Re: Delphi compared to Visual Age C++
- From: "Paul Nichols [TeamB]" <paul@xxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 31 May 2005 22:24:09 -0500
Rudy Velthuis [TeamB] wrote:
> At 00:03:41, 31.05.2005, Alvaro GP wrote:
>
>> I've always admired how IBM works; reliability and quality is
>> their number one priority.
>
> I know a few people from mainframe days who would not talk so favourably
> about them.
Largest complaint I had about IBM and Mainframe is the dismal documentation.
Also, their tools left much to be desired.
IBM has always been great at the science end and development end of
technology. In the past, IBM wrote dismal documentations and their tools
were always sub-par. However, IBM has changed a great deal. Now many of
their tutorials, docs, etc. are quite good, as are their tools (Web Sphere
Studio, Lotus, etc).
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Delphi compared to Visual Age C++
- From: Abdullah Kauchali
- Re: Delphi compared to Visual Age C++
- References:
- Delphi compared to Visual Age C++
- From: Abdullah Kauchali
- Re: Delphi compared to Visual Age C++
- From: Alvaro GP
- Re: Delphi compared to Visual Age C++
- From: Rudy Velthuis [TeamB]
- Delphi compared to Visual Age C++
- Prev by Date: D2005 PE : first impressions // editor bug, or ... ?
- Previous by thread: Re: Delphi compared to Visual Age C++
- Next by thread: Re: Delphi compared to Visual Age C++
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
