Chapter Seven

Recommendations for Source Computing Ltd.

7.0 Introduction

This chapter reviews the advantages and disadvantages of using Java™ as the language to replace QuickBasic™ for future productions of the "Forecourt Plus" back office system, and also reviews the alternatives.

The exponential increase of processing power within PCs and thus the improvement for Human Computer Interaction through the advent of Graphical User Interfaces (GUI), especially with the Windows metaphor, means that customers expect a certain appearance to software interfaces. This judgement occurs regardless of the efficiency of the software and its capability to do the job. This trend probably occurs through the use of advertising, i.e. "New and Improved", and means that something that does not look new, has to be outstanding against a newer looking product.

This perception means that "Forecourt Plus" has to move to a newer GUI interface to replace the Menu driven interface of the past, just to compete visually within the market place.

All the major programming languages now offer easy to produce GUIs by using Rapid Application Development tools such as Visual Basic™ for BASIC, Delphi™ for Object Pascal, Visual Café™ for Java™ and Borland™ Builder™ for C++. This theoretically means that concepts programmed within the QuickBasic™ software can be rewritten within a new programming language - this is not the same as code reuse - while the GUI can be quickly produced using a RAD tool.

7.1 Is Java™ the best way forward?

Java™ has advantages over other languages that could be chosen:

1. "Write Once, Run Anywhere" - this could be used to take advantage of other Operating Systems such as Linux (which the Comm Port API has been ported to very recently). Unfortunately "Write Once, Run Anywhere" does not work well in reality - it normally takes a great deal of work to get Java™ to run on another Operating System, other than that which it was written on.
2. Java™ is easy to understand.
3. Java™ is easy to maintain.
4. Java™ can produce a good "Windows" type interface.

There are some disadvantages to using Java™ also:

1. Slow - but getting faster as the JIT (just in time) compilers get better.
2. Class files easier to "hack" than exe files - relatively easy for unscrupulous competitors to view the source code.
3. No knowledge of Java™ within Source Computing Ltd. or Valid Link Ltd.
4. Java™ requires the use of a new paradigm within Source Computing Ltd.- Object Orientated. The employees have no knowledge of this programming paradigm at any depth.

A comparison between the three main alternatives to Java™:

7.2 Conclusions

Java™ is not the ideal language for Source Computing Ltd. to use, due to the newer type of programming paradigm that it would have to learn. The main perceived advantages such as "write once, run anywhere" does not work in practice and although the ability for software to run under Linux would be a nice advertising point, the majority of customers will still use Windows.

C++ would be a worse choice than Java™ due to the difficulty level of its use and the lack of experience within Source Computing Ltd.

The two main contenders are Delphi™ and Visual Basic™ both are similar apart from the syntax - both work in exactly the same way, "drag and drop".

Delphi™ has an advantage in that Alan Usher of Valid Link Ltd. has good programming skills within this area, but has not great experience within the programming of "Forecourt Plus" itself. The fact that Delphi is currently being ported to Linux (and "open source" programming) means that the product is not confined to one Operating System.

The advantage for Visual Basic™ is that Colin Simm of Source Computing Ltd. who is the main programmer of "Forecourt Plus", should find the transition from QuickBasic™ to Visual Basic™ relatively simple. This would enable the reuse of the concepts used within "Forecourt Plus" although the code could not be reused.

Overall, Delphi™ would be the best language to use if both Colin Simm and Alan Usher worked together. Alan's knowledge of the programming environment and Colin's knowledge of the processes within the back office system would enable both to produce a good "Windows" backoffice system, quickly and successfully.