Your Top Reasons to Upgrade Apps to C11 Now

I would be very interested to hear from other developers their top reasons for spending the time & effort now to upgrade existing C10 apps to C11.


It would be nice if we could know whether the upcoming Unicode support will impart additional upgrade issues to the usual version upgrade.

I don’t think I’d update Apps at the moment.
C11 currently is really just C10++ - the upcoming UniCode and changing the reporting engine to use EMF files is bound to require changes to 3rd Party templates.
So I’d wait until that’s settled.

Unless that is there’s a particular fix or feature that you require.

The only one I can think of is H5 using the Legacy chain - if you’re desperate for that then it may be worth the hassle.


I’m waiting for a real 64-bit compilation
I use high volume MSSQL databases


Nothing compelling to me so far. I inquire here perhaps in hopes of missing something significant.

Unless that is there’s a particular fix or feature that you require.

Lack of a 64bit compiler is the main reason that is forcing my team to start the conversion of Clarion code to C# code.

However we don’t have any plan about upgrading to C11 in the near future.

Only UNICODE is what I need. I payed C11 to support Softvelocity but it is still not ready to use. I am waiting for upcoming release.

If you look at the amount of bugs and problems reported in the NG’s and the PTSS then I don’t think the so called C11 “Gold” version is usable.

I’m using it everyday now Johan - much better than C10.
It couples the solidity of the C10 runtime with the improvements to the IDE so I’m happy.
The issues being reported on the newsgroups are typical for a major release cycle - a mix of bugs that are in C10 anyway, and some feature requests.

regarding Douglas’s question;

I would be very interested to hear from other developers their top reasons for spending the time and effort now to upgrade existing C10 apps to C11.

Frankly it’s not much time or effort. Install your accessories into the new IDE, set your IDE settings to your preferences and you’re done. And you’ve got it for free so it’s not like you have to spend any money.

Personally the biggest feature for me is the wider template windows - I can see more tabs at the same time so it’s a faster, smoother interface. There are a few other minor things as well but given that it takes close to zero effort I think the real question is why not do it? there are lots of bug fixes in it as well, so that’s nice.

Graham said;

C11 currently is really just C10++ -

For me this is the best reason to use it now. It’s an incremental improvement on C10, with mostly the same runtime and bug fixes in it. So it’s a low impact update (which for me is a good thing.) When the new runtime ships I think there will be much more cautiousness about that.

1 Like


How well did the Capesoft templates convert to wider C11 template windows? I understand for some 3rd party folks it requires layout changes to hundreds of prompts in order to get some templates looking good again.

Hi Douglas,
I didn’t do any effort at all. The templates themselves work fine “out the box” and I think that’s true for everyone.

What I have done (and I expect will continue to do as time passes) is remove some of the “width” settings I had before. In the past I’ve sometimes set the Width of a list box or whatever explicitly. Removing this setting allows the box to fill the screen (horizontally).

The change though is purely cosmetic - it’s not “necessary” just looks a bit neater in some places.

I understand for some 3rd party folks it requires layout changes to hundreds of prompts in order to get some templates looking good again.

I know there was speculation on this, but I’m not aware of anyone actually having to do it. Also, if they do, I’m presuming the windows were very heavily “arranged” to begin with.

Aside: The template system is an example of a “no visual designer” system. You specify the fields and the AppGen figures out how to display them for you. It does however let you control it if you like, and in some cases (horizontal radios, or checkboxes for example) it made sense to give the layout engine “more direction”.

Of course the direction fits a specific screen size (like all visual designer windows do) and so if the screen-size changes you then need to go back and re-do. On the other hand the more you left the layout to the engine to determine, the more the engine can work with it when the screen size changes. (Like what browsers do, HTML / CSS etc.)

Our templates are a “minimal mix” - meaning that we let the layout engine “do it’s thing” almost all the time - except for specific cases where screen space was at a premium.

What I’m seeing now is that more tabs are visible (which saves a lot of clicks) and also that prompts that were very space limited now display the whole prompt (which often includes formatting tips etc.)


I appreciate the thoughts, Bruce. I am struck by the noticeable lack here of compelling features that argue for upgrading Apps now. My gut tells me the C11 release was driven by the need for a cash infusion rather than new features that significantly benefit developers. I’m okay with that if SV can focus and deliver, but unfortunately the show just feels like historical charity fund raising rather than a vibrant going concern.

I am struck by the noticeable lack here of compelling features that argue for upgrading Apps now.

I think software development has changed a lot in the last 30 years. There was a time where we got “1 upgrade a year” and everything was in that upgrade. Went to the store, bought a floppy disk, and so on. No patches etc.

These days there are continuous releases - and things get added all the time. There’s less of an “event” and more of a “progression”. We do this with our own programs, and we’re seeing it with Windows, pretty much all browsers and so on.

So in one sense, yes, it’s a “subscription” and for whatever reason it’s now “due”. Thinking of it as a “list of features” is not really the way to think about it now.

On the other hand, SV’s model is expressly not about what they have added. You are not buying C11 - you have that already as part of your C10 CSP. There’s no need to pay to run C11. So the question of buying the C11 CSP (ie the next x months of development) and running the C11 IDE now are completely distinct.

