boiko@aspen2.enet.dec.com (07/27/90)
> Is there anyone out there who has compared/used either > ICS's Xcessory, Sunrise Software Systems ezX, ExoCode from Expert > Object Corp or TeleUse from TeleSoft? > > - What are your general feeling about these tools? > > - How easy to use are these tools? > > - How good is the available technical support? > > - How good is the documentation? > > I do not work for any marketing group, these are questions > based on my own desire to get feedback on what's available at the > present time in the IDT space...and yes I am very much aware of our > own tools under development. > Thanks > -mike- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ --------- Below is a summary of the responses I received, from my request: -mike- ======================================================================== ========= I've talked to two guys who used TeleUSE in their master thesis work. They said that the main disadvantages are that the D-lanaguage (language for interactive semantics) is not powerful enough and that you have to handle a lot of short files with source code to build a complete application. I believe that OSF had TeleUSE in their research program, but decided to leave it for the time being. I haven't used TeleUSE personally yet. I hope to try it in the near future. One of my colleagues have tried it a bit though, so I can ask him for more information if you want to. (He's on holiday now) I'm doing a survey on X and Motif stuff and would appreciate if you could forward any interesting stuff to me. Regards Erik Sparre ABB Corporate Research Dept. KLL | Phone +46 46 168527 Lab for Man-Machine Communication | Telex 33709 IDEON Research Park | Fax +46 46 145620 S-223 70 LUND | Email erik@abblund.se SWEDEN =============================================================================== We compared Teleuse and XCessory. I found them both to be very useful products, but for different audiences. TeleUse is a very complex product that contains a wide breadth of functionality. It is useful for applications and programmers that want to have as little as possible to do with the user interface. I felt the user interface for Teleuse was not always intuitive and didn't always follow standard Motif guidelines. TeleUse is a mature product (relative to most in the X/Motif arena) and did not have too many bugs. We did have a bear of a time getting up and running the first time. XCessory, on the other hand, was easier to use, but seemed to have less functionality. Getting XCessory up the first time was also easier. The documentation on both products was adequate -- nothing spectacular. I should mention that we had a pre-release of XCessory. I wasn't too involved with communicating with the TeleUse people myself, but based on my observation of my coleague's interaction with them, they we very responsive. They worked with us to get the product working on our systems and helped us with our problems. We didn't really have to get any technical support from the XCessory folks, so I can't comment their. One final note -- we chose to use XCessory, because the product we are working on is all user interface and we will control it more. It was more important to us to have a product that was easy and intuitive to use that could quickly allow us to generate a general interface that we could refine. At this time, we await our official release copy of XCessory. If you would like a follow up report let me know and I can get back to you in a month, if you have that long. I hope this helps. +---------+ | Coral | |@@@@@*@**| |@@*@@**@@| Don Dewar |*@@**@@@@| Coral Network Corporation, Marlborough, MA |@***@@@@@| Internet: don@coral.com |@@**@@@@@| Phone: (508) 460-6010 |*********| Fax: (508) 481-6258 |Networks | +---------+ =============================================================================== Please send me a summary of any responses you receive. Thanks! NAME: Michael Strawbridge TELE: (301) 975-3852 USMAIL: National Institute of Standards ARPA: straw@cam.nist.gov and Technology UUCP: uunet!cme-durer!straw Rm. B-146, Bldg. 225 Gaithersburg, MD 20899 =============================================================================== I would be interested in hearing what you find. We have been using a beta version of Xcessary without documentation. We were able to do alot with it so far. We have the official release on order and will hopefully have it next week or so. The biggest problem we have had is not having any documentation. Bu that is our fault. We got our copy from another group in Sony.... What product are you folks putting out? My big concern at this point is how will we use the interface builder with C++.... Bob Berger Sony Advanced Video Tech Center 408-944-4964 [uunet,mips]sonyusa!sfcsun!berger =============================================================================== I think a posted summary of responses, would be appropriate. This seems to be a bit of a hot issue at the moment. I've tried XBuild from Nixdorf. In my opinion it is not ready as a product yet, it is buggy slow, and has many parts that don't work. ==Fraser Orr <fraser@edc.uucp> +44 506 416778x206 UseNet: {uunet,sun}!atexnet!fraser JANet: fraser%edc@cs.hw.ac.uk =============================================================================== Can you please forward to me any information you receive. I am looking for a tool for a project I'm on. Thanks! Stephen Ayers Atex European Development Centre, A Kodak Company sda@epps.kodak.com | {sun,uunet,kodak}!atexnet!sda | ..!uknet!edc!sda +44 506 41 6778 ===============================================================================