From: gordonb@mcil.comm.mot.com (Gordon Berkley)
Subject: Capbak (Was: X-runner)
Organization: Motorola Communications Israel Ltd., Tel Aviv
Distribution: na
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 08:29:19 GMT

In article <1992Oct6.180631.15962@awdprime.austin.ibm.com>, alan@auntbea.austin.ibm.com (Alan R. Weiss) writes:
|> In article <1992Oct6.080355.27824@cbfsb.cb.att.com> nh@cbnewsg.cb.att.com (nicholas.hounsome) writes:
|> >From article <1992Oct5.224401.29918@saifr00.cfsat.honeywell.com>, by dickey@saifr00.cfsat.honeywell.com (Bill Dickey):
|> >> 
|> >> Do anyone know anything of a tool called X-Runner?  I think it is a capture
|> >> and playback testing tool for X-window applications.

|> >Apparently it is for recording/playback of mouse and keyboard events with 
|> >what sounds like very good synchronization capability.
|> >
|> >price from $20000
|> 
|> You should also check out Software Research's "Capback/X" product,
|> which is about $7500 for a seven host license (and they seem to
|> be able to negotiate :-)
|> 
|> At the last place I was at I evaluated their product, and found
|> that their usage of time synchronization instead of event
|> synchronization was problemmatic; scripts recorded on one
|> system in one environment (performance characteristics composed
|> of memory size, swap size, load, etc. etc. ad nauseum) tended
|> to screw-up when played back on a different system with different
|> characteristics.  They have since fixed this with an event synchronization
|> version.
|> 
|> BTW, the reason my last firm decided against Capback/X was threefold:
|> 
|> a.  The GUI was, theoretically, going to undergo massive changes
|>
|> b.  Politics -- the boss asked the wrong person for his opinion
|>
|> c.  Money -- IMHO the *real* reason.  Some firms are running VERY lean,
|> and $7500 comes off the bottom line.  

[The above has been edited for brevity.  GB]

Please add a fourth reason for not using Capbak:
   d.  Product Quality & Support  (OK. so it's two reasons!)
	We used the SR products in three critical projects over the
	past three years.  Only in one of them (!) was the use successful.
	SR themselves do not know what their product can or can't do.

	The one project where we were able to use the SR products semi-
	successfully was a PC based project with a *very* stable user
	interface.  And even there we were not able to do what we really
	wanted to (and what SR claimed -pre-sale- *could* be done).

	On the other project were there U/I was more dynamic, and where
	the development environment was not homogenious, the test
	system was not at all robust, and in the third project
	we had to scrap use of the tools (after buying the 7 user license!)
	because it (Capbak) broke our software!

	As far as support goes, not being in the same time zone as SR
	made us rely on FAX's and email.  In many cases, when they
	chose to respond at all, it was only after several days
	and only with an intelligent:  "Huh?" type of answer.

I would think twice before using any SR products.

Bitter user?  You bet!

PS:  there is a public domain X based capture & playback system, also!
	We'll probably try that one next...
-- 
[  Gordon D. Berkley    INTERNET: gordonb@mcil.comm.mot.com   POST: cgb001   ]
[  PHONE: +972 (3) 565-8727      FAX: +972 (3) 565-8754      (UTC-2)         ]