Sybase NNTP forums - End Of Life (EOL)

The NNTP forums from Sybase - forums.sybase.com - are now closed.

All new questions should be directed to the appropriate forum at the SAP Community Network (SCN).

Individual products have links to the respective forums on SCN, or you can go to SCN and search for your product in the search box (upper right corner) to find your specific developer center.

Curious

5 posts in Commercial ISV's Last posting was on 2008-06-27 19:04:20.0Z
Randy Posted on 2008-04-30 18:37:29.0Z
From: "Randy" <cgreenwellNOSPAMPlease@sparusa.com>
Newsgroups: sybase.public.commercial-isv.general
Subject: Curious
Lines: 38
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.3138
X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Original
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3198
NNTP-Posting-Host: vip152.sybase.com
X-Original-NNTP-Posting-Host: vip152.sybase.com
Message-ID: <4818bc69$1@forums-1-dub>
Date: 30 Apr 2008 11:37:29 -0700
X-Trace: forums-1-dub 1209580649 10.22.241.152 (30 Apr 2008 11:37:29 -0700)
X-Original-Trace: 30 Apr 2008 11:37:29 -0700, vip152.sybase.com
Path: forums-1-dub!not-for-mail
Xref: forums-1-dub sybase.public.commercial-isv.general:123
Article PK: 103840

I am curious about what direction other ISVs are taking with their
applications.

We have a 2 tiered C/S application. A number of years ago we tried to
convince our customer base to move to a 3 tiered system but had little or no
interest. Now with version 11 we are again looking at what direction we
want to take.

We understand that the handwriting is on the wall for Win32 apps. This
means that we must at least migrate to WinForms at some point. We started
this process last year but stopped because of the many problems we
experienced with the initial release of version 11. When 11.1 come along we
went back to it and made a little more progress. Now with 11.2 we have
started again and it looks like we may get even closer to having something.

Our biggest road block with 11.2 is with our 3rd party controls (ActiveX and
OCX's) and interfaces/integration (COM) with other applications. While
these obstacles can technically be overcome, the costs and time requirement
leads us to wonder if we should just stop and wait for version 12. However,
in today's market place that is a bit risky, in that version 12 is way off
and there are no assurances as to its release date.

So, what are others doing? Are you sucessfully migrating your Win32 apps to
WinForms or WebForms? If so, have you been able to maintain the same code
base between the Win32 and the .Net apps?

What about 3rd party visual controls? Are you replacing them with .NET
versions and wrapping them? Or are you using the old ones and wrapping
thoses? In either case, what about performance? What about COM, are you
migratign them to .Net assemblies?

A lot of questions but they come from over a year of working with version 11
and its beta and we still feel like we are not quite there yet.

Thanks
Randy


Jeff Gibson Posted on 2008-06-26 21:25:04.0Z
Reply-To: "Jeff Gibson" <jgibson@interceptsolutions.com>
From: "Jeff Gibson" <jgibson@interceptsolutions.com>
Newsgroups: sybase.public.commercial-isv.general
References: <4818bc69$1@forums-1-dub>
Subject: Re: Curious
Lines: 73
Organization: Intercept Solutions
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5512
X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Response
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.5512
NNTP-Posting-Host: vip152.sybase.com
X-Original-NNTP-Posting-Host: vip152.sybase.com
Message-ID: <48640930@forums-1-dub>
Date: 26 Jun 2008 14:25:04 -0700
X-Trace: forums-1-dub 1214515504 10.22.241.152 (26 Jun 2008 14:25:04 -0700)
X-Original-Trace: 26 Jun 2008 14:25:04 -0700, vip152.sybase.com
Path: forums-1-dub!not-for-mail
Xref: forums-1-dub sybase.public.commercial-isv.general:134
Article PK: 103851

Sorry for the delay Randy,

See inline....

