Debbie Blumenthal wrote:
>
>I've heard from a number of people (thank you!) on this topic.
>But... I seem to be hearing more from the ones who chose Minisoft and
>the overwhelming reason seems to be price.
>
>Did anyone compare (however slightly) then go with Reflection?  Why?
>How do you feel about it now?
> ....
 
Oh, well...
 
I can not count myself into those that evaluated MS-92 and THEN decided for
Reflection simply because I have been using Reflection many moons before
MS-92 ever dreamed to exist.
 
But, I can tell you why we are STILL using it. We currently have a Site
License with WRQ because we use emulators to access HPs, DECs, and soon UX
hosts through X/Windows and AS/400s; and also because we use NS3000, the
multiprotocol network services from WRQ. We've preferred to deal with one
vendor as long as their product quality matches or exceeds the competition,
which is the case with every WRQ product we use. (No, I am not getting an
extra discount for this comment.)
 
I do not have any major objection against *any* other emulator and I know
for sure  there are many others that can do the job as well.
 
But as someone mentioned before, the programmatic capabilities on Reflection
are very good. We have set up application procedures that allow us to do
automatic transfers back and forth from the PC to the 3000 with COBOL and
Reflection. Although RCL (Reflection's Command Language) is very powerful
and we use it to automate some tasks, the other emulators may have similar
capabilities. It is the ability to integrate Reflection's transfer
capabilities with other programming languages what gives us better control
and makes it easier for the users. Additionally, WRQ's technical staff has
provided very good support when we have had trouble, even when it was caused
by a third party 4GL.
 
If you require 3000 emulation only and you are looking for savings, MS-92
has a solid reputation and certainly will do the job. But if  you need
Reflection's programmatic capabilities, if you access multiple hosts and are
thinking of emulators for other platforms as well and would like to
standardize, if you have the extra money and consider part of it to be an
investment in support , Reflection has no match.
 
That's why we STILL use most of the products from WRQ.
 
Regards,
[log in to unmask]
"The above point of view is mine and does not necessarily reflect my
employer's."
**********************************
Why do people keep on saying "My opinions are mine"? Of course they are.
Otherwise they could not be preceeded with "My".