Board index » delphi » Re: Blog on DevCo Non-Sale

Re: Blog on DevCo Non-Sale


2006-11-19 06:29:52 AM
delphi21
The commercial problems are not really Delphi specific.
Open source, freeware and piracy kill many commercial products today.
E.g. shareware businesses are almost dead, but many Shareware authors
used to buy Delphi. Switching the language would not help at all, they must
produce something really superior, but the company size will shrink further.
 
 

Re: Blog on DevCo Non-Sale

Why not.
It's the beauty of the Free/Open Source Software Movement!
- Nate.
"DaniŽl Mantione" <XXXX@XXXXX.COM>writes
Quote

"Nathaniel L. Walker" <XXXX@XXXXX.COM>writes:
>Hmm, has anyone thought of Forking FPC/Lazarus and
>working with it in that way?

Why fork?

DaniŽl Mantione
 

Re: Blog on DevCo Non-Sale

Quote
"DaniŽl Mantione" <XXXX@XXXXX.COM>writes
news:455f788a$XXXX@XXXXX.COM...
>
>"Nathaniel L. Walker" <XXXX@XXXXX.COM>writes:
>>Hmm, has anyone thought of Forking FPC/Lazarus and
>>working with it in that way?
>
>Why fork?
>
>DaniŽl Mantione

[Fix Top-Posting problem!]
"Nathaniel L. Walker" <XXXX@XXXXX.COM>writes
Quote
Why not.

It's the beauty of the Free/Open Source Software Movement!

- Nate.
Come on, answer the question! Why Fork?
What would be the reason to? I don't know what license Lazarus comes under,
but I only see 2 reasons to "Fork":
1. Some fundamental incompatibility or difference in opinion of the
direction the project should take.
or
2. Because you want to "close-source" it and use it in an app to make money,
which is fine for some licenses, and not so fine under others.
I really don't care why you want to Fork, I am just interested in hearing
your reasoning.
 

Re: Blog on DevCo Non-Sale

Quote
"Profits from CodeGear will have the benefit of being reinvested"

? In CodeGear?
That would be the only meaning of the word "reinvested" I can think of.
--
Anders Ohlsson - blogs.borland.com/ao/
CodeGear Developer Relations
"A golf course that does not have a pub after the 18th hole
is like an acupuncturist who does not offer needle removal."
 

Re: Blog on DevCo Non-Sale

yes, may be but do not overlook the fact that CodeGear is more than juts
in the IDE business. It has
- 4 Languages and related Compilers
- the knowledge on how to produce (efficient) code for .net, Win32, Linux
- Database Engine
- A multi "personnality" IDE
- Several technologies which are already heading in that direction.
Do not think of CodeGear as just IDE, me think that would be a mistake
Didier
Quote

 

Re: Blog on DevCo Non-Sale

yes, may be but do not overlook the fact that CodeGear is more than juts
in the IDE business. It has
- 4 Languages and related Compilers
- the knowledge on how to produce (efficient) code for .net, Win32, Linux
- Database Engine
- A multi "personnality" IDE
- Several technologies which are already heading in that direction.
Do not think of CodeGear as just IDE, methink that would be a mistake
Didier
Quote

 

Re: Blog on DevCo Non-Sale

"Nathaniel L. Walker" <XXXX@XXXXX.COM>writes:
Quote
Why not.

It's the beauty of the Free/Open Source Software Movement!
In open source, if a project forks, one fork dies. Look at Samba-TNG and XFree86 for examples. I don't see a reason why your fork would be successfull in any way.
DaniŽl Mantione
 

Re: Blog on DevCo Non-Sale

"geikelite" <XXXX@XXXXX.COM>writes:
Quote
What would be the reason to? I don't know what license Lazarus comes under,
The GNU GPL.
DaniŽl Mantione
 

Re: Blog on DevCo Non-Sale

"geikelite" <XXXX@XXXXX.COM>writes:
Quote
Ah, well that pretty much kills Lazarus for use in a commercial app.
Nope. Don't confuse the license of the program with the license of the libraries, which are modified LGPL.
Quote
Why do we keep seeing all of these posts about Lazarus being an alternative
to Delphi/VCL here in a CodeGear/Borland forum (where the majority of
participants probable write/sell commercial apps) when it is impossible for
most people to switch to Lazarus because of the license?
There is no problem to develop commericial close source applications in Free Pascal/Lazarus.
Quote
Lazarus should switch to an MIT or BSD license if they want a larger
userbase.
No, those licenses encourage forks, and many contributors would walk away.
DaniŽl Mantione
 

Re: Blog on DevCo Non-Sale

"DaniŽl Mantione" <XXXX@XXXXX.COM>wrote in
Quote

"geikelite" <XXXX@XXXXX.COM>writes:

>What would be the reason to? I don't know what license Lazarus comes
>under,

The GNU GPL.

