Re: 64-Bit Compiler Would Help Sell More 32-Bit Compilers
From: Will DeWitt Jr. (edge_at_NOSPAM.icehouse.net)
Date: 02/07/05
- Next message: Tim Jarvis: "Re: [Delphi 64-bit] Observation for the day"
- Previous message: Will DeWitt Jr.: "Re: 64-Bit Compiler Would Help Sell More 32-Bit Compilers"
- In reply to: Larry Drews: "Re: 64-Bit Compiler Would Help Sell More 32-Bit Compilers"
- Next in thread: Larry Drews: "Re: 64-Bit Compiler Would Help Sell More 32-Bit Compilers"
- Reply: Larry Drews: "Re: 64-Bit Compiler Would Help Sell More 32-Bit Compilers"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: 6 Feb 2005 18:59:50 -0800
Larry Drews wrote:
> And what I am asserting is that "right now" means for the next 2-3
> years. After we have the dominant market handled, and if 64-bit
> platforms have fulfilled their promise, then it would make sense for
> Borland to get started on a native 64-bit Delphi. But not before
> then, IMO. I don't think by any stretch of the imagination that
> Borland is in danger of going out of business or even losing market
> share if it focuses on .Net for the 2-3 years and then turns its
> attention to other market opportunities.
In order to be ready in 2-3 years development would have to begin now
or in the very near future. In order to keep people from moving in
droves to Visual C++ 2005, such a move would, at the minimum, need to
be announced so developers would know Borland hadn't abandoned them.
> And from other reports on this newsgroup, it would seem that Delphi
> is enjoying a resurgence in market share over the last year. I would
> assert that at least part of that is because of its .Net offerings.
> Certainly it cannot be attributed to 64-bit stuff since that doesn't
> exist. So, would you have Borland change from what appears to be a
> successful effort to increase market share to pursue what, at this
> point, is an unproven business path? And take us all down with you?
I've not seen these reports. What I've seen and heard is that each
version of Delphi has outsold the last version. Now, dodgy maths aside,
this doesn't mean much if your competitor is outstripping your gains
(in other words, while your unit sales may increase, your portion of
the market would still be declining).
I'd also hardly call it an "unproven business path". Obviously Intel,
AMD and Microsoft feel this is a very lucrative path for businesses or
they wouldn't be promoting it so much. In Microsoft's case they've gone
out of their way with Visual Studio 2005 to offer *native* support for
64-bit platforms (not just AMD64/EM64T but also IA64). There was no
real reason to do this other than to show support for native code still
exists. Some have said they'd have had to have made their own C/C++
compiler to handle kernel driver development-- but this /has/ existed
since the Windows Server 2003 DDK. I have Microsoft's command line C++
x64 compiler right now. I've had their IA-64 C++ compiler for even
longer. They didn't ship that with Visual Studio .NET 2002 or 2003, so
that they're now jumping to include it with 2005 tells me they see
customers who still want to do native development as a big business for
them.
There's no reason Borland can't capture some of that business (and
especially the VB crowd which Microsoft has herded into .NET-- I'm
certain there are some who'd rather have a native solution).
Will
-- Want native support in Delphi for AMD64/EM64T? Vote here-- http://qc.borland.com/wc/qcmain.aspx?d=7324
- Next message: Tim Jarvis: "Re: [Delphi 64-bit] Observation for the day"
- Previous message: Will DeWitt Jr.: "Re: 64-Bit Compiler Would Help Sell More 32-Bit Compilers"
- In reply to: Larry Drews: "Re: 64-Bit Compiler Would Help Sell More 32-Bit Compilers"
- Next in thread: Larry Drews: "Re: 64-Bit Compiler Would Help Sell More 32-Bit Compilers"
- Reply: Larry Drews: "Re: 64-Bit Compiler Would Help Sell More 32-Bit Compilers"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|