Dabble DB is Fantastic April 20, 2006

Posted by Todd Zeigler in Technology, Tools, Web 2.0

A month ago I read a review of Dabble DB on Techcrunch and I was immediately intrigued by the concept of a collaborative, Web 2.0 database program. I’ve been using Microsoft Access to maintain assorted lists for years, and have also been involved in the development of a number of custom online databases.

These experiences have made me think there has got to be a better way to do this stuff.

So I was excited yesterday when I was given access to a Beta version of Dabble DB after being on the waiting list for awhile. Generally speaking, I love it. Below is a breakdown of things I like, things I think are missing, and additional functionality I’d like to see down the road.

Things I Like

(1) Collaboration. I can share the databases I create with friends and colleagues and update the database collaboratively online. This process is much better than working from an offline Access db that everyone forgets the location of, can’t access when on the road, etc. And it’s more flexible/easy to update than a custom online database.

(2) Simple Data Importation Process. You can import data simply by selecting and copying it onto your clipboard instead of uploading a CSV file. For me, this was a much easier process than the traditional “attach, upload, find mistakes, repeat” cycle most programs use for data importation.

(3) Easy data entry. Dabble DB automatically creates a simple data entry form that you use to enter your data. For most people this will be easier than entering data through Access, although I can see it being somewhat slower for big data entry projects.

(4) Filters > Queries. Dabble DB uses a filter system that is much easier to use than the query tools in Access. You just enter the keyword/value in a filter box and go from there.

(5) Column Editing Tools. When viewing data, you can simply click on a column header to sort or filter results by that column, or reconfigure the data type. It’s really simple and intuitive.

Things That Are Missing

By missing, I mean features in Microsoft Access that I find value in and don’t see on Dabble DB.

(1) Table Relationships. I don’t see a way to relate one table to another with a primary key. This is very useful for more complexes databases.

(2) Advanced Queries. If you are doing advanced queries in Access sometimes you have to abandon their query tool and write a manual SQL query (or beg a programmer to do it for you). Be interesting to a see a similar tool on Dabble DB for advanced users.

Update: In the post comments, Avi Bryant of Dabble DB pointed me to a video that shows how to establish relationships between tables. He also says I won’t need to use SQl queries in Dabble DB, because, it’s, well, logical. He also points out that I may be too stuck in my Access thinking process to see how to do it in Dabble DB. Cool. I need to play with it a bit to see if it does what I need, but it looks promising.

Things I’d Like to See

(1) Website Forms. It would be fantastic if Dabble DB would give you some HTML code you could stick on your website and have the responses dumped directly into Dabble DB. I know form creation tools exist already, but having onel tied to a program like Dabble DB is really what is needed.

(2) Data Publication. The system offers a variety of ways to export data. What I’d like to see is a better way for me to automatically publish my data from Dabble DB to a website (table view, XML, etc.).

I think Dabble DB is a great tool and I’m sure it will get even better over time. I’d encourage you to check it out if you need to collaboratively develop and update a database.

Share

Trackbacks/Pings

Comments

  1. Vote -1 Vote +1Avi Bryant - April 20th, 2006 at 5:20 pm

    Todd, thanks for the post. We do actually support relationships between tables – that’s a major advantage of using databases over spreadsheets. We don’t require the user to know anything about primary keys to establish the relationships, however. The best thing is probably to watch our 7 minute demo video – there’s a relationship created between the Session table and the Person table: http://dabbledb.com/utr .

    For advanced queries, I’d love some examples of queries that you can’t do now but would like to be able to.

    Website forms is a feature we’d definitely like to have. We’re piloting an initial version of this with some users but haven’t gotten it to the point of releasing it more generally yet.

    For data publication, you might be interested in the JSON export that we just added – if you save a view and go to the exports page, you can get a URL which can be used to load data from Dabble into another website’s DOM. I’ll post more on this when we have some example uses fleshed out.

    Thanks again for taking the time to post, your feedback is very much appreciated.

  2. Vote -1 Vote +1Todd Zeigler - April 21st, 2006 at 8:34 am

    Avi,

    I took a look and I do see the relationship feature now. Sorry for missing it. I’ll update the piece. Below is the kind of scenario I am talking about:

    Say I have one Access table that contains contact info for customers. I have another table with orders from the customers (Email, Date, Item, Quantity, etc.). The two tables are tied together by the email address. In the order table a single email address could have multiple orders (so rows). Once a relationship between the tables is established, I want to be able to run searches on both tables and see merged results. So I might run a query on orders from people in TX that were for more than $10 after December 1, 2005.

    In Access, sometimes you have to resort to a SQL query to accomplish this. It wasn’t immediately evident to me in Dabble how I would do something like this, but I need to spend more time looking at it.

    Regardless, I love Dabble.

    Todd

  3. Vote -1 Vote +1Andrew Catton - April 21st, 2006 at 8:47 pm

    Hi Todd,

    What I would do is have a Customer category (table) with contact information fields, and an Order category with fields for Date, Item, Quantity, Amount and Customer (a “Link to Entry” field of category Customer).

    To get the results you want, I would then start with a view of all the Orders. I would then add a column for Amount, and use the column header control to add a filter, which I would set at >10. I would then add a column for Customer, and again using the column header control, add a “derived field” column for “Customer -> State”. I would then add a filter for this derived field the same way I added the Amount filter, with value “TX”. All done.

    A few important things to note here:

    * Dabble doesn’t make you think about primary or foreign keys for relations — you don’t need to have that shared Email field, you can just explicitly have a Customer field on Order.

    * The query is built up incrementally, giving you useful intermediate results along the way. This can make querying a much more accessible thing to do than it would be with something like SQL.

    We’re trying to make Dabble powerful, yet leave behind a lot of what traditional relational databases force you think about. For those who don’t know what a foreign key is, this often comes pretty easily. For those used to jumping through RDBMS hoops, there can sometimes be a tendency to try to make things harder than they need to be, but they’re usually quite happy to see how simple it can be.

    Cheers, Andrew

  4. Vote -1 Vote +1Todd Zeigler - April 22nd, 2006 at 12:56 am

    Andrew/Avi,

    I’ll give it a go and report any bugs we find.
    Todd

About this blog

The Bivings Report (TBR) is a source of news, insight, research, analysis and conversation on web-based communications and its increasingly powerful role in the economy, politics and society. TBR content is created, posted and managed by internet strategists, media/communications analysts, web developers, designers and programmers, all of whom are employees of The Bivings Group.



Email Subscription

Delivered by FeedBurner

Search Site


Archives


Most Popular


Authors


Tags