March 93 - Affiliate News
Affiliate News
John MacVeigh
WAMADA
The December WAMADA meeting was host to Jeff Alger, co-founder of SBM
International. Jeff gave us a preview of VDL Companion, a CASE tool which implements
the design methodology which he and co-author Neal Goldstein first described in their
book Developing Object-Oriented Software for the Macintosh. Unable to find an
existing CASE vendor willing to faithfully implement SBM, the authors chose to
produce it themselves (with the assistance of other MacApp programmers).
SBM International's VDL Companion™
VDL Companion is the first of three products in the VDL series. The other two, VDL
Professional and VDL Teamware, add additional features of SBM, as well as multi-user
capabilities. SBM is based on the use of a visual design language (VDL) to, literally,
draw up the scenarios which describe how an application will interact with the real
world. (Here, "real world" means not just individual people, but also the manner in
which those people work together to do their jobs.) Companion provides the basic
drawing tools needed to create and manipulate VDL scenarios. The Professional version
adds the SBM calibration techniques (synthesis, correlation and synchronization)
which are used to meld your various scenarios into a cohesive whole. The Teamware
version, as its name implies, adds multi-user support through the use of DAL and an
ANSI SQL database.
On the business side, the VDL series is reasonably priced, with the entry-level
Companion product priced around $75. I am reluctant to give more details, as by the
time you read this MADACON will be over, and SBM International is sure to have
finalized their shipment and pricing schedules. Jeff and Neal have hired an experienced
executive to run the company and will be pushing hard to broaden the base of support
for the SBM methodology outside the Macintosh world. While some might see SBM as a
newcomer to the land of development methodologies, I think that SBM's emphasis on a
graphical approach to building GUI-based programs means they have arrived at the
right time, and with the right tools, to make a significant impact on the market.
SmalltalkAgents™
The January meeting of WAMADA began with a review by Dave Buell of the MacWorld
Exposition. Among the products he saw was a new development environment for the
Mac named SmalltalkAgents from Quasar Knowledge Systems (QKS). In fact, he was so
impressed he brought the company with him to the meeting (the fact that they are
based in nearby Maryland helped a little, too). David Simmons, president of QKS, gave
us an almost 3 hour tour of their remarkably complete programming system.
Like Component Workshop, SmalltalkAgents is an integrated development
environment, including an editor, class/object browser, incremental compiler,
garbage collector, debugger, and the classes used to provide an application framework.
Unlike CWS, SmalltalkAgents has a richer interface (all text is styled, unlimited undo,
nice use of color and icons) and a more complete implementation of Macintosh system
software, including support for A/UX, WorldScript, QuickTime, AppleEvents, and (it
was rumored) OCE. The environment includes, and uses, its own WDEFs and MDEFs
(menus can be torn off, for example). You can define your own trap interfaces, and
access external code resources. The class library (360 classes, 7,000 methods)
includes support for the usual view/adornment type classes, along with more
specialized tasks such as compression and DES encryption (where available). The
environment also provides threads and supports pre-emptive multi-tasking.
Also unlike CWS, SmalltalkAgents is written in (surprise!) Smalltalk. As I am not
familiar with Smalltalk, either on the Mac or otherwise, I can not compare the QKS
implementation of the language with that of other products. On the other hand, for
those who find this product solves their development problems, that may not be
important. I certainly felt that learning Smalltalk would suddenly be a useful thing to
do, knowing that I could then make use of SmalltalkAgents. Once your app is written,
you can extract your code into a smaller, double-clickable application. To run that
app, though, still requires that the user have the SmalltalkAgents kernel running on
their machine. On the other hand, the kernel can support any number of such
applications running at once. Once the user has the kernel running, additional
applications should require less memory than, say, two MacApp programs running at
the same time.
As for pricing, the entire development package costs $695 (with a limited-time
introductory price of $495). The runtime Kernel costs just $195, and quantity
discounts will be available. While they were not making any statements regarding
specific platforms (the Mac version is their first, and won't ship 'till March), it is
likely that they will port to both Unix and Windows in the future.
WrapUp
While the VDL tools and SmalltalkAgents provide entirely different services to the
programmer, they both share one trait in common. Both were developed by
programmers who had tried other systems, found them lacking, and developed their
own solutions. QKS and SBM have backgrounds in consulting and contract
programming. This exposure to a wide variety of real world problems has given them
the ability to provide tools that are refinements of their past experiences and ideas. I
believe this background greatly improves the chances of success for these two
companies, and I hope MADA members will give their products a close look in the
coming months.