"Randy" <cgreenwellNOSPAMPlease@sparusa.com> wrote in message
news:4818bc69$1@forums-1-dub...
>I am curious about what direction other ISVs are taking with their
>applications.
>
> We have a 2 tiered C/S application. A number of years ago we tried to
> convince our customer base to move to a 3 tiered system but had little or
> no interest. Now with version 11 we are again looking at what direction
> we want to take.

Actually you have me curious. What were you trying to acomplish with the
third tier? I've kind of looked into the multi-tier approach, but wasn't
able to come up with a reason to go that way with a commercial application.
Especially since we're not there on site to support the system. Just
curious what you were looking into.

> We understand that the handwriting is on the wall for Win32 apps. This
> means that we must at least migrate to WinForms at some point. We started
> this process last year but stopped because of the many problems we
> experienced with the initial release of version 11. When 11.1 come along
> we went back to it and made a little more progress. Now with 11.2 we have
> started again and it looks like we may get even closer to having
> something.

You are correct. You will need to make the move to a WinForms app vs. a
Win32 app at some point. I honestly think your looking down the road a good
eight to ten years before Win32 support would be completely pulled. Just my
opinion coming from some things I have heard at some Microsoft events.

> Our biggest road block with 11.2 is with our 3rd party controls (ActiveX
> and OCX's) and interfaces/integration (COM) with other applications.
> While these obstacles can technically be overcome, the costs and time
> requirement leads us to wonder if we should just stop and wait for version
> 12. However, in today's market place that is a bit risky, in that version
> 12 is way off and there are no assurances as to its release date.

What kind of ActiveX/COM problems are you having? I was under the
impression that support was going to continue for these types of interfaces.
I haven't tested standard Win32 ActiveX's in a .Net style application. Does
that break things?

> So, what are others doing? Are you sucessfully migrating your Win32 apps
> to WinForms or WebForms? If so, have you been able to maintain the same
> code base between the Win32 and the .Net apps?

I think our goal will initially be .Net WinForms, but we are also looking
into the WPF deployment option as well.

> What about 3rd party visual controls? Are you replacing them with .NET
> versions and wrapping them? Or are you using the old ones and wrapping
> thoses? In either case, what about performance? What about COM, are you
> migratign them to .Net assemblies?

I'm going to have to look into this.

> A lot of questions but they come from over a year of working with version
> 11 and its beta and we still feel like we are not quite there yet.

Great questions. Are you coming to TechWave? These questions would be
great there.

> Thanks
> Randy

Jeff Gibson
Intercept Solutions - Sybase SQL Anywhere OEM Partner
Nashville, TN


Randy Posted on 2008-06-27 14:09:42.0Z
From: "Randy" <cgreenwellNOSPAMPlease@sparusa.com>
Newsgroups: sybase.public.commercial-isv.general
References: <4818bc69$1@forums-1-dub> <48640930@forums-1-dub>
Subject: Re: Curious
Lines: 132
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.3138
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3198
X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Response
NNTP-Posting-Host: vip152.sybase.com
X-Original-NNTP-Posting-Host: vip152.sybase.com
Message-ID: <4864f4a6$1@forums-1-dub>
Date: 27 Jun 2008 07:09:42 -0700
X-Trace: forums-1-dub 1214575782 10.22.241.152 (27 Jun 2008 07:09:42 -0700)
X-Original-Trace: 27 Jun 2008 07:09:42 -0700, vip152.sybase.com
Path: forums-1-dub!not-for-mail
Xref: forums-1-dub sybase.public.commercial-isv.general:137
Article PK: 103855

Jeff,

Some rambling thoughts in-line below...

Randy

"Jeff Gibson" <jgibson@interceptsolutions.com> wrote in message
news:48640930@forums-1-dub...
> Sorry for the delay Randy,
>
> See inline....
>
> "Randy" <cgreenwellNOSPAMPlease@sparusa.com> wrote in message
> news:4818bc69$1@forums-1-dub...
>>I am curious about what direction other ISVs are taking with their
>>applications.
>>
>> We have a 2 tiered C/S application. A number of years ago we tried to
>> convince our customer base to move to a 3 tiered system but had little or
>> no interest. Now with version 11 we are again looking at what direction
>> we want to take.
>
> Actually you have me curious. What were you trying to acomplish with the
> third tier? I've kind of looked into the multi-tier approach, but wasn't
> able to come up with a reason to go that way with a commercial
> application. Especially since we're not there on site to support the
> system. Just curious what you were looking into.

