 |
BorlandTalk.com
Borland discussion newsgroups
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Abdullah Kauchali
Guest
|
 Posted: Wed Jun 01, 2005 11:33 pm Post subject: Delphi bugs and "moving" to Visual Studio debate |
 |
|
A lot of folks here use the "number of bugs"[1] argument to explain
the preference for shops to use Visual Studio as opposed to Delphi.
I think that could be overstating the "bugs" problem. <g>
While it's true that having bugs in the IDE does not contribute to
its selling quality, I must mention that the choice over the IDE,
in many organisations, centers around its "extension" of some base
enterprise infrastructure. The "base" enterprise infrastructure here
could mean any of these:
1. The Operating System
2. Development framework (Java or .NET)
3. The Enterprise database of choice
In my experience, and recently highlighted with my current project,
clients are more comfortable to choose IDE's that are, what they
assume to be, "natural extensions" of the above. And once again, in my
experience, item 3 (database) is the primary factor for decisions. The
clients don't even know about any bugs etc in IDE's before they decide
against them!
So trends like these are apparent: if the shop is Microsoft SQL Server
based, the clients often feel more comfortable with Visual Studio. If
the client's using DB2, they want something from IBM - Java and Eclipse
are roped in. If it's Oracle, they are even talking about Oracle forms
(out of all things!). If its Interbase, then Delphi's the first option.
Any IDE that is not construed as a natural compliment to the database
is always going to be a hard sell, IME.
So, Delphi's got some real competition out there - no, not directly from
other IDE's, but from the back end databases that are employed at the
client sites. [sic]
(I mentioned in an earlier thread about Borland being a perfect
acquisition for IBM - I based it on the premise that IBM would have a
perfect tool set that complements its back end databases (having added
Interbase to their gluttonous frenzy of acquiring database technologies!
Of course, I base that only in the hope of seeing Delphi thrive.)
Maybe Borland should start selling Interbase more strongly? <g> Don't
ask me what that means!  I'm sure things are much more complicated
inside with real figures etc. <g>
--
[1] Because Borland hasn't fixed x-number of bugs in Delphi ...
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Rudy Velthuis [TeamB]
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 01, 2005 11:40 pm Post subject: Re: Delphi bugs and "moving" to Visual Studio debate |
|
|
At 01:33:47, 02.06.2005, Abdullah Kauchali wrote:
| Quote: | Any IDE that is not construed as a natural compliment to the database
is always going to be a hard sell, IME.
|
1. I guess you meant complement, but you could have meant compliment
after all.
2. Not everyone sees Delphi as an extension of a DB.
--
Rudy Velthuis [TeamB] http://velthuis.homepage.t-online.de
"It is better to be quotable than to be honest." -- Tom Stoppard
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Abdullah Kauchali
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 01, 2005 11:43 pm Post subject: Re: Delphi bugs and "moving" to Visual Studio debate |
|
|
Rudy Velthuis [TeamB] wrote:
| Quote: | 1. I guess you meant complement, but you could have meant compliment
after all.
|
No, you're right. I meant complement - something that "completes" ...
| Quote: | 2. Not everyone sees Delphi as an extension of a DB.
|
Of course. Those would be the type of projects that:
a. Would either want to be database-independent; or
b. Be database-irrelevant (databases do not feature as
enterprise constructs)
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Captain Jake
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 02, 2005 4:31 am Post subject: Re: Delphi bugs and "moving" to Visual Studio debate |
|
|
a <blwatters (AT) shaw (DOT) ca> wrote in message <429e5051 (AT) newsgroups (DOT) borland.com>
| Quote: |
If you are developing professional software the stability of the IDE
trumps everything.
|
While unstable IDE's are very annoying, I have yet to encounter an IDE so
unstable that it actually reduces the productivity of the entire product life
cycle. "Typing" code is not more than 5-10% of the resources that go into
producing professional software, so even if an IDE is AWOL half the time, its
effects on the final result are minimal. Programmers in the trenches might
not see it that way, but managers and leaders do. Besides, a good programmer
can create good software with even the most mediocre tools available. It's a
poor musician who blames his instrument.
--
***Free Your Mind***
Posted with JSNewsreader-BETA 0.9.4.764
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kyle A. Miller
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 02, 2005 7:13 am Post subject: Re: Delphi bugs and "moving" to Visual Studio debate |
|
|
Abdullah Kauchali wrote:
| Quote: | Any IDE that is not construed as a natural compliment to the database
is always going to be a hard sell, IME.
|
Given my experience, I disagree with this whole heartedly. What has a
greater impact on IDE of choice in relation to databases is what kind of
database support the IDE's data engines and components offer.
| Quote: | Maybe Borland should start selling Interbase more strongly? <g> Don't
ask me what that means! I'm sure things are much more complicated
inside with real figures etc.
|
I think it means when Borland writes a paper or creates a Flash
presentation to demonstrate or teach a feature, it should be using
Interbase and not MSSQL and Northwind as has frequently appeared lately,
especially the ECO folks. (Why does ECO offer a special MSSQL
Persistence Mapper and not one for Interbase? Sure, you can use BDP, but
then you could use BDP for MSSQL. Yet, MSSQL gets an extra component.)
