Ashton-Tate remains mum on plans for dBASE.

Ashton-Tate remains mum on plans for dBASE

Troubled computer program is key to company's fate

After five months of new testing to improve its embattled dBASE IV database management program, officials of Torrance-based Ashton-Tate Corp. still won't say when a new version of the computer software program will be released.

"In a couple of weeks, we might be able to give you more information," said spokeswoman Delia Fernandez. "All we can say is we think we're close."

Anxiously awaiting the new version are financial analysts, shareholders, and a dBASE community of more than 1,000 software companies that are licensed by Ashton-Tate to create and sell software products that supplement dBASE programs.

"From what I understand, the testing is going well," said analyst Thomas A. Galvin of New York-based Smith Barney, Harris Upham & Co. "But there's still work to be done in terms of improving the product."

Others predicted that the new product, called dBASE IV, Version 1.1, will be ready for mass marketing in June.

The Torrance-based computer software company built its reputation and revenues on its dBASE products. In nine years, its profits grew to $47.8 million on revenues of $307 million for the year ended Jan. 31, 1989. But the latest October, 1988 update of its dBASE program, dBASE IV, was reportedly full of "bugs" or errors, and sales for the product fell.

Ashton-Tate then suffered losses of $19.8 million and $19.4 million, respectively, for the quarters ended June 30 and Sept. 30, 1989. For the fourth quarter ended Dec. 30, the company reported a loss of $1 million on revenues of $62 million.

Analyst David Bayer of Montgomery Securities in San Francisco predicts the company will break even in the first quarter on revenues of about $60 million. Ashton-Tate stock last week was trading at $12.750, compared with its high of $24 in the past year.

In October the company began new, widespread testing of the 1.1 version of dBASE IV. The new testing technique, said Ashton-Tate project manager Joe Budge, is closer to how other high-tech companies test their products.

The dBASE IV software, with the capability of processing up to 10 lists at a time, had two main features: the standard dBASE programming language designed for managing lists, and a new "interactive user interface" that includes the ability for the software to write other software.

But users found dBASE IV was too slow and had other faults.

"The main issues we found were about the performance . . . getting acceptable speed. . .," said Budge. "After that, there are a number of specific issues -- everyone's got their hot button, but none of which really bubbles up to the top."

The dBASE IV program was by far the largest and most complex software ever created by Ashton-Tate, explained Fernandez. It has 500,000 lines of programming vs. only 40,000 lines for the original dBASE product, dBASE II.

"Another piece of software with the same numbers of lines of codes is the on-board software of the NASA space shuttle," said Fernandez. ". . . We feel strongly that dBASE IV was a good program, an award-winning product and we're extremely proud of it."

But analyst Bayer disagreed.

"It's a complicated program -- that's true," he said. "But Lotus got 1-2-3 out the door without any major flaws the first time; a mass-merchandise product can be complicated and still be released in clean version. The bottom line was there was a release out the door that shouldn't have happened."

In June, company shareholders filed a federal class action lawsuit after the stock price fell $5. The suit alleges the company from February to June misrepresented its financial situation to the investment community.

"We believe they knew early on that the product [dBASE IV] was fatally flawed," said Edward Gergosian of the San Diego law firm Barrack, Roso & Bacine, one of the law firms representing the shareholders. "They said they had thoroughly tested dBASE IV, but they didn't disclose what they had or hadn't done with testing. It was not ready like other software products are ready. . . .If they had told the market they put it out before certain types of procedures had taken place, we wouldn't have a complaint."

Ashton-Tate General Counsel Stanley Witkow said the defense will cite unforeseen changes in market conditions affected software sales -- not negligent procedures by management -- as a reason for softened sales.

The new testing for Version 1.1, added Fernandez, began only five months after dBASE IV was released. In February 1989, she said, the company assembled a group of 16 "design partners" -- dBASE programming experts from companies other than Ashton-Tate -- to review dBASE IV, make comments on the program and make suggestions for Version 1.1.

In June, the design partners were given a review draft of Version 1.1 and in October, Ashton-Tate began "beta" testing of Version 1.1. Beta testers are companies that normally used the product during operations and who also send electronic mail messages to Ashton-Tate, Fernandez said.

The new beta testing, Budge said, is improved.

Original testing for dBASE IV involved in-house pre-testing, explained Budge. Then, the product went to "beta" testers, or companies that tested it by using it normally during the course of operations.

For Version 1.1, Ashton-Tate employed testing strategies along the lines of those used by the mini-mainframe industry, said Budge.

There was more automated in-house testing -- having computer programs run some 50,000 different test cases.

"We set up a bank of [personal computers] run by other computers," to perform the tests, Budge said.

The company greatly increased the number of beta testers -- keeping their identities secret and swearing them to secrecy--and the testers helped to refine the product

Budge said the company gradually increased the number of test sites, which he said now number 1,100 worldwide.

Analysts noted that the success of dBASE IV, Version 1.1 will reflect on Chairman and CEO Edward Esber, a Harvard MBA who was brought into the then start-up company six years ago to give it more structure.

Said analyst Bayer: "What happened, happened; you got to go forward. What they're doing now is the right thing; they're doing what they should be doing."