Morfik - amazing!
Unknown
I just created my first application in Morfik. If you have not seen this yet, it is the most amazing thing I have seen in a long, long time.
Morfik uses the browser for all the UI. But you don't need to know Javascript or anything. You create all your logic in something that looks like a primitive version of Delphi. You can choose to write all the code in Pascal if you want, and they support all the basic pascal syntax that I have tried. Thier literature mentions Delphi and Object Pascal all over the place, so it is obvious that they are very familiar with it. Most of the Delphi IDE shortcuts seem to work the same in Morfik as they do in Delphi..
I created my first simple app in 5 minutes. It (supposidly) can compile to Windows, Mac and Linux. I can only attest to the Windows version.
The UI widgets are still quite primitive, and only had a few basic widgets as far as I can tell, but the concept is simply amazing, and it actually works!
If the VCL for the web can somehow ever turn out to be like this, and able to be run on multiple platforms, it will be a dream come true. A web server gets compiled in to every application, kind of like the standalone intraweb apps, except they can be run on all platforms.
Has anyone had any experience with this? Is this something that we can use Delphi with. Can Codegear work with them to bring the rich VCL library to the web?
--
Oliver Townshend
like, and how well it compares to Intraweb and ASP.Net
Oliver Townshend
Donald Shimoda
I download a sample and see wich i find there:
\PlatformCompilers\CommonLibrary\indy\IdGlobalCore.pas"
L63="C:\Program Files\Morfik\WebOS
v1.2.0.3\System\PlatformCompilers\CommonLibrary\indy\IdGlobalProtocols.p
as"
L64="C:\Program Files\Morfik\WebOS
v1.2.0.3\System\PlatformCompilers\CommonLibrary\indy\IdHeaderList.pas"
L65="C:\Program Files\Morfik\WebOS
v1.2.0.3\System\PlatformCompilers\CommonLibrary\indy\IdHTTP.pas"
L66="C:\Program Files\Morfik\WebOS
v1.2.0.3\System\PlatformCompilers\CommonLibrary\indy\IdHTTPHeaderInfo.pa
s"
L67="C:\Program Files\Morfik\WebOS
v1.2.0.3\System\PlatformCompilers\CommonLibrary\indy\IdIntercept.pas"
L68="C:\Program Files\Morfik\WebOS
v1.2.0.3\System\PlatformCompilers\CommonLibrary\indy\IdIOHandler.pas"
L69="C:\Program Files\Morfik\WebOS
v1.2.0.3\System\PlatformCompilers\CommonLibrary\indy\IdIOHandlerSocket.p
as"
L70="C:\Program Files\Morfik\WebOS
v1.2.0.3\System\PlatformCompilers\CommonLibrary\indy\IdIOHandlerStack.pa
s"
They are using INDY???
--
Donald Shimoda
h visli
David Novo
They have a link to freePascal somewhere on their site that I saw, so I
wonder if they are using this for the compiler. As far as I could see,
the syntax was pure Delphi....
Donald Shimoda
> It's a great web app IDE! http://labs.morfik.com have many demos.
Yes it is. But maybe the USD 5000 per site is a little expensive for
the common developer.
--
Donald Shimoda
Didier Gasser-Morlay
The license says
US$5000 per developer for commercial use. They don't say 'per site' or
did I misread ?
Didier
Alan Garny
news:467b5a72$1...@newsgroups.borland.com...
That's how I read it too. Most interestingly for me is that it is free for
non-commercial use! Definitely worth checking it out then! :)
Alan.
m. Th.
Delphi & Firebird as backend. Dunno if Mauricio (Mauricio Longo - the Morfik's
author) uses also the FPC/Lazarus for cross-platform things.
hth
--
m. th.
Peter Morris
http://controlshadows.labs.morfik.com/
View the source for the book trader demo. Not very Google friendly! No
search engine = no visitors = no money!
http://booktrader.labs.morfik.com/
It's okay, but I'n nowhere nearly as excited as you are :-)
Pete
Donald Shimoda
> The license says
>
> US$5000 per developer for commercial use. They don't say 'per site' or
> did I misread ?
I will reprhase it.
If your team members are you and your computer USD 5000 is expensive. :)
Anyway is a great product, great concept, and the examples i test just
fly (like the gmail webmail).
They use Firebird 2.0, FPC for cross compile (hello codegear is there?)
and may pascal libraries (indy,etc).
I think can use my RO webservice there without problems.
Sad they have only one licence schema, again i think that dont fit to
all kind of customers.
--
Donald Shimoda
Farshad
> If your team members are you and your computer USD 5000 is expensive. :)
Agree. Indeed it is very expensive for small companies.
Brian Moelk
> It's okay, but I'n nowhere nearly as excited as you are :-)
Agreed. Not to mention AJAX everywhere is not the way to go IMO. I'm
more excited about coding with extjs these days.
