Re: Wild speculations about the "other" factors
- From: "IanH" <none@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 20 Oct 2006 08:28:10 -0700
PMFJI,
If CBuilderX wasn't a half-baked product that shipped without
something as basic as Code Insight, it would have stood a chance at
being purchased.
<SNIP>
The issue here again can be summed up as: released too early, dropped
too soon and made some poor choices along the way.
A terrible story. As this is a family-friendly forum, I will not say
what I really think. Thank god I was just a bystander for that one ;-)
than a tool >> for client GUI apps. Hindsight is wonderful that wayI agree that, on Linux, a tool for server work makes more sense
<g>.
No question, I completely recognize that I have benefited from
hindsight. A question that still lingers in my mind and around here
is if DevCo has. ;)
Even if they have, I don't know if Borland/DevCo was, or more
importantly, WILL BE agile/flexible enough to react well if it did. Is
the leadership strong enough to identify a failing strategy, and turn
things round quickly?
Borland gave the impression of being as easy to steer as a supertanker.
I hope Devco has a significantly smaller turning-circle.
<snip>
capabilities, but >> +primarily+ aimed at writing desktopKylix was intended to
be for Linux what Delphi is for Windows: a tool with broad
applications, because that's what most >> Windows programmers do. And
that's what was expected that Linux programmers >> would do.
I agree, and this is where I believe, in hindsight, was the mistake.
The strategy is essentially "port Delphi". They did it with Kylix,
they're doing it with .NET. It didn't work then, it's not going to
work now.
Agreed.
IMO, it's a far better strategy to play to the platform's strength and
enhance them rather than trying to shore up their weakness or
something that is supposedly going to grow.
Bingo.
<snip>
And I
think that's very similar to what happened to CBX.
No. Cross platform C++ is very much alive. There are many, many
ISV's that develop in C++. Think about the potential for supporting
the Mozilla platform with an integrated toolset.
<wild speculation>
How about using the new IDE as a platform that can host many different
types of development, with an open architecture that
can support the Mozilla platform, Rails, LAMP etc. How much effort
would be involved in using the core IDE product with the
platform-specific stuff bolted on, Eclipse-style but wholly
owned/controlled by DevCo?
If resourcing is a problem, maybe they could license the IDE core to
small companies / startups with platform expertise, and take a royalty.
Though they've probably got enough on their plates at the moment ;-)
</wild speculation>
<snip>
I think by the time they had to decide to commit those dollars, the
failure of the Linux platform as a desktop rival to Windows was
already obvious. And without that, there just wasn't enough
market--even potential market--to justify further investment.
Obviously DTG may rethink all of that, but that's how I personally
reconstruct the thinking at the time..
I can understand the logic, but I'll offer up the Kylix community
project as a counter point. Borland could have put forth a minimal
effort here.
But seemed to lack flexibility.
Interesting stuff, guys.
Ian
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Wild speculations about the "other" factors
- From: Brian Moelk
- Re: Wild speculations about the "other" factors
- From: Brian Moelk
- Re: Wild speculations about the "other" factors
- References:
- Wild speculations about the "other" factors
- From: Simon Kissel
- Re: Wild speculations about the "other" factors
- From: Michael Swindell \(Borland\)
- Re: Wild speculations about the "other" factors
- From: Simon Kissel
- Re: Wild speculations about the "other" factors
- From: Wayne Niddery [TeamB]
- Re: Wild speculations about the "other" factors
- From: Simon Kissel
- Re: Wild speculations about the "other" factors
- From: Jon Robertson
- Re: Wild speculations about the "other" factors
- From: IanH
- Re: Wild speculations about the "other" factors
- From: Jon Robertson
- Re: Wild speculations about the "other" factors
- From: IanH
- Re: Wild speculations about the "other" factors
- From: Bob Dawson
- Re: Wild speculations about the "other" factors
- From: IanH
- Re: Wild speculations about the "other" factors
- From: Bob Dawson
- Re: Wild speculations about the "other" factors
- From: IanH
- Re: Wild speculations about the "other" factors
- From: Bob Dawson
- Re: Wild speculations about the "other" factors
- From: Brian Moelk
- Re: Wild speculations about the "other" factors
- From: Bob Dawson
- Re: Wild speculations about the "other" factors
- From: Brian Moelk
- Re: Wild speculations about the "other" factors
- From: Bob Dawson
- Wild speculations about the "other" factors
- Prev by Date: Re: Change in windows licensing
- Next by Date: Re: What is FastCode? (Was Re: FastCode and DevCo relationship?)
- Previous by thread: Re: Wild speculations about the "other" factors
- Next by thread: Re: Wild speculations about the "other" factors
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
|