Talk:Pervasive Software

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

United States: Austin Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Texas - Austin (assessed as Low-importance). Computing: Software Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Software (assessed as Low-importance).

Pervasive was once based in Texas and own by a friendly staff that wouldn't nickel and dime their customer over petty small stuff. Now that Actian corp has purchased Pervasive this aspect of the company is gone. They sell licenses in blocks where you must purchase more licenses than you even need in order to cover the exact number you need. Also, now they won't even talk to you about any issue without charging: the fault of an issue is always the customer's.

They paid big money to purchase Pervasive and they are dead set on milking every dime they can, leveraging the dependence that existing customers have on Pervasive to make big profits. A once great product is now own by greedy corporate exploitors. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.95.212.98 (talk) 14:06, 29 August 2014 (UTC)Reply

The version of the article that was here was such a blatant example of spam it could have been lifted right from the company's own website, so I've reverted the article to the last less spam-y version I could find and removed some of the un-needed external links. It was that or tag the entire article as a speedy delete candidate for the spam. TurningWork (talk) 09:08, 17 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

Also added unreferenced and COI tags, COI based on edits by Ckauffman pvsw (talk), pvsw = Pervasive Software presumably, and by Mclellancreative (talk) because thier edit summaries refer to "client request" presumably meaning they're an advertising firm working for pervasive. TurningWork (talk) 09:47, 17 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

Yes, belated thanks. However, four years later that editor seems long gone and article has been de-spammed enough we can remove the tags. So I will do that. W Nowicki (talk) 23:59, 22 November 2013 (UTC)Reply

Oddly it seems Pervasive DataRush redirects here now, as it has since 2008. However I stumbled across the article DataRush Technology created in 2009, which has a redirect from Pervasive DataRush Technology from a move in 2011. That one has only one citation, and a bunch of HOWTO in it that does not belong in Wikipedia. It was created by single-purpose account Special:Contributions/Rgmadzem who has not edited after that for four and half years. Propose merging into single article with citations and in neutral non-promotional tone. W Nowicki (talk) 00:38, 23 November 2013 (UTC)Reply

Following up, there seem to be separate articles on Pervasive PSQL, Btrieve and Architecture of Btrieve with a bunch of overlap. But they might be easier to stand alone. At least for now; most of the work on Btrieve is from several years ago, when evidently standards for citations were lower, since much of it is uncited. A better question is what to do about Actian. Maybe spin off a new article for that if there are enough sources. W Nowicki (talk) 19:44, 24 November 2013 (UTC)Reply

I redirected DataRush Technology there. There was nothing worth keeping from that advertorial that wasn't already in this article. QVVERTYVS (hm?) 12:45, 26 January 2016 (UTC)Reply