Gupta Technologies
company
Gupta Technologies, LLC was a software development company based in Menlo Park, San Mateo County, California. It was later renamed to Centura Software in the late 1990s and then to Halo Technology Holdings, Inc in 2005. It was acquired by Unify Corporation in 2006.
Its principal products are the SQL relational database management system SQLBase, a mobile HTML5 enterprise development system called TD Mobile and a rapid application development system called Team Developer (also known as SQLWindows). The company is considered as the provider of the first client/server relational database software that would run on personal computers (PC), rather than mini computers.
Company history
The company was founded in 1984 by Umang Gupta, a former vice president at Oracle Corporation. Gupta's first product was SQLBase, followed by SQLWindows, which combined SQLBase with a graphical user interface and programming language for creating business applications. SQLWindows was one of the first GUI development tools for Microsoft Windows. The company went public in 1993 (NASDAQ: GPTA).
The name of the company was changed to Centura Software in the late 1990s.
Begin with the source’s own compact description: “Gupta Technologies” is company. The dossier treats that line as a proposition to test through Gupta, Technologies and company, not as a finished interpretation.
Why this record matters
The phrase “company” supplies a clear boundary for inquiry. It also exposes the unanswered questions: who defined that boundary, when it became stable and which sources sit outside it.
The record creator and administrative purpose are central evidence, because official documentation reflects both action and institutional priorities. The source revision retrieved here is dated Dec 14, 2025. The linked authority identifier is Q362445. 1 of 1 selected statements include explicit references; 0 carry qualifiers and 0 use preferred rank. The first chronological checks are 2005, 2006, 1984 and 1993.
Institutional narratives can privilege the records that survived while minimizing voices that were never formally collected. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.
How to read it
Compare institutional narratives with records created by participants and affected communities. Dates and formal titles are useful anchors, but not substitutes for context.
- Event chronology
- Institutional context
- Locating named record creators
Contemporary correspondence, government or organizational records, oral histories and cited historical scholarship.
Three-step research path
- Establish the record: confirm the title “Gupta Technologies”, its source revision and the description used here.
- Expand the search: follow Gupta Technologies primary sources, Gupta Technologies archive and Gupta research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
- Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.
Questions for further research
- Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Gupta Technologies”?
- Who created the surviving record, and for what administrative purpose?
- Which voices are present, absent or mediated by the institution?
Search terms from this dossier
This entry incorporates text from “Gupta Technologies” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.