While we can't promise that every month will have killer demos of leading edge
software, the past year at WAMADA has provided a lot of chances to see the latest in
object software tools. If you're in the D.C. area, and interested in object oriented
programming, give us a visit. WAMADA meets every third Wednesday at McDonnell
Douglas in Tyson's Corner, Virginia, beginning around 7:15 p.m. [Notice: The
February meeting will be held a week later, to accommodate MADACON]. For a map,
send a message to JEFFRIES.L on AppleLink, or call Leslie at (301) 340-5126 during
business hours (EST). -
Dave Pomerantz
NEMADA
We had another large turnout for our January meeting (which was held in February).
Component Software graciously extended the use of their facility and even helped us
forage for chairs.
Jeff Alger delivered two speeches back-to-back: the first explored the directions that
OOP has taken and will take, and the second speech described Solution-Based Modeling.
OOP Directions
OOP has been around for a while, Jeff observed, but hasn't had the impact its
proponents expected because of a lingering perception that it fails to solve real-world
problems. This perception helps create a resistance to OOP at high-levels. Managers
have watched previous approaches, like structured programming, fall short of their
promises, and they refuse to pay the costs of switching to yet another new approach
that makes the same old promises.
The point Jeff makes is that the resistance to OOP is not unreasonable. OOP proponents
promise instant productivity. In reality, it takes months to learn OOP techniques and
perhaps two years to groom a skilled designer. Further, OOP proponents promise great
reusability of code and focus their efforts on the code. But if it's true that 75% of a
project is spent in analysis and design, then it's more important to focus on
reusability of designs. Jeff feels we have much farther to go before we can achieve the
kind of reusability and productivity that have been promised.
Nonetheless, OOP is necessary to design software for the coming generation of
operating systems. HP and Sun are working on an object-oriented OS called DOE (for
Distributed Objects Everywhere), Apple has PINK and the new Dylan™ language, and
Microsoft has Windows/NT as well as other OOP systems on the drawing board. Jeff
believes the resulting systems will look like an "object soup", his term for the
collection of objects, persistent and otherwise, that will comprise the documents and
databases and environments of the future.
These new systems will result in the "death of the application" as we know it. Instead
of documents being centered around an application, we will see Object-Bases
combining the application and the data. These Object-Bases will replace databases as
the future corporate assets.
Solution-Based Modeling
Having barely absorbed the history and future of objects, we were thrust into Jeff's
second speech, on Solution-Based Modeling, which is his (and Neal Goldstein's)
methodology for analysis and design.
SBM distinguishes itself from other design methodologies with its user-centered
approach. For once, however, we are the users. It's nice to know that for all the effort
we take to pamper our users, people like Jeff and Neal have gone out of their way to
pamper us with a design methodology that's tailored to the way we design software. Jeff
calls this "ergonomics for software engineers." It's based on a scientific understanding
of the creative process.
According to current research into cognition, people approach problems from the
center and work their way outward. Most methodologies force you to work top-down or
bottom-up. Even though we arrive at our design from the center (we have to, it's the
way our minds work) we have to force-fit our ideas into the methodology. SBM lets us
work naturally from the middle.
Once we complete our design, additional research shows that our audience retains only
10-20% of our requirements specifications after we've written them. I'm sure that
surprises no one. I've yet to see a requirements spec that reads like a bestseller, so
even 10% sounds high. This lack of communication means that marketing people don't
know what they're getting until it arrives. And that means more work for us rewriting
the software.
Jeff and Neal attack these cryptic specs with a graphic design language. But instead of
cobbling up a language on the back of an envelope, with a few arrows and boxes, they
took the novel approach of asking a graphics design firm to build the graphic elements
of the language. The result is a 3D syntax for analysis and design called the Visual
Design Language. The graphic elements can still be drawn on the back of an envelope,
but the shape of the elements connote their syntax, greatly aiding comprehension. For
example, the element for a class is an open box and the element for an instance is a
closed box contained in the class. The graphic elements suggest the logical relationship
even before you draw the arrows.
Although the language was built for object-oriented analysis and design, it's
compatible with existing (non-OOP) systems. It's been used by career COBOL
programmers for designing procedural programs. Jeff even hinted that a major
consulting firm is considering adopting it as the standard method for analyzing and
presenting business models.
Operators Are Standing By
I know these notes are beginning to sound like a sales pitch for SBM. In fact, I don't
know how well it works in practice. Jeff insists that when he and Neal have introduced
SBM in corporations, they've "had very good success" but he also admits that using a
full-blown set of design scenarios on a small project would be overkill. On the other
hand, a few skillfully chosen drawings can clarify the major concepts.
If you'd like to try out SBM yourself, you can get Jeff and Neal's book right now
(Developing Object-Oriented Software for the Macintosh, Neal Goldstein and Jeff
Alger, Addison Wesley, 1992) and perhaps by press time you'll be able to buy the
CASE tool (VDL Companion, $74.95), which is in its third round of beta testing as I
write this. If you do use the book or VDL Companion, be sure to let us know your
experiences. -
Ken Addison
TriMADA
This note is to let you know what took place at the first meeting of TriMADA, the new
local chapter of MADA in the New York, New Jersey and Connecticut area. We met at
NovaWorks which is located in downtown Manhattan at 630 3rd Ave between 40th and
41st street on the 9th floor. We would like to thank Bob McDowell of NovaWorks for
getting us the location to meet. Thanks Bob!
