What: SQLiteStudio
Where: http://sqlitestudio.one.pl/ (only viewable in browsers with Javascript enabled)
Description: cross-platform sqlite database manager.
Supports SQLite 3.x, with support of SQLite 2.x, RealSQL, and others
planned.
Currently tested on Linux and Windows.
Open source (GPL licence).
Currently at version 1.0.0.
Updated: 05/2008
Contact: See web siteLarry Smith I regret putting it so harshly, but the above statement "Open Source BUT..." means that it is NOT Open Source. "Open Source" has a precise meaning, and the use of the term should be governed by the Open Source Initiative [L1 ], and should not be used willy-nilly for what amounts to a source-available proprietary product. True open source means commercial usage is okay, modification is okay and redistribution is okay. The above statement denies all of these and is therefore NOT "Open Source." You should read [L2 ] before you use the term again.
Kevin Walzer For better or worse, the OSI does not have a trademark on the phrase "Open Source." So there is nothing to prevent anyone from using the term as they see fit.
LV I know that I always bristle when I see people create their own meanings for terms like freeware or public domain . And when OSI created a definition of open source , I wasn't really certain that it was a good idea - seemed to me that it would have been better to come up with a new term and leave the old, vague, term to continue to have the wide variety of meanings that it had grown to have.
Googie In my understeanding "open source" is just a description of releasing model. It means that sources are open to read and eventually to modify, but nothing more. I don't interprete it and don't use it as filled with whole ideology. Anyway, I agree that writing it using uppercased-words makes it somehow related to "Open Source" in OSI understeanding. I didn't write it like this in here, on this page (some else did), so I just fixed it at this moment.
Googie ...and one more thing. I've read some interview with Richard Stallman not so long ago. He pointed out difference between Free Software [L3 ] and Open Source. There is a big difference. So:
(...) commercial usage is okay, modification is okay and redistribution is okay.
is much closer to Free Software, than an Open Source. That's just a meaningless riff, because I don't force my application to be OSI Open Source compatible.
KJN It appears that the product is available with a source code license (as UNIX was in days gone by). That does not imply that the license is open-source,
AET 26jul07
Just tried it on XP. Very nice indeed. Nice, uncluttered interface, and intuitive to use. Compliments on your web site, too.
There doesn't seem to be an option to open an existing database, or am I missing something? When I first started the only option under the File menu was "New Database".
JAG - I agree that it's a bit confusing, but go ahead and select "New Database". In the dialog that opens, provide a name for your database (just to represent it in the tree), then select the "Choose existing database" button to browse for your existing file.
Googie 1 Sep 2007 "New Database" is going to be changed to "Add database" in next release. I think it's less confusing.
Bryan Oakley for the sake of discussion... "Add database" is still confusing to me. I don't want to add my database to some other database (?), I simply want to open it and browse around. Does "Add" mean "Add to the GUI"? That's a bit confusing. Maybe it's because I've not used similar products in the past. Also, if I open a database and click on a table name on the left, nothing seems to happen. It's not clear what purpose there is in single-clicking on a table on the left.
Those quibbles aside, it's a pretty nice GUI. I like your attention to detail -- the "Did you know that..." and the license dialogs are very professional looking, as is the toolbar.
As a final comment -- it's not clear if changes to a database are immediate or not. I'm afraid to try something like "edit table" because it's not clear whether or not that's a reversible action. Do I get to play around with an in-memory version of the database without actually altering the live database, or do actions directly affect the underlying database? Put more succinctly, do I have to "commit" or "save" changes for them to take effect?
Charlie, Sunday October 19th 2008. If the goal of this program is the write yet another piece of software for programmers, one among zillions, then it has absolutely no interest (at least as far as I'm concerned). But if the purpose is to write a piece of software for the general public, a public domain equivalent of Access then it is a very worthwile initiative. Unfortunately, the way the program presents itself is not at all general user friendly as of now (version 1.0.0). In the first place, the average user thinks in terms of Database/Fields and not in terms of tables.
The simple steps to create a database are:
1) Create a database (or a file) 2) Add Fields 3) Add data 4) Save
The view most people are confortable with is table view and not record view.
A lot of care has to be given to the interface if Pawel ever dreams of providing a public domain answer to Access. But if he wants to cater to programmers as most programmers on internet do, then his Studio will be limited to programming circles, it won't move to the main stream and it will be stuck in one place. Too bad.