In Vision, I used client tags to store colours and then I bound these to components on Windows, but this is a really crude way to centralise colours. There is no* way in Vision however, to centralise the styling of other attributes, and to especially not to group styles together for example the complete styling of a button, or a panel. This is where Perspective is streaks ahead of Vision
I don't really understand, because CSS (e.g. within Perspective Styles, component props.style, and CSS themes) will always be required for a well-built application. Perhaps you're talking specifically about raw theme CSS or the advanced stylesheet?
Same here. Client tags for colors. The styling of everything else isn’t that big of a deal for us but I can definitely see it being helpful. Like I said, Perspective has a lot of nice features. Just a higher bar to train people to use it efficiently.
This. The style props are simple enough to be analogous to standard properties.
Definitely agree with you here! And I imagine that a higher percentage of the peeps that are active on this forum are willing to actively learn its intricacies than the general population of SCADA devs. I've often thought of Ignition as being the programmer's SCADA. The possibilities are only limited by your imagination, compared to some other platforms which are more targeted at people with less technical ability or desire to push boundaries, and I don't say that with any animosity. Everyone is different and has different strengths. Personally, I would much rather freedom than an explicit set of possibilities. But freedom also comes at a cost! Sometimes it depends on the project and its budget. Once you have a solid base project to work with though, it's much of a muchness
I 100% agree with your viewpoint. Again, I’m voting for developing in both Vision and Perspective. If someone is super comfortable with Perspective or general web dev, jump right into Perspective. But if trying to work on a deadline and jumping into Perspective as the sole approach can definitely be stressful and overwhelming if trying to learn it at the same time - more so than Vision for most users. Have Vision (it’s quick to build in and add to) but then can slowly work through adding features to Perspective. I do realize this can be cost prohibitive to some though, at which point, I’m less sure of what to suggest. Would be dependent on the situation and abilities of the personnel developing the project.
That describes my first Perspective project. A lot of 16 hour days. It went well but it was a pretty stressful way to learn Perspective. It's easier to learn these days because the documentation is written now but it is still a pretty rough way to learn it.
I don't think I have much to add to the debate here, everyone has made good points already. I just wanted to add that the easiest way to get a feel for the perspective learning curve is to just sit down and start developing a thin slice pretend project. Just one screen, one popup for a control module, one UDT. And one Power Chart
Sounds fun! I put in Vision years ago for a friend's parent's olive processing plant on their farm. It was super fun to do and a fun environment "commissioning" it with them.
I think, the major problem is not the lack of the desire to learn.
In the end of the day, everyone quickly forgets the rarely used approach or techniques. Tasks performed on a frequent daily basis create stronger skills. Complicated tasks need to be intuitively understandable in order to be quickly completed.
The majority of the final users (plant's controls engineers and technicians) are dealing with thousands of tasks other than Ignition development. Rarely used skills are quickly disappearing from the memory.
CSS is not intuitive and is not used frequently in order to sustain the knowledge of a professional Perspective developer.
Professional Ignition integrators/developers - sure, they are probably dealing with it on a daily basis. But final users- maybe 1 out of 10 (in the most optimistic scenario) would have a thorough knowledge of the system. Again, not because of a lower IQ or laziness. Simply because the majority of their daily routine is in a completely different field.
As much as I love the idea of the Perspective - it needs to be more adapted for masses.
I (Controls Engineer by profession), completely disagree with this.
I find CSS is intuitive (no less un-intuitive then say regex).
I'm moving to Ignition so that a large majority of my "thousands of tasks" are managed in a single place.
Any Controls Engineer worth their salt should know their system inside and out, anything less is sub par, IMNSHO.
IMO, the reasons for using Vision vs. Perspective are completely a matter of the application. Specifically, if you need access to the client machines drives in any way, then Vision is the only way to go. If you're looking for mobile, perspective is probably the winner.
IMO, perspective is still not ready as a Complete SCADA solution, and should not be used as such.
I get what you're saying but I feel like Perspective can do a full SCADA systems just fine. I know you have solid Perspective, CSS and SVG skills so don't take this as a dig.
I work for an integrator. Our first Perspective apps were simple dashboards with minimal device control and mobile support. Over time, we built reusable tools that allow us to execute SCADA projects in Perspective roughly as fast as we can do them in Vision.
We've done a few full SCADA systems that run entire plants and they work great. A few weeks ago I replaced a 20+ year old InTouch app with Perspective to run a wastewater plant. The customer LOVES it. It's dramatically improved their workflow because they can load their HMI on a tablet or phone if they need to control equipment from somewhere other than the normal HMI stations. What used to take 2 operators and a radio now takes 1.
Some things can be harder to execute in Perspective but other things are much easier such as data visualization and supporting diverse screen resolutions. You have to design around things like needing files on HMI clients and momentary buttons but that is typically achievable.
I think it's going to get a lot easier to execute full SCADA in perspective after the drawing tools go live. We make heavy use of embedded SVGs when we're doing HMIs in Perspective and SVG libraries are something that takes time to build. I feel like this is one of the biggest reasons for people to choose Vision over Perspective in the current environment.
I look at how limited Perspective was in beta and compare to where it is now and I feel confident using Perspective for SCADA. A LOT has changed since beta. It's going to keep getting better and there is no automated migration path from Vision to Perspective.
Vision isn't going anywhere, though. I would never say choosing Vision is the wrong decision. Both are amazing.
Sometimes it depends on the project and its budget. Once you have a solid base project to work with though, it's much of a muchness