Re: Delphi 8 ... is it a worthy investment?

From: Ian (bogus_at_nospam.com)
Date: 03/03/04 

Date: Wed, 3 Mar 2004 10:00:38 -0000

Wayne,

> > For me, as a Pro-SKU user only, it's another of those things that can
> > be taken 2 ways:
> > - Borland bring to the masses 2-way model-based tools, integrated
> > version control, refactoring help etc, and other goodies that may
> > help me as a one man band, all at the traditional Borland prices.
> > ==> count me in.
>
> So IOW, as long as it's essentially free or really cheap? Getting
> significant new functionality should be worth something to you. When
Makita
> introduces a new power tool that makes a carpenter measurable more
> productive, should the carpenter expect it to be thrown in as an extra to
> the rest of their tools at little?

If I'm being critical, then that reads to me like putting words in my mouth.
(Where's Nick when I need him).
I'm *not* after something 'free or really cheap'. I have always considered
the Pro SKU very good value for money. I bought ADOExpress for D5 because
that was the only thing from the Enterprise (or was it still called C/S
then??) SKU that I had any use for. Why should I be interested in paying for
things I do not need?

When D6 came along, there were a few new things that I was interested in
(though not immediately required), but they were not part of Pro. I could
either:
 - buy the Pro upgrade, which IMO did not offer much to ME
 - upgrade to Enterprise, for a lot more money, just to get the stuff I was
interested in, plus a load of stuff I would never use.
 - save the money, buy a new PC instead.

If I was only interested in 'free or really cheap', don't you think I would
just stick to Visual Studio? I got my first copy of VS6 (Enterprise) with a
copy of SQL Server 7, Win 2K Server, Exchange Server and a load of other
goodies for £200 from MS, on a deal specifically targetted at developers. I
don't expect Borland to be able to compete with that?

To me, I got a substantial advantage over VS developers, by using an
inherently better tool. They got cheaper tools, MSDN backup, and a much
bigger job market. To extend your analogy, using one type of power tool does
not stigmatise the carpenter if he finds himself looking for work, or
looking to hire another carpenter.

> > - Borland add lots of bloat that may appeal to people working in big
> > teams, increasing their margins, targetting more at the
> > Enterprise/Architect SKU buyer.
> > ==> no thanks.
>
> Anything new generally costs a lot initially, but it gradually becomes the
> norm and the cost drops over time. This is already happening with the
> "enterprise" tools - Starteam was among the most expensive SCC products
out
> there - several $1000s to get started, now it's an incremental cost when
> buying Delphi. Same for Bold - around $3500 and now only an extra ~$500.
> IOW, by acquiring these products, Borland has made them *very* afforable
to
> a huge number of developers that simply would not have even considered
them
> before.

Agreed, but there is a danger that the new features are introduced at a
price level that makes them unattractive. I want the features, but not at
that price, so I go to a 3rd party for a solution. By the time Borland are
pricing their feature at a level I am interested in, I'm committed to a
different path. One example, for me, was MIDAS. For me the initial cost was
a barrier, and the licensing was just not worth bothering with (I stress,
this is just for me: I do not claim to represent any other users, I've got
enough on my plate already <g>). It missed it's chance with me.

I agree with many others that a pick'n'mix, modular approach would be better
for a lot of customers, myself included (although I totally accept that
Borland choose not to do this: it is their call, and I'm sure they have
considered it many times).

I don't begrudge Borland maximising their revenue; I encourage it. A healthy
Borland is good for me. But I get to decide what is the best strategy for me
and my company.

Cheers,

Ian

Relevant Pages

  • Re: In My Dreams
    ... $20,000 for a copy of Delphi, as per the theories posited by Thorsten Veblen ... I think that if Borland went all out and created a Delphi that had all these ... would make up in volume what they lose in price, ... But as I said in another post in this thread, a dream is not an expectation. ...
    (borland.public.delphi.non-technical)
  • Re: Delphi Software Assurance ~ Buyer Beware!
    ... What we have learnd from history over the years, is that developers can very simply be attracted by subscriptions to all ... is welcome at a compareable price to MSDN which in the end is the direct competitor from the customers point of view. ... Borland products and this dream will be swept away by lot more ... >SA renewals for Delphi Architect was $2089.00 US. ...
    (borland.public.delphi.non-technical)
  • Re: How bad is Kylix?
    ... Linux development full throttle, but I did want to explore it as a possible ... Not that I suggest Borland could or should have done that, ... But a high price can pretty much kill it for good or at least ... more value to the customer to give them a good reason to go that way. ...
    (borland.public.delphi.non-technical)
  • On price
    ... I have a question for the Borland / DevCo guys watching these groups: are there any plans for price modifications for future versions? ... I do know extremely well that Visual Studio doesn't stand a chance when compared with Delphi as I've been working with both a lot. ... I don't even want to go into the topic of individual purchases in poorer countries like Romania or other Eastern-Europe countries, where Delphi is still very popular. ...
    (borland.public.delphi.non-technical)
  • MS VS 2005 Team System... is it good or bad thing?
    ... Before killing, please read, it is related to Delphi and not only... ... System by MS and then let Borland present few things from upcoming BDS ... looking at this trend I would see that Borland price of BDS ... an interface is more "developed by designer" than it is not with D2005. ...
    (borland.public.delphi.non-technical)