CaptainCasa Enterprise Client

Pros: The developer needs to focus only on the business logic.
The UX is guaranteed by the components, which are really well made.

Cons: None if you are looking for a solution for enterprise applications.

Overall: A solid development environment with excellent components, well documented and continuously updated.
The right tool for building applications that need to be supported for a long time. Simply a product that flawlessly creates the right model to return to producing software in a credible way.

Pros: Java also for frontend development. No need to deal with frequently changing and hyped "new" UI frameworks.
No need to handle HTML, JS, cryptic formats/syntax like TS, TSX, SFC or whatever (proprietary) technologies. I can just use Java also for the UI layer. CC does all the necessary translations to client side resp. browser side HTML/JS representations. Binding from UI to frontend layer just via regular Java method calls. To be honest, this is the most easy approach to develop rich UIs I know.

Nevertheless a clear separation between frontend and backend logic possible. Integrated WYSIWYG UI layout editor available to maintain layout definitions, bindings, literals, styling etc.. It is very easy to use.
So - I can concentrate on the business logic what I really appreciate.
This also ensures a high ROI for the frontend (dialog layer) code.

I was not able to detect real Browser incompatibilities.

It is high performant also for huge amount of data, e.g. tables. Ensured by fine granular incremental UI updates automatically handled; also highly configurable in its behaviour if required.

Provides some predefined UI stylings, which are generally fine. All is customizable with direct styling attributes or as usual with CSS if required.

Very broad amount of UI widgets and controls for all purposes (table, tree, input fields, selections, image, dialogs, D&D etc.) are available. Also for more uncommon stuff like creating screenshot, PDF handling, uploads/downloads, barcode scanning, virtual keyboard and much more. Nearly everything is highly customizable regarding appearance and behaviour.

Development of own (composite) UI components is easy and straightforward. It is possibly to create own reusable UI component libraries.

Support in case of bugs or feature requests is excellent and quick. Never experienced a better one, really.

Documentation (widget & controls, API doc) is generally good. Could be improved at some points.

Cons: Documentation could be improved at some points.
The demo application is very comprehensive, but honestly a bit confusing at the beginning.
UI Styling is not "state of the art" as with popular frameworks, but for me and my use cases not a real drawback. As I mentioned, it is adjustable via CSS at the end.

Overall: I am using CC more than 10 years now, and I can justifiably say, that it is a very excellent Ajax / Web framework, especially in terms of simplicity, efficiency and sustainability of development.

Pros: The big advantage of CaptainCasa is that you don't need any knowledges about html, javascript or css to build nice and modern sites.
The Java Code is translating automatically to HTML.
You must not spend a lot of time in creating and styling controls. You can lay your attention to the business code.
All controls which you need for developing websites are included and easy to use.
Properties like bgPaint, rounding and many others makes it easy to design all controls in a nice way without css.
Anyway if this is not enough you can also use css if you want to create your own styles.

For me as a Java developer, and also the large number of projects we have, CaptainCasa is the best way to go.
Its up to you if you use Eclipse, Netbeans or IntelliJ.
So you can develop in your favourite environment.

So I use CaptainCasa now around 12 years and I have never seen a better Framework.
I still like to develop with CaptainCasa.
It makes a lot of fun.
Performance and support are excellent.

Cons: There is nothing negative to say. We use CaptainCasa over 10 years.

Overall: Around 12 years ago we were looking for a framework.
We had a lot of projects written in Access.
The main thing was to decide which framework wood help us to get away from Access.
In view of the number of projects which has accumulated over 30 years it was not easy to find something to change all the projects in a possible fast way.

Then we find CaptainCasa and the decision to use it was a good one and we never regretted it.

Pros: Ideal for backend Java developers because you need to know next to nothing about HTML and JavaScript.
A very rich palette of widgets for all requirements (trees, grids, pages with information) that can be configured project-specifically.
Own templates for recurring requirements can be created with little effort and reduce the development effort in larger projects.
For each part of the dialogue you can configure, wether a change of the user will lead to an immediate transfer of the information to the server, so that you can build an application very alive.
Good documentation of the interfaces on the backend and of all UI components and widgets.
Very good beginners guide for the first steps with the framework.
Very active forum where bugs can be reported, questions can be asked and wishes for extensions can be submitted.
Continuous development of the UI controls for further improvement of the application possibilities and the implementation of trends in the field of UI design and UX.
The annual community meetings (recently the 17th meeting was held) give developers the opportunity to learn about new features live and share experiences with other users.
Fast development in hot-deploy mode → as long as changes are only made in the dialogue, no restart of the WebServer is necessary and the change is visible in the dialogue in a few seconds.
WYSIWYG editor for the configuration of the dialogue facilitates the creation of new masks.
The masks are saved as XML files. This makes it very easy to copy and modify similar dialogue boxes.
Supports the consistent separation of dialogue programming and BusinessLogic.

Cons: I was able to implement all my needs, so no cons so far.

Overall: Development of a parent-teacher-student information system with complex dialogues.
I can recommend the framework without reservation.

Pros: Cross-platform compatibility: seamlessly supports across multiple operating systems. Using Java in the Backend and HTML in the UI (Browser). Perfect match :-)
Rich user interface: The framework offers visually appealing UI components and widgets, enhancing the user experience and allowing for intuitive and interactive applications.
Performance and scalability: The framework delivers high performance, even with complex interfaces and large data sets. It supports efficient data handling and scalability for enterprise-level applications.

Cons: So far, there have been no negative experiences. We have been using CaptainCasa for over 10 years and are still convinced of our decision.

Overall: As a Java developer, you can develop in your usual Java environment. The framework translates the UI definition into HTML. You can develop your own components, so the framework has an incredible flexibility.

If you have change or improvement requests, they are often implemented within a week after consultation and delivered with the weekly update.

As a developer you can mainly concentrate on the development of new functions and don't have to deal with strange new web frameworks and "technologies"...
It is fun to use CaptainCasa.

Pros: Fast development.
Structured development - used in big projects (each containing > 200 dialog definitions).
Good quality + good performance.

Cons: Demo workplace nice, but too many info: sometimes difficult to find the right info.

Overall: I intensively used the software in 4 big projects (one of them deployed to 2.000 operational users) - and can only recommend.

Pros: Simple code to integrate the backend.
Focus on the development of the business application.
I stay in my familiar Java world.

Cons: Default appearance a little outdated; but that is the task of the designers.

Overall: Absolutely perfect for me; I'm very satisfied.
In terms of industry, it's one of the best frameworks I know.