BorlandTalk.com Borland discussion newsgroups   Archives   FAQ   Search   Memberlist   Usergroups   Register   Profile   Log in to check your private messages   Log in  Sorry Borland Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next          BorlandTalk.com Forum Index -> C++ Builder (Non-Technical) View previous topic :: View next topic   Author Message Kai Schaeffer Guest Posted: Wed Dec 15, 2004 9:47 am    Post subject: Sorry Borland Hi all. Finally its there: The new Open Letter or should I say the new Open Statement? The core is a little bit too short for a letter: In the future BCB will be a part of Delphi. I know, for many people -who rely only on the VCL- it is a good news and they are happy. But: Borland made so many promises in the past, is this really enough to give back the trust? No details, no schedule, no bigger concept. And for me? I need cross platform. Borland made many promises in the past. At least two regarding cross platform development (Kylix and CBX). And now? Still nothing. Sorry Borland but after over one year of frustration it is not enough for me. Now my decision is clear: I will, I have to move away from Borland (probably to a wxWidgets solution). Good bye Borland Kai Back to top Kristofer Skaug Guest Posted: Wed Dec 15, 2004 10:44 am    Post subject: Re: Sorry Borland Kai Schaeffer wrote: Quote: I need cross platform. Borland made many promises in the past. At least two regarding cross platform development (Kylix and CBX). May I remind you that the current announcement was *only* intended to address VCL/Win32 support with C++Builder, and was *never* intended as an opportunity to make bold statements about other products such as Kylix and/or CBX. So your criticism about lack of plans for Kylix and CBX is strictly speaking not fair in this context. But anyway I think your basic conclusion is correct: Borland appears to be winding down its cross-platform ambitions for the time being, in favour of giving some long-overdue "TLC" for the Win32 users (and forging ahead with .NET). It looks like the "Win32 side" may actually have persuaded Borland of the lasting demand for BCB/Win32/VCL development. And as perhaps indicated by the Kylix and CBX stories, cross platform work may just not be mission-critical enough to most companies in these times. If it were so important a market force, then some other commercial tools offering would long ago have filled the big hole that Borland has left in the wake of its Kylix initiative. And companies would gladly invest a few K$'s if that's what it takes to have the right tools. So unfortunately, it looks like either Kylix is not the right tool, or companies are not willing to pay the price. But also, apart from the bare license costs, many companies appear to be unwilling to pay the hidden price for cross-platform capability that involves compromising the quality of their existing Win32 products/code base. I think this is very clearly demonstrated by the failure of the CLX library on the Win32 platform (I have yet to see a single serious app built with it). Cross-platform capability: Nice to have, sure, and great if it works (which it sort-of does **cough,cough**, especially if we **cough** loyally buy Borland's v1.0 x-platform products to show them we would actually buy the next version too if only they'd make one). -- Kristofer Back to top Andrue Cope [TeamB] Guest Posted: Wed Dec 15, 2004 11:00 am    Post subject: Re: Sorry Borland [snip] Well put. CBX looks like becoming a darn good product for those that really need it. Since it doesn't tied in to any specific platform frameworks it is /development tool/ agnostic rather than /target platform/ agnostic. It just lets you use almost any compiler/debugger combination you want and /that/ can be very handy. From my POV the idea of being able to develope and debug MSDOS applications using the same IDE that I use for Win32 applications and Linux applications is an appealing one. -- Andrue Cope [TeamB] [Bicester, Uk] http://info.borland.com/newsgroups/guide.html Back to top Guest Posted: Wed Dec 15, 2004 11:16 am    Post subject: Re: Sorry Borland Borland