Re: Older QC reports
- From: "David Dean [CodeGear]" <david.dean.no@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2007 08:50:24 -0800
In article <47567d03@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "m. Th." <a@xxxxx> wrote:
Otoh, the Borland disobedience to its user base was a way of thinking
(remember, pride) so, also, this one doesn't go away so easy.
As relatively new blood here, (I started the day before CodeGear came
into existence) I'm glad that I haven't seen as much of the pride
(arrogance) that I remember from the days when I was a customer. (I
don't know if the folks on the Delphi side realize how poorly the C++
customers were treated between 2002 and 2006)[1] I think that arrogance
being stamped out.
We've worked very hard to return our focus to the individual
developers who use our products. That's why we're trying to reinvigorate
interest in QC.
[1] There are parallels to D8, but it was far worse for C++. CBX didn't
support VCL at all, and when the last version of CBX was ready, they
pulled it completely.
--
David Dean (CodeGear)
Lead C++ QA Engineer
.
- References:
- Re: Older QC reports
- From: m. Th.
- Re: Older QC reports
- From: JED
- Re: Older QC reports
- From: m. Th.
- Re: Older QC reports
- From: David Dean [CodeGear]
- Re: Older QC reports
- From: m. Th.
- Re: Older QC reports
- Prev by Date: Re: Question about Class Helpers
- Next by Date: Re: Where is Support and Maintenance explained?
- Previous by thread: Re: Older QC reports
- Next by thread: Re: Older QC reports
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
