»

[Jose]

Not at the user level so please no flamming wars I decided I'll take some time to slowly learn one of the APIs and would like advice on advantages/disadvantages of both regarding:
- User ability to make your own Boopsi objects and mix them with Reaction/MUI's own ones.
- Ability to modify Reaction/MUI's own objects to add features / behavious, just like you can do with subclassing a Boopsi object
- Compatiblity regarding AOS4/MOS/Classic. Think MUI is ahead on this one but the users had to buy the licence to run MUI on OS4 or something and it wasn't granted that development would continue. My memory is probably failing on this one but again, please no flame wars, just present the facts.

Thanks!
José

[Karlos]

Thread moved from news section

[Kronos]

- ReAction and BOOPSI ? Should work, just don't ask me...

- MUI has a special class for embeeding BOOPSI-Objects, pretty much straighforward (as far as that can be with raw BOOPSI)

- in MUI you can subclass every class (both builtin and external) and overload every function in that subclass with your own code. But there are allready plenty of good classes available

- ReAction is only available for AOS3.5,3.9 and 4.x (one might get away useing 68k-versions under MorphOS nut no avail for AROS)

- MUI3.8 (or better) is available for AmigaOS3.x,4.x and MorphOS. 68k and OS4 versions require a keyfile to use some configuration options but all MUI-apps works without. Under AROS one can use Zune which offeres some compability with MUI3.x (your mileage may vary)

I'll advice learning MUI:

- it's available on all Amiga-platforms
- it's far more widely used and accepted (maybe not loved by everyone, but still accepted)
- it's more matured
- it's better documented
- finding someone who could help you with problems is easier (as it's more widely used)
- more/better classes available (even if you discount some problematic ones) make developing complex SW much easier.
- MUI RuLeZ !!!
- looks better (not much of an achievment in that competition if you ask me)

[itix]

Originally Posted by Jose

Not at the user level so please no flamming wars I decided I'll take some time to slowly learn one of the APIs and would like advice on advantages/disadvantages of both regarding:
- User ability to make your own Boopsi objects and mix them with Reaction/MUI's own ones.

You can do that but you rarely find any reason to use BOOPSI objects in MUI. BOOPSI objects simply are very archaic compared to MUI classes.

- Ability to modify Reaction/MUI's own objects to add features / behavious, just like you can do with subclassing a Boopsi object

MUI subclasses are powerful way to extend your existing MUI classes.

[Cammy]

I would never program for Reaction, what a laborious and unrewarding task that would be compared to writing something for MUI, which can be used on more Amiga OSs including Aros, MorphOS and AmigaOS 2. From the programming point of view as well as accessibility, MUI is by far the wiser choice, not to mention the configuration options to the user are second to none on any platform. MUI3.8 can still be registered online, and eventually Zune should replace MUI3.x on both OS3 and OS4 the way it does in Aros, and should have all the features of MUI4 in MorphOS.

The great thing about MUI/Zune is anyone can code for it and the interface should work on all Amiga systems, reaching the widest audience. You don't even need an Amiga to use it, just a PC running Aros will do. And Aros can run from a USB stick, so it's portable and you can test your system and programs on any PC without installing a thing on the hard drive.

Once Zune is enhanced to MUI4 standards you'll see much more useful and beautiful software ported to Aros, OS3 and OS4, like Ambient and Fab's OWB browser. We just need more poeple to donate towards the bounty: http://www.power2people.org/projects/profile/54

[Minuous]

Wow, the MUI-lovers are out in force today :-(

ReAction is the official AmigaOS GUI, this applies to both 3.x and 4.x. If AROS and MOS don't support then that is a lack in those OSes. If those OSes didn't support eg. menus, would there be suggestions along the lines of "don't use menus"?
ReAction software can run under MOS, it's just a matter of the relevant classes being omitted from the MOS CD for some reason. As for AROS, if/when the 68K emulation ever gets done then ReAction classes will be usable under that too. As it stands, AROS is missing huge chunks of functionality and isn't ready for prime time anyway.