One of our customers has a large number of users and was interested in a
thin client solution and reducing the number of DB client licenses. So we
comptemplated moving all of the business logic NVO's to EAServer to take
adavantage of the caching and database connectivity features. We polled our
client base to see if there were any other interesed parties and there were
none. It did not make economical sense to go this route for one customer.

>
>> We understand that the handwriting is on the wall for Win32 apps. This
>> means that we must at least migrate to WinForms at some point. We
>> started this process last year but stopped because of the many problems
>> we experienced with the initial release of version 11. When 11.1 come
>> along we went back to it and made a little more progress. Now with 11.2
>> we have started again and it looks like we may get even closer to having
>> something.
>
> You are correct. You will need to make the move to a WinForms app vs. a
> Win32 app at some point. I honestly think your looking down the road a
> good eight to ten years before Win32 support would be completely pulled.
> Just my opinion coming from some things I have heard at some Microsoft
> events.
>
>> Our biggest road block with 11.2 is with our 3rd party controls (ActiveX
>> and OCX's) and interfaces/integration (COM) with other applications.
>> While these obstacles can technically be overcome, the costs and time
>> requirement leads us to wonder if we should just stop and wait for
>> version 12. However, in today's market place that is a bit risky, in
>> that version 12 is way off and there are no assurances as to its release
>> date.
>
> What kind of ActiveX/COM problems are you having? I was under the
> impression that support was going to continue for these types of
> interfaces. I haven't tested standard Win32 ActiveX's in a .Net style
> application. Does that break things?
>

Look at chapter 11 in the HTML books for unsupported features. We use a
couple of ActiveX visual controls, for example a graphing package and a
barcode package, which must use the Microsoft ActiveX wrapper to work with
.Net. Neither work 100 percent and often crash an burn. The vendor will
not fix the problems and has recommened their .Net versions, which cannot be
used yet since PB currently does not support visual .Net controls.

We are encountering a number of other issues with Microsoft Project and
Office integration. In our WIN32 applications we activate these guys
"in-place" and take advantage of merging the menus and customizing them for
our needs. This makes the user experience a seamless integration. This
does not work with WINFORMS.

On the COM side, we use COM to integrate our application with other vendors,
such as accounting systems and CAD systems. There are plans for PB to phase
out the COM project type in the future.

These are minor issues and probally a good thing because they have made us
re-think our approach.

>> So, what are others doing? Are you sucessfully migrating your Win32 apps
>> to WinForms or WebForms? If so, have you been able to maintain the same
>> code base between the Win32 and the .Net apps?
>
> I think our goal will initially be .Net WinForms, but we are also looking
> into the WPF deployment option as well.

I agree. One good thing about migrating from WIN32 to WINFORMs has been the
process of cleanning up the application code. Our appication was started
with version 1 and has carried a lot of baggage with it over the years. Its
amazing how many PB bug work arrrounds are still in the code which are no
longer needed but they still do the job. For example, we have our own
calendar control (written with PB) for the DW, written back in the version 3
days and still in use today. Another good one is our own treeview control
(written in PB). We had these things years before they were included in PB
but to decouple them and replace them with the native PB controls was a lot
of work.

Doing these things now will greatly benefit us when WPF is available. Based
on all the info I have right now, I do not see us releasing a .NET version
of our application until then.

