VisualWorks 2.0 vs. PowerBuilder 
Author Message
 VisualWorks 2.0 vs. PowerBuilder


Quote:

> I have been working on a development project using PowerBuilder 3.0a.
> I have just been given an evaluation copy of VisualWorks 2.0 to evaluate
> as a possible development tool rather than PowerBuilder.  Has anyone
> worked on both products?  I would appreciate any comments and comparisons.
> Thanks.....

I've used both.  If you're already familiar with PowerBlower and your
project is already underway, I'd stick with PB.  Especially if your app is
simple enough to do little more than hit away at a database all day.  If
you have a large project whose complexity is too great, in your opinion,
for a comparatively shallow tool like PB and you have plenty of time for
training, you might want to look into VW.

Andy



Mon, 28 Apr 1997 09:46:59 GMT  
 VisualWorks 2.0 vs. PowerBuilder

I certainly don't envy your position. Powerbuilder, aka: the Fastest Demo
in the West, is OK for quick development of typewriter applications (type
it in, read it out). Powerbuilder's paradigm (we are being really generous
here) is based on relational table views. Once you have to do something really
smart, you find yourself short of the weapons and ammo to build anything
to handle it.

It appears that your management has fallen for PP's infamous build-a-GUI-
in-a-minute ad. There is a special place in hell for people who write stuff
like that. Without object boot camp and a couple months experience you are not
going to have measurable success. VW and ST/V both have admirable UI
capabilities, but VW and ST/V are built upon the object model. PB makes
some outrageous claims about being object-oriented, but all they have going
for them is some trivial inherited attributes and behaviors for their
windows.

The question to ask back is what is the real problem they're trying to
solve. If they're looking for the magic bullet, they won't find it anywhere.
If they have real long-term development issues to deal with, then start off
with a good book on object analysis and design to understand what y'all
are really getting into and what the potential benifits are.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

writes:

Quote:
> Path:

ralph.vnet.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!agate!boulder!news.co
op.net!news.den.mmc.com!iplmail.orl.mmc.com!usenet
Quote:

> Newsgroups: comp.lang.Smalltalk
> Subject: VisualWorks 2.0 vs. PowerBuilder
> Date: 8 Nov 1994 22:18:39 GMT
> Organization: MMIS
> Lines: 6


> NNTP-Posting-Host: 141.240.34.164
> X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.90.5

> I have been working on a development project using PowerBuilder 3.0a.
> I have just been given an evaluation copy of VisualWorks 2.0 to evaluate
> as a possible development tool rather than PowerBuilder.  Has anyone
> worked on both products?  I would appreciate any comments and comparisons.
> Thanks.....



Mon, 28 Apr 1997 04:15:35 GMT  
 VisualWorks 2.0 vs. PowerBuilder
I have been working on a development project using PowerBuilder 3.0a.
I have just been given an evaluation copy of VisualWorks 2.0 to evaluate
as a possible development tool rather than PowerBuilder.  Has anyone
worked on both products?  I would appreciate any comments and comparisons.
Thanks.....


Sun, 27 Apr 1997 06:18:39 GMT  
 VisualWorks 2.0 vs. PowerBuilder

Quote:
(Anita Mangan) writes:
> I have been working on a development project using PowerBuilder 3.0a.
> I have just been given an evaluation copy of VisualWorks 2.0 to evaluate
> as a possible development tool rather than PowerBuilder.  Has anyone
> worked on both products?  I would appreciate any comments and

comparisons.

I have to agree that this is not an enviable position to be in.  I've been
working in VisualWorks for about a year (starting with 1.0 and moving to
2.0), and I still think that it is one of the more immature business
products that I have ever seen.  This is ignoring the fact that ParcPlace,
the company, has proven to be extremely hard (and expensive) to work with.
 (Just check out their run time and maintenance / upgrade policies.)

PowerBuilder, on the other hand, is relatively mature for what it does,
but that role is limited to database front ends with relatively little
intelligence.  The idea that it is "object-oriented" is a joke.  Just try
to impliment even a moderately complex business model with PBs tools, and
you'll see what I mean.

All in all, it depends on the complexity of the problem domain and the
amount of lower level work your willing to do.  Smalltalk (VisualWorks) is
much better at handling complexity, while PowerBuilder is much more mature
as a business tool.  However, I highly recommend that you look at IBM's
VisualAge and its visual development environment as an alternative.  The
latest version has fixed much of the past performance problems, has many
business components, and the tool feels much more mature than VisualWorks.
 Kind of the best of both worlds ("best" being a relative term :) ).

Good luck!

James



Wed, 30 Apr 1997 15:50:06 GMT  
 VisualWorks 2.0 vs. PowerBuilder

Quote:

>I have been working on a development project using PowerBuilder 3.0a.
>I have just been given an evaluation copy of VisualWorks 2.0 to evaluate
>as a possible development tool rather than PowerBuilder.  Has anyone
>worked on both products?  I would appreciate any comments and comparisons.
>Thanks.....

Apples and oranges.  Both are good products, but for different projects.
While PowerBuilder (PB) supports inheritance of non-visual objects, if
you are using PB datawindows, then you are dealing with database rows and
columns, not objects.  Consequently, if you are using datawindows, you are
developing a two layer application (view layer and database layer).  If you
use non-visual objects in PB, then you aren't using the datawindow.  And if
you aren't using the datawindow, then you shouldn't be using PB, because
that is its strength.  So, PB is good at developing workgroup client-server
apps where performance and reuse are not key issues.  (PB can be quite slow.)

With smalltalk, you deal with objects, so you can develop multi-layer
applications (e.g., model, view, controller, access, etc.).  The result is an
application which can be changed much more easily.

Smalltalk has a bigger learning curve.  While the language syntax is simple,
the class libraries are large and it takes a while to really start
thinking in objects.  Some people never make the transition.  PB, on the other
hand, is really just Basic.

Smalltalk is much more powerful and flexible, but it requires a bigger
investment in training and time.



Thu, 01 May 1997 09:56:30 GMT  
 
 [ 5 post ] 

 Relevant Pages 

1. VisualWorks 2.0 vs VisualWorks 2.5

2. (VW) Powerbuilder vs. Visualworks

3. (VW) Powerbuilder vs. Visualworks

4. Delphi 2.0 vs. Powerbuilder 5.0

5. Clarion VS PowerBuilder VS FoxPro

6. VisualWorks Widgets for VisualWorks 2.0 and 2.5

7. VisualKit 1.5 for VisualWorks 2.0 or VisualWorks 2.5

8. 1.5.2 vs 1.6 vs 2.0 vs godzilla

9. Object Studio vs VisualWorks vs VisualAge

10. Powerbuilder vs. Smalltalk

11. Smalltalk vs. PowerBuilder

12. Powerbuilder 5.0 vs. Smalltalk

 

 
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software