Is any one charting packing considered to be the "best"? We've used ChartFX
but wasn't too happy about the way data had to be populated along with some
other issues which slip my mind right now and Dundas has bugs and doesn't do
a good enough job displaying axis labels and is very slow to paint large
numbers of series and data points.

We're currently evaluating ProEssentials which we are happy with but it's
not a native .NET package.

Thanks,
Joe

Hi Joe,

Thank you for posting here!

I notice that you have posted the same question in our
microsoft.public.dotnet.framework.windowsforms.controls newsgroup, which I
have already responded. So please check my answer there and if you need any
further assistance on this particular issue, please reply to me in that
thread so I can follow up with you in time.

For your convenience, I have include my reply as follows:

I am not sure which charting packing is considered to the the "best". I
have searched the google and found "Nevron .NET Vision", which is the
ultimate suite for creating unique and powerful data presentation
applications with spectacular data visualization capabilities and wins the
best Charting and Graphing Component for .NET of MSN2D.com 2005 Reade.

For more information on Nevron .NET Vision, please visit the following link.

http://www.nevron.com

Thank you and have a nice day!


Sincerely,
Linda Liu
Microsoft Online Community Support

==================================================
Get notification to my posts through email? Please refer to
http://msdn.microsoft.com/subscripti...ult.aspx#notif
ications.

Note: The MSDN Managed Newsgroup support offering is for non-urgent issues
where an initial response from the community or a Microsoft Support
Engineer within 1 business day is acceptable. Please note that each follow
up response may take approximately 2 business days as the support
professional working with you may need further investigation to reach the
most efficient resolution. The offering is not appropriate for situations
that require urgent, real-time or phone-based interactions or complex
project analysis and dump analysis issues. Issues of this nature are best
handled working with a dedicated Microsoft Support Engineer by contacting
Microsoft Customer Support Services (CSS) at
http://msdn.microsoft.com/subscripti...t/default.aspx.
==================================================

This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.

"Joe" <(E-Mail Removed)> ha scritto nel messaggio
news:%(E-Mail Removed)...
> Is any one charting packing considered to be the "best"? We've used
> ChartFX but wasn't too happy about the way data had to be populated along
> with some other issues which slip my mind right now and Dundas has bugs
> and doesn't do a good enough job displaying axis labels and is very slow
> to paint large numbers of series and data points.
>
> We're currently evaluating ProEssentials which we are happy with but it's
> not a native .NET package.

Did you see the ZedGraph package?

http://zedgraph.org/wiki/index.php?title=Main_Page

It does not have nevron special effects but it seems well done and it's
free...

--
www.neodatatype.net

You may want to take another look to Chart FX, Chart FX for Visual
Studio 2005 has been completely redesigned making it easier to use.

More info at: http://www.softwarefx.com/sfxNetProducts/cfxVs2005/

Francisco Padron
www.chartfx.com


Joe wrote:
> Is any one charting packing considered to be the "best"? We've used ChartFX
> but wasn't too happy about the way data had to be populated along with some
> other issues which slip my mind right now and Dundas has bugs and doesn't do
> a good enough job displaying axis labels and is very slow to paint large
> numbers of series and data points.
>
> We're currently evaluating ProEssentials which we are happy with but it's
> not a native .NET package.
>
> Thanks,
> Joe

Yes, try ZedGraph. It is a free, yet quite powerful .NET control. Works well
in Windows
as well as ASP.NET application.

Have a look at the samples.
http://zedgraph.org/wiki/index.php?title=Sample_Graphs


There is also a good tutorial at:
http://www.codeproject.com/csharp/zedgraph.asp

---



"Fabio" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>
> "Joe" <(E-Mail Removed)> ha scritto nel messaggio
> news:%(E-Mail Removed)...
>> Is any one charting packing considered to be the "best"? We've used
>> ChartFX but was't too happy about the way data had to be populated along
>> with some other issues which slip my mind right now and Dundas has bugs
>> and doesn't do a good enough job displaying axis labels and is very slow
>> to paint large numbers of series and data points.
>>
>> We're currently evaluating ProEssentials which we are happy with but it's
>> not a native .NET package.
>
> Did you see the ZedGraph package?
>
> http://zedgraph.org/wiki/index.php?title=Main_Page
>
> It does not have nevron special effects but it seems well done and it's
> free...
>
> --
> www.neodatatype.net
>