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Abdullah Kauchali
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 02, 2005 7:20 am Post subject: Re: Delphi bugs and "moving" to Visual Studio debate |
|
|
Hi Brett,
I hear you with *every* point you've made. They are all very relevant and
you've put them well.
However, the point I was making was that these issues are only considered
/after/ any decision is made about extending the enterprise architecture.
If decisions are made to abandon Delphi for its bugs, then I agree the
situation with the bugs squanders whatever opportunities exist for Delphi
to compete. I'm saying Delphi's got a problem right at the gates - it
mostly does not get considered because the perception within typical
enterprises is to demand what's considered to be "natural complements" to
the
enterprise database architecture.
Most programmers do not get to choose the IDE for their next project. In
typical enterprise settings, managers up the strategic ladder make decisions
on behalf of the techies who are then simply positioned to fulfill those
strategic decisions. So, company A will standardise on SQL Server then
conclude that Microsoft Visual Studio is the most natural IDE to use for
writing against SQL Server and only then start hiring Visual Studio
developers.
Selling Delphi in such a situation will be an uphill battle.
If Delphi is to compete at the enterprise level, not ISV level, it has to
align
with a mainstream DB technology. Or, sufficiently, it needs to be perceived
to
be aligned to a mainstream database technology. Like it did when it boasted
support for Oracle??? Someone help!
(I change my vote, maybe Oracle would benefit most with a tool like Delphi!
)
Kind regards,
Abdullah
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Abdullah Kauchali
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 02, 2005 7:21 am Post subject: Re: Delphi bugs and "moving" to Visual Studio debate |
|
|
"Captain Jake":
| Quote: | While unstable IDE's are very annoying, I have yet to encounter an IDE so
unstable that it actually reduces the productivity of the entire product
life
cycle. "Typing" code is not more than 5-10% of the resources that go into
producing professional software, so even if an IDE is AWOL half the time,
its
effects on the final result are minimal.
|
What "final result" are you talking about?
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Abdullah Kauchali
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 02, 2005 7:31 am Post subject: Re: Delphi bugs and "moving" to Visual Studio debate |
|
|
"Kyle A. Miller" wrote:
| Quote: | Given my experience, I disagree with this whole heartedly. What has a
greater impact on IDE of choice in relation to databases is what kind of
database support the IDE's data engines and components offer.
|
Boasting "database support" seems passé to me now. In the days when ODBC
was considered revolutionary, it may have been a valid selling point. But
things seem to have moved on now with generic database connectivity
architectures. And most importantly, the reliance on database vendor
connectivity drivers. That's the real reason why BDE and Borland native
driver /cannot/ compete anymore.
Or seeing it as a corollary: the irrelevance of BDE somehow reflects to a
greater danger of making Delphi itself irrelevant. (Please don't
misunderstand
me on this one )
| Quote: | (Why does ECO offer a special MSSQL Persistence Mapper and not one for
Interbase? Sure, you can use BDP, but then you could use BDP for MSSQL.
Yet, MSSQL gets an extra component.)
|
I can see how this makes /my/ point - but I understand the concern too.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jesper Hogstrom [Borland]
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 02, 2005 9:35 am Post subject: Re: Delphi bugs and "moving" to Visual Studio debate |
|
|
"Kyle A. Miller" <kyle#REMOVE (AT) millerdevelopment (DOT) info> wrote
| Quote: | I think it means when Borland writes a paper or creates a Flash
presentation to demonstrate or teach a feature, it should be using
Interbase and not MSSQL and Northwind as has frequently appeared lately,
especially the ECO folks.
|
Northwind is a widely recognized demo, and appeals to a large audience.
Reversing the Employee database is doable too, but most people simply happen
to be more familiar with Northwind.
I personally love Interbase, and most of our examples shipping with the
product use Interbase as the persistence backend.
| Quote: | (Why does ECO offer a special MSSQL Persistence Mapper and not one for
Interbase? Sure, you can use BDP, but then you could use BDP for MSSQL.
Yet, MSSQL gets an extra component.)
|
The SQLConnection ships with .Net. Delphi does not ship with a special
Interbase connection, as that is handled by the bdp connection - and yes, we
do ship a PersistenceMapperBdp.