lost me and my team and so many others. I've lost all my trust to Borland. I do NOT beleive them any more regardless what they are claiming to do in the "future". Bye bye Borland... Back to top Duane Hebert Guest Posted: Wed Dec 15, 2004 2:19 pm    Post subject: Re: Sorry Borland "Andrue Cope [TeamB]" <no.spam (AT) not (DOT) a.valid.address> wrote Quote: CBX looks like becoming a darn good product for those that really need it. Since it doesn't tied in to any specific platform frameworks it is /development tool/ agnostic rather than /target platform/ agnostic. It just lets you use almost any compiler/debugger combination you want and /that/ can be very handy. Well it depends on the status of CBX within Borland. So far, there's been no official word about CBX. Quote: From my POV the idea of being able to develope and debug MSDOS applications using the same IDE that I use for Win32 applications and Linux applications is an appealing one. From my POV it's not only an appealing idea, but a necessary one if I'm to remain a Borland customer. I'm currently using MSVC/Qt to develop applications. When building for Linux, we're using G++/Qt. It would be great to have the same IDE in both cases. Back to top Atmapuri Guest Posted: Wed Dec 15, 2004 4:04 pm    Post subject: Re: Sorry Borland Hi! Quote: It looks like the "Win32 side" may actually have persuaded Borland of the lasting demand for BCB/Win32/VCL development. Yes. Interesting. Before .NET became big, Borland did not look, once it did, I got an impression they wanted to sack W32 as quickly as possible.. It is much simpler to have one platform and one compiler instead of trying to support two: .NET and W32. Also, Borland did not invest in to compiler optimizations in Delphi nor in C++ for the last 10 years. That would be a great thing for them, if they could just forget it and leave it all to the Microsofts IL compiler. But now... It is not happening. .NET is big is cool is nice, but it is not going to replace W32/W64. The problem: Borland is now stuck with truly "ancient" W32 compiler techonology. Regards! Atmapuri Back to top Michael McCulloch Guest Posted: Wed Dec 15, 2004 5:27 pm    Post subject: Re: Sorry Borland On Wed, 15 Dec 2004 09:19:38 -0500, "Duane Hebert" <spoo (AT) zowie_flarn (DOT) com> wrote: Quote: It would be great to have the same IDE in both cases. Eclipse. Back to top Kevin Berry Guest Posted: Wed Dec 15, 2004 7:54 pm    Post subject: Re: Sorry Borland Duane Hebert wrote: Quote: Well it depends on the status of CBX within Borland. So far, there's been no official word about CBX. The last I heard they were continuing with CBX development. What wasn't clear was whether the C++ VCL development would continue. This announcement addresses that concern _ONLY_. Wasn't the CBX announcement at BorCon? I recall something about Nokia.... Cheers, Kevin. Back to top Randall Parker Guest Posted: Wed Dec 15, 2004 8:50 pm    Post subject: Re: Sorry Borland Andrue Cope [TeamB] wrote: Quote: CBX looks like becoming a darn good product for those that really need it. Since it doesn't tied in to any specific platform frameworks it is /development tool/ agnostic rather than /target platform/ agnostic. It just lets you use almost any compiler/debugger combination you want and /that/ can be very handy. CBX does not now support other processor architectures. Its debugger doesn't understand their byte sex, floating point formats, or register sets. So all the embedded people who use ARM or some TI DSP or a Moto MPC555 or MicroChip can't debug in it. Quote: From my POV the idea of being able to develope and debug MSDOS applications using the same IDE that I use for Win32 applications and Linux applications is an appealing one. Can CBX do that now? With what back-end debugger? Back to top Duane Hebert Guest Posted: Wed Dec 15, 2004 9:22 pm    Post subject: Re: Sorry Borland "Kevin Berry" <kevin (AT) berryware (DOT) NO.SPAM.com> wrote Quote: The last I heard they were continuing with CBX development. What wasn't clear was whether the C++ VCL development would continue. This announcement addresses that concern _ONLY_. Wasn't the