RE: Is anybody using Seagull's new Transidiom software (Screen Scraper)?

> From: trevor perry
>
> You can guess which one looked the
> best, was the cheapest development and the easiest to maintain...

Actually, no I can't guess, even though you stacked the deck pretty well.

"Looked the best" depends on your idea of good looking.  Some people think
newlook is an acceptable interface, some people don't.  Some people think
WebFacing looks good, some don't.  The only sure way is to pilot the project
and let your users see if they're still productive on the new interface.
And the more flexible the interface the better, which is why most people
like PSC/400's capabilities.

Cheapest development depends on your definition of cheapest.  Startup cost?
Consulting costs?  Workstation costs?  User-based licensing?  Integration
into development?  Change management?  Multi-site deployment?  Total cost of
ownership is a pretty large issue.

The easiest to maintain is also an issue.  It depends on the tool,
certainly.  A rules-based UI generator has certain benefits, but falls down
when a program breaks the rules.  A completely custom interface is the most
flexible, but requires more work when the program changes.  The best of both
worlds would be a UI generator that is customizable.  Nathan's snippet
approach is one of the best along those lines, and in fact we're reviewing
that kind of technology as the front end to PSC/400.

Joe Pluta
www.plutabrothers.com