Hello,

Thank you for evaluating ProEssentials. We just released v6 if you hadn't
downloaded it. As for native .NET (managed code) concerns: managed code is
now over 3 years old and I'm still not convinced 100% managed code is a
foundation for mission critical commercial software. You mentioned a few
100% managed tools and found them to contain bugs and render slow. Two
things Gigasoft avoids with a passion. If anyone reading this has specific
concerns on the value of managed code (as a 3rd party tool), I'd love to
hear them. Gigasoft needs to hear real-world concerns before it commits to
100% managed code. Bugs, Speed, and Memory management are not valid
concerns. Bugs and Slowness obviously are not an advantage. As for memory
management, .NET is great for beginners or rare programmers. However,
professionally programmed products should keep track of their own memory,
and can easily do so with 100% accuracy. Leaving memory management up to a
black-box is a shortcut purely designed for beginners and
engineers/scientists who don't regularly program. Native code (unmanaged)
will exist for many years to come. Being an early adopter simply in the name
of being an early adopter is not practical. Gigasoft takes a purely
practical direction, as should everyone. .NET has other advantages related
to beginners and non-regular programmers, mostly related to easy of use.
However, a 3rd party managed/unmanaged tool can coexist with the .NET IDE
and still provide more stability, more speed, and .NET type ease of use.
Thus, providing the best of both worlds and an optimum solution for the
problem; how to achieve the best possible charting functionality; which
should not be confused with the problem; how to most easily get generic
charts into an application. Charting is a huge subject, and using one
charting tool for all scenarios is not practical. Tools are cheap enough to
buy the right tool for the job. When working on a mission critical project
where speed, stability, and rendering intelligence are most important; use
ProEssentials. When you need to quickly add a generic chart holding a few
data points, maybe choose another. More on this subject can be found in my
“Letter from the President” at www.gigasoft.com



Best regards,



Robert Dede

President

Gigasoft, Inc.

(E-Mail Removed)






"Joe" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:%(E-Mail Removed)...
> Is any one charting packing considered to be the "best"? We've used
> ChartFX but wasn't too happy about the way data had to be populated along
> with some other issues which slip my mind right now and Dundas has bugs
> and doesn't do a good enough job displaying axis labels and is very slow
> to paint large numbers of series and data points.
>
> We're currently evaluating ProEssentials which we are happy with but it's
> not a native .NET package.
>
> Thanks,
> Joe
>

Robert Dede wrote:
> Thank you for evaluating ProEssentials. We just released v6 if you hadn't
> downloaded it. As for native .NET (managed code) concerns: managed code is
> now over 3 years old and I'm still not convinced 100% managed code is a
> foundation for mission critical commercial software.

Java code is managed code, Java has been around for over 10 years and
is used in many mission critical applications.

<snip>

> As for memory management, .NET is great for beginners or rare programmers. However,
> professionally programmed products should keep track of their own memory,
> and can easily do so with 100% accuracy.

They can do so - but certainly not easily. Do you think programmers
ought to keep track of which of their variables end up in registers,
too?

Personally I find that not having to worry about memory management
(beyond having it as a permanent thing to be aware of, and avoid being
silly about it) is a great productivity benefit - it means I can
concentrate on adding features rather than keeping track of memory.

Give me managed code any day - as a regular, professional programmer.

Jon

Jon Skeet [C# MVP] wrote:
> Robert Dede wrote:
> > Thank you for evaluating ProEssentials. We just released v6 if you hadn't
> > downloaded it. As for native .NET (managed code) concerns: managed code is
> > now over 3 years old and I'm still not convinced 100% managed code is a
> > foundation for mission critical commercial software.
>
> Java code is managed code, Java has been around for over 10 years and
> is used in many mission critical applications.
>
> <snip>
>
> > As for memory management, .NET is great for beginners or rare programmers. However,
> > professionally programmed products should keep track of their own memory,
> > and can easily do so with 100% accuracy.
>
> They can do so - but certainly not easily. Do you think programmers
> ought to keep track of which of their variables end up in registers,
> too?
>
> Personally I find that not having to worry about memory management
> (beyond having it as a permanent thing to be aware of, and avoid being
> silly about it) is a great productivity benefit - it means I can
> concentrate on adding features rather than keeping track of memory.
>
> Give me managed code any day - as a regular, professional programmer.

I agree with Jon, and I take issue with Robert Dede's post, but for
other reasons.

Robert is right: it really doesn't matter to the charting functionality
whether the package is written in managed code or unmanaged code. There
are some considerations (see below), but if I'm calling an API to draw
pretty shapes then I don't really care what's happening under the
covers.

However, Robert, if you want to impress C# programmers and sell your
charting package, avoid writing dense screeds on why garbage collection
is for "occasional" programmers and non-professionals. (Not "rare"
programmers. I like to think of myself as "well done," thanks.) I say
this for two reasons: 1) I couldn't care less how much better it is for
you to write in a non-GC language; I care about how your package
interacts with my language of choice. "It was easier for me to write"
is not a selling feature; "It's easier for you to use" is. 2) It tells
me nothing about what your charting package will do for me.