CBX announcement at BorCon? I recall something about Nokia.... CBX is still at version one with all bugs intact. As far as I know, there's been no official word on a new release. Back to top Will DeWitt Jr. Guest Posted: Wed Dec 15, 2004 10:28 pm    Post subject: Re: Sorry Borland Atmapuri wrote: Quote: Yes. Interesting. Before .NET became big, Borland did not look, once it did, I got an impression they wanted to sack W32 as quickly as possible.. This is how it seemed to Delphi developers as well. The .NET preview compiler that was included with Delphi 7 was a neat toy, but then Borland built a whole product around it and gave us nothing *but* that (Delphi 8 didn't include a Win32 compiler at *all* (!!)). They seem to be backpedaling from that mistake with Delphi 2005, but I'm still pessimistic about their intentions. Quote: It is much simpler to have one platform and one compiler instead of trying to support two: .NET and W32. I can only imagine the pain of having people suggest they go towards Win64 with Delphi too, heh. (See sig.) =) Quote: Also, Borland did not invest in to compiler optimizations in Delphi nor in C++ for the last 10 years. That would be a great thing for them, if they could just forget it and leave it all to the Microsofts IL compiler. I agree. Delphi 2005 has seen some minor codegen improvements but nothing Earth shattering (e.g. - different compiler targets ala CPPBuilder (PPro, enabling code that utilizes SSE/SSE2, etc)). IMHO they'll need to invest some time improving the compilers for both products to keep their native code customers happy. .NET isn't going to take the world by storm, nor has it. Of course it'd be great if Borland worked on releasing native 64-bit compilers (for EM64T/AMD64) for both Delphi and CPPBuilder. But I'm not holding my breath... Will -- Want a 64-bit Delphi compiler for AMD64 / IA-32e? Vote here-- http://qc.borland.com/wc/wc.exe/details?reportid=7324 Back to top Rudy Velthuis [TeamB] Guest Posted: Wed Dec 15, 2004 11:02 pm    Post subject: Re: Sorry Borland Will DeWitt Jr. wrote: Quote: Atmapuri wrote: Yes. Interesting. Before .NET became big, Borland did not look, once it did, I got an impression they wanted to sack W32 as quickly as possible.. This is how it seemed to Delphi developers as well. I think the impression is wrong. It may have loked like it, because they were very busy porting the compiler to .NET, and this took so much of their time, that the original plans for making a Win32 + .NET release for D8 had to be abandoned, so D8 only contained .NET. But now it seems they are on the original track again, and I see a Win32 personality. -- Rudy Velthuis [TeamB] "Chaos Theory is a new theory invented by scientists panicked by the thought that the public were beginning to understand the old ones." -- Mike Barfield. Back to top Will DeWitt Jr. Guest Posted: Wed Dec 15, 2004 11:43 pm    Post subject: Re: Sorry Borland Rudy Velthuis [TeamB] wrote: Quote: I think the impression is wrong. In the end? Yes, of course it was wrong. Though obviously the allure of .NET was enough for them to risk alienating customers by releasing a product that was /very/ incompatible with the previous version. Will -- Want a 64-bit Delphi compiler for AMD64 / IA-32e? Vote here-- http://qc.borland.com/wc/wc.exe/details?reportid=7324 Back to top John Kaster (Borland) Guest Posted: Thu Dec 16, 2004 5:41 am    Post subject: Re: Sorry Borland Will DeWitt Jr. wrote: Quote: They seem to be backpedaling from that mistake with Delphi 2005 No "mistake" was made by Borland. There was no backpedaling. As you should well know from the conversations in the delphi non-tech newsgroup, we announced YEARS before shipping Delphi 2005 that we planned to release a Delphi IDE that supported both Win32 and .NET. As Allen Bauer also mentions in his blog, the team also had plans (actually, the primary goal) of including C++ support in the same IDE, same release. The important point here is that management has approved this plan and now engineering can go forward with it. -- John Kaster http://blogs.borland.com/johnk Features and bugs: http://qc.borland.com Get