MUI is a third-party hack and rather slow and ugly IMHO, requiring many extra files and not giving any benefit over ReAction. Another case of reinventing the wheel for no real purpose and forcing users to go download and install extra packages instead of using what is already present in the OS.

[save2600]

Originally Posted by Minuous

MUI is a third-party hack and rather slow and ugly IMHO, requiring many extra files and not giving any benefit over ReAction. Another case of reinventing the wheel for no real purpose and forcing users to go download and install extra packages instead of using what is already present in the OS.

I pretty much expressed the same sentiment about MUI (especially the bit about having to track down files, being slow/ugly) and got flamed for it. Glad to see I'm not the only "uninformed" AmigaOS user or whatever I was called that day.

[jahc]

Originally Posted by Jose

Not at the user level so please no flamming wars I decided I'll take some time to slowly learn one of the APIs and would like advice on advantages/disadvantages of both regarding:
- User ability to make your own Boopsi objects and mix them with Reaction/MUI's own ones.
- Ability to modify Reaction/MUI's own objects to add features / behavious, just like you can do with subclassing a Boopsi object
- Compatiblity regarding AOS4/MOS/Classic. Think MUI is ahead on this one but the users had to buy the licence to run MUI on OS4 or something and it wasn't granted that development would continue. My memory is probably failing on this one but again, please no flame wars, just present the facts.

Thanks!
José

It sounds like you'd like to modify a fair bit, or create your own classes. I just wanted to pick classes that could already do what I needed without needing to put in any extra work. I found that MUI had a nicer listview at the time so I ended up using that for most of my Amiga projects. Whatever the project is, I'd investigate and see which classes are available for Reaction and MUI, and see which fits your project best. Of course, if you want to be multi-Amiga platform, then MUI is the way to go. I didnt realise it at the time, but when you code stuff its good to make it as easily portable as possible.. some things get a bit intertwined, but if can seperate the UI from the business stuff (which I'm trying to do more these days), then it helps when you want to port stuff.

[nicholas]

Originally Posted by Minuous

ReAction is the official AmigaOS GUI, this applies to both 3.x and 4.x.

Strange you should say that as just this very evening I booted up a NOS Escom A1200 with Workbench 3.1, which had "MUI-AT" drawer with a readme that said "MUI 3.2 Amiga Technologies Edition".

No Reaction in sight........

Karlos was here with me and can confirm this as it was he who noticed it first.

[mongo]

Originally Posted by Minuous

Wow, the MUI-lovers are out in force today :-(

ReAction is the official AmigaOS GUI, this applies to both 3.x and 4.x. If AROS and MOS don't support then that is a lack in those OSes. If those OSes didn't support eg. menus, would there be suggestions along the lines of "don't use menus"?
ReAction software can run under MOS, it's just a matter of the relevant classes being omitted from the MOS CD for some reason. As for AROS, if/when the 68K emulation ever gets done then ReAction classes will be usable under that too. As it stands, AROS is missing huge chunks of functionality and isn't ready for prime time anyway.

MUI is a third-party hack and rather slow and ugly IMHO, requiring many extra files and not giving any benefit over ReAction. Another case of reinventing the wheel for no real purpose and forcing users to go download and install extra packages instead of using what is already present in the OS.

ReAction is based on ClassAct from Finale Development and was renamed and added to Amiga OS in version 3.5.

MUI was available 7 years before that.

[matthey]

Reaction:
+ fast
+ small
+ expandable (boopsi objects)
+ integrated very well with AmigaOS
- not available on AROS
- not as many ready made custom classes or examples

MUI/Zune:
+ available on all Amiga like platforms
+ expandable (boopsi objects) with many available custom classes
+ very configurable
+ easy and fast to program
+ lots of documentation
- slow
- memory hog
- many different versions and classes make installation a pain
- user interface is non standard (e.g. PSI instead of standard screen mode requestor)

I prefer to use and look at Reaction. MUI is easier to program and powerful (more configurability and ready made custom classes). I hope that all Amiga platforms will support both at this point. I can't image doing without either.

