Board index » delphi » Re: Am I paying for the same components in Delphi 2005 that I paid for in Delphi 1 and 2?

Paul Dolen

Delphi Developer
 

Re: Am I paying for the same components in Delphi 2005 that I paid for in Delphi 1 and 2?


2004-10-30 05:16:24 AM
delphi46
Quote
giving you "two for the price of one". For anyone that would've considered
paying that price for D8, paying it for D9 is a no-brainer.
Yeah, but what about for those that wouldn't consider paying it for
D8? <g>
Seriously, for me, I am okay with the price of the Delphi 7 Pro to D2005 Pro.
For those that did buy Delphi 8 and felt like they didn't get their money's
worth, they may not be so happy about price.
 
 
Nick Hodges [TeamB]

Delphi Developer

2004-10-31 10:57:03 AM

Re: Am I paying for the same components in Delphi 2005 that I paid for in Delphi 1 and 2?

Andrea
I have cancelled this message and reposted it below in an amended form.
Please keep the forums professional and family friendly.
Nick
Quote
Marco Caspers writes:

>That doesn't matter because you can set a filter option that will
 >completely block all articles you don't want to see.
<Deleted>. If I want to do Win32 only, I don't want to have D4DN help
installed. that is all.

>See 1.
You sure? I would say that if you use a Win32 VCL unit and look for
help on it, in the "Remarks" section you might find some references at
dotNET usage of the class for VCL.NET . Don't you think it is likely?

>D9 requirements are less than the OS's requirements to run it on so
 >don't even bother to go down that lane..
<deleted>. I have tried on my PC to start SharpDevelop and some
free tools from MS. dotNET 1.1 is a ram vampyre, and each time I
start any of them, my available RAM is decreasing faster and
faster by the minute. *In practice* dotNET 1.1 is a RAM vampyre and
*nothing* will change this fact.

>Connecting your computer to the internet is a security issue always,
This is true but disconnected from what I was saying.
I'm not talking of INTERNET, but of dotNET which is not the
same thing. DotNET is likely to have vulnerabilities and
programs can do whatever they want if they're programmed in a
certain way. dotNET gives a false sense of security, because
really there can be lots of things going wrong. Starting, for
example, from the GDI+ bug.

>If you use good up to date AV software and use your head in regards
 >to strange e-mail's with attachments you're pretty much secure on
 >the inside too. If you want to be very sure about email, just
 >convert everythig to plain text, then you know there's no trash
 >hidden in some links or scripts inside a html, rtf or msoffice
 >documents.
LOL, like email was the only thing to care about :-)

>It requires an administrator to be aware of some new things, but
 >that's his job for crying out loud. He's got to look it up anyways
 >since Microsoft ain't selling any OS anymore that doesn't have .NET
 >runtime included, it is not even an option anymore.
It's all true, but it is a COST. SysAdmin's time has a cost.
Training on dotNET adimistration is a cost. A cost that could be
avoided( always looking from the Win32-only developer POV ) quite
easily.
--
Nick Hodges -- TeamB
Lemanix Corporation -- www.lemanix.com
Read my Blog -- www.lemanix.com/nick
 
Nick Hodges [TeamB]

Delphi Developer

2004-10-31 10:57:04 AM

Re: Am I paying for the same components in Delphi 2005 that I paid for in Delphi 1 and 2?

Larry Drews writes:
Same for you, Larry, as you quoted it...
Quote
Andrea Raimondi <XXXX@XXXXX.COM>wrote in news:41829b98$1
@newsgroups.borland.com:

>
 ><deleted. If I want to do Win32 only, I don't want to have D4DN help
 >installed. that is all.
 >
If you are doing Win32 only, why not just stick with D7? Then you
will not be bothered with all of the .Net stuff. Delphi 7 should be just
fine for Win32 for several years. What's the problem?
--
Nick Hodges -- TeamB
Lemanix Corporation -- www.lemanix.com
Read my Blog -- www.lemanix.com/nick
 

mehere

Delphi Developer

2004-10-31 11:37:33 AM

Re: Am I paying for the same components in Delphi 2005 that I paid for in Delphi 1 and 2?

