bcusick:
Write a plug-in!
Why would I need to, or want to write a plug in to get two windows?
I’m a 4GL developer, not a C++ programmer. That’s why I use tools like Omnis, Filemaker, etc. and not .Net.
I barely have time to do what I have to do.
Regards,
Lee Snover
It does count as two licenses but of course this would not be something
you would do for very long as in the examples earlier in this thread. The
other way to do it in OS X is to download two copies of Client to your
desktop (give them different names so as to keep track). Then you can
double-click both and don’t have to do it from the command-line to have
two simultaneous client connections from the same machine.
leesnover:
bcusick:
Write a plug-in!Why would I need to, or want to write a plug in to get two windows?
I’m a 4GL developer, not a C++ programmer. That’s why I use tools like Omnis, Filemaker, etc. and not .Net.
I barely have time to do what I have to do.
I can understand that. The merits of having multiple windows have been well documented on this forum in multiple threads. The request has been “heard” by the development team and management team. No decision has been made as to when or even IF we will include that functionality in the product. It will NOT be in the product for the forseeable future (at least for the releases scheduled to mid 2006 that I am aware of).
For my two cents I feel it is a GOOD thing that multiple windows is not at the top of the list for Servoy development. Because one can have multiple client windows open - as mentioned earlier - and the only downside is that it involves using another concurrent license during the time of use. My feeling is that if one is actually needing two windows/solutions open at the same time on a permanent basis, then one should be purchasing those two licenses anyway. If it is a temporary, look-something-up-quickly-without-disturbing-my-work type of thing as mentioned, then the beauty of the concurrent license structure really allows for that. I’d rather development time was spent on other things for which there is no good alternative or work around.
bcusick:
leesnover:
bcusick:
Write a plug-in!Why would I need to, or want to write a plug in to get two windows?
I’m a 4GL developer, not a C++ programmer. That’s why I use tools like Omnis, Filemaker, etc. and not .Net.
I barely have time to do what I have to do.
I can understand that. The merits of having multiple windows have been well documented on this forum in multiple threads. The request has been “heard” by the development team and management team. No decision has been made as to when or even IF we will include that functionality in the product. It will NOT be in the product for the forseeable future (at least for the releases scheduled to mid 2006 that I am aware of).
Bob:
Sorry if I’m beating a dead horse here. I’m new to the forums and just getting involved with trying to do some “real” work in Servoy. It’s certainly not a show stopper, but I do feel it’s an important issue, just from a competitive standpoint. I did the multi-copy thing with Omnis 7 for years, but I was quite pleased when Omnis Studio came out and finally got rid of that limitation. Same for Filemaker 7. I use the feature extensively in FM7 for things that have nothing to do with user interface, because of the “main file” being tied to a layout. I don’t think that will be such an issue in Servoy.
Regards,
Lee Snover
Hi Lee,
Thanks for all your comments.
It’s important that we hear from our developers - and I’m not trying to stop that from happening.
We do take ALL requests and considerations and keep track of them - and we have to prioritize them based on how much work, how much time, how much it affects backward compatability, how much it affects developer code, how much it affects client code, how much it affects server code, how much it affects headless client code, etc, etc.
We DO value all input - so thanks!
I was shocked to find the one window limitation after purchasing Servoy. It didn’t even occur to me that a modern, object-oriented RAD might NOT support multiple windows, and I was pretty far into porting a project before running into this brick wall!
Even the ancient, archaic system I was hoping to upgrade from supported this!
I’ve been checking back now and then in the hopes of seeing this feature appear, but things don’t look good at this point… Please add my vote nevertheless.
I found it surprising, too.
Please at least reconsider implementing the idea raised here:
http://forum.servoy.com/viewtopic.php?t=2085
Specifically, the ability to not hide the first FID when a second FID is called. Is that easier to do than implementing a full-blown window management system?
Hi
I actually prefer servoy’s style of a single main window with the ability pop a single FID. It almost forces a very ‘clean’ interface. Almost all users i speak to prefer this style as opposed to getting lost in a mess of pop up windows.
I don’t find it limiting at all, it does make you rethink the design however.
Adding to what Rodney said about this subject. It has come across more than once.
I too have had huge difficulties talking to my clients about a ‘single window interface’. Simply because they were used to work in another way. Today they like it.
It is, imho, a matter of what you are used to and I see many many applications using just one window…
And to add a little more:
If you want to start using Servoy 3.0 Webclient features: You need to build a GUI that does everything in one window.
Paul
I agree that endless window proliferation is best to be avoided, but I think that one more level deep of visible form would be a big plus.
We have our users enter all data in FIDs; it keeps the main interface screens neat, and they always know where they are because the main screen is right in the background. Some data entry screens are necessarily a bit complex; it would be very handy to be able to pop open another FID to accomplish some small task or other, then return to the data entry screen- all the while leaving the main screen in the background. Often this secondary FID would be very smaill, size-wise, kind of like a dialog box but with the flexibilty of a full-on form.
In addition to keeping the comfort level high for our users (many of whom are volunteers who likely receive little or no training from their organization), this also takes advantage of another dimension for organizing information. While discipline must be maintained not to go overboard with stacking windows, I see an inherent advantage in using the z-axis if the capability exists. It more closely resembles the “real” world of our perceptions.
Jim
Like jim I prefer to have users enter data in FIDs, and here’s why I would like to have a second FID visible along with the first FID: I am planning on “rolling my own” dialogs, for a couple of reasons (can’t stand the look of them on a Mac, plus you can’t return the number of the button that was pressed, only the text).
Anyway, when I’m validating the data entry on the first FID, I would like to display a dialog (which is the second FID), alerting the user of some data entry problem. From a UI standpoint, it will look strange to see the first FID disappear, which is why I’m asking if it’s possible to not hide the first FID.
In an earlier post it was brought up that on the Mac OS X side a second instance of Servoy by launching it in a line command.
What would the line command be?
you can do that by firing a url:
http://youripaddress:8080/servoy-client … ution.jnlp
Hope that helps.
What is the status of (modal) stackable forms-in-dialog?
Soon? I hope…
Jim