>> What about 3rd party visual controls? Are you replacing them with .NET
>> versions and wrapping them? Or are you using the old ones and wrapping
>> thoses? In either case, what about performance? What about COM, are you
>> migratign them to .Net assemblies?
>
> I'm going to have to look into this.
>
>> A lot of questions but they come from over a year of working with version
>> 11 and its beta and we still feel like we are not quite there yet.
>
> Great questions. Are you coming to TechWave? These questions would be
> great there.
>

Would love to but unfortunatly I cannot. I have a scheduling conflict with
my favorite passtime, racing sail boats.

>> Thanks
>> Randy
>
> Jeff Gibson
> Intercept Solutions - Sybase SQL Anywhere OEM Partner
> Nashville, TN
>


Jeff Gibson Posted on 2008-06-27 16:51:55.0Z
Reply-To: "Jeff Gibson" <jgibson@interceptsolutions.com>
From: "Jeff Gibson" <jgibson@interceptsolutions.com>
Newsgroups: sybase.public.commercial-isv.general
References: <4818bc69$1@forums-1-dub> <48640930@forums-1-dub> <4864f4a6$1@forums-1-dub>
Subject: Re: Curious
Lines: 156
Organization: Intercept Solutions
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5512
X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Response
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.5512
NNTP-Posting-Host: vip152.sybase.com
X-Original-NNTP-Posting-Host: vip152.sybase.com
Message-ID: <48651aab$1@forums-1-dub>
Date: 27 Jun 2008 09:51:55 -0700
X-Trace: forums-1-dub 1214585515 10.22.241.152 (27 Jun 2008 09:51:55 -0700)
X-Original-Trace: 27 Jun 2008 09:51:55 -0700, vip152.sybase.com
Path: forums-1-dub!not-for-mail
Xref: forums-1-dub sybase.public.commercial-isv.general:138
Article PK: 103860

My question is this...

On your COM object issue. Is Microsoft planning on deprecating COM? I'm
curious why Sybase would want to remove it from PB. In fact, we had just
started looking into what we could do to open up our application to third
party apps, and was looking at COM as a mechanism of doing that.

Will .NET assemblies basically give you the same options, just in the .NET
world?

I'm looking into this and may try and talk to Dave Fish about it when I'm at
TechWave.

Any other thoughts you might have on COM object development?

