Board index » delphi » Re: Informal Poll --- 100K to 1M Sale

2005-08-09 12:19:19 AM
delphi135
In article <42f78160$XXXX@XXXXX.COM>, XXXX@XXXXX.COM
says...
for large multi-billion dollar corporations, even though we have no
desire to get involved in the so called enterprise market, we do
introduce Delphi to our clients. As far as "enterprise" programming
goes, it makes no sense for us to compete against IBM on one end of the
spectrum to consultants who typically charge about half of our going
rate on the other end.
 

"Brian Moelk" <XXXX@XXXXX.COM>writes
from "You don't agree with me, therefore you must not understand me, so let
me explain it to you again in more detail and from this other angle. Here,
now I am standing on a chair. Let's try again."
-- d
---------------------------------------------------
Need to see what's happening?
Check out the Delphi Community Blog Aggregator
delphi.flashblogger.com
 

One of my pet peeves is being misunderstood, so I try really hard to make
clear what I am saying. Unfortunately, this often leads to endurance battles
and wears everyone out. I apologize for that.
 

 

I would prefer for Delphi to embrace a vibrant Open Source
community in Free Pascal that already has things working
well on Linux and Mac OS.
The biggest thing Free Pascal is missing is a good VCL.
The LCL is barely Delphi 1. Free Pascal is closer
to Delphi 7 support.
Object Pascal needs as much synergy as it can get to break
down the "isn't C++" or "it isn't MS" as much as possible.
Sometimes you have to give a little to get a lot. If you
are only going to do something half hearted (whether it be
because of financial reasons or not), then empower those
that will do it. By playing friendly with Free Pascal, it
is a win / win situation all the way around.
I would start selling a certified version of the VCL for $195 per
programmer. So if you inclined to use Lazarus, you still
have a commercial library to program against.
Dennis Landi writes:
Thomas Miller
Wash DC Delphi SIG Chairperson
Delphi Client/Server Certified Developer
BSS Accounting & Distribution Software
BSS Enterprise Accounting FrameWork
www.bss-software.com
www.cpcug.org/user/delphi/index.html
https://sourceforge.net/projects/uopl/
sourceforge.net/projects/dbexpressplus
 

Thomas Miller writes:
amongst the top five silliest ideas that have ever been presented here
in this group.
--
Nick Hodges -- TeamB
Lemanix Corporation -- www.lemanix.com
Read my Blog -- www.lemanix.com/nick
 

"Thomas Miller" <XXXX@XXXXX.COM>writes
all that much as a commercial entity, except as you point out to keep Object
Pascal alive.
-- d
---------------------------------------------------
Need to see what's happening?
Check out the Delphi Community Blog Aggregator
delphi.flashblogger.com
 

"Nick Hodges [TeamB]" <XXXX@XXXXX.COM>writes
Delphi Inc. then I would agree with you; but explain how it does please.
-- d
---------------------------------------------------
Need to see what's happening?
Check out the Delphi Community Blog Aggregator
delphi.flashblogger.com
 

Or I get, aren't they doing .Net now. Why wouldn't I use C#
then?
The plain fact, I'd rather have 1 million users from
small shops then 350,000 from a mixture of corporate and
small shops.
With a win64 native compiler, you would be able to ensure
your customers that Object Pascal will remain relative for
the next 10 years, at least. Same with continued .Net
support.
My first job as technology director would be to have a
VCL framework that IDE and compiler friendly. Not just
Delphi friendly.
Wed someone to your framework, you have them for a lot
longer then a language or IDE.
Imagine a framework that was similar for Chrome, .Net,
Mono, Delphi, Free Pascal. Then you know you won't program
yourself into a corner.
Then you have Qt but in Object Pascal. Home run in my book.
Unfortunately just a few see a benefit in this. I can tell
you large companies see the benefit in this. That is why
so many of them went to Java to begin with. A few tweaks
and now I am running my Java code on IBM. 4 year later,
HP give them a better deal, tweak the code and your up
and running on a different platform. Large companies don't
want to program themselves into a corner. That is the
way to sell them.
Quality in doing the basics it what small shops want.
You can do both with the right focus.
Dennis Landi writes:
Thomas Miller
Wash DC Delphi SIG Chairperson
Delphi Client/Server Certified Developer
BSS Accounting & Distribution Software
BSS Enterprise Accounting FrameWork
www.bss-software.com
www.cpcug.org/user/delphi/index.html
https://sourceforge.net/projects/uopl/
sourceforge.net/projects/dbexpressplus
 

Thomas Miller writes:
means???
OpenSource does not mean that you are allowed to redistribute it.
--
Regards,
Andreas Hausladen
 

In article <XXXX@XXXXX.COM>, XXXX@XXXXX.COM
says...
when bugs are found. I wouldn't even think of buying a third party
library if the source wasn't available, I gave that up that up when
Delphi 2 was released.
 

"Thomas Miller" <XXXX@XXXXX.COM>writes
the foreseeable future? Build a 64-bit compiler and give your customers a
smooth upgrade path to Win64 changing as little of their code as possible.
Borland didn't do it.
That doesn't mean they couldn't offer .NET as well, but it could have been a
gradual offering while the new platform figured out what it was going to
become; and an ASP.NET-only offering would have been enough to begin with.
IMO. There *really* was no rush. Not for the vast majority of the Delphi
customer base in my opinion.
-- d
---------------------------------------------------
Need to see what's happening?
Check out the Delphi Community Blog Aggregator
delphi.flashblogger.com
 

"Andreas Hausladen" <XXXX@XXXXX.COM>writes
with the delphi source code, you CANNOT redistribute it as source. No
matter what bug it fixes or enhancement is offered.
-- d
---------------------------------------------------
Need to see what's happening?
Check out the Delphi Community Blog Aggregator
delphi.flashblogger.com
 

In article <42f79007$XXXX@XXXXX.COM>,
XXXX@XXXXX.COM says...
bug fixes.
 

Well all you are doing now is frustrating a lot of people that paid
for Kylix. You could always do some plugins for Lazarus and charge
money for them. I think there are quite a few companies making some
money on doing that with Eclipse.
Of course it would help Delphi, Inc.
#1 Spend lots of money on Kylix and get a minimal return (likely
loosing money). I think Borland tried this one already.
#2 Give Kylix to open source and make almost nothing (but make
very little investment).
#3 Work with Free Pascal and make almost nothing (but make very
little investment). Able to claim cross platform capabilities and
really mean it. Have an army of programmers improving the VCL and
be able to sell it commercially (like MySQL does and Qt does) to
programmers using Lazarus on other platforms. Create good will
with the open source community.
Putting the VCL in open source doesn't mean you don't make any money. I
would even venture if you made the Pro version a more reasonable $395
instead of the ridicules $995 it is now, you would get most programmers
to buy the Pro version instead of just the VCL for commercial use.
I baught my C# VS for just $200. I can do everything I want.
Why should any one buy D2005 pro for $900 to do .Net development?
Dennis Landi writes:
Thomas Miller
Wash DC Delphi SIG Chairperson
Delphi Client/Server Certified Developer
BSS Accounting & Distribution Software
BSS Enterprise Accounting FrameWork
www.bss-software.com
www.cpcug.org/user/delphi/index.html
https://sourceforge.net/projects/uopl/
sourceforge.net/projects/dbexpressplus