source: http://cc.borland.com What's going on? http://calendar.borland.com Back to top vavan Guest Posted: Thu Dec 16, 2004 7:19 am    Post subject: Re: Sorry Borland On 15 Dec 2004 21:41:01 -0800, "John Kaster (Borland)" <johnk (AT) borland (DOT) com> wrote: Quote: same release. The important point here is that management has approved this plan and now engineering can go forward with it. good news please remind c++ team of not forgetting to rebuild their prehistoric compiler, otherwise new product won't be c++ anyway -- Vladimir Ulchenko aka vavan Back to top Display posts from previous: All Posts1 Day7 Days2 Weeks1 Month3 Months6 Months1 Year Oldest FirstNewest First         BorlandTalk.com Forum Index -> C++ Builder (Non-Technical) All times are GMT Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next Page 1 of 4   Jump to: Select a forum C++ Builder Newsgroups----------------C++ BuilderC++ Builder (ActiveX)C++ Builder (Announcements)C++ Builder (Command Line Tools)C++ Builder DatabasesC++ Builder Databases (ADO)C++ Builder Databases (Desktop)C++ Builder Databases (InterBase Express)C++ Builder Databases (Multi-Tier)C++ Builder Databases (SQL Servers)C++ Builder (Graphics)C++ Builder (IDE)C++ Builder (Internet)C++ Builder (Internet Socket)C++ Builder (Internet Web)C++ Builder (Jobs)C++ Builder (Language)C++ Builder (Language C++)C++ Builder (Compatibility with MFC)C++ Builder (Native API)C++ Builder (Non-Technical)C++ Builder (Students)C++ Builder (Third Party Tools)C++ Builder (Upgrade)C++ Builder (VCL)C++ Builder (VCL Components Usage)C++ Builder (VCL Components Development)C++ Builder (VCL Usage)C++ Builder (WinAPI)C++ Builder Installation Delphi Newsgroups----------------Delphi (General)Delphi ActiveX Controls UsageDelphi ActiveX Controls DevelopmentDelphi As400Delphi DatabasesDelphi Databases (ADO)Delphi Databases (dbExpress)Delphi Databases (Desktop)Delphi Databases (InterBase Express)Delphi Databases (Multi-Tier)Delphi Databases (SQL Servers)Delphi DeploymentDelphi GraphicsDelphi IDEDelphi InternationalizationDelphi InternetDelphi Internet Isapi-WebBrokerDelphi Internet WebSnapDelphi Internet WinsockDelphi JobsDelphi Language BASMDelphi Language ObjectPascalDelphi Model Driven Architecture (General)Delphi Model Driven Architecture (Third Party)Delphi MultimediaDelphi Native APIDelphi Non-TechnicalDelphi ObjectPascalDelphi OLE AutomationDelphi OO designDelphi OpenToolsAPIDelphi Reporting-ChartingDelphi RTLDelphi StudentsDelphi TeamSourceDelphi Thirdparty ToolsDelphi Thirdparty Tools (General)Delphi Thirdparty Tools (IntraWeb)Delphi Thirdparty Tools (RaveReports)Delphi UpgradeDelphi VCLDelphi VCL ComponentsDelphi VCL Components UsingDelphi VCL Components WritingDelphi WebServices SOAPDelphi WinAPIDelphi XMLDelphi Installationcomp.lang.pascal.delphi.components.misccomp.lang.pascal.delphi.components.usagecomp.lang.pascal.delphi.components.writingcomp.lang.pascal.delphi.databasescomp.lang.pascal.delphi.misccomp.sources.delphi JBuilder Newsgroups----------------JBuilderJBuilder AnnouncementsJBuilder Applet IssuesJBuilder As400JBuilder CompilerJBuilder CORBA/RMIJBuilder DatabasesJBuilder DB SwingJBuilder DebuggerJBuilder DeploymentJBuilder DocumentationJBuilder EnterpriseJBuilder HandheldJBuilder IDEJBuilder JavaJBuilder JavaAPIJBuilder Java LanguageJBuilder Java SwingJBuilder Java BeansJBuilder Java Beans UsageJBuilder Java Beans DevelopmentJBuilder JBCLJBuilder JDataStoreJBuilder JobsJBuilder LinuxJBuilder MacintoshJBuilder & MobileSetJBuilder MultiLingual AppsJBuilder Non-TechnicalJBuilder OpenToolsJBuilder Servlets (JSP)JBuilder StudentsJBuilder Team DevelopmentJBuilder Thirdparty ToolsJBuilder UpgradeJBuilder Installation InterBase Newsgroups----------------InterBaseInterBase Bug DiscussionInterBase GeneralInterBase IBConsoleInterBase OpenSourceInterBase ReplicationInterBase SQLInterBase ThirdpartyInterBase Installation Miscellaneous Borland Newsgroups----------------AppCenterAppServerEnteraVisiBroker  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 Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2006 phpBB Group SEO toolkit © 2004-2006 webmedic.