home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!usc!isi.edu!gremlin!nrtc!maurit
- From: maurit@nrtc.nrtc.northrop.com (Mark Aurit <maurit>)
- Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.apps
- Subject: Re: CA_Realizer
- Message-ID: <43460@gremlin.nrtc.northrop.com>
- Date: 26 Dec 92 23:19:34 GMT
- References: <1056.317.uupcb@filebank.cts.com>
- Sender: news@gremlin.nrtc.northrop.com
- Reply-To: maurit@nrtc.nrtc.northrop.com (Mark Aurit)
- Organization: Northrop Research & Technology Center, Palos Verdes, CA
- Lines: 24
-
- In article <1056.317.uupcb@filebank.cts.com> steve.silverwood@filebank.cts.com (Steve Silverwood) writes:
- > >Does anyone have any experience with CA_Realizer? It's a VisualBasic
- > >competitor (they SAY it's better, surprise), available for a limited
- > >time for ONLY $99! Should I get it? What say you?
-
- As usual, depends on what you are going to use it on.
- We're putting together an EIS, and in evaluating alternative software
- products decided to use Realizer (back when the owner was Within
- Technologies). Our C programmers were able to learn it very quickly -
- as it supports C-like subroutines - and its a much more productive
- development environment than C.
- What we REALLY liked were its very good imbedded graphics (also
- has some other embedded features like spreadsheets that look good).
- This lack of graphics, by the way, is the reason we couldnt take
- Visual Basic seriously (tho Microsoft tried to tell us to use
- Excel for this - get real). Pretty good support for 3rd party
- libraries.
- What I dont like about it is that, when you get right down to it, its
- still a programming language. Has a forms generator that we dont use,
- too simplistic. Purely procedural code - but an inexpensive way to
- get into Windows programming with no runtime royalties.
- And, its not cross platform - which is why we're not going to use
- it anymore.
- Mark
-