Welcome To The Home Of The Visual FoxPro Experts  
home. signup. forum. archives. search. google. articles. downloads. faq. members. weblogs. sponsors. rss.
RE: WHY ODBC AND NOT OLEDB?
 From: tushar
  Where is tushar?
 Panaji
 India
 tushar
 To: Andy Kramek
  Where is Andy Kramek?
 Westminster Circle, Akron
 Ohio - United States
 Andy Kramek
 Tags
Subject: RE: Why ODBC and Not OLEDB?
Thread ID: 110533 Message ID: 111090 # Views: 80 # Ratings: 0
Version: Visual FoxPro 9 Category: ODBC, ADO and OLEDB
Date: Wednesday, October 25, 2006 9:14:35 AM         
   

> It is not, and never has been, anything to do with Microsoft and they most certainly do not control it

ODBC is one of the very few open technology initiated by Microsoft
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ODBC says
Microsoft created ODBC by adapting the SQL Access Group CLI. It released ODBC 1.0 in September, 1992.

Since ODBC is an open standard, Microsoft does not have full control over it.

> It has nothing to do with platform and therefore your statement that it is
> >> To some degree, it is available on Linux and Unix platforms
> is incorrect. Since ODBC drivers are related only to the database to which they provide connectivity, the platform is involved only indirectly - if the database runs on Linux, then the ODBC driver for that database will work on Linux.

ODBC architecture consists of Request Brokers at the client end and Database Agents on the server which communicate over a port on the TCP/IP network. Initially Database Agents were not available on Platforms other than Windows. You can connect only to databases which have Database Agents compliant with ODBC. If you check php, you will see that it has different libraries to connect with different databases. These libraries would not have been necessary if there was ODBC on linux from the start.

Regards
Tushar



COMPLETE THREAD
Why ODBC and Not OLEDB? Posted by Dexter Carlit @ 10/19/2006 10:00:17 PM
RE: Why ODBC and Not OLEDB? Posted by Pete Sass @ 10/20/2006 2:44:12 PM
RE: Why ODBC and Not OLEDB? Posted by Dexter Carlit @ 10/20/2006 5:22:23 PM
RE: Why ODBC and Not OLEDB? Posted by Pete Sass @ 10/20/2006 7:30:36 PM
RE: Why ODBC and Not OLEDB? Posted by Ken Murphy @ 10/20/2006 7:37:19 PM
RE: Why ODBC and Not OLEDB? Posted by Bernard Bout @ 10/23/2006 10:38:51 AM
RE: Why ODBC and Not OLEDB? Posted by Ryan Lashway @ 12/4/2006 9:02:45 PM
RE: Why ODBC and Not OLEDB? Posted by Andy Kramek @ 10/23/2006 1:57:47 PM
RE: Why ODBC and Not OLEDB? Posted by Eric den Doop @ 10/23/2006 2:43:15 PM
RE: Why ODBC and Not OLEDB? Posted by Andy Kramek @ 10/24/2006 12:17:38 PM
RE: Why ODBC and Not OLEDB? Posted by Nilson Rishi @ 10/23/2006 3:32:12 PM
RE: Why ODBC and Not OLEDB? Posted by Ken Murphy @ 10/23/2006 6:37:52 PM
RE: Why ODBC and Not OLEDB? Posted by Nilson Rishi @ 10/24/2006 5:17:33 AM
RE: Why ODBC and Not OLEDB? Posted by Bernard Bout @ 10/24/2006 6:18:13 AM
RE: Why ODBC and Not OLEDB? Posted by Nilson Rishi @ 10/24/2006 8:31:50 AM
RE: Why ODBC and Not OLEDB? Posted by tushar @ 10/24/2006 7:22:47 AM
RE: Why ODBC and Not OLEDB? Posted by Nilson Rishi @ 10/24/2006 10:00:29 AM
RE: Why ODBC and Not OLEDB? Posted by Andy Kramek @ 10/24/2006 1:32:41 PM
RE: Why ODBC and Not OLEDB? Posted by tushar @ 10/25/2006 9:14:35 AM
RE: Why ODBC and Not OLEDB? Posted by Andy Kramek @ 10/25/2006 1:10:22 PM
RE: Why ODBC and Not OLEDB? Posted by Andy Kramek @ 10/24/2006 12:26:39 PM
RE: Why ODBC and Not OLEDB? Posted by Nilson Rishi @ 10/24/2006 1:03:04 PM
RE: Why ODBC and Not OLEDB? Posted by Andy Kramek @ 10/24/2006 1:21:46 PM
RE: Why ODBC and Not OLEDB? Posted by Pete Sass @ 10/24/2006 10:23:04 PM
RE: Why ODBC and Not OLEDB? Posted by Ken Murphy @ 10/25/2006 1:05:40 AM
RE: Why ODBC and Not OLEDB? Posted by Nilson Rishi @ 10/25/2006 4:31:57 AM
RE: Why ODBC and Not OLEDB? Posted by tushar @ 10/25/2006 9:28:28 AM
RE: Why ODBC and Not OLEDB? Posted by Andy Kramek @ 10/25/2006 3:04:41 PM
RE: Why ODBC and Not OLEDB? Posted by Pete Sass @ 10/25/2006 4:10:42 PM
RE: Why ODBC and Not OLEDB? Posted by Ken Murphy @ 10/25/2006 4:47:32 PM
RE: Why ODBC and Not OLEDB? Posted by Bernard Bout @ 10/25/2006 6:13:41 PM
RE: Why ODBC and Not OLEDB? Posted by Ken Murphy @ 10/25/2006 6:40:19 PM
RE: Why ODBC and Not OLEDB? Posted by Bernard Bout @ 10/26/2006 5:55:08 AM
RE: Why ODBC and Not OLEDB? Posted by Ken Murphy @ 10/26/2006 2:33:34 PM
RE: Why ODBC and Not OLEDB? Posted by Bernard Bout @ 10/26/2006 11:33:28 PM
RE: Why ODBC and Not OLEDB? Posted by Randy Smith @ 11/28/2006 8:59:48 PM
RE: Why ODBC and Not OLEDB? Posted by Andy Kramek @ 11/29/2006 1:15:09 PM
RE: Why ODBC and Not OLEDB? Posted by Randy Smith @ 11/29/2006 2:58:16 PM
RE: Why ODBC and Not OLEDB? Posted by Andy Kramek @ 11/29/2006 7:27:04 PM
RE: Why ODBC and Not OLEDB? Posted by Randy Smith @ 11/30/2006 11:14:13 PM
RE: Why ODBC and Not OLEDB? Posted by Andy Kramek @ 12/1/2006 1:00:35 PM
RE: Why ODBC and Not OLEDB? Posted by Randy Smith @ 12/1/2006 4:03:51 PM
RE: Why ODBC and Not OLEDB? Posted by Andy Kramek @ 12/1/2006 5:21:24 PM
RE: Why ODBC and Not OLEDB? Posted by Randy Smith @ 12/5/2006 1:25:04 AM
RE: Why ODBC and Not OLEDB? Posted by Boudewijn Lutgerink @ 10/27/2006 11:33:27 AM
RE: Why ODBC and Not OLEDB? Posted by Ken Murphy @ 10/27/2006 2:27:33 PM
RE: Why ODBC and Not OLEDB? Posted by Boudewijn Lutgerink @ 12/5/2006 12:55:03 PM
RE: Why ODBC and Not OLEDB? Posted by Ken Murphy @ 12/5/2006 3:12:45 PM