Home » Developing U++ » External resources » XVT comparison missing
| XVT comparison missing [message #14847] |
Mon, 17 March 2008 23:52  |
XVT_rocks
Messages: 3
Registered: March 2008
Location: NC, US
|
Junior Member |
|
|
Hi guys,
Love your site, very well done, great information.
One thing seemed glaringly lacking--I'd love to see you do a comparison of U++ and XVT, another C/C++ cross Platform Development Toolkit. It has been around for a very long time. Current version is 5.8. It can be downloaded and evaluated for free for 30 days. (Yes, it is a commercial product, and yes, I work there. But heck, I'm glad to see more competitors providing solutions. Go for it guys!)
see www.xvt.com
|
|
|
|
| Re: XVT comparison missing [message #14851 is a reply to message #14847] |
Tue, 18 March 2008 07:57  |
 |
mirek
Messages: 14255
Registered: November 2005
|
Ultimate Member |
|
|
| XVT_rocks wrote on Mon, 17 March 2008 18:52 |
Hi guys,
Love your site, very well done, great information.
One thing seemed glaringly lacking--I'd love to see you do a comparison of U++ and XVT, another C/C++ cross Platform Development Toolkit. It has been around for a very long time. Current version is 5.8. It can be downloaded and evaluated for free for 30 days. (Yes, it is a commercial product, and yes, I work there. But heck, I'm glad to see more competitors providing solutions. Go for it guys!)
see www.xvt.com
|
First time I hear about it.
void CPokerWin::DoCommand( long theCommand, void * theData )
{
switch( theCommand )
{
is all I need to know 
Mirek
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: XVT comparison missing [message #14867 is a reply to message #14851] |
Tue, 18 March 2008 16:50 |
XVT_rocks
Messages: 3
Registered: March 2008
Location: NC, US
|
Junior Member |
|
|
[quote title=luzr wrote on Tue, 18 March 2008 02:57]| XVT_rocks wrote on Mon, 17 March 2008 18:52 |
First time I hear about it.
void CPokerWin::DoCommand( long theCommand, void * theData )
{
switch( theCommand )
{
is all I need to know
Mirek
|
Who doesn't love good, crisp sarcasm? That was funny, and no good comes from us taking ourselves too seriously.
But c'mon Mirek, come out and play for a bit, along the lines of "Compare and discuss other platforms, frameworks, IDE, toolkits, libraries, programming tips etc..."
XVT has been around for 18 years, and we have customers all over the world, from big names to two man shops happily pounding out and supporting their multi-platform-market product(s). Given the job you are tackling and the work you have done, I know you are much more capable than to merely dismiss a product like XVT out of hand from a snippet. We certainly assume you are doing some good work with your product, and it just might be the case we are as well. Both of us--and especially our user communities--can gain from a little joint exploration. Both of our products might become the stronger for it, and that is the real fun of our work.
Here is a starter intro: XVT supports both C and C++. You can write code on one development platform and port the same code to 12 other platforms, and compile it to run natively. These platforms include: Win32, Linux32, Win64, Linux64, Mac OS, Solaris, HP-UX and AIX.
XVT supports all Microsoft compilers, all gcc compilers, Xcode on the Mac, Sun Studio on Solaris, aCC on HP-UX and Visual Age on AIX. We have a Net version requiring only a recompile of existing XVT application to run a thin client with native look and feel across the internet. As to documentation, we have over 2,000 pages for our API alone.
Our GUI layout tools are clean and easy to use, supporting RAD development, and they deliver ANSI compliant C and C++ code.
|
|
|
|
| Re: XVT comparison missing [message #14868 is a reply to message #14867] |
Tue, 18 March 2008 17:27 |
cbpporter
Messages: 1427
Registered: September 2007
|
Ultimate Contributor |
|
|
I think that any comparison can not harm (as long it does not distract from priorities  ). If you have 18 years experience and a lot, your product probable is a viable solution for certain needs, even though is not one of the "bigger" players out there (I have never heard of it before too). So I gave a little look to the website.
Unfortunately, your website does not offer a lot of information beyond the basics. It is hard to form an opinion or to get meaningful information from it. I does not contain IMO anything that hooks you right from the start (as I saw on the U++ page on wikipedia when I started using it). Also the downloads page is a little confusing, without any link to register. I have to click Trial Versions first, and probably after registering, one can download. There also don't seem to be any documentation or tutorials to see the capabilities of the framework.
So the only information that is accessible is the two sample projects with their screenshot. I didn't look over the C sample, but the C++ doesn't look that bad. It certainly is a lot cleaner than MFC for example. But is also quite verbose. And that little switch is sure to not attract a lot of fans around here. Since I did not download it yet, I can not comment upon the code generators and their effectiveness.
I'll try to download it and give a more educated opinion in the near future, but I think I can assume safely that these two products were designed with very different goals in mind.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: XVT comparison missing [message #14874 is a reply to message #14868] |
Tue, 18 March 2008 18:40 |
XVT_rocks
Messages: 3
Registered: March 2008
Location: NC, US
|
Junior Member |
|
|
Totally agree on the critique of our XVT website. U++ has done a really nice job on theirs. We have not focused on marketing, and that is an important part of serving users/potential users. We are in the process of replacing the site, but it will probably be the end of April at best, more likely May.
