Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!uflorida!gatech!mcnc!uvaarpa!vger.nsu.edu!manes
From: manes@vger.nsu.edu
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga
Subject: Re: CANDO Info. - request (once again)
Message-ID: <223.273ae51e@vger.nsu.edu>
Date: 9 Nov 90 21:19:26 GMT
References: <834.272c0136@sleepy.bmd.trw.com> <835.272db412@sleepy.bmd.trw.com> <840.273843e0@sleepy.bmd.trw.com>
Lines: 32

In article <840.273843e0@sleepy.bmd.trw.com>, rthorstr@sleepy.bmd.trw.com writes:
>   
>  Also, is there anyone out there that has programmed using both AMIGAVISION and
>  CANDO and can give me their impressions on the the strengths and weaknesses
>  of the two packages in comparison to each other?
>   
>                                      thanks, 
>   
>                                               R.T.

I have both packages and like both.

I find that CanDO is annoyingly slow in moving through the maze of windows
and requestors, and scripting.  I do like the fact that you can make your
own intuition type windows and screens where in AmigaVision you can not.
Cando seriously needs a 'database' capability, it is the lacking of 
ability that has caused me to abandon it for now.

AmigaVision is a large program with a lot of capability, more than even
what appears on the surface.  It does not do as well as CanDo does in the
applicaiton development area, but you can work around most of its weakneses.
 
I think you should get both!
 
 -mark=
     
 +--------+   ==================================================          
 | \/     |   Mark D. Manes                    "Mr. AmigaVision" 
 | /\  \/ |   manes@vger.nsu.edu                                        
 |     /  |   (804) 683-2532    "Make up your own mind! - AMIGA"
 +--------+   ==================================================