butler@marine.nasl.t.u-tokyo.ac.jp (Jim Butler) (01/18/91)
I have been programming with InterViews for about 6 months now. I have recently heard about and obtained ET++, but before making any further decisions would like to hear any comments re: the pros and cons of these two. I realize ET++ has more classes corresponding to fundamental structures similar to those found in Small-Talk, but I was wondering more about the GUI comparison. Any Comments? -- Jim Butler butler@marine.nasl.t.u-tokyo.ac.jp Faculty of Engineering University of Tokyo 7-3-1 Hongo, Bunkyo-ku Tokyo 113 Japan
reha@cbnewsi.att.com (reha.gur) (02/16/91)
Actually, there is a third system, Andrew that should be mentioned in any discussion of OO Ui's. (Yes I know it's not done in C++; their mistake!) I have used Interviews, ET++ and looked at Andrew and MacApp. My opinion is that of these environments ET++ is by far the best environment for developing user applications (with certain qulifications stated below.) The user interface abstractions provided by Interviews differ substantially from those offers by ET++, MacApp, Andrew, and Smalltalk. I feel that the ET++, MacApp, Andrew, Smalltalk abstractions, even though they have differences among their own abstractions produce a much richer and frankly better set of objects for use interface design. On the other hand there are problems with ET++ 2.0. ET++ requires threads. It also does not support a MOTIF, or OL look and feel. It looks a lot like a MAC interface. Changing the ET++ look and feel is not a difficult task and I know of someone who has done it, but it is not trivial. There are also good things about Interviews. I use their idraw program and it is great. So my recommendation is to get the manuals for both of these systems and see which one looks and feels right to you. reha gur attunix!honshu!reha