My experience of CW5.1 vs MSVC++6 is that their stability is pretty much the same. And CW5.1 may actually be somewhat better.
As the primary target of our PDE product is barcode scanning and Symbol don't seem in any hurry to move past 3.2, there's no real benefit to us going to CW6, which did seem to have a lot of stability problems. And my apps do run happily on Palm OS 3.5 >From reading this list, the main stability problems of CW6 do seem to be finally behind us, so I think the critique of CW is now unfair. The issue was probably related to rushing out what we can now say (in hindsight) was a beta-test version of CW6 to meet 3.5 availability, but not continuing to sell a (stable) version of CW5.1 to those many people who didn't need 3.5 capabilities and didn't have the time to fuss with product that wasn't fully stable. I'm waiting for a stable CW 6.1 (??) release and a guarenteed clean upgrade from CW 5.1. Can MetroWerks comment on when a tight, stable release might be available? All the bits and pieces seems available now, but they do still seem to be "bits and pieces". (If this already exists in one straight release set, I apologise) Roger Stringer Marietta Systems, Inc. -------------------------------------------- >Subject: Re: Palm OS Developer Exchange >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ben Darnell) >X-Message-Number: 82 >In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Bradly J. Barton wrote: >> >>Just on the subject of Microsoft giving away the Devo Environments... >> >>I'd rather pay the $200 for Metrowerks Codewarrior (or whatever the price >>was, I've slept since then) and have it WORK instead of use that piece of >>garbage that is the C++ environment for CE that was free. At least I don't >>have to reboot every 5 or 6 builds with Metrowerks. >But just because you pay for it doesn't make it good. It's true that >you don't have to reboot every 5 or 6 builds with Metrowerks, but it's >still unacceptably buggy on Windows IMHO (crashes every 2-3 hours that >force me to reboot my machine; at one patchlevel you had to restart the >IDE between debugging sessions; from time to time would refuse to talk >to the emulator) (And don't get me started on Constructor. Give me >GCC/PilRC any day.). In my (admittedly limited) experience with >Microsoft's development tools has been rather positive; the term >'that piece of garbage' would seem more applicable to CW IMHO. >-Ben -- For information on using the ACCESS Developer Forums, or to unsubscribe, please see http://www.access-company.com/developers/forums/
