>For those who wonder, NoSQL is a groundswell movement that advocates doing away with all the baggage connected to modern databases, even paring away field definitions, ACID and SQL itself in pursuit of fast delivery of simple needs. It sounds radical at first but it's a wildfire in the LAMP community. Facebook and Amazon are already heavily into it. Obviously this is relevant to MS's direction wrt SQL Server and the Andrew Brust mentioned here authored a paper on the MS website referencing NoSQL. I agreed with some of what he said. It might have been interesting to discuss further, but apparently not necessary.
>
>I wouldn't get too excited about NoSQL. It is not a very interesting topic.


Depends what you consider interesting.

I am just jumping into this thread, but the sentiment expressed in the quote at top, I think I expressed the same sentiment in an essay here:

http://fox.wikis.com/wc.dll?Wiki~DoesAnybodyRememberData~VFP

That is from 2004, and basically says, with today's computing technology, server-based systems have the benefit of making sure the software provider gets paid.

With MySql pretty much breaking that down, why isn't there a MyDBase?

Because people are sheep, and do what they're told. My advice in the 2004 article was to create an implementation of dbase that would run on native platforms.

I'm a little surprised that Android wants people to use SqlLite, but then... more people understand server-based database programming more than file based programs (which today are easily wrapped in web services or mobile apps).

Why is that?

Because a decade or two ago, the database software providers could make more money selling licenses to database servers than royalty free database products.

Add it up.