Borland C#Builder Enterprise

asp:review

BorlandC#Builder Enterprise

By Michael Riley

C#Builderis the first commercial Windows-based C# development tool that is notfrom Microsoft. Borland is attempting to win over converts from the MicrosoftC# community the same way it did in the Java world - by offering a bettersolution than the incumbent's. However, the circumstances are considerablydifferent for Borland this time around. First, at the time of Borland'sJBuilder introduction in 1997, no competitor in the Java space had a strong IDEpackage, especially not from JDK-provider Sun Microsystems. Second, thecommercial competitors in the Java space had tools that were still firstgeneration in their approach to the development problem. Most importantly,Borland eventually got around to practicing what it preached about Java byreleasing its JBuilder tool written completely in the Java language.

Conversely,C#Builder's situation is not as strong. For starters, C#Builder's primarycompetition is Microsoft's Visual Studio .NET IDE. As VS .NET developers know,this IDE is one of the most sophisticated development environments on theplanet, and the latest 2003 edition solidifies that position even deeper withinthe corporate application development market. Second, no other commercial interestshave opted to compete head-to-head with Microsoft's .NET IDE dominance, makingBorland the only other player in the C# IDE space. And although Borland mayachieve this goal by version 3.0 (as it did with JBuilder), the first releaseof C#Builder was written in a combination of languages, from Borland C++ toDelphi. Borland could have made quite a statement if it had gone the native C#route (akin to Delphi being written in Delphi, JBuilder in Java, etc.), butmost likely because of time and market constraints, they evidently opted to getthe product out the door and gauge its success in the marketplace.

Figure 1. The C#Builder IDE improves uponBorland's best practices culled from years of experience with their C++Builder,JBuilder, and Delphi IDEs.

Installingthe product can take anywhere from 10 minutes to an hour or more, depending onthe number of dependencies already installed (Windows 2000 or higher withService Pack 2 or higher, Internet Explorer 6.0 or higher with Service Pack 1or higher, .NET Framework SDK 1.1, Microsoft Visual J# .NET Redistributablev1.1 and IIS 5.0 or higher), the speed of your hardware, and the number ofprogram options selected. Even with most of the dependencies previouslyinstalled, it took my 1.8 MHz test system about 20 minutes of configurationbefore launching the first instance of the program. Like most expensivesoftware these days, the product requires electronic registration andactivation, and will expire seven days after installation if an authorizationkey is not installed.

Besidesthe core C# IDE, the Enterprise edition is bundled with a number of usefulthird-party tools. These include the ComponentOne Studio Enterprise suite (seeBrian Noyes' review of ComponentOneStudio for ASP.NET), and customized versions of Crystal Reports,InstallShield Express, and Wise Owl Demeanor, a .NET code obfuscator. Developereditions of Microsoft SQL Server 2000, IBM DB2, and Borland's InterBase SQLservers are also included.

Inaddition to CaliberRM, a separately installed IDE plug-in that that connectsC#Builder users to Borland's collaborative requirements management product, oneof the most compelling tools bundled in the package is Borland's Janevaproduct. Janeva bridges .NET to J2EE and CORBA server-side components via IIOP,effectively connecting the Java world with the .NET world. Janeva is installedas an IDE Plugin package (janevaide71.bpl) and requires the Java Runtime (JRE)version 1.4 or higher. This is the tool that C#Builder markets as enablingcross-platform development within the IDE, but this message is diluted by thefact that Janeva is sold as a standalone product that can also be integratedinto Microsoft's Visual Studio .NET IDE, thereby negating the exclusivity thatC#Builder might have provided. However, when I attempted to explore the VS .NETintegration, this option failed on my machine and the installer reported thatit could "not find your Visual Studio .Net 2002 installation." Apparently,Visual Studio .NET 2003 integration still needs some work.