--
Brian Moelk
Brain Endeavor LLC
bmo...@NObrainSPAMendeavorFOR.MEcom
Donald Shimoda
> Peter Morris wrote:
> > It's okay, but I'n nowhere nearly as excited as you are :-)
>
> Agreed. Not to mention AJAX everywhere is not the way to go IMO. I'm
> more excited about coding with extjs these days.
Im afraid of that. Links please. :)
--
Donald Shimoda
Mauricio Longo
>>
>
> Delphi & Firebird as backend. Dunno if Mauricio (Mauricio Longo - the
> Morfik's author) uses also the FPC/Lazarus for cross-platform things.
>
> hth
>
I use FPC as the backend compiler in everything I do. To avoid
confusion I would point out that I'm just the Author of large portions
of the documentation, not Morfik itself. :-)
Mauricio
Eryk
> Agree. Indeed it is very expensive for small companies.
>
Depends where you are based I guess. Personally I would be unlikely to
entertain the idea of taking on a development project that had <$5000
earning potential and any tool which I can pay for out of one project
counts as "pretty cheap". After all, if we worked as taxi drivers we
would be looking at laying out $30000+ for our tools and most likely
taking out bank loans to do so.
Eryk
Brian Moelk
> Im afraid of that. Links please. :)
Afraid of ExtJS? IMO, it totally rocks and I can't wait for 2.0.
http://extjs.com/
http://extjs.com/deploy/ext/docs/index.html
2.0 dev demo:
http://extjs.com/playpen/ext-2.0-dev/examples/feed-viewer/view.html
Donald Shimoda
> Depends where you are based I guess.
I live in argentina and USD 5000 is the price of a taxi.
Anyway i already ask them, they are open minds and are open to any
suggestions and adapt the license to the size/amount of development you
do. I just plan to develop two web applications, so i will pay a
special amount they say.
--
Donald Shimoda
Donald Shimoda
> I use FPC as the backend compiler in everything I do. To avoid
> confusion I would point out that I'm just the Author of large
> portions of the documentation, not Morfik itself. :-)
Nice to meet you.
--
Donald Shimoda
Donald Shimoda
> Donald Shimoda wrote:
> > Im afraid of that. Links please. :)
>
> Afraid of ExtJS? IMO, it totally rocks and I can't wait for 2.0.
I see. That is a library set running over AJAX or im wrong?
The beatifoul of morfix is the RAD and pascal coding. Sorry i know
somebody will tell : you must use another languages, and blah bla blah.
But coding in morfix seems cool. The form design and pascal inside is a
pro IMHO.
--
Donald Shimoda
Brian Moelk
> I see. That is a library set running over AJAX or im wrong?
It provides AJAX support, but it's about building nice UI's in
Javascript/html. It doesn't necessarily use AJAX when hiding/showing UI
widgets like tab changes; how and where you use AJAX is up to you.
Also, it doesn't have any server-side requirements beyond a HTTP so
you're free to implement that side however you'd like (php, ASP.NET,
Delphi, etc).
ExtJS is one of many libraries out there. It's heavy so I recommend it
only when you need a heavy UI. For websites, I prefer something lighter
like mootools or scriptaculous.
> The beatifoul of morfix is the RAD and pascal coding. Sorry i know
> somebody will tell : you must use another languages, and blah bla blah.
Well, typical developers need to use other languages: SQL, XML, etc.
> But coding in morfix seems cool. The form design and pascal inside is a
> pro IMHO.
Sure it is cool, but IMO having the flexibility of where/when one
utilizes AJAX is important. I'm not so attached to Pascal that I will
sacrifice control and what I believe to be the best solution simply to
use it. :)
David Novo
development platforms tomorrow.
Sure, there are probably many small glitches. And some of the demos I
saw were pretty lame too. But if you look at many of the demos that
come with Delphi, you will not be blown away either :-)
My point is that as a concept, it is amazing. If you look at apps using
Ajax (such as google maps, gmail, the MS Outlook client for windows,
etc.) it is very obvious that you can create exceptionally feature rich
web apps these days.
When I began programming with Delphi, I knew NOTHING about the win32
API. And the beauty of Delphi was that I did not have to in order to
create really great apps. As I learned more and more, I learned more
and more about the windows API as I needed it. Now I feel quite at home
both programming to Delphi and dropping into the winAPI when needed.
I feel the same way about Javascript. I want/need to create cross
platform apps. If I can create rich UIs in Javascript, then thats fine
with me. Looking at all the different cross platform widget sets, its
obvious that its VERY hard to make cross platform widgets. However,
Javascript is Javascript.
As I contemplate cross platform apps, I realize the main thing I will
miss is the VCL and the tons of third party libraries that go along
with it.