There were about 12 in attendance and I imagine that there would have been many
more if we had not been competing with Comdex. We have actually been told by MADA
that there are many active or inactive members of MADA in the tri-state area. We will
be getting these addresses and mailing out invitations to the next meeting. This meeting
will be taking place Monday, January 18, 1993 same place, 7 pm.
Starting Out
The beginning of the meeting was pretty much your first meeting kind of stuff which in
no way means that it was boring for one second. Adam Wildavsky chaired the meeting
and kept us entertained with his clever puns and quips. Adam also volunteered to keep
an electronic mailing list for TriMADA.
The first thing we did was introduce ourselves. We had people attend from the
following companies: FieldStone, FutureSoft System Designs, HBO, H.H.Wilson Co.,
KPMG, NovaWorks, PaperFree Corporation, and RPI.
The next thing we did was elect a temporary president who will serve for at least three
months. Stephanie Keller was elected to take the helm for this position of which she
was more than willing to do considering all the perks.
The next item was to vote on whether to become a fully recognized local chapter of
MADA which meant adopting their bylaws etc. We tabled the topic until the actual
benefits of being an official local chapter of MADA can be determined.
We then talked about who we could get to come and talk to us. Craig Morrissey and I
also volunteered to personally scout out several possibilities.
The most interesting part of the meeting was when Joel Benisch from Paperfree
Corporation demonstrated their dual platform application called LightPaper™. It is an
insurance form imaging system for the Macintosh and Windows. They built the
application on top of their own proprietary cross platform library. Basically, the
LightPaper user interface presents complex forms (i.e. Insurance forms) on the
Macintosh screen that look very similar to the paper form which it replaces. The idea
of LightPaper is that there is almost no training necessary because the user already
knows how to fill out the paper form. However, LightPaper forms are intelligent
because each field in the form is actually an object. Each field object knows that it may
be dependent on other fields, knows what kind of data it is, how to receive data entry
and how to display itself on the form. The same data shown in two or more different
places (i.e. Customer Name or Address) is actually one field object so that adding or
changing a Customer Name will be reflected in all places the Customer Name is
displayed. Joel demoed quite a bit more of LightPaper and there were many other
innovative features shown that go beyond the scope of this short description. All in all
LightPaper is a good example of how OOP in general, smart class design and some
ingenuity can deliver slick user-centered applications.
Unfortunately, the meeting date of Monday, January 18th was a poor choice. That day
is the celebrated day of Martin Luther King's Birthday. With all the scheduling
software, PIM's and paper calendars possessed by all of the attendees of the first
TriMADA meeting, we failed to note that we were scheduling this meeting on a National
Holiday until it was too late.
That oversight resulted in a low attendance. However, despite all of that, the meeting
was quite lively and enthusiastic. Adam Wildavsky, co-founder of TriMADA, opened the
meeting introducing the MacApp-guru and veteran Jesse Feiler who was our speaker.
We began discussing some SIG business of which one of the issues was about picking the
meeting dates (surprisingly). It was decided that we will continue to meet on the 3rd
Monday of every month EXCEPT WHEN IT FALLS on a holiday.
Following SIG business we began a lively and interesting Q & A session that covered a
wide range of topics from migrating from Pascal/MacApp 2.0 -> C++/MacApp 3.0 to
the pending impact of Bedrock, Pink and Component Software. The Q&A was lively
because it had a conversational tone where we could freely go off on tangents and
return back to the question at hand. Much of the conversation was like the more
interesting threads on MacApp3Tech$. Most Q & A's are more rigid and linear and less
interesting. The conversational tone was probably due to the wide range of backgrounds
present and the more personal feeling there is in smaller gatherings.
After the Q&A Jesse Feiler gave a witty and insightful talk and demonstration about
creating windows for data entry and the various "undocumented" gotcha's dealing with
text editing fields in dialog views. He shared many of the things you only know when
you have been in the MacApp trenches doing this stuff for a while as he definitely has.
Jesse was also constantly adding witty, tongue 'n cheek, and satirical comments in his
presentation. To those that know him or have heard him speak know this is one of his
endearing trademarks.
The meeting was then adjourned by Adam Wildavsky but it took another 30 minutes or
so before everyone actually left because much of the discussion carried on impromptu.
Our next meeting will be held on 2/22/93 (NOT the 3rd Monday due to President's
Day, we learn quickly) and we are at this time planning on a well known MacApp
luminary (that may be an oxymoron) but that has not yet been finalized. Please stay
tuned for more information.