Just interested really to find out others views on what are the "To Die For" features or "Icing on the Cake" that really makes your own database system(s) great?

Considering this is a whole forum on databases, the content is a little sparse.

If we share a few ideas they could go a long way in developing excellence.

I suppose a flippant answer might be:- it is always nice when they actually work!

Like you, I have seen a fair number of (expensive) proprietary equipment database systems that require a lot of "nursing" in order to become anything like efficient. At one place I know, a senior biomed* is employed full-time to run the "system". Nice work if you can get it, I suppose, but surely not a cost-effective solution.

Regarding the "wish list" ... again as you know, that may well vary considerably from site to site. A "one size fits all" solution is both difficult to achieve, and perhaps also less than ideal anyway.

As I've said before, a good system needs to be highly configurable in order to suit specific needs.

Regarding collaboration, we've tried that a few times on here before, but have yet to produce anything of lasting value. Frankly, I feel that (to many) the whole idea of biomed databases may have become "old hat".

* Just to be clear, I'm not talking about Lancaster!

Geoff, thanks for the sentiments! I hope we can stir a little response. I like to hope that biomeds have unique needs and therefore should not come under shadow of estates maintenance packages.

I will add my 2p worth from the top of my head:-

- Geenrate Letters & E-mail functionality using word templates
- Hard access to my data through msaccess/crystal etc
- Export to excel from various views
- Contract management functions - With attach documents
- In fact attach documentation or text comments to everything - Assets, Models, Equipment Types - Anything that will help in the future.

What features of your systems do you think are not mirrored in others?

There are quite a few CMMS companies out there, so I decided to put specifications together for BME, then with the assistance (not yet delivered) of the 'estates' people there specifications will be added, contracts, purchasing, projects etc. then we will forward these to the various companies to see if their software can be modified to our requirements instead of learning a whole new system. The current system developed by IT absolutely SUCKS!!

As I keep saying, Neil ... do it yourself (in-house)!

@Joe: yes (again as I may have mentioned before) ... a "bare bones" (but robust) database, filled with accurate and up-to-date information, but expandable as (when or if) necessary, and with all the hooks in place to be able to link here, there, and everywhere!

Geoff, IT control the network and the computers, therefore I have to get something for the whole of maintenance, politics will not allow us to submit our own as we cannot make IT look stupid and inept.

Yes, Mate. I hear you.

My stuff already does basic exporting (to .dbf, .txt, .xls, etc.) and importing (but only to *CSV files for the importing routines). As well as being able to **link (where appropriate - eg, service manuals in .pdf) to other documents, as long as these are accessible in some way to the host computer being used ... plus a number of "features" (not to mention bugs) rarely found in "off the shelf" packages.

I reckon I'm more or less at the end of the road now as far as actual nuts and bolts coding is concerned. But cosmetic "improvements" aside (and I'm really more interested in functionality), an ability to output via templates to Word may well be worth a visit.

Sad chap that I am, I hope to spend time over the Christmas / New Year / Midwinter Feast / Holiday Season / Office Parties / Winterfest / Ground to a Halt Fortnight / Multi-Faith Rest Period / Hibernation / Bank Holidays (whatever) happily coding away. If anyone wants (needs) my latest stuff (and until I get Huw to post the latest revision in the Downloads section), feel free to get in touch.

Meanwhile, and in regards to Joe's original question(s) at the top of this thread ... does anyone else want to say a few words?
______________

* Which is probably sufficient, I reckon, as any external software package worth its salt can usually send output to CSV text files.

** Using either Hyperlinks (eg, to URL's) or the format file:///c:/manuals/pumps/manual.doc as appropriate.

Your comment about Word Templates has reminded me about Surefire, Joe. As they say, there's nothing new under the sun. And what was wrong with DOS, anyway?

My stuff already does a rudimentary filtering of (up to *five) database fields, selectable by the user, and directing them to text output. So, if you have a couple of your nice Word Templates that you could bung my way as examples to have a play with, I might look into having a go.

Meanwhile, Crystal Reports looks like **"spending money" to me! I haven't had a go with Crystal for many years. Do current versions accept input from Good Old .dbf files?
__________

* At "design time", I reckoned that five fields was enough for most needs (especially considering that many pre-formatted reports are also available within the system), but more could be added if need be.

** As in ... at least £ 400 plus!

Hi Joe,

Long time since we spoke (9fd wksp).
Currently we use Access 2003 tables, but our trust is currently in the process of getting Backtraq to use as a database system.
How reliable or effective it will be will be determined over the next few months.
I remember the system we had at Haslar that you and Steve developed but that required one of you to keep overhauling it on a frequent basis.