The technology is already here and it can open up a whole new direction
for people to program
- Take the VCL for the web and really focus on making it extensible and
feature rich. Focus on making desktop quality widgets.
- not use any code that prevents cross platform using FreePascal
- compile a web server as part of the app
Every app automatically would become both a standalone app and a app
deployable on the web.
I have used Intraweb quite extensively since it first came out. I have
not tried the latest version yet. But quality has been spotty in the
past. If Codegear can put some muscle behind it and really polish it
up, I think this is an excellent way forward and will open a huge new
market.
If Morfik is getting away with charging $5k for their limited toolset
and much less developed IDE (which is still pretty cool).... I think
there is room for Codegear in there.
Peter Morris wrote:
> It's okay, but I'n nowhere nearly as excited as you are :-)
>
>
> Pete
--
Donald Shimoda
> Well, typical developers need to use other languages: SQL, XML, etc.
I mind programming languages (C,C++,C#,PASCAL,WHATEVER). Imagine i
cannot make my day work without SQL,XML,etc.
BTW, i use C++ with microcontrollers,a nd really miss pascal, anytime.
> Sure it is cool, but IMO having the flexibility of where/when one
> utilizes AJAX is important. I'm not so attached to Pascal that I will
> sacrifice control and what I believe to be the best solution simply to
> use it. :)
Is all related to where you feel comfortable to be more
productive.idont feel productive with cripted js syntax. :P
--
Donald Shimoda
Brian Moelk
> BTW, i use C++ with microcontrollers,a nd really miss pascal, anytime.
Having a preference for a language is natural. I prefer Pascal as well,
but it appears that I'm willing to sacrifice my preference much more
quickly than others. :)
> Is all related to where you feel comfortable to be more
> productive.
Agreed; but pascal doesn't run in the browser. I know Morfik has their
JST stuff, and it's cool. I just wonder how well it plays with other
JavaScript libraries.
> idont feel productive with cripted js syntax. :P
The more time I spend coding in JavaScript, the more I realize it is
productive and its syntax isn't crippled. The more time invested, the
more skilled one becomes.
It's not accurate to project the productivity level attained in one
discipline against another while learning it.
brekhof
something to create platform independent programs. I stumbled upon APEX
(http://www.oracle.com/technology/products/database/application_express/index.html)
and never looked back. Develop in Windows, Test on Linux, deploy on a
zLinux box (IBM mainframe)? I do this daily without worrying about wether
or not things run on the next platform.
Price? 0,- euro's and a Oracle database (starts at 0,- also).
And top of that Oracle is in demand in the job-market, I guess you can
find the odd Delphi job and I doubt you'll find any add's looking for
Morfik expertise.
Martin
--- posted by geoForum on http://delphi.newswhat.com
James Smith
> Also, it doesn't have any server-side requirements beyond a HTTP so
> you're free to implement that side however you'd like (php, ASP.NET,
> Delphi, etc).
This is critical, because it implements the sentiments of the end user who
doesn't give a crap about what's used on the backend provided all
functionality metrics are met. Building web apps which depend on tools that
are only available on one OS or requires a specific DB engine is stupid and
missing the point, IMO.
Tibco GI also has no specific backend requirements.
Brian Moelk
> This is critical, because it implements the sentiments of the end user who
> doesn't give a crap about what's used on the backend provided all
> functionality metrics are met.
Agreed.
> Building web apps which depend on tools that
> are only available on one OS or requires a specific DB engine is stupid and
> missing the point, IMO.
Well, vendor lock-in is good for the vendor. :)
Another important point is that client libraries that enforce
requirements for the server also assume *one* server. You might need a
few to do what you want.
> Tibco GI also has no specific backend requirements.
Yes, that's another one.
Bob Dawson
>
> Well, vendor lock-in is good for the vendor. :)
Might also be good for the customer: "Why should I pay an ISV for jumping
through any hoops, or accept any compromises whatsoever, in order to obtain
cross-platform software that will only ever run on ONE platform? That's what
I have, and there are no plans to change, so as far as I'm concerned,
'multi-platform' is a totally useless feature I can't justify paying for."
bobD
Donald Shimoda
> The more time I spend coding in JavaScript, the more I realize it is
> productive and its syntax isn't crippled. The more time invested, the
> more skilled one becomes.
Is a metter of Taste i think.
> It's not accurate to project the productivity level attained in one
> discipline against another while learning it.
Agreed, for complete.Learning everynew techonolgy is a must, everytime.
Heck, we are not talking about new technologies here?
The bad news is while you are learning are not producing. ;)
--
Donald Shimoda
Donald Shimoda
> Building web apps which
> depend on tools that are only available on one OS or requires a
> specific DB engine is stupid and missing the point, IMO.
BTW, note the case of morfik.
