BorlandTalk.com

Paul Gustavson · Guest

Okay, getting some good feedback from everyone. Thanks.

Here's an update, which includes a piece on thirdy-party component vendors.

http://www.simventions.com/gustavson/2004/10/open-community-letter-to-borland.html

(note new link due to the fact we're in October now)

Question of the day:
are we close with the letter?

r/ Paul

OBones · Guest

Paul Gustavson wrote:

Doug · Guest

"Paul Gustavson" <pgustavNOSPAM (AT) NOSPAMsimventions (DOT) com> wrote:

Leroy Casterline · Guest

"Paul Gustavson" <pgustavNOSPAM (AT) NOSPAMsimventions (DOT) com> wrote:

Colin B Maharaj · Guest

Hi Paul, firstly as a C++ Builder Developer, I thank you greatly in the
effort you have undertaken in restoring Borland's efforts in C++ Builder.

C++ Builder and the news groups are the best things that has ever
happened to me (probably second to being born).

C++ Builder has sky rocketed my into developer status, for once I was a
Telecoms Technician (still am...), but I am trying to leave this behind
to move onto bigger and better things, to the point that I have finally
decided to develop full time (currently all my efforts are part time).

This is not an easy decision and I will have to be lean and organized
for a while until I can make it as a freelance telecoms developer.

Enough of the mushy stuff - The signatures... how am I going to get mine
to you, should it be scanned and emailed to you??? any suggestion will
be appreciated.

Thanks again Paul.....

Paul Gustavson wrote:

Kenneth de Camargo · Guest

Paul Gustavson wrote:

Paul Gustavson · Guest

Leroy,

excellent eds -- thank you.

Also, as you mentioned, Matthew's comments to the blog seemed valid, and
infused them as best I could.

Therefore - I have cleansed and updated the community letter yet again.
It's better than ever... I hope.

I'm almost ready to push it out as an early release PDF.

Just need those signatures / survey results / and a place to deposit
(upload) letters for those who wish to write additional/ organizational
ones.

Keep in mind the signature page let's you make a short comment that will be
passed on to Borland.

r/ Paul

Leroy Casterline · Guest

Here's a comment from your blog:

"I'd love to sign your letter, but can't use my company's name, or their
client's names. This for fear that our business would be imperiled by
Borland's lack of developer / product support."

I wonder if we should work this into the last paragraph where you talk
about companies who don't wish to be connected with the open letter. I
don't know if this is a good idea or not, just wanted to bring it up.

A couple more edits if you don't mind, Paul:

Consider that these vendors have a more viable and financial interest to
-->remove the 'and' between 'viable' and 'financial'
-->perhaps rephrase??
Consider that these vendors have a stronger financial interest in
producing

Delphi/BCB vendors to equip them with essential VCL controls and
-->change 'controls and' to 'controls,'

This is an attribute in which C++ has often been able to support.
-->remove the 'in' between 'attribute' and 'which'

availability of the language, framework and tools for which they use to
-->remove the 'for' between 'tools' and 'which'

find that it is imperative that Borland continue to the develop and
update the C++Builder product line.
-->remove 'the' between 'to' and 'develop'

renewed their focus in C++ as the principal language to exploit all the
-->change 'focus in C++' to 'focus on C++'

greater time than this for Borland to live and measure up to these words
-->perhaps change "live and measure up" to "live by and measure up"

Paul Gustavson · Guest

Again, excellent eds. Please check the last paragraph of the letter now to
see if I've conveyed the intent of your recommendation for the person who
made the following comment.

Leroy Casterline · Guest

"Paul Gustavson" <pgustavNOSPAM (AT) NOSPAMsimventions (DOT) com> wrote:

Randall Parker · Guest

It is obvious at this point that telling customers that one develops one's app in BCB
is unwise unless you think your customers really trust you. A dev tool that might be
dead is not what you want to tell customers you are using.

Leroy Casterline wrote:

Paul Gustavson · Guest

Thanks, I've made a few more tweaks based on your comments. I have heard
from several folks who were either to identify their development company or
sponsor. So it is more than one, but certainly not a "significant" number.
Thus, I changed it from "significant" to "several".

Leroy Casterline · Guest

"Paul Gustavson" <pgustavNOSPAM (AT) NOSPAMsimventions (DOT) com> wrote:

Leroy Casterline · Guest

Paul, I found one more nit. In the line:

As another example, today’s modern marine relies on Forward Observer

If you're referring to a member of the U.S. Marine Corps, "Marine"
should be capitalized.

Paul Gustavson · Guest

Hmm. I thought I fixed this once b4. It's fixed now though - thanks.