With SV the payment is always forward looking - not about what they have delivered but what they might (or might not) deliver in the future.
Whether you bother to run, or use, the builds you have already paid for - well that’s your decision I guess.


Admittedly, I am old school, like so many in the Clarion world, but I have the feeling you are flanneling here.

SV does not need us to redefine their subscription plan for them. They adopted the major/minor release plan and have stuck with it over the years, despite several suggestions/pleas that a simple time based plan might help even out the cash flow. Moreover, I believe that you, of all Clarion developers, know well how customers respond when a release has major additions that are proudly highlighted on ClarionLive.

Having said that, it should be clear that renewing a subscription was not the issue for starting this discussion. While some might consider it easy to upgrade their development environment with each Clarion release, I long ago decided to invest the time ONLY when a release is widely recognized as stable AND offers new features, fixes, or efficiencies for development. Given that SV did not deem C11 significant enough to bother making a ClarionLive appearance, my inquiry here was to help insure I was not missing something significant.


I had to look that up… I’m going to assume you meant “to flannel” - as in “use bland fluent talk to avoid addressing a difficult subject or situation directly” and not the Urban Dictionary version… (seriously… don’t look it up…)

There is a difficult subject regarding the way SV does marketing, or public relations, or the weirdness of their subscription. But here’s the thing - I don’t really care about them, so that argument isn’t really that interesting to me. (So yeah, “bland”). I figured out a long time ago that it’s not my job to run their business. It’s my job to run my business so I’d much rather spend the time and attention on what we are doing wrong, and correct that. There are around 50 people here now so that uses up my emotional energy, and I don’t have energy left for complaining about SV this or SV that.

So frankly whether they are on ClarionLive or not or whether they have a weird subscription is off my radar. They will do what they will do.

Given that I don’t care, I simply make choices based on what is best for me. And for me Clarion 11 was free (part of the C10 CSP) and was better than C10. So why not run it? Costs me nothing. Sure I get to install it, and all the accessories, but if I do that once every 2 years I can survive that.

I don’t have a list of compelling reasons - I have just 1. I ask myself “Is it better than what I have?” In this case the answer is easy because of the wider template windows. But even if that wasn’t there I’d use it because I don’t have a “minimum number of major features” requirement. It’s simply better, or not better. If it’s better I’ll use it, if not I wait for the next build and ask again.
I know this is a very narcissistic approach, but it works for me - I’m not all that interested in what is “not in there” or if it validates some personal criteria for being a “major version” - it’s simply better or not better.

I long ago decided to invest the time ONLY when a release is widely recognised as stable

This is of course a smart strategy. I install it side-by-side and use both interchangeably and move production up as and when stability is proven. On the other hand lots of people refuse to update even when more stable versions are available. Witness the number of folk on C8 or C9 (and even one I discovered using C7…) So the danger of this “wait for stable” approach is that it becomes a “good excuse” never to upgrade, and hence you deprive only yourself of all the improvements.

AND offers new features, fixes, or efficiencies for development.

I’d be hard pressed to think of a “stable version” that didn’t do this. Of course much of this is very small and doesn’t make big feature lists, but I notice it a lot when I use older versions, where some setting, or locator, or whatever is missing. Efficiencies are often an accumulation of very incremental improvements. Of course each build has lots of fixes - the release notes are testimony to that.


I haven’t really done much work in C11, but I went through all my templates with it, side by side with C10 and made modifications to take advantage of the wider screens in C11. I had both C10 and C11 running side by side for several days and neither showed any issues at all. In the past one of the more vulnerable points in the IDE (both old and new) was when doing template development and constantly reloading and updating the registry. Neither C10 or C11 IDEs had any issues at all.

Some of the C10 builds had issues with MSSQL, but I don’t see “major” releases as “major” We are getting a pretty steady stream of builds and for what I have used them for, they have been very stable.

I’m a bit disappointed that neither Unicode or EMF was included in C11 Gold, but since I don’t need either, it doesn’t affect my work at all.

Best regards,
Arnor Baldvinsson - Icetips Alta LLC

Apologize for the colloquialism. Perhaps “making pajamas” would have been better.

Apologize for the colloquialism.

not necessary - that’s what makes it interesting :slight_smile:

Perhaps “making pajamas” would have been better.

not really :slight_smile: - I’m not familiar with that term, and in this case google is no help at all :slight_smile:

I also consider the whole subscription based thing comparing it to if I were servicing my car…
Sure the car will run for a while if I do not pay attention to servicing, but I know if I do service it, the car will return me good, and perhaps even better, reliability and, more so, mileage.
In addition, I know, not with any degree of confidence though, that my service centre will continue to exist because of the business generated by my small contribution. (Unfortunately servicing does not result in having added features: sound system upgrade…)

I have CW11 ee, paid the subscription, but have no intentions of upgrading any existing applications at the present. New applications, that is different, Cw11 ee for them.

Is the value to me to keep them in business? Yes.

Is the value to me purely on what I get from them? This far down the track, important yes, but not the only priority.

At the end of the day, we all may our individual choices: hang in there, or jump ship.

And let’s face it… We all got to eat…