--
Donald Shimoda
Brian Moelk
> Might also be good for the customer
Sure, it might be.
> "Why should I pay an ISV for jumping
> through any hoops, or accept any compromises whatsoever, in order to obtain
> cross-platform software that will only ever run on ONE platform?
Well, in terms of web technology that is hosted by a third party this is
important since the platform marketshare is more balanced than the
desktop.
Using a client library that has particular server requirements can lock
you into a smaller number of ISV's. With stuff like ASP.NET, it's not a
big deal because there are enough ISV's that support ASP.NET for
competition to adjust prices. With things like Morfik...it's not so clear.
> That's what
> I have, and there are no plans to change, so as far as I'm concerned,
> 'multi-platform' is a totally useless feature I can't justify paying for."
Sure, if you're happy with that, go for it.
But one-vendor closed/proprietary systems are typically more expensive
not less. Profit margins are readily inflated up to switching costs.
Donald Shimoda
> After dropping PHP because off the Delphi-4-PHP fiasco I still needed
> something to create platform independent programs. I stumbled upon
> APEX
Great info, i will check.
> And top of that Oracle is in demand in the job-market, I guess you can
> find the odd Delphi job and I doubt you'll find any add's looking for
> Morfik expertise.
I dont base my every day learning on the jobs available from a logn
time ago, thanks god. :)
If i open my skills only where theres jobs i must levae delphi from a
long time ago.
--
Donald Shimoda
James Smith
> through any hoops, or accept any compromises whatsoever, in order to
> obtain
> cross-platform software that will only ever run on ONE platform? That's
> what
> I have, and there are no plans to change, so as far as I'm concerned,
> 'multi-platform' is a totally useless feature I can't justify paying for."
You have to jump through hoops because the vendors make you do so - which is
good business of course. But the point is that the Internet is the platform,
not the backend. As long as we treat the backend as the platform, this keeps
the Internet from maturing into a far more powerful platform than any single
OS or framework can provide. One example is true concurrency - steal cycles
from anywhere as needed -- technology that will make simple threading or
writing for multicore processors seem like stuff people did in the dark
ages.
James Smith
Morfik does have a specific db requirement unfortunately.
Donald Shimoda
> > BTW, note the case of morfik.
>
> Morfik does have a specific db requirement unfortunately.
If you mind specific DB engine i think you are wrong, but i cannot find
the link rigth now. :(
If you asre talking about other reqs please enlight me.
TIA
--
Donald Shimoda
Unknown
> After dropping PHP because off the Delphi-4-PHP fiasco
Martin
--- posted by geoForum on http://delphi.newswhat.com
--
Brian Moelk
> If you asre talking about other reqs please enlight me.
http://www.morfikwiki.com/Deploying_an_XApp
http://www.morfikwiki.com/Compiling_and_deploying_for_Linux
Finding a third party hosting company that will let you deploy that is
going to be tough. Which is the reason why Morfik offers hosting
services, another revenue stream. :)
Donald Shimoda
>
> But one-vendor closed/proprietary systems are typically more expensive
> not less. Profit margins are readily inflated up to switching costs.
Typically si true, but specifically dont.
I you need (like me) to develop only one kind of app running on a
customer server (never will use hosting for many designe reasons) why
take the long trip of ASP.NET? forget it, in that arena *things* like
morfik fits very well.
--
Donald Shimoda
Brian Moelk
> I you need (like me) to develop only one kind of app running on a
> customer server (never will use hosting for many designe reasons) why
> take the long trip of ASP.NET? forget it, in that arena *things* like
> morfik fits very well.
Sure, but you'll pay more for it; that's the point. Not only in upfront
tool costs, but support, maintenance and HR.
Not that there's anything necessarily wrong with paying more for
something better. I prefer to select open systems and solutions to
closed/proprietary ones, especially when it comes to web technology. I
do use Delphi and Windows; perhaps I'm learning from past decisions. :)
Donald Shimoda
> Donald Shimoda wrote:
> > If you asre talking about other reqs please enlight me.
>
> http://www.morfikwiki.com/Deploying_an_XApp
> http://www.morfikwiki.com/Compiling_and_deploying_for_Linux
>
> Finding a third party hosting company that will let you deploy that is
> going to be tough. Which is the reason why Morfik offers hosting
> services, another revenue stream. :)
Yes, that is clear, not my case like i expain before.
But im asking for the sentence James write:
'Morfik does have a specific db requirement unfortunately.'
Which specifically reqs at DB have morfik? I read it suports many db
engines. Is wrong?
--
Donald Shimoda
Anders Ohlsson (CodeGear)
> Fiasco? I did not realize there was a fiasco....
Me neither.
