Without pausing for breath after its recent exertions, Sybase Inc now also appears to be close to going public about a data storage strategy which would deliver it into the object world. Although it is not admitting publicly that work is underway, all indications are that Sybase is set to build itself an object model that could be used alongside its relational architecture and take advantage of the same front-end development environments. It is not clear whether it is separate from the plans alluded to by Sybase founder Robert Epstein in his DB Expo keynote address the other day, to wrap SQL Server data up in object bundles, or whether it involves the Ilog SA C++ technology we have previously reported on (CI No 2,450). If it cannot develop the thing, then it will have to go to the market and buy the technology as it has done for front-end tools. Sybase has swallowed the notion that users of future object paradigms will want to use relational and object storage models, or at least to have that choice. Even if it is not sure about the viability of what is likely to be offered from the object-oriented world – it says the only stuff it is has got time for at the moment is Steve Jobs’ NeXTstep, from which SQL Server can already be accessed – it knows it must play there. Closer to home, Sybase has divulged a few more snippets on its current strategy. It says we should expect some of the object enabling-type features, functions, optimising technologies and C++ class libraries that were being prepared for the now defunct Build Momentum application development tool set to find homes in the soon-to-be-acquired PowerBuilder Windows development tool. Enterprise Momentum, the component-level object tool set, remains unchanged for now. However, Sybase is looking at whether to maintain what are currently two very distinct repositories – for PowerBuilder and Enterprise Momentum – or to try to merge them into a single code base. It is cautious of saying too much about its future relational architecture, believing that competitors learned too much about it at the last iteration. As an aside, it observes it has been using the System 11 tag so much of late that it will retain the name for its next product set.
