Re: 64-bit on the horizon? (Was Re: Vista Requirement Already)
- From: Jolyon Smith <jsmith@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2007 09:27:56 +1300
In article <45c0ed98@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Dan Palley says...
"Jolyon Smith" <jsmith@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:MPG.202ab0b930499a80989baf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Aside (and a rant - sorry): In common I am sure with very many other who
have been waiting impatiently for 64-bit Delphi, 64-bit capability is
FAR more important than generics or partial classes, for example.
Generics, partial classes etc - these are all "nice to haves" (for some
- I personally have yet to be convinced that they are even "nice to
have". They absolutely aren't "necessary").
My understanding is that generics are necessary for Net 2.0 support, and are
not a nice-to-have.
Yep - all part of the game of "keeping up with Jones' in the .net space
(aiui even a .net language doesn't _have_ to support generics, it will
just look pretty dumb if it doesn't, since all the rest do).
But of course, native 64-bit specifically _isn't_ .net so I'm not sure
what the relevance here is.
For me, 64-bit is a nice-to-have. The apps I develop wouldn't even benefit
64-bit and none of my customers have 64-bit servers up and running anyway.
My 64-bit servers run all my 32 bit apps just fine.
You are aware, I take it, that Vista will be the last ever 32-bit
Windows release?
Presumably you are also aware that 64-bit IA servers will be running 32-
bit apps at sub-32-bit speeds. Even x86-64 based servers will be
running 32-bit apps a little slower than they would on tru x86-32.
Had you asked me 2 weeks ago whether 64-bit was important, I would have
said the same as you. But a lot can happen in 2 weeks and there is now
a _customer_ driven need to address 64-bit. That doesn't mean
delivering a 64-bit version tomorrow, but it _does_ mean satisfying the
customer(s) that we have a viable strategy for getting there in a
reasonable timeframe.
In any event, whether you need 64-bit now (you will absolutely need it
one day, and probably - like me - sooner than you think) generics and
partial classes are even more meaningless to your customers and none of
them have - or can choose to acquire - hardware that derives any benefit
what-so-ever from such trinkets and baubles in the language you use to
develop their apps.
It absolutely isn't viable to have to wait until 64-bit becomes
essential to have the tools to support it.
The main point being, if there were a 64-bit Delphi available (as there
could very easily have been), Borland would be King of the 64-bit Hill
right now, rather than being an also-ran in the .net space.
I should confess of course that part of my frustration and ire is
entirely selfish: I really would much rather not be in the depressing
position of having to recommend that Microsoft and RemObjects get the
purchase order for the dev tools required in the future, rather than
CodeGear.
:(
--
Jolyon Smith
Say, do any of you guys know how to Madison?
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: 64-bit on the horizon? (Was Re: Vista Requirement Already)
- From: Dan Palley
- Re: 64-bit on the horizon? (Was Re: Vista Requirement Already)
- References:
- Vista Requirement Already
- From: TObject
- Re: Vista Requirement Already
- From: Nick Hodges (CodeGear)
- Re: Vista Requirement Already
- From: Chris Burrows
- Re: Vista Requirement Already
- From: Nick Hodges (CodeGear)
- 64-bit on the horizon? (Was Re: Vista Requirement Already)
- From: Jolyon Smith
- Re: 64-bit on the horizon? (Was Re: Vista Requirement Already)
- From: Dan Palley
- Vista Requirement Already
- Prev by Date: vista upgrade anyone?
- Next by Date: Re: Turbo Delphi and dbExpress
- Previous by thread: Re: 64-bit on the horizon? (Was Re: Vista Requirement Already)
- Next by thread: Re: 64-bit on the horizon? (Was Re: Vista Requirement Already)
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
