Bill
|
| Posted: 08/27/2002, 5:13 AM |
|
Hi all,
In new to codecharge so please excuse a stupid question.
Im trying to develop a contact management system in PHP that uses a MySQL database.
I have a high level of html knowledge but a fairly low php knowledge and a moderate level of MySQL knowledge.
What would be better for me to use?
CodeCharge 2 or Codecharge Studio and why?
|
|
|
 |
Superkikim
|
| Posted: 08/27/2002, 5:32 AM |
|
Hi Bill,
CCS will be more flexible, if you have good HTML knowledges. PHP is not an issue. If you need something special function, you just have to go on the net, on a PHP site, find the function you want, then add it in an event. The whole PHP script for the application will be generated by Codecharge et you don't need to access it nor to alter it.
CodeCharge 2.x is less flexible. It should be used only for small applications. Again, if you have good HTML knowledge, you could be disapointed by the CC2.x limitations at this stage.
|
|
|
|
Darius
|
| Posted: 08/27/2002, 10:11 AM |
|
Some advices learned the hard way:
1) Code Charge Studio is for website developers working 40 hours a week doing just that: website developing. Unless you are such a person, Studio IT IS NOT a RAD (Rapid Application Development).
2) Code Charge 2 IS a RAD. Much faster, far more intuitive.
3) Unless you are generating PHP and MySQL applications EVERY week, these “free” software will cost you far more than ASP and MS Access. More time to learn to use them, far less user friendly, far more time to find answers to how to do questions. For most applications you will need to spend huge amount of time to find answers, or hire a consultant with experience in PHP and MySQL to finish the task.
4) The “unreliable” operation of Windows based ASP and MS Access applications, is an example when real facts are interpreted to fit somebody’s objectives. I managed 6 websites in the last 4 years, hosted 2 on Unix, 2 on Linux and 2 on Windows servers. The servers down time was approximately: for Unix, 15min/6 months. For Linux, 15min/1 month. For Windows, 15min/1 week. Conclusion: Windows servers are far less reliable than Unix and Linux! Right? Wrong! Servers downtime has no meaning for a website visitor. What a visitor cares is to have the WEBSITE available, regardless how you are doing it. Servers downtime accounted for less than other causes to the overall WEBSITE availability. A major issue rarely reported, is routing problems. Very few website managers are checking to see if a website is visible all around the world. Our websites were unavailable more time due to routing problems with Sprint, UU Net or MCI than due to server reliability. Routing problems would cause a website to be visible for example on the US west coast but not on east coast, or visible in Canada but not in US, or visible in US but not in Europe. Other causes for a site unavailability, surpassing server reliability are network overload, server providers overload, etc. The real reasons behind PHP, MySQL and Linux are profits. A website host will make more money on a Linux cheap package than on a Unix or Windows which would require more service, more technician attendance to achieve and high quality servers to achieve a reasonable reliability.
5) PHP and MySQL are pushed by website hosts because they are free, and the “real cost” is shifted from hosting to website developing. A website owner will pay less for hosting and far more for website developing AND maintaining!
6) PHP and MySQL are also pushed by website developers consultants, because they are making far more money developing PHP and MySQL websites instead of ASP and MS Access. A website applications in ASP and MS Access once is deployed, can be managed and modified relatively easy by people with limited knowledge of website developing but who are the experts in what an application should do. An application in PHP and MySQL is more likely to require a lifetime maintenance by an expert in PHP and MySQL.
Some final comments:
a) Code Charge 2 is a GREAT product, possible the ONLY real RAD on the market.
b) I hope that Yes Software will continue to support AND improve this software.
c) I hope that Yes Software users would have a second look at the CodeCharge 2 and recognize the advantages compared with Studio. As Yes Software mentioned in an earlier comment, Code Charge and Studio are 2 different products, suitable for two market segments. I would suggest that unless you are a full time website developer, do not jump to Studio. Use Code Charge 2.
d) I hope, as several users suggested, to have a separate Code Charge 2 forum, and more people to post questions and answers relative to Code Charge 2.
e) Of course, everything above is valid for small to medium size applications. Fro real big applications you may need to use Oracle database and hire a full time website developer expert.
A last word:
A think that software developers, such as Yes Software, should pay more attentions in the future to develop software that can be used by people with limited knowledge in programming, but are experts in other areas and need a software to implement their ideas. Examples: electrical engineers that may need to develop an online application to design a particular product, a marketing manager needing an online database, a human resources specialist developing an intranet application for employees. These professionals, armed with a proper software would be far more efficient, more productive, faster in developing, lower in cost, higher in quality, compared with a combination of a application expert plus a software developer/consultant.
|
|
|
|
Bill
|
| Posted: 08/28/2002, 7:36 AM |
|
Thanks for the detailed answers, its given much food for thought
I have spent several hours messing around with Studio tonight and doing the tut, I will spend tomorrow on CC2 and go from there.
