As is my habit whenever I see Sources discussed, I forwarded
your post to Joe. In response, he is in the process of
setting up a mailing list to alert subscribers to new
issues. Keep an eye on your inbox.
Win an autographed copy of
"Mastering AutoCAD 2000 Objects"
by Dietmar Rudolph
"Terry W. Dotson" wrote in message
> Frank Oquendo wrote:
> > ... Joe Sutphin's "Sources" ezine ...
> I signed up for a year of that, don't think I *remembered*
to visit the
> site after the initial time. If it were something that
arrived by email
> in a PDF or something, it might be worth $30 per year.
I could say these same things about ToolPac or VLAX. You guys may fall off
the face of the earth at anytime (theoretically). Terry, I don't think you
would have appreciated someone discouraging the use of ToolPac just because
you were new to the arena. What happens if I become dependant on your
software and you go belly-up?
I am just trying to make the point that discouraging the use of the software
will make it harder for ObjectDCL to stick around. This does not help those
of us that use and like the program very much.
What about dockable forms, modeless forms, configuration tabs.....
Can VLAX or your method do all of these? (without using other arx)
"Terry W. Dotson" wrote in message
> Rodney McManamy wrote:
> > ... dialogs from www.objectdcl.com work great ...
> But what about when the ARX spec changes, and the objectdcl people
> decide they didn't make enough money and don't create another build.
> Not a good position to be in.
> You guys may fall off the face of the
> earth at anytime (theoretically).
Two words: open source. VLAX, ACCONT.ARX and the like cannot be
compared to commercial products since the availability of the source
means you always have options even if the original authors are no
longer supporting the effort.
Not to mention there's a big difference between utilities and
technology necessary to the proper operation of your code. No one's
code is going to stop working if Terry drops ToolPac.
I completely understand your argument, and I believe it is a valid one for
those particular kinds or products. However, you still did not answer my
question about modeless forms and config tabs. I would like to hear your
response to these and the other issues I mentioned.
For ToolPac I was really talking more about dependencies on things like his
AutoCell, TableTools, and LiveText. It would still cause major problems for
companies who have become dependant on his products if he goes belly-up. I
was responding more to him saying:
But what about when the ARX spec changes, and the objectdcl people
decide they didn't make enough money and don't create another build.
Not a good position to be in.
I think the exact same thing could be said about ToolPac.
Some of his utilities do have APIs, and if you use them and he goes belly
up, then yes, some code may have problems.
Trying not to sound like I have an attitude....
"Frank Oquendo" wrote in message
> > You guys may fall off the face of the
> > earth at anytime (theoretically).
> Two words: open source. VLAX, ACCONT.ARX and the like cannot be
> compared to commercial products since the availability of the source
> means you always have options even if the original authors are no
> longer supporting the effort.
> Not to mention there's a big difference between utilities and
> technology necessary to the proper operation of your code. No one's
> code is going to stop working if Terry drops ToolPac.
Hi since you fellows are discussing my program, ObjectDCL, I thought I might as well get in on the conversation. I have no plans on dumping ObjectDCL. It took a long time to write it, working on a part time basis after hours and week ends. Time I could have spent with my family. Now that it's for sale I am developing it on a full time basis. And have many ideas that I wish to add, both mine and wonderfull suggestions ObjectDCL users. Many of whom, have phoned me personally to thank me for creating the product and making such a useful set of tools and controls, that simple in some cases VBA can't duplicate without effort, or at all (both in R14 and R2000 and the next release once it's available). Now to answer the question, in the case that it doesn't make enough money, I will simply go back to developing it on a part time basis, as I did when I first created it. But I will tell you the install base is around 800 people now and I don't see an end of demand for ObjectDCL. Thanks Chad
VBA is not free! Sure it comes included with AutoCAD, but your time is not free. We don't work in a world where we program for free. If an AutoLisp programmer wants to create a dialog box in VBA he/she could spend up to a week just getting used to the programming language and how to make it work with AutoLisp. With ObjectDCL the same dialog box could be created in hours because there in no new language to learn and get used to. Trust me I have gone from AutoLisp to VB and then to C++ and each time there was a huge learning curved that slowed me down and cost me lots of time. ObjectDCL pays for itself in the first day compared to using VBA.
> ObjectDCL pays for itself in the first
> day compared to using VBA.
That all depends on the standard by which you measure cost and
benefit. For example, the week spent learning VBA forms (a little
exaggerated IMO, but why not) translates to a working knowledge of VBA
forms and a working knowledge of event-driven programming in *all*
VBA-enabled applications. The same cannot be said of ObjectDCL's
Don't get me wrong: ObjectDCL is cool (especially compared to the
fossil that is DCL). I guess it comes down to a simple choice: do you
want to expand your toolbox or your skills?