Asidefrom all the goodies included in the box, the pinnacle achievement is theC#Builder IDE itself. Rather than attempting an apples to oranges comparison ofthe C#Builder versus Visual Studio .NET IDEs, I've elected to highlight theC#Builder enhancements that are either radically new to C# developers or arefar superior to Microsoft's current feature interpretation. Topping the list isthe integrated dynamic modeling feature, which generates UML class diagrams onthe fly, courtesy of Borland's Together product. Whether application developersuse this feature as a lazy auto-documentation feature or for the realhonest-to-goodness real-time whiteboard design ability, the flexibility of themodeling tool is self-evident. Even though Microsoft has announced theirintentions to build modeling capability into future editions of Visual Studio.NET, Borland's C#Builder answers the call today. And for those fans of Borlandproducts who prefer the presentation style of C++Builder or Delphi, acclimatingto C#Builder's IDE takes a matter of minutes instead of hours. Developers mayeven be surprised to discover that the product can consume and compile VB .NETsyntax. Borland doesn't heavily promote this fact because, unlike C# tool tipsand parameter auto-completion, only syntax highlighting is supported for the VB.NET language. Nevertheless, for those large projects with mixed .NET syntax,it's comforting to know that developers won't need to switch to an alternativeediting environment to work with non-C# files.

Figure 2. One of the coolest features ofC#Builder Enterprise edition is the integrated Model View, allowing applicationdesigners to dynamically switch between UML class views and actual code.

Othernice-to-have amenities bundled into the product are LiveTeam, an interfaceproviding access to various source-control management systems such as MicrosoftSourceSafe, Rational ClearCase, CVS, and Borland's own StarTeam product.Borland has also created Borland Data Provider (BDP) for ADO.NET to include thebundled SQL database servers - and even one that didn't quite make it into thebox; the printed Quick Start guide erroneously states that a developeredition of Oracle 9i is bundled with the product, but the inclusion of Oracle'sCD never made it into the final package. Speaking of documentation, with theexception of the Quick Start guide, documentation is almost entirelyonline. Although some might lament the lack of stacks of books weighing downthe box, the amount of documentation is considerable and well written, and evenincludes the most meaningful extracts from five of Sams Publishing's C# booksand a 19-lesson online C# tutorial authored by third-party provider Softsteel.Last but certainly not least, the product includes Microsoft's relatively newCassini Web server for local development and testing of ASP.NET Web pages andWeb service components.

C#Builderis not without its faults. It is littered with the trappings of a 1.0 product.Nagging bugs and interface glitches are apparent throughout the product, fromlist boxes missing vertical scrollbars to buttons sizing outside their dialogbox frames. Other bugs are full-blown showstoppers that can bring the IDE to acrashing halt. A patch was immediately issued just as the product hit theend-user distribution channel, but it will take an army of beta testers payingthe privilege of debugging a 1.0 product to ferret out these and othertroublesome issues before the product is hardened enough for enterprisebudgeters to consider bulk license purchases.

Figure 3. The product is not without itsproblems. Besides fatal bugs that crash the IDE, even minor nuisances like theInstalled .NET Components tabbed dialog box lacking a vertical scroll baradvertise C#Builder's 1.0 status.

Ultimately,the question comes down to whether developers should buy into Borland'sinterpretation of the C# development environment. Companies that have adoptedVisual Studio 2003 will most likely have no reason to reconsider their choice,unless they have a deep rift between their .NET and Java developers. Companiesthat haven't yet committed to a standard development environment shouldevaluate C#Builder in the context of Borland's end-to-end development lifecyclesuite of tools. On its own, C#Builder is a good first attempt, but it reallyshines in the context of Borland's Define-Design-Develop-Test-Deploy-Managestrategy.

UnlikeMicrosoft's current offering, C#Builder fits nicely within an integrated,end-to-end application lifecycle management platform that can reduce bothoverall development time and multi-vendor tools integration problems. Borlandis ahead of the pack when it comes to this approach, and is one of the firstmajor players to embrace the emergence of Model-Driven Architecture (MDA),which is viewed by many computer scientists as the next wave of applicationdevelopment practices. Like Apple in the computer hardware space, Borland is aninnovator in the field of software development tools.

Althoughthe 1.0 version of C#Builder is a good first try, it may be too early to adoptfor all but the most enthusiastic supporters of Borland's vision. However, onceit hits its stride in its next iteration, and is seamlessly integrated into theBorland lifecycle strategy, its respect and stature among even the strongestVisual Studio .NET advocates will unquestionably arrive.

Rating:

Price: US$1,799

http://www.borland.com/csharpbuilder/