--
Anders Ohlsson - http://blogs.codegear.com/ao/
CodeGear Developer Relations
"A golf course that does not have a pub after the 18th hole
is like an acupuncturist who does not offer needle removal."
Farshad
> Depends where you are based I guess. Personally I would be unlikely to
> entertain the idea of taking on a development project that had <$5000
> earning potential and any tool which I can pay for out of one project
> counts as "pretty cheap". After all, if we worked as taxi drivers we would
> be looking at laying out $30000+ for our tools and most likely taking out
> bank loans to do so.
Most of the time it depends on type of business you're running. 90% of my
income is based on software packages that are in range from $300 to $1500.
If I'm going to develope a new package using a certain tool then I have to
invest money in advance and there is no guarantee that the revenue from that
package will cover the initial investment. OTOH, if your job is based on
software contracts and you are able to do contacts in a year then it may be
reasonable to purchase a 5000$ tool.
Brian Moelk
> Which specifically reqs at DB have morfik? I read it suports many db
> engines. Is wrong?
Where did you read it supports multiple DB engines? AFAICS, it only
supports Firebird.
Frank J
"James Smith" <jks...@grid-sky.com> wrote in message
news:467b...@newsgroups.borland.com...
>> BTW, note the case of morfik.
>
> Morfik does have a specific db requirement unfortunately.
No it doesn't.
It uses Firebird underneath for it's internal storage and for off-line use
(Yes, you can use Morfik offline like an executable).
But it allows you to use ODBC, SQLServer, etc for your database
connectivity.
Brian Moelk
> No it doesn't.
> It uses Firebird underneath for it's internal storage and for off-line
> use (Yes, you can use Morfik offline like an executable).
>
> But it allows you to use ODBC, SQLServer, etc for your database
> connectivity.
Do you have a reference indicating this? It looks like Firebird is
required for deployment:
http://www.morfikwiki.com/Deploying_an_XApp
I do see that people are using ODBC in their support forums, but I can't
find any documentation regarding that. Nor is there anything that says
that Firebird isn't required to deploy an app even if you do decide to
use ODBC with another database.
Also, do they support ODBC on Linux?
Farshad
> OTOH, if your job is based on software contracts and you are able to do
> contacts in a year then it may be reasonable to purchase a 5000$ tool.
Errata:
OTOH, if your job is based on software contracts and you are able to do
"lots of" contacts in a year then it may be reasonable to purchase a 5000$
tool.
Tom
> Brian Moelk wrote:
>
>> The more time I spend coding in JavaScript, the more I realize it is
>> productive and its syntax isn't crippled. The more time invested, the
>> more skilled one becomes.
>
> Is a metter of Taste i think.
Not really. If you want a true web application, then you really *must*
learn javascript; for the time being anyway...
Brian, extjs is *very* cool!
Unknown
Which Databases are Supported?
You can use with Morfik any database that has an ODBC driver. This opens up possibilities to
connecting to all the major databases, commercial or open source as well as many proprietary
data sources.
--
Brian Moelk
Brain Endeavor LLC
bmo...@NObrainSPAMendeavorFOR.MEcom
--
Dean Hill
> I use FPC as the backend compiler in everything I do. To avoid
> confusion I would point out that I'm just the Author of large
> portions of the documentation, not Morfik itself. :-)
What has happened with Morfik's patent application? I know I won't
look at it further because of that.
--
Dean
Unknown
It would be nice if CodeGear could do the same for Javascript as it did for the windows API
Tom wrote:
Not really. If you want a true web application, then you really must learn javascript; for the time being anyway...
Brian, extjs is very cool!
--
Martin Brekhof
"Anders Ohlsson (CodeGear)" <aohl...@codegear.com> wrote in message
news:467c08fa$1...@newsgroups.borland.com...
Brian Moelk
> From their manual (http://morfik.cachefly.net/Developers-Handbook-1.0.pdf):
>
> Which Databases are Supported?
> You can use with Morfik any database that has an ODBC driver. This opens up possibilities to
> connecting to all the major databases, commercial or open source as well as many proprietary
> data sources.
Thanks. Not sure if that includes Linux support.
Brian Moelk
> It would be nice if CodeGear could do the same for Javascript as it
> did for the windows API
Everyone else is doing it, why not CodeGear? :)
Donald Shimoda
> Not really. If you want a true web application, then you really must
> learn javascript; for the time being anyway...
Wich kind of afirmation is that? Wich based on? So a intraweb app is
not a real web app? Silly...
--
Donald Shimoda
Mauricio Longo
Hi Dean,
I don't think this would be the best place to start that discussion. :-)
If you wish you can take this matter up on the Morfik forums or email
privately.
Mauricio
Dean Hill
> I don't think this would be the best place to start that discussion.
> :-) If you wish you can take this matter up on the Morfik forums or
> email privately.
