SQL-SELECT against View via ODBC?

[Steve Holden]

"""The eGenix.com Commercial License is covers commercial eGenix.com
software, notably the mxODBC package. Only private and non-commercial use is
free of charge. Usage of the software in commercial settings such as for
implementing in-house applications in/for companies or consulting work where
the software is used as tool requires a "Proof of Authorization" which can
be bought from eGenix.com. """

It's fairly clear that using it in-house requires a license.

"""Pricing is USD 75.00 for a 1-CPU license, USD 700.00 for the 10-CPU
license and USD 6,500.00 for the 100-CPU license. We also offer a site and
corporate licenses; please write to sales at egenix.com for quotes on these."""

But it isn't outrageous for a single CPU. Personally I'd like to see the
pricing scale down a little faster for quantities, but since I'm not (yet)
making commercial use of the software this isn't an issue.

Also note that you can use the product in a commercial environemnt for 30
days, for evaluation purposes, after which continued use requires a license.

Finally, note that I am not connected with eGenix, nor M-A Lemburg, and just
took this stuff from the appropriate web site pages.

regards
 Steve
--
http://www.holdenweb.com/


"Bill Seitz" <fluxent at yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:e2491a75.0107020921.3a773de2 at posting.google.com...
> I established that the "cause" of the problem is that one of the
> tables in my view has a Text field. It's the last field in the base
> table, so those queries always worked fine. When I built the view, it
> was no longer the last field, so the error reared it's ugly head.
>
> Does anyone know whether mxODBC has this bug? The person who led me on
> this discovery thought so, but wasn't too sure...
>
> Also, I'm not clear on what qualifies as "commercial" use triggering
> the non-free status of mxODBC? Is it limited to using the API within a
> product for sale, or does any internal use by a corporate trigger it?
>
> "Steve Holden" <sholden at holdenweb.com> wrote in message
news:<2l%Z6.22470$g4.740189 at e420r-atl2.usenetserver.com>...
> > The generic odbc driver (I presume you mean the one from the Windows
> > extensions) is known to be in need of maitnenance, and I understand from
a
> > recent posting that Mark Hammond expects to release a slightly updated
copy
> > (may even have done so by now).