In my own experience, deploying applications on traditional relational databases is a pain. Most of the applications I have worked on were applications for State government. The applications get heavily tied to the database, requiring the database to be populated to test the logic. The table structures are unnecessarily convoluted. These applications process client data (eligibility, certifications, enrollment) sometimes in the context of state data.
I have built solutions that allow me to collect data from running applications, and later inject data from these collected scenarios into the business logic for testing and debugging.
All of this to say that any objective analysis of these systems would reveal no need for a relational database. In fact, imposing the relational transaction model onto these applications is clearly detrimental to the development of these systems, the cost of these systems, the testability of these systems (though this isn't really the fault of the database technology itself), and the performance of these systems.
We should be processing the information through an application designed solely according to the needs of the application, and then selective pushing data to a data warehouse for reporting (which can certainly be a relational database).
It is almost like Ford claiming all your transportation needs require a truck, and forcing all supermarkets to accommodate driving trucks up and down the grocery aisles...
Nobody would say you don't need trucks. But the fact that trucks are sometimes needed isn't proof you should always use a truck.
Right. Because the patent office would never allow a patent on toast.
Patent number: 6080436
Filing date: Jun 14, 1999
Issue date: Jun 27, 2000
What is claimed is:
1. A method of refreshing bread products, comprising:
a) placing a bread product in an oven having at least one heating element,
b) setting the temperature of the heating elements between 2500 F. and 4500 F., and
c) ceasing exposure of the bread product to the at least one heating element after a period of 3 sec. to 90 sec.
2. The method of claim 1 including the step of exposing the bread product to electromagnetic radiation in the wavelength range between 1.2 and 3.4 microns.
3. The method of claim 1 including the step of selecting said bread products from rolls, muffin, buns and bagels.
I don't know. I think everyone has to figure out how to make a buck in this world, and inventors that don't produce any products anyone wants should be (in a fair world) out of luck.
Ethically, I think you have to do more than just file paperwork and leverage the government to extract money from others. It might be legal to tax people producing products, but it isn't moral or ethical.
Besides, it isn't the inventors (generally) who troll. The patents are sold to lawyers (like Intellectual Ventures) that troll, and they are the inventors on very few of the patents they take to court.
Maybe actual inventors can sue even if they don't have a product? I see no advantage in this, but I doubt this group is big enough to matter either.
Anyone that wants to actually ship a product is aided by removing the fear of patent lawsuits.
If someone wants to sit around and think up ideas, and earn license money from those ideas, well then they need patents. Producing products is just different than thinking up ideas and filing broad patents and suing people that actually produce products.
Are you seriously defending the billions that the patent system costs our economic system with the idea that it protects "dozens" of individuals and small businesses?
Seriously, if you stack up the number of patent lawsuits and license fees extorted by IBM, TI, Microsoft, and others against small tech firms, the damage to small business by the patent system is overwhelmingly larger than the benefit some small businesses might gain from it.
I have built solutions that allow me to collect data from running applications, and later inject data from these collected scenarios into the business logic for testing and debugging.
All of this to say that any objective analysis of these systems would reveal no need for a relational database. In fact, imposing the relational transaction model onto these applications is clearly detrimental to the development of these systems, the cost of these systems, the testability of these systems (though this isn't really the fault of the database technology itself), and the performance of these systems.
We should be processing the information through an application designed solely according to the needs of the application, and then selective pushing data to a data warehouse for reporting (which can certainly be a relational database).
It is almost like Ford claiming all your transportation needs require a truck, and forcing all supermarkets to accommodate driving trucks up and down the grocery aisles...
Nobody would say you don't need trucks. But the fact that trucks are sometimes needed isn't proof you should always use a truck.