Re: Delphi bugs and "moving" to Visual Studio debate
- From: "Larry Maturo" <lmaturo@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 02 Jun 2005 17:15:57 GMT
In that case, mention to them that Delphi is named Delphi because it was to
be the best
development environment for Oracle, re the Delphi at Oracle.
-- Larry Maturo
"Abdullah Kauchali" <non@xxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:429e45dd$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>A lot of folks here use the "number of bugs"[1] argument to explain
> the preference for shops to use Visual Studio as opposed to Delphi.
> I think that could be overstating the "bugs" problem. <g>
>
> While it's true that having bugs in the IDE does not contribute to
> its selling quality, I must mention that the choice over the IDE,
> in many organisations, centers around its "extension" of some base
> enterprise infrastructure. The "base" enterprise infrastructure here
> could mean any of these:
>
> 1. The Operating System
> 2. Development framework (Java or .NET)
> 3. The Enterprise database of choice
>
> In my experience, and recently highlighted with my current project,
> clients are more comfortable to choose IDE's that are, what they
> assume to be, "natural extensions" of the above. And once again, in my
> experience, item 3 (database) is the primary factor for decisions. The
> clients don't even know about any bugs etc in IDE's before they decide
> against them!
>
> So trends like these are apparent: if the shop is Microsoft SQL Server
> based, the clients often feel more comfortable with Visual Studio. If
> the client's using DB2, they want something from IBM - Java and Eclipse
> are roped in. If it's Oracle, they are even talking about Oracle forms
> (out of all things!). If its Interbase, then Delphi's the first option.
> Any IDE that is not construed as a natural compliment to the database
> is always going to be a hard sell, IME.
>
> So, Delphi's got some real competition out there - no, not directly from
> other IDE's, but from the back end databases that are employed at the
> client sites. [sic]
>
> (I mentioned in an earlier thread about Borland being a perfect
> acquisition for IBM - I based it on the premise that IBM would have a
> perfect tool set that complements its back end databases (having added
> Interbase to their gluttonous frenzy of acquiring database technologies!
> Of course, I base that only in the hope of seeing Delphi thrive.)
>
> Maybe Borland should start selling Interbase more strongly? <g> Don't
> ask me what that means! :) I'm sure things are much more complicated
> inside with real figures etc. <g>
>
> --
> [1] Because Borland hasn't fixed x-number of bugs in Delphi ...
.
- References:
- Delphi bugs and "moving" to Visual Studio debate
- From: Abdullah Kauchali
- Delphi bugs and "moving" to Visual Studio debate
- Prev by Date: Re: First day with production development on D2005
- Next by Date: Re: Will Delphi will do this one day?
- Previous by thread: Re: Delphi bugs and "moving" to Visual Studio debate
- Next by thread: Re: Delphi bugs and "moving" to Visual Studio debate
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