There are also histrical reasons for the existence of PersistenceMapperSql;
We were ahead of BDP in the beginning of time, so we needed a testbed.
Having two components also significantly helps verify the assertion that any
other player can write a specialized persistence mapper for their connection
(Internally we have specialized persistence mappers for a whole slew of
connections, so now we know ).
--Jesper
R&D Manager ECO
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Abdullah Kauchali
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 02, 2005 10:30 am Post subject: Re: Delphi bugs and "moving" to Visual Studio debate |
|
|
Jesper Hogstrom [Borland] wrote:
| Quote: | Northwind is a widely recognized demo, and appeals to a large audience.
Reversing the Employee database is doable too, but most people simply happen
to be more familiar with Northwind.
|
Don't decisions like these compete against the strategy of furthering
the Interbase "cause"? How do you guys draw the line?
(Jesper, I am sure things are more complicated from the inside[*], but
I'd love to hear where on the ALM strategy Interbase features.)
-
[*] Not supporting SQL Server would be naive. Not providing an easier
demonstration of Borland's toolset with existing databases would also
be foolish.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Rudy Velthuis [TeamB]
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 02, 2005 10:36 am Post subject: Re: Delphi bugs and "moving" to Visual Studio debate |
|
|
At 01:43:19, 02.06.2005, Abdullah Kauchali wrote:
| Quote: | a. Would either want to be database-independent; or
b. Be database-irrelevant (databases do not feature as
enterprise constructs)
|
I think the term "enterprise constructs" is very confusing here.
You seem to have a very db- and enterprise-centric view on programming.
--
Rudy Velthuis [TeamB] http://velthuis.homepage.t-online.de
"If absolute power corrupts absolutely, where does that leave God?"
-- George Deacon.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Rudy Velthuis [TeamB]
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 02, 2005 10:38 am Post subject: Re: Delphi bugs and "moving" to Visual Studio debate |
|
|
At 02:18:26, 02.06.2005, a wrote:
| Quote: | Abdullah,
If you are developing professional software the stability of the IDE
trumps everything.
|
Depends on what you mean with "the" stability of "the IDE". If you mean
that some experts work badly, or that the insight features get in your
way, then I don't agree. If you mean that the IDE crashes every five
minutes, or doesn't allow you to edit source code or design forms, then I
do agree.
--
Rudy Velthuis [TeamB] http://velthuis.homepage.t-online.de
"Woman was God's second mistake."
-- Friedrich Nietzsche (1844-1900)
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Rudy Velthuis [TeamB]
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 02, 2005 10:39 am Post subject: Re: Delphi bugs and "moving" to Visual Studio debate |
|
|
At 09:21:29, 02.06.2005, Abdullah Kauchali wrote:
| Quote: |
"Captain Jake":
While unstable IDE's are very annoying, I have yet to encounter an
IDE so unstable that it actually reduces the productivity of the
entire product life
cycle. "Typing" code is not more than 5-10% of the resources that go
into producing professional software, so even if an IDE is AWOL half
the time, its
effects on the final result are minimal.
What "final result" are you talking about?
|
The software one writes, I'd guess.
--
Rudy Velthuis [TeamB] http://velthuis.homepage.t-online.de
"Heaven is an American salary, a Chinese cook, an English house, and a
Japanese wife. Hell is defined as having a Chinese salary, an English
cook, a Japanese house, and an American wife."
-- James H. Kabbler III.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Abdullah Kauchali
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 02, 2005 10:50 am Post subject: Re: Delphi bugs and "moving" to Visual Studio debate |
|
|
Rudy Velthuis [TeamB] wrote:
| Quote: | I think the term "enterprise constructs" is very confusing here.
You seem to have a very db- and enterprise-centric view on programming.
|
I am because my /clients/ are. (BTW, would it really be a revelation to
you that the vast majority of development "out there" is happening in
the enterprise and database context? Hmm interesting.)
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Rudy Velthuis [TeamB]
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 02, 2005 10:59 am Post subject: Re: Delphi bugs and "moving" to Visual Studio debate |
|
|
At 12:50:32, 02.06.2005, Abdullah Kauchali wrote:
| Quote: | Rudy Velthuis [TeamB] wrote:
I think the term "enterprise constructs" is very confusing here.
You seem to have a very db- and enterprise-centric view on
programming.
I am because my clients are.
|
Good for you, but don't make the mistake of projecting that on all Delphi
users or programming in general.
--
Rudy Velthuis [TeamB] http://velthuis.homepage.t-online.de
"Distrust any enterprise that requires new clothes."
- Henry David Thoreau (1817-1862)
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