Alvaro GP writes:
Quote
And this still ignores that many people don't want to have a mixed IDE
installed on their computers.
I do dsp audio programming using Delphi7. (Programs for digital
recording ala Cubase, Logic,etc).
Delphi is quick, fast and efficient. How would C# or .NET help what I
do? As far as I can see, they can't.
C# and .NET are included in D 2005, but I will never use them. These
products had a cost to develop them. So it is blatently obvious that they
cost something. it is also blatently obvious that I only need a Win 32
Delphi. Who wants to pay for something they won't use?
 
Joanna Carter (TeamB)

Delphi Developer

2004-10-31 04:29:42 PM

Re: Am I paying for the same components in Delphi 2005 that I paid for in Delphi 1 and 2?

"mehere" <XXXX@XXXXX.COM>a écrit dans le message de news:
41845eb9$XXXX@XXXXX.COM...
Quote
C# and .NET are included in D 2005, but I will never use them. These
products had a cost to develop them. So it is blatently obvious that they
cost something. it is also blatently obvious that I only need a Win 32
Delphi. Who wants to pay for something they won't use?
It should also be blatantly obvious to anyone who has taken the time to read
the messages from Borland that D2005 is priced the same as Delphi 7 which was a
Win32 only IDE; ergo you are getting the extra functionality for free.
If you knew how to do real OO development, then you would know just how
inexpensive things becometo modify/extend once you have well designed
frameworks in place. Borland excel in OO tools; both the provision of tools
that are well designed and also that make real OO development easy.
Suggestions about splitting the IDE to reduce the price are naive in the
extreme. Think about it; once they had developed a multi personality IDE
(essential to their future strategy if they are going to compete against the
likes of M$), then how much do you really think it cost them to provide the
C# compiler? M$ gives this away!!
Now please quit this pointless thread; Borland are not going to change their
pricing strategy for a few misers, but if you really make the point hard
enough, you might just succeed in getting them to see that D2005 is actually
too *inexpensive* and to raise the price.
Joanna
Consultant Software Engineer
TeamBUG support for UK-BUG
TeamMM support for ModelMaker
 
Derek Davidson

Delphi Developer

2004-10-31 05:46:56 PM

Re: Am I paying for the same components in Delphi 2005 that I paid for in Delphi 1 and 2?

Nick Hodges [TeamB] writes:
Quote
That may be, but there's nothing to be done about that -- it is what
it is.
I disagree! If it mattered enough, Borland would change it.
--
Derek Davidson
www.ebsms.com
Send SMS Text messages from your PC. For FREE!
 
Joanna Carter (TeamB)

Delphi Developer

2004-10-31 06:09:24 PM

Re: Am I paying for the same components in Delphi 2005 that I paid for in Delphi 1 and 2?