It sounds like CC2 may be the way to go, I only want forms, quierys and so on done, the html I can throw togeather my self.
|
|
|
|
Jeremy
|
| Posted: 08/28/2002, 9:16 AM |
|
Bill, while codecharge 2 will produce your forms easily, it is a major pain in the ass to deal with html. For instance, say you create your forms, get everything done with the Database and selects, then change your html files. After you change your html files "outside" of codecharge, lets say you want to change something with your form. So you go into codecharge, change it, and regenerate the files. It will overwrite your html, or ask to overwrite it. The problem is, if you add a new form, you have to overwrite it, or manually go add the form tags etc. It's just a big pain. Codecharge studio is great because it reads whatever html files you have in your directory, and just appends changes to them. Much more efficient, and you aren't wasting time redoing what you already did.
Just my thoughts.
Jeremy
|
|
|
|
Graham
|
| Posted: 08/28/2002, 12:00 PM |
|
Bill, I agree wholeheartedly with all of Darius's comments - I only wish Yes Software would spend a little more time fully developing CC and setting up a separate CC forum, rather than apparently having shifted its focus entirely to CC Studio.
CC has a very quick learning curve whilst Studio requires some considerable time getting to grips with all of its functionality.
In terms of Jeremy's comments regarding customising your html - they are valid, but if you have any experience with other html programmes (I use FrontPage) - there are quick and easy workarounds.
|
|
|
|
Darius
|
| Posted: 08/28/2002, 7:05 PM |
|
It is true that modifying html files outside CodeCharge 2 may slow down the design process but, as mentioned by Graham there are quick and easy workarounds.
However, depending of the application, you may never need to modify them outside the CodeCharge 2. If the application focus is functionality, simple forms already built in are sufficient. Serious people are looking for information and functionality, not for pop-up windows or annoying animated Flash.
If you need to add some additional information and graphics, besides the database application (which I believe is why somebody would by CodeCharge/Studio), you can have the CodeCharge database within a frame, and add everything outside the frame. Check the link below: http://www.PowerSupplies.net/SMPS-Community.htm. The main site is hosted on a UNIX server, html and little JAVA. The database application is running inside a frame and hosted on a Windows server.
|
|
|
|
Jeremy
|
| Posted: 08/28/2002, 8:02 PM |
|
I totally agree to a certain point with Darius and Graham. If you want to hit the floor running, and deal with html workarounds throughout developing, then CC is for you. If you want to spend about a day learning studio, and have no problem integrating any look you want into your application, while also being able to regenerate pages with form additions like grids/records etc, studio is the way to go. Once you learn studio, it's much faster than CC. The part that takes longer is learning it, but it's a one time deal. I personally own CC Pro and CC Studio and love them both, but I'll be honest, I haven't used CC since I learned studio. The number one reason is time. I can spend about 1/2 the amount of time developing the same web site in studio as I did in CC due to the html changes I do for the look. I don't just throw forms in with a CSS and call it good. Sometimes I like to put curved corners in the tables, little stuff that is tough to add and regenerate with CC. I hope we have givin you a good idea. If you are a fairly quick learner, I say go for CC studio. Don't be scared :).
Jeremy
|
|
|
|
Dan
|
| Posted: 09/12/2002, 1:18 PM |
|
How can we convince Yes Software not to abandon Code Charge 2, improving it but not making it more sofisticated?
|
|
|
|
banjo
|
| Posted: 09/12/2002, 5:44 PM |
|
HTML templates with CC2 can lead to a degree of reworking the HTML files if iterative development is done.
Often, on moderately complex pages, once the html design is done after the first CC generation, a lot of the HTML can be cut up and spread into the Page header/footer and Forms headers and footers within CC. Then changing form details isn't so much a headache.
It'll never be all point and click coding - some jobs ya just gotta do...
|
|
|
|
Larry Boeldt
|
| Posted: 09/12/2002, 7:17 PM |
|
Our friend Darius must have more experience in the UNIX/LINUX realm, he's Running NT4, or perhaps there's a defunced business process in getting content to the IIS server. I've managed Win2K Based IIS+ASP, IIS+VB.NET, Linux Based Apahce/PHP, Apple iMac based Apache/PHP and am starting to delve into JSP (It strikes me as a slow, sucky technogy, but hey I'm a n00b there). They all perform pretty equal, about the same downtime for all. If you want to talk business, IIS/ASP/?SQL Server is your best bet for several reasons:
1. Odds are your business runs Office, the VB you write for ASP can be applied to your office automation solutions thus leveraging your talant across the business.