No problem. Often the intention is what counts and not the action. I
will check out the Morfik forums.
--
Dean
Mauricio Longo
I'll see you there then. We're always open to questions. Either through
the forums of direct email.
Mauricio
Tom
> Wich kind of afirmation is that? Wich based on? So a intraweb app is
> not a real web app? Silly...
Prove it. Show me a good IW site. There is no comparison for many a
real AJAX site and IW (w/"AJAX").
Something along the lines that you see with Google (gmail, analytics,
etc.) or Yahoo AJAX sites. Yahoo financials site is pretty amazing!
Tom
> I'll see you there then. We're always open to questions. Either through
> the forums of direct email.
Mauricio, you guys should seriously reconsider your pricing model.
There are many of us small developers that would like to use your tools
for commercial purposes, but cannot... Rather than dealing with people
on and one-on-one basis, consider publishing a pricing model that gives
us all comfort.
Tom
Frank J
"Brian Moelk" <bmo...@NObrainSPAMendeavorFOR.MEcom> wrote in message
news:467c13d8$1...@newsgroups.borland.com...
If you are interested, I would suggest going to the Morfik forum, they are
very nice people over there and will answer all your question.
Donald Shimoda
> Donald Shimoda wrote:
> > Wich kind of afirmation is that? Wich based on? So a intraweb app is
> > not a real web app? Silly...
>
> Prove it. Show me a good IW site. There is no comparison for many a
Morfik samples have a exact copy of google mail.The performance is
amazing. Donwloand that and check it.
--
Donald Shimoda
Donald Shimoda
> Mauricio, you guys should seriously reconsider your pricing model.
> There are many of us small developers that would like to use your
> tools for commercial purposes, but cannot... Rather than dealing
> with people on and one-on-one basis, consider publishing a pricing
> model that gives us all comfort.
Just send they a email and they will consider your particular
situation. They do with me!
--
Donald Shimoda
Tom
Show me a good IW app. I already am aware of Morfik.
Nick Hodges (CodeGear)
> Show me a good IW site.
IW isn't really designe for web sites. It's designed for delivering
applicaitons via the web. Most IW sites are internally facing, not
externally facing. IW is exceptionally well suited for that purpose.
--
Nick Hodges
Delphi Product Manager - CodeGear
http://blogs.codegear.com/nickhodges
Dean Hill
> Mauricio, you guys should seriously reconsider your pricing model.
> There are many of us small developers that would like to use your
> tools for commercial purposes, but cannot... Rather than dealing
> with people on and one-on-one basis, consider publishing a pricing
> model that gives us all comfort.
Joel on Pricing :)
http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/CamelsandRubberDuckies.html
--
Dean
Joe Hendricks
> IW isn't really designe for web sites. It's designed for delivering
> applicaitons via the web. Most IW sites are internally facing, not
> externally facing. IW is exceptionally well suited for that purpose.
I disagree regarding the internally-facing bit - any external facing (public)
web app that can use the built-in session management (saves db roundtrips,
allows delphi-like datamodule use, and desktop type rad development) is perfect
for IW. Our new public IW/D2006/NexusDB career assessment app soon to launch
will be partnered with the Dept of Labor on their state workforce sites.
JoeH
Michael Elsdörfer
> Morfik samples have a exact copy of google mail.The performance is
> amazing. Donwloand that and check it.
Exact copy? I think not. Start Firefox, go to gmail.com and press
Ctrl++/Ctrl+- a couple times. Now try the same in the Morfik version.
I wish there were a web framework that would actually generate
acceptable code.
Michael
Nick Hodges (CodeGear)
> I disagree regarding the internally-facing bit
Cool -- glad to hear it.
Tom
> IW isn't really designe for web sites. It's designed for delivering
> applicaitons via the web.
Nick, that is what I am discussing. Delivering applications to the web
(intranet or internet), does not matter.
> Most IW sites are internally facing, not
> externally facing. IW is exceptionally well suited for that purpose.
So no one has any sites that they can show off and impress us with?
JohnE
>> externally facing. IW is exceptionally well suited for that purpose.
>
> So no one has any sites that they can show off and impress us with?
IW (and ExpressWeb Framework EWF) was/were slick before asp.net and all of
the other web frameworks that have come along. It's lived much longer than
I thought it would. DevExpress were smart enough to stop development a long
time ago.
John
Q Correll
| Joel on Pricing :)
<chuckle> I love Joel's writing.
Thanks.
--
Q
06/24/2007 13:28:49
XanaNews Version 1.17.5.7 [Q's salutation mod]
Donald Shimoda
> Donald Shimoda schrieb:
> > Morfik samples have a exact copy of google mail.The performance is
> > amazing. Donwloand that and check it.
>
> Exact copy? I think not. Start Firefox, go to gmail.com and press
> Ctrl++/Ctrl+- a couple times. Now try the same in the Morfik version.