Yes, it ain't that much fun being a "best kept secret!" Lots of folks never heard of XVT. We're gonna work on that, but still our focus is more on getting the next set of features and functions delivered *sigh*.
One thing that will be useful is to develop a feature/function overview and a series of training modules using Camtasia--that is a sweet and simple tool that works well for demonstrating products like U++ and XVT.
If you have a chance, say more stuff about the focus. That sounds interesting. There are many ways to approach platform portability, as well as code writing. REALbasic certainly took an interesting approach! I'll post something about our approach/focus in a week or so, as well. It has been exciting to find U++. There are so many ways to skin a cat, as they say. No tool meets everyone's needs, even though we all tend to think we do it right or the best, etc. We do have the competitive spirit, but we also honestly appreciate having good competitors like U++ and Qt, etc. It proves the market's desire for solutions.
(And yes, Mindtraveller, I've been very upfront that I work at XVT, including using my corp email and website in profile, but I do want to be respectful and give credit to the U++ team for their hard work and successes.)
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: XVT comparison missing [message #14877 is a reply to message #14867] |
Tue, 18 March 2008 21:46 |
|
mirek
Messages: 14255
Registered: November 2005
|
Ultimate Member |
|
|
[quote title=XVT_rocks wrote on Tue, 18 March 2008 11:50]| luzr wrote on Tue, 18 March 2008 02:57 |
| XVT_rocks wrote on Mon, 17 March 2008 18:52 |
First time I hear about it.
void CPokerWin::DoCommand( long theCommand, void * theData )
{
switch( theCommand )
{
is all I need to know
Mirek
|
Who doesn't love good, crisp sarcasm? That was funny, and no good comes from us taking ourselves too seriously.
But c'mon Mirek, come out and play for a bit, along the lines of "Compare and discuss other platforms, frameworks, IDE, toolkits, libraries, programming tips etc..."
Here is a starter intro: XVT supports both C and C++. You can
|
Sorry that you see this as sarcasm. It is just XVT design seems not really unique and defintely not interesting to us.
Each time I am introduced to new toolkit, I search for two things: how output events are handled and how dialogs are managed. So really, I have seen how output events are propagated and that is all I needed to know
Mirek
|
|
|
|
| Re: XVT comparison missing [message #14880 is a reply to message #14874] |
Tue, 18 March 2008 22:00 |
|
mirek
Messages: 14255
Registered: November 2005
|
Ultimate Member |
|
|
| XVT_rocks wrote on Tue, 18 March 2008 13:40 |
Totally agree on the critique of our XVT website. U++ has done a really nice job on theirs. We have not focused on marketing, and that is an important part of serving users/potential users. We are in the process of replacing the site, but it will probably be the end of April at best, more likely May.
Yes, it ain't that much fun being a "best kept secret!" Lots of folks never heard of XVT. We're gonna work on that, but still our focus is more on getting the next set of features and functions delivered *sigh*.
|
Well, actually, what is the most interesting to me is that you seem to actually make some money (?) by developing GUI toolkit
Something I have always considered impossible by a long shot
(Although I make money USING the toolkit we have developed).
I also see surprising that you consider our "marketing" superior:)
| Quote: |
If you have a chance, say more stuff about the focus. That sounds interesting. There are many ways to approach platform portability, as well as code writing. REALbasic certainly took an interesting approach! I'll post something about our approach/focus in a week or so, as well. It has been exciting to find U++. There are so many ways to skin a cat, as they say. No tool meets everyone's needs, even though we all tend to think we do it right or the best, etc. We do have the competitive spirit, but we also honestly appreciate having good competitors like U++ and Qt, etc. It proves the market's desire for solutions.
(And yes, Mindtraveller, I've been very upfront that I work at XVT, including using my corp email and website in profile, but I do want to be respectful and give credit to the U++ team for their hard work and successes.)
|
Actually, why not. Well, first of all, it is still a bit weird feeling discussing it here, especially XVT being commercial toolkit, OTOH I always wanted this forum to be more "open", so I guess I can take it
Besides, there are too many secrets to resolve if you are going to do something like this and we are definitely willing to share... Maybe we can even get something back....
Mirek
|
|
|
|
| Re: XVT comparison missing [message #15582 is a reply to message #14874] |
Tue, 29 April 2008 17:43 |
lunetick
Messages: 1
Registered: April 2008
|
Junior Member |
|
|
A coworker sent a mail to XVT support team last week, no answer, the mail came back with an invalid mailbox error message. So we mailed the sales... 3 days later, still no answer.
I google this morning to find XVT user group, what ever... it seem to be a top secret product.
Also very nice of you to have changed all of your functions name between 3.0 and 5.0.
Sadly I got that new job few week ago and they use XVT...
|
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Sun Apr 27 00:30:35 CEST 2025
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.02463 seconds
|
Members
Pages
Help
Register
Login
Home
