Re: HyperCard or HyperStudio?

[taob@ionews.io.org (Brian Tao)]

In article <1993Nov15.145315.24751@seq.uncwil.edu>, Craig N. Caroon writes...
> 
> Which is better, so to speak!
> 
> HyperCard IIGS by Apple or HyperStudio by Roger Wagner?
> 
> By better I mean is more flexible, has more features, etc...

    In my experience as a stack developer, HCGS is by far easier to use
than HyperStudio.  Because of HCGS' powerful scripting language, you can
automate many tasks inherent in creating a stack.  I can quickly create
and place array of 100 buttons (as I had to do for my Hypertable perodic
table stack).  It took me less than five minutes to do that.  Then I
discovered a mistake in each of the scripts associated with the 100
buttons.  A couple of minutes later, they were all changed with another
script I wrote.  Try doing this with HyperStudio.  I also find that
SimpleScript in HS 3.1g crashes from time to time while HCGS is very
solid.  HS's strengths are in multimedia and integrating animations,
sounds, 320-mode graphics and video into a stack.  That's possible with
HCGS, but much more difficult to do.  HS also has the big advantage of
the run-time player, so your potential audience is easily 10 to 20 times
that of HCGS.
-- 
Brian Tao:: taob@io.org (Internex Online, 416-363-3783, 27 lines, v.32bis)
::::::::::: 90taobri@wave.scar.utoronto.ca (University of Toronto, 9T4)