Ah, well that pretty much kills Lazarus for use in a commercial app.
Why do we keep seeing all of these posts about Lazarus being an alternative
to Delphi/VCL here in a CodeGear/Borland forum (where the majority of
participants probable write/sell commercial apps) when it is impossible for
most people to switch to Lazarus because of the license?
Lazarus should switch to an MIT or BSD license if they want a larger
userbase.
 

Re: Blog on DevCo Non-Sale

"DaniŽl Mantione" <XXXX@XXXXX.COM>writes
Quote

"Nathaniel L. Walker" <XXXX@XXXXX.COM>writes:
>Why not.
>
>It's the beauty of the Free/Open Source Software Movement!

In open source, if a project forks, one fork dies. Look at Samba-TNG and
XFree86 for examples. I don't see a reason why your fork would be
successfull in any way.
I didn't say anything about it being successful. Who said I wanted to fork
Lazarus and set up a open source community for it.
Maybe I wanted to fork it so modify the development environment and
libraries
to suit my particular purposes.
But since it is GPL I would rather not.
Maybe do a nice Eclipse plug-in for FPC, though.
- Nate.
 

Re: Blog on DevCo Non-Sale

Anders Ohlsson (CodeGear) writes:
Quote
>"Profits from CodeGear will have the benefit of being reinvested"
>
>? In CodeGear?

That would be the only meaning of the word "reinvested" I can think
of.
Yes, but then this is not understandable:
"..the positive cash flow from the profitable IDE
business was much more attractive for us.."
If it is to be read like this, CodeGear would be for Borland like the
wife for her husband:
"I am happy because my wife just won 7 millions in LOTTO and she has
bought new coupons for all the money she won"
To sum it up:
When CodeGear makes money, Borland will be happy because money will
flow from CodeGear to Borland. Not all, but some. If this is not right,
please tell me.
--
Ingvar Nilsen
www.ingvarius.com
 

Re: Blog on DevCo Non-Sale

When perusing many of the posts in here about Borland, CodeGear, and
Delphi, I notice the tendency of many to offer a free business analysis.
Favourite words are "market," "economics," "potential buyers," "worth,"
"investors," "sales," and now even "boytoy."
While many have had these "free market" pillars of economic reality
imprinted in them since birth, to some of us they are meaningless. Not
meaningless because they are not understood, but meaningless because
they are so far removed from the sphere in which many lone developers
exist.
The lone developer knows that one spark, one idea, can drive him for
months, regardless of any surrounding economic realities. This reality
comes second to creation and, frankly, the entire circus of economics
could not exist without that someone who followed his guts, regardless
of the circus.
He might create a compiler over a few days or weeks, on which an entire
company is consequently based.
In a nutshell, if I see a person who is inspired, driven, and prepared
to realize his visions, he has my vote, regardless of the materialistic
realities surrounding him. From what I read from the CodeGear people,
all these qualities seem to be present, even when some try to
clusterbomb them out of hope.
I know one or two people can make all the difference, and now these one
or two people have the opportunity to drive their visions home. Let's
not slow them down.
 

Re: Blog on DevCo Non-Sale

- C# compiler is Microsoft's.
- Visual Basic compiler is Microsoft's.
- Borland C++ Compiler is so old it is only maginally useful outside of
working with the VCL.
- Delphi.NET has yet to "catch on".
- Microsoft has an IDE that includes multiple languages under the same roof.
- Microsoft has ample database configuration and database application
development tools in their IDEs.
- Microsoft has several technologies headed in that direction (LINQ,
ADO.Next, etc.).
The same can be said for other IDE/compiler vendors (like IBM, Sun,
and Oracle for Java IDEs in respect to JBuilder).
- Nate.
"Didier Gasser-Morlay" <XXXX@XXXXX.COM>writes
Quote
yes, may be but do not overlook the fact that CodeGear is more than juts
in the IDE business. It has

- 4 Languages and related Compilers
- the knowledge on how to produce (efficient) code for .net, Win32, Linux
- Database Engine
- A multi "personnality" IDE
- Several technologies which are already heading in that direction.

Do not think of CodeGear as just IDE, methink that would be a mistake

Didier


>
 

Re: Blog on DevCo Non-Sale

I really think CodeGear takes all these free consultancy sessions
with a grain of salt, as would every business. They have people
working for them that make their business decisions, why should
they take the advice of the community so seriously that they would
alter their roadmap or drive their business at their whim.
The community matters, but I think alot of people overstate it.
I don't see how the community can realistically "slow them down"
outside of "not" purchasing their products.
Let's be realistic.
- Nate.