TIA

Jeff Gibson
Intercept Solutions - Sybase SQL Anywhere OEM Partner
Nashville, TN

"Randy" <cgreenwellNOSPAMPlease@sparusa.com> wrote in message
news:4864f4a6$1@forums-1-dub...
> Jeff,
>
> Some rambling thoughts in-line below...
>
> Randy
>
> "Jeff Gibson" <jgibson@interceptsolutions.com> wrote in message
> news:48640930@forums-1-dub...
>> Sorry for the delay Randy,
>>
>> See inline....
>>
>> "Randy" <cgreenwellNOSPAMPlease@sparusa.com> wrote in message
>> news:4818bc69$1@forums-1-dub...
>>>I am curious about what direction other ISVs are taking with their
>>>applications.
>>>
>>> We have a 2 tiered C/S application. A number of years ago we tried to
>>> convince our customer base to move to a 3 tiered system but had little
>>> or no interest. Now with version 11 we are again looking at what
>>> direction we want to take.
>>
>> Actually you have me curious. What were you trying to acomplish with the
>> third tier? I've kind of looked into the multi-tier approach, but wasn't
>> able to come up with a reason to go that way with a commercial
>> application. Especially since we're not there on site to support the
>> system. Just curious what you were looking into.
>
> One of our customers has a large number of users and was interested in a
> thin client solution and reducing the number of DB client licenses. So we
> comptemplated moving all of the business logic NVO's to EAServer to take
> adavantage of the caching and database connectivity features. We polled
> our client base to see if there were any other interesed parties and there
> were none. It did not make economical sense to go this route for one
> customer.
>
>>
>>> We understand that the handwriting is on the wall for Win32 apps. This
>>> means that we must at least migrate to WinForms at some point. We
>>> started this process last year but stopped because of the many problems
>>> we experienced with the initial release of version 11. When 11.1 come
>>> along we went back to it and made a little more progress. Now with 11.2
>>> we have started again and it looks like we may get even closer to having
>>> something.
>>
>> You are correct. You will need to make the move to a WinForms app vs. a
>> Win32 app at some point. I honestly think your looking down the road a
>> good eight to ten years before Win32 support would be completely pulled.
>> Just my opinion coming from some things I have heard at some Microsoft
>> events.
>>
>>> Our biggest road block with 11.2 is with our 3rd party controls (ActiveX
>>> and OCX's) and interfaces/integration (COM) with other applications.
>>> While these obstacles can technically be overcome, the costs and time
>>> requirement leads us to wonder if we should just stop and wait for
>>> version 12. However, in today's market place that is a bit risky, in
>>> that version 12 is way off and there are no assurances as to its release
>>> date.
>>
>> What kind of ActiveX/COM problems are you having? I was under the
>> impression that support was going to continue for these types of
>> interfaces. I haven't tested standard Win32 ActiveX's in a .Net style
>> application. Does that break things?
>>
>
> Look at chapter 11 in the HTML books for unsupported features. We use a
> couple of ActiveX visual controls, for example a graphing package and a
> barcode package, which must use the Microsoft ActiveX wrapper to work with
> .Net. Neither work 100 percent and often crash an burn. The vendor will
> not fix the problems and has recommened their .Net versions, which cannot
> be used yet since PB currently does not support visual .Net controls.
>
> We are encountering a number of other issues with Microsoft Project and
> Office integration. In our WIN32 applications we activate these guys
> "in-place" and take advantage of merging the menus and customizing them
> for our needs. This makes the user experience a seamless integration.
> This does not work with WINFORMS.
>
> On the COM side, we use COM to integrate our application with other
> vendors, such as accounting systems and CAD systems. There are plans for
> PB to phase out the COM project type in the future.
>
> These are minor issues and probally a good thing because they have made us
> re-think our approach.
>
>>> So, what are others doing? Are you sucessfully migrating your Win32 apps
>>> to WinForms or WebForms? If so, have you been able to maintain the same
>>> code base between the Win32 and the .Net apps?
>>
>> I think our goal will initially be .Net WinForms, but we are also looking
>> into the WPF deployment option as well.
>
> I agree. One good thing about migrating from WIN32 to WINFORMs has been
> the process of cleanning up the application code. Our appication was
> started with version 1 and has carried a lot of baggage with it over the
> years. Its amazing how many PB bug work arrrounds are still in the code
> which are no longer needed but they still do the job. For example, we
> have our own calendar control (written with PB) for the DW, written back
> in the version 3 days and still in use today. Another good one is our own
> treeview control (written in PB). We had these things years before they
> were included in PB but to decouple them and replace them with the native
> PB controls was a lot of work.
>
> Doing these things now will greatly benefit us when WPF is available.
> Based on all the info I have right now, I do not see us releasing a .NET
> version of our application until then.
>
>>> What about 3rd party visual controls? Are you replacing them with .NET
>>> versions and wrapping them? Or are you using the old ones and wrapping
>>> thoses? In either case, what about performance? What about COM, are you
>>> migratign them to .Net assemblies?
>>
>> I'm going to have to look into this.
>>
>>> A lot of questions but they come from over a year of working with
>>> version 11 and its beta and we still feel like we are not quite there
>>> yet.
>>
>> Great questions. Are you coming to TechWave? These questions would be
>> great there.
>>
>
> Would love to but unfortunatly I cannot. I have a scheduling conflict with
> my favorite passtime, racing sail boats.
>
>>> Thanks
>>> Randy
>>
>> Jeff Gibson
>> Intercept Solutions - Sybase SQL Anywhere OEM Partner
>> Nashville, TN