Forget it. You lost the point.
--
Donald Shimoda
Donald Shimoda
> Show me a good IW app. I already am aware of Morfik.
Dont have the need time, sorry.
--
Donald Shimoda
Frank J
"Michael Elsdörfer" <mic...@elsdoerfer.info> wrote in message
news:467d85a0$1...@newsgroups.borland.com...
> Donald Shimoda schrieb:
>> Morfik samples have a exact copy of google mail.The performance is
>> amazing. Donwloand that and check it.
>
> Exact copy? I think not. Start Firefox, go to gmail.com and press
> Ctrl++/Ctrl+- a couple times. Now try the same in the Morfik version.
>
product.
But it's close enough and it really shows the power of Morfik.
Tom
> Tom wrote:
>
>> Show me a good IW app. I already am aware of Morfik.
>
> Dont have the need time, sorry.
Nor do I. That is why I am looking for better solutions than IW/Delphi.
Nick Hodges (CodeGear)
> Nick, that is what I am discussing. Delivering applications to the
> web (intranet or internet), does not matter.
And my point is that the vast number of Intraweb apps aren't something
that you can be pointed to on the WWW.
> So no one has any sites that they can show off and impress us with?
That's the point -- they mostly aren't public facing.
Craig
> I wish there were a web framework that would actually generate
> acceptable code.
>
This is impossible. Why? Because every single developer I have ever met
has a different idea of what is 'acceptable code'. If you want a
framework to generate large chunks of code just the way you like it,
then build it yourself. There are plenty of frameworks that millions of
people are using, ASP.NET, Intraweb, PHP, Ruby on Rails etc all that
work perfectly well by someone who knows how.
Craig.
Tom
>> Nick, that is what I am discussing. Delivering applications to the
>> web (intranet or internet), does not matter.
>
> And my point is that the vast number of Intraweb apps aren't something
> that you can be pointed to on the WWW.
>
>> So no one has any sites that they can show off and impress us with?
>
> That's the point -- they mostly aren't public facing.
That indicates that it should *not* be used for Internet applications.
I have already had dismal experiences with IW, I just wanted to see if
others (besides IW themselves) have used it successfully to deploy real
applications. The answer seems quite obvious...
Robin
> That indicates that it should *not* be used for Internet applications.
an intended primary purpose <> only purpose. But you can feel free to
be black and white about it I suppose.
> I have already had dismal experiences with IW, I just wanted to see if
> others (besides IW themselves) have used it successfully to deploy real
> applications.
http://www.atozed.com/intraweb/studies/index.en.aspx
> The answer seems quite obvious...
Well, their links to were certainly in an obvious spot.
--
Robin.
Australian Bridal Accessories := http://www.bridalbuzz.com.au
Turbo for Noobs (a work in progress) := http://turbofornoobs.blogspot.com/
Tom
> http://www.atozed.com/intraweb/studies/index.en.aspx
>
> > The answer seems quite obvious...
>
> Well, their links to were certainly in an obvious spot.
Having paid through the nose for IW in the past, I wanted to know if any
other developers have deployed IW solutions. I do *not* believe the
marketing bung! You can believe what you want.
Brian, has been the most helpful in pointing me in some very good
directions. After further studying of EXTJS/Yahoo UI/JSON, I can tell
you that Freepascal looks like a decent alternative for rich web UIs
(the future).
Robin
> I do *not* believe the marketing bung!
How did it burn you in the past? I have only ever tinkered with it. I
went back to ASP.NET and Java where necessary as they suited my needs
very nicely.
> You can believe what you want.
Lol, I just might do that :-)
Michael Elsdörfer
>>
>> I wish there were a web framework that would actually generate
>> acceptable code.
> This is impossible. Why? Because every single developer I have ever met
> has a different idea of what is 'acceptable code'.
Most web developers I know pretty much agree on what is "acceptable
code". And we're not talking about formatting or is-it-ok-to-use-with
here. Acceptable means complying to standards and accessbility guidlines
as much as possible.
> ASP.NET, Intraweb, PHP, Ruby on Rails etc all that
I don't know about Intraweb, but none of those others really belong
here, except maybe ASP.NET (which is actually doing an ok job in this
area). But PHP is not a framework and Ruby on Rails isn't really
generating any client side code to speak of either.
I like the Morfik IDE, but the client-side code is just bad, and the
same is true for most frameworks I've seen that try to encapsulate
"rich" html/javascript functionality as controls.
Nick Hodges (CodeGear)
> The answer seems quite obvious...
I think you are missing the point. My guess is that the address if a
large number of IW apps is
http://someinternalserver/myapp.htm
and thus you can't see it.