"Andrea Raimondi" <XXXX@XXXXX.COM>a écrit dans le message de news:
41849fad$XXXX@XXXXX.COM...
Quote
Another problem, that I fear, is that some Win32 features are based on
dotNET at design time( like, for example, refactoring ). I have the
strong feeling that Borland is *pushing* towards dotNET programming, but
this shouldn't be, in my opinion, its role. Its role, always in my
opinion, should be to provide us with the tools for the job, nothing
else.
FYI, I had cause to buy PowerQuest disk tools (DriveImage, etc) and that
required the .NET framework to run.
Like it or not .NET *is* being used in real world applications *now*.
Borland have to look to the future, possibly further ahead than you do. .NET
allows them to do things in the IDE now that will not have to be changed in
the future. Porting anything as massive as Delphi entirely to .NET is not a
trivial undertaking and to get it completed for a few years time would mean
having to start as soon as possible.
Certainly Win32/64 will still be supported in the future of Windows, but
after a number of years, it will eventually fade out, just as Win16 has in
the most part.
For Borland to develop a .NET IDE without impinging on a Win32 IDE would
mean twice the effort, as they would then have to support and maintain both
IDEs. Twice the effort, twice the cost.
As has been said before, those who want a Win32 IDE can always stay with D7.
Although, then folks would say they also want all the new bells and whistles
in D2005, just not done in .NET. This then means not just maintaining two
separate IDE code bases, but also having to insert new features in them both
just to keep a different set of moaners from the No .NET bunch happy.
Seems to me, whatever they do, Borland are stuffed in somebody's opinion.
FMPOV, Delphi 2005 is an ideal product in that it allows me to continue
developing Win32 stuff (I don't have to install the .NET personalities), but
it also allows me to play with .NET to see, ahead of time, what is required
to move my apps when the time comes. OTOH, if I want to develop new .NET
apps, I can still leverage existing Win32 code by wrapping that code in .NET
assemblies, debugging freely between the two patforms in the same IDE.
Joanna
Consultant Software Engineer
TeamBUG support for UK-BUG
TeamMM support for ModelMaker
 
Larry Drews

Delphi Developer

2004-10-31 08:29:55 PM

Re: Am I paying for the same components in Delphi 2005 that I paid for in Delphi 1 and 2?

"Nick Hodges [TeamB]" <XXXX@XXXXX.COM>wrote in news:41845480$1
@newsgroups.borland.com:
Quote
Larry Drews writes:

Same for you, Larry, as you quoted it...

>Andrea Raimondi <XXXX@XXXXX.COM>wrote in news:41829b98$1
 >@newsgroups.borland.com:
 >
 >>
 >><deleted. If I want to do Win32 only, I don't want to have D4DN help
 >>installed. that is all.
 >>
 >
 >If you are doing Win32 only, why not just stick with D7? Then you
 >will not be bothered with all of the .Net stuff. Delphi 7 should be just
 >fine for Win32 for several years. What's the problem?


Nick, I didn't get your point. Could you elucidate please?
 
Andrew Rybenkov

Delphi Developer

2004-10-31 09:42:55 PM

Re: Am I paying for the same components in Delphi 2005 that I paid for in Delphi 1 and 2?

Quote
Please keep the forums professional and family friendly.
eh.. Delphi is a family tool?? Is it some Disney toon?
It's interesting to know how many Delphi users are really offended by those words TeamB so like to censor.
(vs those who are "amused" by the censorship)
 
Andrew Rybenkov

Delphi Developer

2004-10-31 09:52:37 PM

Re: Am I paying for the same components in Delphi 2005 that I paid for in Delphi 1 and 2?

Quote
If you knew how to do real OO development...
[skipping blatantly obvious {*word*99}]
Way to go, TeamB'er!
Show that customer he/she doesn't know about programming a bit!
Show he/she just don't know what he/she blubbering about!
Show he/she uses just wrong tool!
 
Bob Dawson

Delphi Developer

2004-10-31 10:09:17 PM

Re: Am I paying for the same components in Delphi 2005 that I paid for in Delphi 1 and 2?

"Larry Drews" wrote
Quote

Nick, I didn't get your point. Could you elucidate please?
You apparently quoted an <explicative deleted>in your reply.
bobD
 
Bob Dawson

Delphi Developer

2004-10-31 10:14:14 PM

Re: Am I paying for the same components in Delphi 2005 that I paid for in Delphi 1 and 2?

"Andrew Rybenkov" wrote
Quote

eh.. Delphi is a family tool?? Is it some Disney toon?
It isn't a matter of prudishness or offense, but of appropriate behavior in
a very public place. I am not offended by the fact that people people pich
their noses ocasionally either--but that still doesn't make it a good idea
while making a business presentation.
bobD
 
Wayne Niddery [TeamB]

Delphi Developer

2004-10-31 10:35:38 PM

Re: Am I paying for the same components in Delphi 2005 that I paid for in Delphi 1 and 2?