John Strano[Sybase] Posted on 2008-06-27 19:04:20.0Z
From: "John Strano[Sybase]" <nichtspamjstrano@csi.com>
Newsgroups: sybase.public.commercial-isv.general
References: <4818bc69$1@forums-1-dub> <48640930@forums-1-dub> <4864f4a6$1@forums-1-dub> <48651aab$1@forums-1-dub>
Subject: Re: Curious
Lines: 179
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2180
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Response
NNTP-Posting-Host: vip152.sybase.com
X-Original-NNTP-Posting-Host: vip152.sybase.com
Message-ID: <486539b4@forums-1-dub>
Date: 27 Jun 2008 12:04:20 -0700
X-Trace: forums-1-dub 1214593460 10.22.241.152 (27 Jun 2008 12:04:20 -0700)
X-Original-Trace: 27 Jun 2008 12:04:20 -0700, vip152.sybase.com
X-Authenticated-User: TeamSybase
Path: forums-1-dub!not-for-mail
Xref: forums-1-dub sybase.public.commercial-isv.general:139
Article PK: 103856

There were air brakes put on this decision internally...

COM/COM+ will be in PowerBuilder 11.5, but there were
ramifications for documentation delivery time lines...

Resolution:

--Put COM/COM+ back into PB 11.5. Proceed with product GA as scheduled.
Delay release of docs by 2 weeks.

--add one line of reference in online help to reference COM/COM+ in the
online book.


