Comparing Apples 
Author Message
 Comparing Apples


   > .. if portability is your big thing then forget APL.
One of the nicest things about APL is the fact that you can allow yourself
to forget about the operating system and concentrate on the problem at hand.
The problems are you sometimes have to communicate with the operating system
so the portability in such applications go out the window.

   >  J is not inexpensive when you look at it from the point of
   > view of the cost of the Professional Version of J.  That's
   > about 400$. So while this is inexpensive compared to Manugistics
   > or Dyalog APL it is not compared to APL2 which, with the same
   > features as J, sells for 190$. (Of course you have to buy into
   > OS/2.)
This is a typical case of comparing apples and oranges. You can always set
up a case that proves the point you want by mixing the variables shoving the
statistic you
want to stand out and leave out what is not supporting your point.

The comparison comes out completely different if you state

APL2 is not inexpensive if you think about having to buy into OS/2 which for
most people is unthinkable.

J you can get for free and runs on most peoples platforms and less expensive
than that you can not get.
Obviously the people developing J need to live so they have left out a few
very interesting features which you get for 40$ in the personal edition.
The form editor (Visual J), ODBC to mention a few.
The professional system gives you the option to sell your applications using
all J facilities to anyone without paying any royalties so of course it is a
bit more expensive.

   >  Hum... Don't most IBM mainframes come with APL2?
The best thing about the IBM mainframes is of course APL2
Unfortunately the mainframes are not very cheep

  >  APL2 has less terse and more complete documentation than J :
That is absolutely true and the need for more documentation about J should
be a challenge to anyone.

    > For one thing, K. Iversons books focus too much on clever one
    > liners, not on how to develop real applications.
You can not expect him to solve all the problems in the world. It usually
takes me about 10 years to understand what Ken is talking about.
When I saw him and Jim fight about APL2 on the stage in Heidelberg 1982 I
did not have a clue what they were arguing about.
10 years later after using APL2 all those years and then SAX for years then
I finally understood what they had been arguing about and that Ken was
right.
J is a follow on to SAX and is even better.

      >  There is not DDE dialog example for communicating with Excel ;
You may have missed the book I got when I bought J
It had an excellent example communicating with Excel

    >  APL2 has better internet support than J :
There are a bit more people still using APL2
If they do not come out with a Windows 95 product soon that may change
though

    > APL2 has better marketing and a wider programming audience.
I could not agree with you more but given this uneven advantage is it not
funny that we are even thinking about comparing the two ?

   >    At APLBUG meetings there are almost always
    >  more APLers than Jers.
I have to say that I amazed that there already is a divide so people have to
either be Jers or APLers.
I consider myself APLer even if I favor J for obvious reasons.

I have nothing against APL2 except it does not support Windows 95 and the
characterset which has lost me many potential customers in the past.

/Gosi



Wed, 28 Jan 1998 03:00:00 GMT  
 
 [ 1 post ] 

 Relevant Pages 

1. LOGO-L> Apple Logo - for Apple IIe

2. Comparing file objects: what is compared?

3. Apple's "Programming In Apple Dylan.pdf"

4. Apple's "Programming In Apple Dylan.pdf"

5. Is Apple Dylan Tech Release available from Apple Singapore?

6. Apple solves ALL problems! (was: Re: Apple Solves the Halting Problem!)

7. Rendevouz (Apple) lib?

8. APL for APPLE II

9. Device Driver: from Apple III BASIC to IBM BASIC

10. I-APL for Apple?

11. I-APL for Apple //??

12. Apple Events attributes

 

 
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software