Andrew Rybenkov writes:
Quote
>If you knew how to do real OO development...
 [skipping blatantly obvious {*word*99}]

Way to go, TeamB'er!

Show that customer he/she doesn't know about programming a bit!
Show he/she just don't know what he/she blubbering about!
Show he/she uses just wrong tool!
It's easy to make a statement look bad when you quote it out of context.
Possibly it could've been worded better, but in context it should be clear
she was not attempting to accuse the person of not understanding OO
development, but rather was trying to point out an analogy between the
shared IDE framework and OO concepts.
--
Wayne Niddery - Logic Fundamentals, Inc. (www.logicfundamentals.com)
RADBooks: www.logicfundamentals.com/RADBooks.html
"The two most abundant elements in the universe are hydrogen and
stupidity." - Harlan Ellison
 
Derek Davidson

Delphi Developer

2004-11-01 12:49:13 AM

Re: Am I paying for the same components in Delphi 2005 that I paid for in Delphi 1 and 2?

Wayne Niddery [TeamB] writes:
Quote
... she was not attempting to ...
Then, with respect, let her say that.
--
Derek Davidson
www.ebsms.com
Send SMS Text messages from your PC. For FREE!
 
Derek Davidson

Delphi Developer

2004-11-01 01:02:07 AM

Re: Am I paying for the same components in Delphi 2005 that I paid for in Delphi 1 and 2?

Joanna Carter (TeamB) writes:
Quote
If you feel that your comments are justified, then please quote the
sentences that imply them, together with your reasons for your
assumptions.
Joanna, he already did.
Quote
I simply asked those who are constantly complaining about Borland's
strategies in these newsgroups to either do something useful or quit
getting on other people's nerves by whinging about it in these
groups, where you have more chance of flying to Venus than you do of
influencing the people who really hold the pursestrings at Borland.
Then what is this newsgroup for? Sunshine? The utterly trite 'Having
a great Delphi day' garbage spewed recently? Good news *only*? That's
not a newsgroup - that is propaganda and there's way too much of that
here already.
Quote
These groups are paid for by Borland ....
Let's face it, it ain't costing a fortune (at all) and they get FREE
support for their products out of it. So cry me a river.
Quote
... and are intended for peer
support of folks wanting to use their products.
In a non-tech newsgroup? I think not.
Quote
It is by Borland's
grace and TeamB's forbearance ....
Which makes it all sound like the customer gets in the way. Can you not
see this?
Quote
that you are allowed to continue biting
the hand that feeds you;
ROTFLMAO!
Quote
we could easily cancel every negative post
as 'not being in Borland's interest', but we don't because we know
that there are problems that need raising and addressing.
Wait a minute. Seems to me you're contradicting yourself now. Unless
of course you're demanding postings should be made along the lines of
"Oh great Borland, we the unworthy have the terrible responsibility of
informing you that due to our unreasonable coding efforts we have
discovered a lack of optimization in a part of your product <wibble>"
Quote
However
continuing to insist that you know how to run the company better than
they do without providing evidence to that assertion simply clogs up
these groups and hinders those who want answers to genuine problems
from finding the help they need.
You're failing to recognize that Borland themselves are showing that
THEY are unable to run the company. After that, anyone else has a
better chance.
You want people to blow sunshine up your a**? Give them something to
priase. You want people to provide constructive criticism? Give them
an environment that encourages it. You want people to buy Borland?
Give them something worth investing their money in.
So Borland's customers aren't happy. suck it up. Better still, do
something positive about it instead of blaming customers.
While Borland continue to perform the way they are and blame everyone
else for their problems, you will always get a queue of Monday morning
quarter-backs ready to tell them how it should be done. You don't like
that? Then either get out of the business or *win*.
No-one said business was easy.
--
Derek Davidson
www.ebsms.com
Send SMS Text messages from your PC. For FREE!