--
John Strano - Sybase Technology Evangelist

"Jeff Gibson" <jgibson@interceptsolutions.com> wrote in message
news:48651aab$1@forums-1-dub...
> My question is this...
>
> On your COM object issue. Is Microsoft planning on deprecating COM? I'm
> curious why Sybase would want to remove it from PB. In fact, we had just
> started looking into what we could do to open up our application to third
> party apps, and was looking at COM as a mechanism of doing that.
>
> Will .NET assemblies basically give you the same options, just in the .NET
> world?
>
> I'm looking into this and may try and talk to Dave Fish about it when I'm
> at TechWave.
>
> Any other thoughts you might have on COM object development?
>
> TIA
>
> Jeff Gibson
> Intercept Solutions - Sybase SQL Anywhere OEM Partner
> Nashville, TN
>
> "Randy" <cgreenwellNOSPAMPlease@sparusa.com> wrote in message
> news:4864f4a6$1@forums-1-dub...
>> Jeff,
>>
>> Some rambling thoughts in-line below...
>>
>> Randy
>>
>> "Jeff Gibson" <jgibson@interceptsolutions.com> wrote in message
>> news:48640930@forums-1-dub...
>>> Sorry for the delay Randy,
>>>
>>> See inline....
>>>
>>> "Randy" <cgreenwellNOSPAMPlease@sparusa.com> wrote in message
>>> news:4818bc69$1@forums-1-dub...
>>>>I am curious about what direction other ISVs are taking with their
>>>>applications.
>>>>
>>>> We have a 2 tiered C/S application. A number of years ago we tried to
>>>> convince our customer base to move to a 3 tiered system but had little
>>>> or no interest. Now with version 11 we are again looking at what
>>>> direction we want to take.
>>>
>>> Actually you have me curious. What were you trying to acomplish with
>>> the third tier? I've kind of looked into the multi-tier approach, but
>>> wasn't able to come up with a reason to go that way with a commercial
>>> application. Especially since we're not there on site to support the
>>> system. Just curious what you were looking into.
>>
>> One of our customers has a large number of users and was interested in a
>> thin client solution and reducing the number of DB client licenses. So
>> we comptemplated moving all of the business logic NVO's to EAServer to
>> take adavantage of the caching and database connectivity features. We
>> polled our client base to see if there were any other interesed parties
>> and there were none. It did not make economical sense to go this route
>> for one customer.
>>
>>>
>>>> We understand that the handwriting is on the wall for Win32 apps. This
>>>> means that we must at least migrate to WinForms at some point. We
>>>> started this process last year but stopped because of the many problems
>>>> we experienced with the initial release of version 11. When 11.1 come
>>>> along we went back to it and made a little more progress. Now with
>>>> 11.2 we have started again and it looks like we may get even closer to
>>>> having something.
>>>
>>> You are correct. You will need to make the move to a WinForms app vs. a
>>> Win32 app at some point. I honestly think your looking down the road a
>>> good eight to ten years before Win32 support would be completely pulled.
>>> Just my opinion coming from some things I have heard at some Microsoft
>>> events.
>>>
>>>> Our biggest road block with 11.2 is with our 3rd party controls
>>>> (ActiveX and OCX's) and interfaces/integration (COM) with other
>>>> applications. While these obstacles can technically be overcome, the
>>>> costs and time requirement leads us to wonder if we should just stop
>>>> and wait for version 12. However, in today's market place that is a
>>>> bit risky, in that version 12 is way off and there are no assurances as
>>>> to its release date.
>>>
>>> What kind of ActiveX/COM problems are you having? I was under the
>>> impression that support was going to continue for these types of
>>> interfaces. I haven't tested standard Win32 ActiveX's in a .Net style
>>> application. Does that break things?
>>>
>>
>> Look at chapter 11 in the HTML books for unsupported features. We use a
>> couple of ActiveX visual controls, for example a graphing package and a
>> barcode package, which must use the Microsoft ActiveX wrapper to work
>> with .Net. Neither work 100 percent and often crash an burn. The vendor
>> will not fix the problems and has recommened their .Net versions, which
>> cannot be used yet since PB currently does not support visual .Net
>> controls.
>>
>> We are encountering a number of other issues with Microsoft Project and
>> Office integration. In our WIN32 applications we activate these guys
>> "in-place" and take advantage of merging the menus and customizing them
>> for our needs. This makes the user experience a seamless integration.
>> This does not work with WINFORMS.
>>
>> On the COM side, we use COM to integrate our application with other
>> vendors, such as accounting systems and CAD systems. There are plans for
>> PB to phase out the COM project type in the future.
>>
>> These are minor issues and probally a good thing because they have made
>> us re-think our approach.
>>
>>>> So, what are others doing? Are you sucessfully migrating your Win32
>>>> apps to WinForms or WebForms? If so, have you been able to maintain
>>>> the same code base between the Win32 and the .Net apps?
>>>
>>> I think our goal will initially be .Net WinForms, but we are also
>>> looking into the WPF deployment option as well.
>>
>> I agree. One good thing about migrating from WIN32 to WINFORMs has been
>> the process of cleanning up the application code. Our appication was
>> started with version 1 and has carried a lot of baggage with it over the
>> years. Its amazing how many PB bug work arrrounds are still in the code
>> which are no longer needed but they still do the job. For example, we
>> have our own calendar control (written with PB) for the DW, written back
>> in the version 3 days and still in use today. Another good one is our
>> own treeview control (written in PB). We had these things years before
>> they were included in PB but to decouple them and replace them with the
>> native PB controls was a lot of work.
>>
>> Doing these things now will greatly benefit us when WPF is available.
>> Based on all the info I have right now, I do not see us releasing a .NET
>> version of our application until then.
>>
>>>> What about 3rd party visual controls? Are you replacing them with .NET
>>>> versions and wrapping them? Or are you using the old ones and wrapping
>>>> thoses? In either case, what about performance? What about COM, are
>>>> you migratign them to .Net assemblies?
>>>
>>> I'm going to have to look into this.
>>>
>>>> A lot of questions but they come from over a year of working with
>>>> version 11 and its beta and we still feel like we are not quite there
>>>> yet.
>>>
>>> Great questions. Are you coming to TechWave? These questions would be
>>> great there.
>>>
>>
>> Would love to but unfortunatly I cannot. I have a scheduling conflict
>> with my favorite passtime, racing sail boats.
>>
>>>> Thanks
>>>> Randy
>>>
>>> Jeff Gibson
>>> Intercept Solutions - Sybase SQL Anywhere OEM Partner
>>> Nashville, TN
>
>