2. TCO: Even though Linux is free, Win2K is much easier to support if done right (I'm no n00b to unix/linux so I think my experience has value here). The key is to make sure you have rigerous testing and deployment standards for your sites. Some folks will freak when I say this, but if you are insistent on PHP/MYSQL you might consider Apple Servers running OSX. They are damn cheap, damn fast, and damn easy to support.
3. SQL Server, Oracle, DB2 are far more advanced database platforms. mySQL is a simple, anemic and often incable database server. Especially when you consider the complexity of a CRM system. Sooner or later you will hit the wall with mySQL where the best design cannot be supported, at that point you'll be pressed to resconsider, so you might want to consider a more robust database up front. Considering the critical and pivotal nature of CRM (company reputation, sales, margins, integration to legacy systems) you may want to let go of mySQL. Don't get me wrong, it is an absolutly fabulous database for simple DB schemas, but if you need nested queries, transactional capabilities, views or stored procedures (the latter two of which are hallmark in well designed application architecture) mySQL isn't there yet. Look in your organization for existing platforms as a starting point for your db backend decision if you are already using DB2, MS SQL or Oracle, stick with it - you won't regret it.
4. Support, there are more VB developers out there than anything else. if you need answers you are most likely to find them in that community. I am very experienced with technology, but still always have questions and things to learn, I find that the LINUX crowd is chock full of pompus individuals that would rather gloat about their latest kernel complie than actually provide an answer. I'm really not up to endure that. I can compile my own kernel and am confident enough not to brag about it.
5. This isn't really about any specific technology, but rather about good planning. You have to think about your project now, where it will be, and where you and the business people that support the project see it in the future. If you want a solution that sticks and that you can carry to your next job/client pick technolgoies that are universally avaiable (that actually flies in the face of my Apple recommendation above, but at least Apple has longevity). What is the real future of companies that give away software. And when the market is tight (as it will be in the near future) support for those free systems will be anything but free (at one point when the net was hot, Linux/JSP programmers were charging $150-$200 per hour, keep that in mind even though they'll work for $10 per hour now).
On the CC2/CCS front, I just started a project with CCS had six pages developed around my database schema, had all sorts of new requirements come up which had me change the schema. CCS made it so difficult to implement the changes that I got halfway done and rebuilt the whole site in CC2, in the time it took me to make those changes. Learning curve or not, CC2 is just plain easier.
I've already registered a request titled CC3. Please respond, mark it valuable, whatever it takes. They do listen, I suggest VB.NET be integrated into CCS and they did it. Hats off to Yes Software for that move. Indeed, I still use CCS, but that's because VB.NET is there and I have projects using VB.NET. I have not been dissappointed in CC2, the key is to avoid templates if you can (pick PHP/ASP only not PHP/ASP with templates... something CCS doens't offer).
Hope this helps.
Larry Boeldt
http://larry.boeldt.net
|
|
|
|
Jeff Scott
|
| Posted: 09/12/2002, 9:55 PM |
|
1) PHP (or perl) and MySQL is definitly the way to go. I have MySQL databases
with multiple tables with Millions of records each. (Last count somewhere
around 10+ million records, and it never skips a beat.) Also I have serveral
Oracle DBs, one has about 2-3 million new records per day,
and it works great but requires a full time dba. The MySQL server does not.
As I'm sure you are aware, MySQL is easy, fast, reliable, and load with features.
2) I use CC2 for one big reason that I think might be overlooked. I'm not very
experience with Studio, but from what I've seen it "assumes" one developer.
With CC2 I generate the PHP/CGI code and turn the HTML over to my HTML
developer. He loves it this way. I suck at HTML and he is not very good
with SQL....so its a perfect fit.
|
|
|
|
Darius
|
| Posted: 09/13/2002, 3:58 PM |
|
Excelent comments, Larry Boeldt. I wish more people would read your comments, and be more realistic about website design.
|
|
|
|
Dave
|
| Posted: 09/18/2002, 1:20 AM |
|
Hi
I would just like to endorse the earlier comment made by Darius about the speed of CC and its use for people whose expertise does lie in computing, but who need to get something running quickly. I'm one of those people.
My sites are small but add huge value to my work. I wouldn't even have known how to prepare a brief for a consultant developer as I did not know the capabilities of dynamic databases. With CC I just got stuck in and one year on I'm gradually accumulating knowledge about the 'fancy tricks' (such as events)without it interfering with my job too much.
As more and more info is becoming web-dependent in all walks of life, there must surely be a viable market for this type of user.
From where I sit, the major requirement is for a good manual.
Dave
|
|
|
|
|
