'm not sure what the hell qualifies this guy to be able to do much of anything in Linux much less tie MySQL to OO via ODBC.

Re:Huh?

[Chazmyrr]

You're right. The guy hasn't paid his dues. He hasn't spent days poring over man pages. He hasn't spent hours trying to recompile his kernel to get it to recognize his NIC. He probably doesn't even know how to use xf86config.

Then again, maybe the point was you shouldn't have to be a wizard to get an office suite to talk to an odbc datasource. Maybe the point was that real people trying to do real work don't want to be a sysadmin. They just want to get their work done.

Uh, he's a Linuxworld columnist?

[yoz]

Two points:

1: The writer of the piece, talking about his install troubles, is a Linuxworld columnist. Now, this may not give them kernel-developer-like skills, but...

2: ... how leet should Linux users be before they can install an MS Access equivalent? On Windows, you can do it with a few clicks. It sounds like you want the Linux equivalent to come with a 10-page exam.

-- Yoz

Re:Uh, he's a Linuxworld columnist?

[j_kenpo]

"I agree that it should be simpler to set up, but does Joe Sixpack really need to be designing databases?"

Absolutly, if Joe Sixpack works for a small freight, delivery or trucking company and needs to keep a small database of shipping, customers, destinations, and other small business related matters. Ive seen plenty of smaller companies (1 to 2 offices and handfull of employees) who do this with Access (mostly by means of the pre-built databases and templates, or a consultant/tech set one up for them). This is my point right here, instead of the "why would they" or the "should they be" mind set, it should be percieved from the "Ok, they are going to, so how can I make it easier for them".

Re:Uh, he's a Linuxworld columnist?

[yoz]

Yes and the few click method generally leaves security holes wide enough to drive a bus through. That method is obviously working.

No, poor security design generally leaves security holes wide enough to drive a bus through. Fast, easy installers with secure defaults generally leave happy users with less hair torn out and less anger at ivory-tower developers who think you should already know a piece of software inside and out before being allowed to install it.

Since when did usability design equate to wide-open holes, apart from in the minds of those who think spending two hours hand-editing a makefile is a vital entry requirement for those who want to use basic office software?

-- Yoz

Re:Trail of Tears?

[blaine]

Eh. On the one hand, yes, political correctness sucks.

On the other hand, comparing the configuration problems inherent to OpenOffice with the Trail of Tears is pretty obnoxious. I mean, what next, "Linux Networking: 9/11 All Over Again"?

I really don't think this is a case of being overly politically correct. It's more that the author of the article used an entirely inappropriate title, given the subject. Comparing computer configuration problems with the death of thousands is, well, shitty.

Re:Who cares

[fishbowl]

>Are there seriously still people who don't have
>MS Office?

There are projects for which the price of MS Windows and MS Office will preclude the project being done. Such things may not matter to you, since you obviously either have working capital or are willing to compromise your ethics. What if your entire expected revenue was less than the price of that software, but the system you want to develop has value other than cash value? Because of the price of Office, you're suggesting that such a project should not even be done.

That's not your call. It's okay that there are alternatives, and that people choose to use them!

MySQL vs Access

[lspd]

This certainly isn't the first or last attempt to wrap a user friendly UI on top of MySQL, but I think attempts to push MySQL + a nice GUI as an Access killer are mistaken.

My own experience with Access is fairly limited, but from what work I have done with Access, it seems that the biggest benefit is entirely ignored by this and other products like The Kompany's Data Architect. Access lets you take everything (data, reports, forms, queries, etc) and shove it all into a single portable file. Burning a copy to CD-R or Floppy is a snap, and it seems to be much easier for the clueless to wrap their heads around the idea of a database + reports + forms as a single file. I tried to sell a non-profit organization on the idea of MySQL + custom interfaces as a replacement to their quirky Access databases and they were completely unplussed by the idea.

It seems like such a simple idea to combine perl or Python forms, HTML, XML or PDF reports, and Data into a single gzipped file (maybee even a file that runs on it's own without any third party software other than a perl or python interpriter.) I don't get why so much effort seems to be directed at making MySQL user friendly instead. MySQL seems like complete overkill as an Access replacement. GNutrition is a good example of this problem.. Why in the world do you need a MySQL server for something so simple?

Re:Trail of Tears?

[salesgeek]

Political Correctness is a problem - sometimes. But in this case, it is at a level higher than PC. Perhaps because we never again want to see another people go through what our people have been through.

To a Native American like myself, to compare a great human tradgedy to your problems with an incomplete piece software is insulting. It trivializes the death of much of my people and the death of our entire way of life and culture. It's just a bad analogy.

C is a tool. The person programming the bomber is a toolmaker. The pilot is alas a soldier following orders, the orders come from a government, and that government exists at the privelidge of the people it serves.

Re:Trail of Tears?

[Reality Master 101]

it's important to understand that offense is in the eye of the offended, not the offender.

NO NO NO!! Sorry to come off so strongly, but this is completely and TOTALLY wrong.

You cannot define offense by who is offended, because you can ALWAYS find someone who is offended by ANYTHING.

The rational point of view is looking at the intent of what someone is saying. I'm particularly reminded of someone who was fired for using the word "niggardly" in a staff meeting! A black person was offended, even though the word has absolutely nothing to do with the word "nigger", and the person was forced to resign. Is this really the world you want where the idiots who get offended decide who gets lynched (word used intentionally)?