Re: Open Delphi?
- From: "Robby Tanner" <robby_tanner@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 12 Mar 2006 14:03:08 -0600
"Alex Zencovich" <zencovich@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:441473a1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
A few years I would imagine, which would mean the end of Delphi
indeed...
It would take maybe an hour to make it open source once the rights had
been procured and the actual code transferred, which seems to be the
entirety of their agenda. What would take "a few years" exactly?
Public several millions lines of source code on the web does not mean -
production of new version of Delphi will started immedialtely.
I didn't see any claim made by Open Delphi to that end. What is the
"production of a new version of Delphi" exactly? Is a new version not
merely a collection of enhancements and additional features from the
previous version as well as some bug fixes? It is quite likely under the
open model that there would never be "a new version" of Delphi. However,
that doesn't mean it wouldn't improve and possibly on a daily basis. One
would not have to wait for "the new version" to apply fixes for known
problems with known solutions. Enhancements and bug fixes could begin
immediately. Annoying, persistent bugs could be dealt with by the people
who are inconvenienced by them, rather than having to wait for some budget
allocation and prioritization of the bug over working on the next year's
release. I'm not being critical of the product managers, but their focus is
different then mine and what I want fixed may never show up on their radar.
I remember dealing years ago with a bug in the DDE components, that I had
tracked down. It was a simple matter of a DDE function call interpretting a
non-zero value as FALSE when it should have been TRUE (or something like
that). Another developer ended up writing a VB "relay" application to ferry
between the client and server as a workaround, because VB's DDE controls
didn't check return codes or something like that. Anyway, it would have
been one change on one line of code that would have allowed me to eliminate
an extra application running on Win95a at a time when 16MB was a lot. And
it wouldn't have taken me years to fix it, all I needed was access to the
source.
Not maybe the best specific example, as I believe the DDE controls weren't
and still aren't Borland's anyway. The point of the example was that fixes
can start immediately. Take the discovery Andreas made in the C++ compiler
and the workaround developed to greatly enhance compile time in BCB (the
details escape me, something to do with lengthy file access calls,
especially for ones where the files don't exist?). There are many bugs for
which at the very least the problem is know and for some solutions EXIST, if
a community could only apply them.
Al least it will need some time to study that code. I imagine few years
will not enough, especially if people will do that for free time.
I don't know about that. There are some pretty savvy people out there.
Take a look at what Andreas did with CrossKylix. I don't know the full time
commitment and how many people he had helping him (if any), but it seemd to
come about in fairly short order; as it always does when someone else is
doing the work... :)
So time for code understanding will dead time. It mean - Delphi will not
in developement for this time. It mean - Delphi will die.
That's your conclusion based on the incorrect assumption that the only means
of survival is through regular releases of a "new version of Delphi" rather
than incremental and more frequent and timely enhancements, patches and bug
fixes. As for your claim about "dead time" it seems BCB survived a rather
long period of neglect and even threats of termination, so I'm not as
convinced about your conclusion. Delphi might die anyway. It could be
murdered in its sleep and the remains bricked up in the catacombs of some
former competitor's labyrinth. At least this way we'd have access to the
source rather than it sitting unused and decaying in a vault somewhere.
(Very dramatic, I smell Oscar......)
As I pointed out above, there are many enhancements likely waiting in the
wings that could take place immediately and others for which work on a
solution could commence right away based on user needs, rather than
development focus as defined by a desire to satisfy shareholders and ship a
"new version" to generate revenue.
Now, after all that, for the most part, I think it a moot argument. I don't
think there is the support for an Open initiative. All the arguments about
"business case" are equally moot. The OpenDelphi strategy is not to venture
down a business path.
Rob
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Open Delphi?
- From: Jim Cooper
- Re: Open Delphi?
- References:
- Open Delphi?
- From: Danijel Tkalcec
- Re: Open Delphi?
- From: Alan Garny
- Re: Open Delphi?
- From: Robby Tanner
- Re: Open Delphi?
- From: Alan Garny
- Re: Open Delphi?
- From: Robby Tanner
- Re: Open Delphi?
- From: Alan Garny
- Re: Open Delphi?
- From: Robby Tanner
- Re: Open Delphi?
- From: Alex Zencovich
- Open Delphi?
- Prev by Date: Re: Delphi for Obsolete.NET
- Next by Date: Re: Steve Jobs very very interested.
- Previous by thread: Re: Open Delphi?
- Next by thread: Re: Open Delphi?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
