Re: Delphi 2.0 vs. Powerbuilder 5.0

Danny Hung wrote:
>
> On 28 Jun 1996, ray charbonneau wrote:
>
> > an133911_at_anon.penet.fi (an133911_at_anon.penet.fi) wrote:
> > >What about Oracle's own Developer/2000 ... it took 4 of the 7 awards
> > >over both Powerbuilder and Delphi in Computer World when it came to
> > >developing for database applications.
> > >
> > I have found that the awards a product wins are meaningless. Like the
> > Academy awards, you can create so many that almost every product wins one
> > or another. In talking to real people who build information systems, I
> > have never heard of anyone who thought Developer/2000 was superior to
> > Powerbuilder or Delphi. Delphi is a great product; but, there seems to
> > be some sort of lack of confidence in Borland that prevents the corporate
> > world from jumping on the bandwagon. As far as Powerbuilder is
> > concerned, literally thousands of applications have been built and are in
> > production with success using this tool. With Powerbuilder 5.0,
> > virtually all of the negative aspects of the tool have been eliminated.
> > So, today, if I am doing a database intensive application, I lean
> > towards Powerbuilder. If it is not database intensive, I lean towards
> > Delphi.
> >
> > have fun
> > ray c.
>
> I decided to use Oracle's tool mainly because their advertised
> cross-platform portability, i.e. a Forms developer on Windows can be
> re-compiled on HP using Dev2K's Form Generator. As I found out, the FMB
> files are not actually portable. The files can get corrupted during the
> port and you may have to redo the whole form design for each platform to
> port (this is Oracle's suggested solution :-( ).
>
> If you do not have the issue of cross-platform portability, go
> for PB. In fact, their 5.0 release has caught up with the X/Motif
> compatibility. This is a features in transition and you may want to wait
> for a while before it get mature.
>
> later,
> -----
> Danny
> #include standard.disclaimer

While this is true, I found the PB4.0 Unix version to be very good. I demo'd recently a Base Class Library application using a sophisticatedd class library on win 3.1 and Win NT. I then FTP'd the libraries across to my Unix workstation and ran the application "without changing a line of code, or even regenning the application". To the astonishment of all present (God knows, we all know about PB apps thirst for regens), the application ran without a glitch. (Of course, I had already prepared the class library for the cross-platform issues such as OS API calls). Of course, this was in Development mode. I would have to recompile the EXE under Unix. So I've had no reason to look at Oracle's product, even for cross-platform.

With 5.0 for Unix already in Beta (and no, I've not been a tester), I'm looking forward to the ditributed capabilities of 5.0 from NT to Unix.

BTW, Delphi does not do UNIX, and most major corporations I know requrie tools to support cross-platform before they'll even consider them for their "standard toolsets".

-- 
---------------------------------------------------
-----+
Bill Green[TeamPS]   | green_william_at_JPMorgan.com	
|
Castle Software      | CIS: 
71203.1414_at_compuserve.com	|
Knowledge is a Quest | bgCastle_at_mail.concentric.net	
|
---------------------------------------------------
-----+