Re: In My Dreams

From: John Jacobson (johnjac76_at_comcast.net)
Date: 07/02/04 

Date: Fri, 2 Jul 2004 09:21:47 -0500

"zedd" <nospam@for.me> wrote in message
news:40e4fde4$1@newsgroups.borland.com...
> > All future stuff.
>
> Future stuff that is already alive in the Express Beta
> (and probable the whidbey beta 1).

I downloaded C# Express a few days ago. It does not fit my dream, though it
moves in that direction. There is still a lot that would need to be added to
it for it to meet my wishes.

> When was the last time the code editor got stable improvements?
> hmmm... Delphi 6? Delphi 5? At least for 4 years the CR ideas
> have been out, ready for implementation and integration,
> and nothing got done.

But CR wasn't really "stable". D+CR was less stable than D by itself.

> One more reason why getting over using Delphi ended up not so hard.

I suspect the main reason was a disregard for code reuse and a developer
bias toward the new.

> Not in Delphi, Together was an acquired technology that still isn't in
> Delphi, it wasn't technology invented by Borland,

Huh? How is that relevant? Almost all the IDE innovations you see in MSFT
IDE's was not invented by Microsoft. So what? That doesn't make them less
useful. I don't care who started what. I only care how tools will help me
develop software.

> On the paper. Still nothing tightly integrated, and MS is making
> great strides, and communicating about them.
> How long do you think Borland will be able to compete head-on with a
> strategic effort from MS, that'll practically give away their soft with
> the rest of MSDN Universal? This is another BC++ debacle waiting to
happen.

Interesting point, because Borland survived the C++ denoument.

>
> And better hurry on integration, whidbey seem to already have huge chunks
> of ALM covered... enough to prevent many from wandering into Borland's
> arms.

Whidbey is a long ways off. MSFT has every right not to include huge chunks
of what is currently promised or implied.

>
> > WinForms is already legacy code, according to MS.
>
> Same can be said for VCL, and at least WinForms is legacy code with
> much life and full support of XP theming... which cannot be said
> of the VCL. Try the Express Editions.

I have to laugh every time someone mentions this XP theming stuff. It really
isn't that big a deal. Eye candy that is easily emulated. Are customers
really clamoring for XP themes? If so, it iseasy to use current versions of
Delphi to accomodate them. You buy a $50 third-party library and voila!
you're covered.

>
> And that talk about Avalon obsoleting WinForms into oblivion is a little
> far-fetched,

Hmmm...some Microsoft personnel seem to disagree with you there. I saw an
interesting demo at BorCon by one of the MSFT guys and he made it sound like
once Avalon is out there is every reason to expect that it will become the
most exciting way to layout GUI's, eclipsing WinForms.

 the WinForms model fits much more what the Avalon preview and
> MSDN video show than the VCL does.

I can't agree. It is VERY different from both.

> FoxPro, MFC, VB6 still exists, WinForms
> will exist for years and be supported.

Same for VCL. So what?

> The policy of not providing updates for legacy or abandonned products
> is Borland's, not MS's.

Huh? Try to get any updates for Win95, DOS, Visual C++ 4.0, etc.

> And then users are left out to dry on non-updated products, catch-up
> attempt products, and finally canceled products (BC* etc.).
> Take Delphi: finally Win32 compiler updates are planned in D9 (though
> known via way of rumour, with nothing particular promised)... because
> of .Net pressure and D8 compatibility? Come on!
> Couldn't they have been trickled during the D5-D7 era to keep Delphi sexy
> and up to date as a compiler? Sorry, but that's not a proactive strategy.

I've been thinking about this a lot these last few days and I think the
problem is Dale Fuller. He seems to keep head counts too low and/or too
volatile for long-term preservation and nurturing of intellectual capital.
Every time shareholders howl for blood he lays off people, and then when
times are good he hires replacements. That's very destructive. 

-- 
Read Jake's Blog at http://blogs.slcdug.org/jjacobson/
Or Get the RSS Feed at http://blogs.slcdug.org/jjacobson/Rss.aspx

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Where4s Delphi going?
    ... Especially if Microsoft ... doesn't just encourage Avalon, but actively discourages Winforms. ... I'll write that demo when VCL for Avalon ships and upgrade it for the ...
    (borland.public.delphi.non-technical)
  • Re: Delphi Product Manager questioned
    ... IOW I think the VCL ... better than MS for developers - making the differences between Winforms, ... Avalon, and CF nearly transparent. ...
    (borland.public.delphi.non-technical)
  • Re: Delphi Product Manager questioned
    ... differences between Winforms, Avalon ... ... the VCL would be capable of being used for CF development and for Avalon. ...
    (borland.public.delphi.non-technical)
  • Re: Whidbey end station of Windows Forms train.
    ... > Rick Beerendonk wrote: ... Last year it was lightly hinted that VCL forms were ... likely to be more portable to Avalon than WinForms. ... it seems even more confirmed that WinForms ...
    (borland.public.delphi.non-technical)
  • Re: My rant about the "throw out delphi and re-write it in C#" crowd.
    ... nothing out there that I've seen for WinForms that hasn't already been ... done to death by 3rd party vendors for VCL? ... thought we were talking about being able to port Delphi applications to ... Drop it on a Windows Form. ...
    (borland.public.delphi.non-technical)