[itix]

Originally Posted by Minuous

Wow, the MUI-lovers are out in force today :-(

ReAction is the official AmigaOS GUI, this applies to both 3.x and 4.x.

Sorry but I dont remember any Reaction classes on my Workbench 3.1 install disks.

If AROS and MOS don't support then that is a lack in those OSes. If those OSes didn't support eg. menus, would there be suggestions along the lines of "don't use menus"?

You can download ClassAct/Reaction from Aminet for free.

ReAction software can run under MOS, it's just a matter of the relevant classes being omitted from the MOS CD for some reason.

There are no Reaction classes to omit. They never got written for MorphOS and I dont think we are going to see Reaction for MorphOS in the future. It just does not make sense when MUI is chosen as the official toolkit.

MUI is a third-party hack and rather slow and ugly IMHO, requiring many extra files and not giving any benefit over ReAction. Another case of reinventing the wheel for no real purpose and forcing users to go download and install extra packages instead of using what is already present in the OS.

I know bunch of broken 3rd party MUI classes, just like I know tons of Amiga software which only reboots your Amiga without a warning. However, how many 3rd party Reaction classes you have seen in last 10 years? Is it less than zero?

But anyway, real reason to consider Reaction obsolete is that creating UI with Reaction is laborous. You have to invent wheel again and again if you want standard features into your software and it still hasnt got out from this ID based eventloop hell.

[itix]

Originally Posted by matthey

- user interface is non standard (e.g. PSI instead of standard screen mode requestor)

In MorphOS PSI uses the standard screen mode widget, the very same widget what screen requester is using ;-)

Do you happen to have a screenshot from Reaction screenmode widget?

[Tcheko]

Originally Posted by matthey

Reaction:
+ fast
+ small
+ expandable (boopsi objects)
+ integrated very well with AmigaOS
- not available on AROS
- not as many ready made custom classes or examples

MUI/Zune:
+ available on all Amiga like platforms
+ expandable (boopsi objects) with many available custom classes
+ very configurable
+ easy and fast to program
+ lots of documentation
- slow
- memory hog
- many different versions and classes make installation a pain
- user interface is non standard (e.g. PSI instead of standard screen mode requestor)

I prefer to use and look at Reaction. MUI is easier to program and powerful (more configurability and ready made custom classes). I hope that all Amiga platforms will support both at this point. I can't image doing without either.

MUI : Slow? Memory hog? Do you have any numbers?

To make some factual statement, we need to write a GUI benchmarking working on both ui framework : Reaction / MUI.

For example, how long does it take to MUI / Reaction to create a window with 1024 buttons (32 x 32 buttons grid) and release all resources. The window shall be opened and then closed and application exited.

The test should be run on the same hardware (let say a Pegasos2) and execution time measured from start to end of program.

Another version of the program that exit on window close button should be created. This version is for memory test:
- avail flush
- run <>nil: memtestprogram
- avail flush

Compare numbers.

This would give a raw and rough estimation about which one is the fastest (for buttons at least). MUI button should be set to something that looks like Reaction button.

I can write the MUI program test... if anyone feel writing the reaction one.

Both sources shall be published for comparison. No custom startup code allowed. The only allowed optimisation is using gcc -O3.

[lsmart]

Originally Posted by matthey

MUI/Zune:
[...]
- slow
- memory hog
- many different versions and classes make installation a pain
- user interface is non standard (e.g. PSI instead of standard screen mode requestor)

That was my impression too. But this is the user-level view. The original poster asked for the developers perspective. MUI fans keep claiming that it´d be so easy and flexible. I´d love to give my perspective on this, but I only coded GadTools and BOOPSI back in the day. I wrote a small Reaction GUI recently, but not enough to tell if it really has a serious advantage to the classic way of writing Amiga GUI, which actually was very straightforward and had all the gadgets my programs ever needed!!!!