David Novo
Do you think that there is something intrinsic that limits IW to be
primarily for internal facing applications? As far as I can tell, if
you make some additions i.e.
- ability to bundle webserver into app for standalone use
- library of really high quality, good looking widgets
- do not use code that would impair cross platform compiling
then you have
a) ability to write cross platform standalone apps
b) ability to write great looking web apps
all at the same time. If the UI widgets are good looking/responsive
enough, I don't think anyone will care if they are using an app through
the browser or from the desktop.
IW should be able to support enhancements I described above without
major changes to its architecture, or am I wrong about that?
Brian Moelk
> Having paid through the nose for IW in the past, I wanted to know if any
> other developers have deployed IW solutions. I do *not* believe the
> marketing bung! You can believe what you want.
FWIW, we have deployed IW applications. I like IW, but mostly for a
specific kind of application.
IW is mostly suited to those kinds of applications that are traditional
IT client/server GUI apps that need to be on the web. This typically
means intranet/extranet type front-end to a database applications.
In "app mode", which is what almost everyone uses, everything is
positioned absolutely. This isn't "weblike" at all and is much more
application like. Using IW, I don't bother to look at the markup that's
generated. It's a mess; supporting "tab order" is a hack because of it.
There's no such thing as "document order", etc. CSS support isn't
terribly elegant.
But that's not what IW is about. IW is about creating IT
"front-end-to-a-db" applications in the "Delphi way". It attempts to
insulate the developer from "messy" JS/HTML which may be regarded as a
good thing by those who don't want to know anything about it.
As we've moved forward, we've stripped out a lot of IW's Intraweb-ness
but we still use it because it offers some infrastructure stuff that we
don't have to write ourselves. My colleague is doing most of the IW
coding and he has far more patience than I do hacking up JS and crafting
markup. It's certainly *faster* to crank it out with IW.
So basically, yes, I like IW, it's good enough and can build out
functional IT applications very quickly. But if I choose to use it, I'm
not going to look at the markup and I'm not going to build a website
with it.
> Brian, has been the most helpful in pointing me in some very good
> directions. After further studying of EXTJS/Yahoo UI/JSON, I can tell
> you that Freepascal looks like a decent alternative for rich web UIs
> (the future).
Thanks, I'm really digging ExtJS with a minimal backend server. I'm
currently using a REST type API serving out XML from an embedded DB all
from a "desktop" application by hosting Firefox via LLMozLib. It all
works quite well.
I converted from Indy to Synapse with my application since it's the
smallest socket server I can get working reasonably quickly. Also
Synapse supports Freepascal if I choose to go that route in the future
and it will enable me to move more of my infrastructure code. I'm not
sure what the status of Indy on FPC is, when I looked it wasn't clear.
But if I want to move that application elsewhere, I suspect that I'll be
using C++, Ruby, PHP or ASP.NET to support the same ExtJS UI. This is
the beauty of ExtJS, I can move it from place to place without fear that
the UI work I've done will become completely obsolete. I can move it
from desktop to website, website to desktop, website to website.
Using ExtJS is more coding up front than IW or something like Morfik,
and it takes a bit more trial/error in environments that might not be
comfortable for the Delphi developer, but I think it's worth it.
Especially if you've done some web development before.
Using modern libraries that abstract away all the browser differences
and odd behaviors, you can get quite far, very quickly. Also tools like
FireBug are great for debugging and inspecting values in the page.
BTW, I can't wait for ExtJS 2.0. I'm really looking forward to the
different layout options that they've talked about.
--
Brian Moelk
Brain Endeavor LLC
bmo...@NObrainSPAMendeavorFOR.MEcom
Dave Nottage [TeamB]
> I wanted to know if any other developers have deployed IW solutions
As Nick said, many have; just like many have deployed non-IW Delphi
solutions that are not public, either.
--
Dave Nottage [TeamB]
Randy Magruder
> That indicates that it should *not* be used for Internet applications. I
> have already had dismal experiences with IW, I just wanted to see if
> others (besides IW themselves) have used it successfully to deploy real
> applications. The answer seems quite obvious...
>
I have, but it was an 'internally facing' app as Nick calls it.
What 'dismal experiences' did you have? How long ago was it? What was it
you were having problems with with IW?
Randy
Jason Southwell
>>
> I think you are missing the point. My guess is that the address if a
> large number of IW apps is
>
> http://someinternalserver/myapp.htm
>
> and thus you can't see it.
Or in most cases, require a login, so giving the address won't help.
Remember that Intraweb applications are used in cases where session and state
are very important, and almost always are user based and therefore require
a login mechanism of some sort.
I have a list of several IW apps that I've developed for myself and clients,
none of which would make sense to give out.
Nick Hodges (CodeGear)
> I have a list of several IW apps that I've developed for myself and
> clients, none of which would make sense to give out.
Exactly --