Newsgroups: comp.lang.smalltalk
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!rochester!udel!gatech!swrinde!cs.utexas.edu!news.ti.com!ticipa!clw
From: clw@ticipa.pac.sc.ti.com (Chris Winemiller)
Subject: Re: opinions wanted: VisualAge, VisualWorks, Digitalk
Message-ID: <1995Apr28.163124.2670@ticipa.pac.sc.ti.com>
Organization: None
References: <3nm978$bmu@news.tamu.edu> <3nqbau$h72@agate.berkeley.edu>
Date: Fri, 28 Apr 1995 16:31:24 GMT
Lines: 22

In article <3nqbau$h72@agate.berkeley.edu> Stephen Travis Pope <stp@CNMAT.Berkeley.edu> writes:
>I've used all three systems, but am an admitted ParcPlace VisualWorks "bigot."
>
>I consider it the only serious, stable, high-performance, portable alternative.
>
>Digitalk's stuff is nice enough, but their class libraries are written in a 
>rather low-level and un-reusable style. They also only support DOS and the 
>Mac, and their versions aren't even portable among each other.

Digitalk's stuff by now has good portability between Windows and OS/2
(supposedly) though I can't say for sure.  Compatibility with the MAC version
is non-existent; and Digitalk isn't carrying the MAC version forward.

Anyway, I just wanted to remark that the Digitalk Windows product (Visual
Smalltalk) will run fine on Windows NT, though it does not take advantage of NT
threads to my knowledge.  Don't know how it runs on Win95.

Chris
==============================================================
Chris Winemiller               Internet: clw@works.ti.com
Disclaimer: I do not speak for TI.
==============================================================
