Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!dasys1!alexis
From: alexis@dasys1.UUCP (Alexis Rosen)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac
Subject: Re: Fourth Dimension, is it any good? - Yes! (No!)
Message-ID: <5725@dasys1.UUCP>
Date: 25 Jul 88 09:23:38 GMT
Lines: 133


Recently, Olle Nilsson (OLLE@ISAGEL.SUNET.SE) wrote:
> [general praise for 4D, and some complaints] 
>1. Included layouts. Database structure: I have one file with two or more sub-
>files. Application: I want to display two different included layouts from two
>different subfiles in one parent layout. This is not possible. 4D will only
>show the layout and its data for the currently selected included layout. The
>other included layouts on the parent layout are all erased from data and even
>erased from the layout itself. Only a blank rectangular space gives you a
>painful reminder that there should have been more data on the screen then is
>actually displayed...
> 
>I don't like this. It can be considered a bug or a feature but I would really
>like to have it fixed. I can't see any reason for displaying only one included
>layout at a time. Limitations in programs annoy me, and limitations in 
>developers packages gives me an *outburst* of anger.

You sound just like me. The problem with 4D is that the entire program is 
riddled with limitations like that: Things which ought to work, but don't. 
Sometimes, you get a tech note three months after figuring out the problem 
saying "Don't do that since it won't work." For example, "Don't delete records 
within sub-layouts," or, "Don't change the current record selection within 
'Modify Selection'."  This is not what I call good technical support! What's 
worse, many of these limitations are actually bugs, in that they were supposed 
to work, but didn't (the modify selection one is a good example).

>2. Speed of picture handling. It's PAINFULLY slow! Is this going to be speeded
>up? I sure hope so, because just to move a reasonably sized picture in a
>picture data field takes some 1 sec (!!!) between screen updates even on a
>MacII.
 
Welcome to the wonderful slow-motion world of 4D. The word 'fast' isn't in 
Acius' vocabulary. In fact, if Acius ever comes through with it's upgrade to 
1.1, or whatever they call it, and even if it IS six times faster, it will 
still be pathetically slow at most things. I could bitch about this for days, 
but I'll let it speak for itself.
 
>3. Memory limitations. On the MacII I have noticed that if you set the mapping
>of your colour screen to 256 bits, every now and then you get "Memory Almost
>Full, Please Quit As Soon As Possible" messages. This is fixed if you turn the
>mapping to 2 bits. Why is this? Bug to correct?
> [ and shouldn't all the bitmaps be in the video card? ]

No, this is one thing you can't fault them on. It is a property of the Mac II. 
While the screen pixmap is on the video card, everything else is in system RAM. 
The background graphics of your screens are probably kept in an off-screen 
pixmap in order to facilitate speedy screen refreshing. Many other programs 
have problems running in 8-bit mode on a 1MB Mac II for the same reason. 
Furthermore, you are storing pixmaps in your datafile, and those are kept in 
memory too when they are on an active screen.

>4. Global Procedures (speed of). Can thay be made to run faster? Optimization?
>One solution is of course to use external procedures, but life sure would be
>simpler if this was unneccessary. My major problem, is to read data files with
>"4D-Talk" (4D's programming language) and this is really slow. (I have enorm-
>ousely large data files, and many of them too...)

If you have medium or large files (over 10K records), don't use 4D. If you do
any table-level manipulation of your data regularly, you'll die of old age
waiting for it to process your data. Import and Export are particulary
outrageous.

>5. Importing pictures to 4D. How is this done in a smart way? Say that I have
>some 20 picures to store in my database. I don't want to cut and past in all
>these pictures manually via the clipboard. So what do I do? Has anyone done
>anything about this problem? Perhaps written an extarnal procedure that reads
>pictures form the clipboard or a file and puts them into picture fields in
>some predefined 4D-database? Postings please!?!

Nobody has really dealt with this well, yet. The FoxBase people are working on 
some neat things, but they are not quite as automatic as what you want.

>6. Text fields. Really annoying in one of my applications! You cannot use more
>then one font at a time with text field data. (Defined in your output layout)
>[i.e. he wants the new textedit stuff to work]

Well, I agree that it would be really nice, but I also know that most people 
don't have significant need for this (read, 'most database-buying 
businesspeople'). This may change in the future, but for now it is true.
However, it would not be so difficult to do (Chuq says otherwise, but he may
have forgotten that the new TextEdit will handle most of that automagically).
That doesn't mean it would be _easy_ to do, and there are probably many things
that are higher on most peoples' most-wanted-features list.

>7. Run-Time modules. Why stick to this "by one at a time" model? Can one get
>an unlimited Run-Time Module licence for 4D? Whitout paying MegaBucks? I think
>the cost for a module is ridiculously high here in Sweden. Some +100$ a piece.
>Far too high. I believe in selling reasonably priced software. An application
>should not have to cost more then maximum some 100$ even if it is complex, and
>100$ - 100$ = 0$ (No profit = I starve to Death)

Why? Because they make more money that way. They think. I just switch to a 
company with a more reasonable pricing scheme. (Who? Fox, of course :-)

---
Someday when I have time, I will post an article where I really trash 4D. Not a 
flamefest, just a point-by-point analysis describing why I think it's a
miserable product for most uses. (There are some cases where it works decently
well.) For now, I will just suggest that people compare 4D with programs like
FileMaker 4 or FoxBase+/Mac.

{Mini-flame}
I really trusted Kawasaki. I paid them $700 for a product in early Beta. Then I 
sent them a 12 page typed memo with about 50 documented and reproduceable bugs 
and numerous suggestions. Two months later they release the product. It is now 
a year later and they have fixed ONE bug. There have been no serious upgrades. 
The V1.0.4 upgrade form I sent in three months ago vanished into some pit at 
Acius, so I have yet to see even that feeble revision. Acius is using its name 
to sell a product that could not long survive on its own merits anymore. The 
situation was different a year ago and they could afford to be lazy. Today it's 
a different story.
{Bunsen burner off}

Dropping 4D was one of the smartest moves Apple ever made.


I know there are many people out there who love 4D. Some of them will probably 
accuse me of slandering {Acius, Kawasaki, 4D, motherhood & apple pie}. Flame 
all you want, but note that I use (or have used) all of these products, 
professionally. It's what I do to make a living. If you manage a mailing list 
with 4D, there's nothing wrong with that. But that's not the type of 
application that 4D was meant for, and that's not the kind of thing that will 
show 4D's flaws.

I have no affiliation with Acius except as an utterly dissatisfied customer.
I have no affiliation with Fox Software except as a very satisfied customer.

----
Alexis Rosen                       {allegra,philabs,cmcl2}!phri\
Writing from                                {harpo,cmcl2}!cucard!dasys1!alexis
The Big Electric Cat                  {portal,well,sun}!hoptoad/
Public UNIX                         if mail fails: ...cmcl2!cucard!cunixc!abr1
Best path: uunet!dasys1!alexis