What is your experience using the TIBCO General Interface?

Question

It looks interesting and I've played around with it some --- but the development IDE in a web browser seems to be nightmare eventually.

Does anyone have experience using it and what are your thoughts?

Answer 1

From a coworker who used to work at TIBCO:

TIBCO is a complicated, hard to use system because it's used for complicated, hard to solve problems.

Answer 2

We evaluated GI a few months ago for a project but didn't end up selecting it.

The IDE-in-a-browser (which is itself build with GI) actually works surprisingly well, though there are some features you normally expect from an editor that it lacks, most notably (and irritatingly) an Undo command. It's also impossible to do things like subdocument includes (practically a necessity for team development) from the IDE, though you can do them manually in the underlying XML and the IDE will respect them.

In the end the main reason we didn't go with it was that it was difficult to make the resulting web application look as good as the designers really wanted. It was relatively easy to build functionality, but the components were very restrictive in look and feel. The way GI renders its own document model to HTML involves a lot of style attributes which makes skinning in CSS all but impossible. It seems to prefer making web applications that look like applications, instead of web applications that look like websites.

So it would probably be great for building intranet type applications where look and feel isn't a huge issue, but I probably wouldn't use it to make a public facing site.

By the way for those that don't know, TIBCO GI is a completely separate product from the rest of TIBCO's SOA business integration stuff - General Interface was a separate company that was acquired by TIBCO a couple of years ago.

Answer 3

Kieron does a good job of summarizing GI. It's really for enterprise web applications, not consumer-y widgets. The overhead of loading the entire GI framework and waiting a second or two for it to load doesn;t seem like much if you're firing up a call center or an employee provisioning application you're going to use for the next few hours. But, it seems like forever if you're waiting for a widget to load into an existing web page. And, even though, GI supports some nice functional and performance QA tools, they really are overkill unless you're working on something important and complex. So, if all you want is to toss a sexy looking datepicker on screen, use something else for sure.

Answer 4

Yup, couldn't agree more. I have developed a few applications with TIBCO GI and integrated it with TIBCO CIM. I work for TIBCO and GI is something I have been working with quite heavily doing some complicated stuff. Whilst doing it, I came across the odd sides of GI, things you sometimes can't explain but are just the way they are, working with JavaScript and dealing with multithreading issues can be a nightmare etc. It's good to create something quick without being too fussy about the sexiness of the application hence good for internal apps but not for consumers unless you want to get lost in a jungle of crazy CSS styling. The XML Mapping utility is a great feature saving you lots of time to implement SOA applications. The other good part is that deployment is really easy - GI apps use a combination of XML, XSLT, X-Path and JavaScript. In GI 3.8 there are also a couple of testing tools. Unfortunately, development inside GI's editor is slow and painful, so I recommend using an external editor like Notepad++.