Re: 64-bit Windows for AMD 64 is here...
From: Brian Moelk (bmoelk_at_NObrainendeavorSPAM.FORcomME)
Date: 03/11/04
- Next message: chrisC: "Re: Delphi 8 - Download LINK NOT Working"
- Previous message: John Pressman: "Re: Application without forms"
- In reply to: Eric Grange: "Re: 64-bit Windows for AMD 64 is here..."
- Next in thread: Eric Grange: "Re: 64-bit Windows for AMD 64 is here..."
- Reply: Eric Grange: "Re: 64-bit Windows for AMD 64 is here..."
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2004 14:36:21 -0500
> Indeed, but with no decent Win64 support in Delphi, only
> one way is practical.
Only if supporting 64-bit is important to you and your application. Most
applications don't need it.
> Pure waste of time and money IMHO, and I don't really buy the argument
> that it "came at almost no cost" to Borland.
I don't buy that argument either. <g>
> All major Java IDE had/have a Linux incarnation AFAIK.
Ahh...sorry, I was mostly thinking about C++ on Linux. Borland competes
with a Java IDE and now a focused C++ IDE.
> Anyway, I wouldn't call Kylix "mainstream" in Linux, but rather "niche",
> if only because it doesn't use (or keeps up with) the mainstream
> compilers, environments or libraries on this platform.
I only refered to it as mainstream because Borland is a mainstream tools
vendor. Indeed I think Kylix is a poor choice if you are developing for
Linux as your primary platform.
> *If* it's a good strategy. The crash of the "net economy" a few years
> ago illustrated it quite well. Good strategies survive, bad one disappear,
> however efficiently they copied their masters, and "good ones" are rarely
> the hyped ones.
I think we're mostly in agreement here. But IMO, most people think that an
innovative strategy is the most important thing when planning to go into
business, when in fact its the execution of a good strategy, regardless of
whether or not it's innovative or not, is what will make or break a company.
IOW, I believe that Borland can follow the technology leaders and still
succeed. This is exactly what they've done in the past and I suspect will
continue to do. The problem I see with products like their dotNET ones is
that they aren't executing as well as they need to in that strategy.
> > Even with the "best" strategy in the world, if you don't execute there
> > is nothing of any value.
>
> Indeed, and it works *this way*, not the other.
Agreed.
> > The risk, and hence the reward, doesn't come from the strategy,
> > but the execution.
>
> *That* is pure nonsense.
> Executing a perfect jump in a pit with spikes at the bottom
> will only result in a gory death.
No. You can have the best landing pad in the world and if you never jump or
get "lost" in the preparation for that jump you'll end up with the same
results.
> > but dotNET is being used in mainstream applications today.
>
> Which ones?
Mostly corporate/internal stuff. I'm willing to bet dotNET is being used
much more than 64-bit Windows apps.
> > There is a much more immediate need for dotNET,
> > specifically ASP.NET applications.
>
> Yes, but that's server side stuff, and doesn't justify dumbing
> down everything else.
Agreed and currently I only see value in doing serverside dotNET
development. I'm not sure if I follow...what is being dumbed down? Delphi
itself?
> > The number of companies that are using dotNET far outnumber
> > the companies using 64-bit...
>
> ...as a VB.net runtime, yes. And it's progress, for VB users, yes,
> and even for MFC users, yes.
> Doesn't means Delphi has to become a VB clone.
Please, get over the VB stuff --- that's history. A large part of dotNET
development is done in C#.
> > [...] and Borland now has dotNET products.
>
> dotNet is about *not* poised to harvest the benefits of 64bits,
> namely greater virtual memory addressing space and performance
> improvement.
Agreed...did you not see the "<g>"? My whole point is that now they have
dotNET products they may consider new markets (i.e. 64-bit); hopefully
they'll have the resources to devote to it.
> > Hopefully some in Borland have thought the same.
>
> We have been promised a set March announces, things will hopefully
> be clarified...
Sure...time will tell.
> > IMO, it's the price Borland had to pay. There was no win-win there.
>
> With VS.net, MS only added options for its C++ developper, with both
> Win64 and .net support added.
Use VS.NET for C++ if cross platform isn't important to you. Regardless, I
think it was the right move for a more pure C++ toolkit; we can agree to
disagree on this.
> > QC reports don't seem to be a solid indicator of revenue to me.
>
> No, they're an indicator of activity.
Although there is certainly some correlation to activity, they're an
indicator of bugs reported...that's it. But what does QC have to do with
revenue?
-- Brian Moelk bmoelk@NObrainendeavorSPAM.FORcomME http://www.brainendeavor.com
- Next message: chrisC: "Re: Delphi 8 - Download LINK NOT Working"
- Previous message: John Pressman: "Re: Application without forms"
- In reply to: Eric Grange: "Re: 64-bit Windows for AMD 64 is here..."
- Next in thread: Eric Grange: "Re: 64-bit Windows for AMD 64 is here..."
- Reply: Eric Grange: "Re: 64-bit Windows for AMD 64 is here..."
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|
