Active State does a lot of work on the "look and feel" for the graphical (GUI) modules like Tk. It will look to the user like a native Windows application (that it is a Perl application is almost unnoticeable). I have never used Strawberry for a serious project before so I cannot comment on how well or not well that they have done on that part, but I can say that Active State does very well.
Some of the Active State utilities have no counterpart of which I am aware on Strawberry or other Perl distributions. For example, I wanted to add a developer to one of my freeware projects, I sent him what Active State calls a "profile" which is an XML file and he runs it (this does take awhile) but, bingo he has now "cloned" my system with every module that I have.
I do have a license for the Active State Perl Development Kit and this thing makes deploying .exe files much easier than with Strawberry. But you have to pay for this.
Overall, I have not seen any advantage to go with Strawberry.
In reply to Re: Which is better: ActiveState or Strawberry Perl?
by Marshall
in thread Which is better: ActiveState or Strawberry Perl?
by Eldan Aranye
| For: | Use: | ||
| & | & | ||
| < | < | ||
| > | > | ||
| [ | [ | ||
| ] | ] |