That said, a someone developing in managed code, a package written in
unmanaged code brings up several concerns.

1) I want the package to interact seamlessly with my platform of
choice. If the package has a nice, managed, .NET interface that is well
documented, exposes powerful functionality, integrates nicely with .NET
Framework types, and uses exceptions and return codes to signal errors
in accordance with standard .NET practices, then I'm happy.

If, on the other hand, I have to talk directly to a COM object, and the
only kind of exception I get back is COMException, and the
documentation is written for C++ programmers, then I'm not so happy.

As I said before, in the end I don't care what the package is written
in. I care about what it can do, how stable it is, and how easy it is
to use from C#.

2) Deployment. If I have to install a COM component as part of my
deployment then that's extra work. It's not the end of the world, but
it's an extra step I need to take, and it means that some deployment
scenarios aren't possible.

3) Security. If I'm calling a COM component then I may need additional
privileges granted to my .NET application. That may or may not be a
problem depending upon my deployment / runtime scenario.

Address these three concerns and I won't care whether the package is
written in C#, C++, or Forth.

Hi Jon,

> Give me managed code any day - as a regular, professional programmer.

I totally agree, and I didn't make this clear enough, I questioned managed
code as a foundation for mission-critical commercial tools. Not software in
general. The more efficient, fast, and stable the building blocks, the
better the final application. It's generally best to optimize as much as
possible; and using tools which are themselves optimized is an easy way to
bolt-on optimization without any extra work, just the decision to take
advantage of it.



best regards,



Robert Dede

Gigasoft, Inc.









"Jon Skeet [C# MVP]" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> Robert Dede wrote:
>> Thank you for evaluating ProEssentials. We just released v6 if you
>> hadn't
>> downloaded it. As for native .NET (managed code) concerns: managed code
>> is
>> now over 3 years old and I'm still not convinced 100% managed code is a
>> foundation for mission critical commercial software.
>
> Java code is managed code, Java has been around for over 10 years and
> is used in many mission critical applications.
>
> <snip>
>
>> As for memory management, .NET is great for beginners or rare
>> programmers. However,
>> professionally programmed products should keep track of their own memory,
>> and can easily do so with 100% accuracy.
>
> They can do so - but certainly not easily. Do you think programmers
> ought to keep track of which of their variables end up in registers,
> too?
>
> Personally I find that not having to worry about memory management
> (beyond having it as a permanent thing to be aware of, and avoid being
> silly about it) is a great productivity benefit - it means I can
> concentrate on adding features rather than keeping track of memory.
>
> Give me managed code any day - as a regular, professional programmer.
>
> Jon
>

Getting back to your original question on chart packages, I looked at
quite a few and thought that Dundas had the richest feature set and
fairly easy to develop with, though I think you are right about the
axis labeling and speed. Please let us know how your eventual
selection goes.



On Jan 23, 4:23 pm, "Robert Dede" <rob...@gigasoft.com> wrote:
> Hi Jon,
>
> > Give me managed code any day - as a regular, professional programmer.I totally agree, and I didn't make this clear enough, I questioned managed
> code as a foundation for mission-critical commercial tools. Not software in
> general. The more efficient, fast, and stable the building blocks, the
> better the final application. It's generally best to optimize as much as
> possible; and using tools which are themselves optimized is an easy way to
> bolt-on optimization without any extra work, just the decision to take
> advantage of it.
>
> best regards,
>
> Robert Dede
>
> Gigasoft, Inc.
>
> "Jon Skeet [C# MVP]" <s...@pobox.com> wrote in messagenews:(E-Mail Removed)...
>
> > Robert Dede wrote:
> >> Thank you for evaluating ProEssentials. We just released v6 if you
> >> hadn't
> >> downloaded it. As for native .NET (managed code) concerns: managed code
> >> is
> >> now over 3 years old and I'm still not convinced 100% managed code is a
> >> foundation for mission critical commercial software.
>
> > Java code is managed code, Java has been around for over 10 years and
> > is used in many mission critical applications.
>
> > <snip>
>
> >> As for memory management, .NET is great for beginners or rare
> >> programmers. However,
> >> professionally programmed products should keep track of their own memory,
> >> and can easily do so with 100% accuracy.
>
> > They can do so - but certainly not easily. Do you think programmers
> > ought to keep track of which of their variables end up in registers,
> > too?
>
> > Personally I find that not having to worry about memory management
> > (beyond having it as a permanent thing to be aware of, and avoid being
> > silly about it) is a great productivity benefit - it means I can
> > concentrate on adding features rather than keeping track of memory.
>
> > Give me managed code any day - as a regular, professional programmer.
>
> > Jon