Board index » delphi » Delphi 2 or not Delphi 2, that is the question

Delphi 2 or not Delphi 2, that is the question

I am working on an application in Delphi 1.0 that is to run on Win 3.1
workstations and  I am looking at upgrading to Delhpi 2.

Does Delphi 2 support 16 bit programs and support VBXs or will I have to
install Win32S on the Win 3.1 work stations and upgrade Spread VBX (which
is only doing a few simple tasks) to Spread's new OCX control, or perhaps
there DLL?

Is the speed increase of the 32 bit program and database drivers apparent
to the users using Win32S?

Are the any problems with Delphi 2,( after what I experienced upgrading to
Borland C++ 5.0)?

Thanks in advance

Ashley

 

Re:Delphi 2 or not Delphi 2, that is the question


Quote
Ashley{*word*106}son wrote:

> I am working on an application in Delphi 1.0 that is to run on Win 3.1
> workstations and  I am looking at upgrading to Delhpi 2.

> Does Delphi 2 support 16 bit programs and support VBXs or will I have
> to install Win32S on the Win 3.1 work stations and upgrade Spread VBX
> (which is only doing a few simple tasks) to Spread's new OCX control,
> or perhaps  there DLL?

  Delphi 2.0 is for Win95 & WinNT only.  It does not support .VBX's (as
these are 16 bit (only .OCX's)) and will not work properly with the
Win32s (the BDE won't work at all).  The only way to upgrade is to
switch to Win95/WinNT.

Quote
> Is the speed increase of the 32 bit program and database drivers
> apparent to the users using Win32S?

  A nice speed increase, but it won't work with the Win32s, so it
doesn't really matter...

Quote
> Are the any problems with Delphi 2,( after what I experienced
> upgrading to Borland C++ 5.0)?

  Probably the same...  Delphi 2.0/C++ 5.0 are for Win95/WinNT, and not
meant to run under Win32s.  Bottom line:  Unless you're willing to
upgrade to Win95 (That's what our network is using (and I've never had a
problem)) or WinNT, don't even bother...

--
Jason
E...@DarkElf.reno.nv.us

Re:Delphi 2 or not Delphi 2, that is the question


Quote
Ashley{*word*106}son wrote:

> I am working on an application in Delphi 1.0 that is to run on Win 3.1
> workstations and  I am looking at upgrading to Delhpi 2.

> Does Delphi 2 support 16 bit programs and support VBXs or will I have to
> install Win32S on the Win 3.1 work stations and upgrade Spread VBX (which
> is only doing a few simple tasks) to Spread's new OCX control, or perhaps
> there DLL?

Delphi 2 produces only 32-bit code intended for Win 95, to the best of
my knowledge. A gripe that some people have with Borland is that D 2 is
being developed and D 1 ignored, while most clients, including those of
my firm, still have mainly Win 3.1.

Regards

Mark Patterson

Re:Delphi 2 or not Delphi 2, that is the question


Quote
Mark Patterson wrote:

> Ashley{*word*106}son wrote:

> > I am working on an application in Delphi 1.0 that is to run on Win 3.1
> > workstations and  I am looking at upgrading to Delhpi 2.

> > Does Delphi 2 support 16 bit programs and support VBXs or will I have to
> > install Win32S on the Win 3.1 work stations and upgrade Spread VBX (which
> > is only doing a few simple tasks) to Spread's new OCX control, or perhaps
> > there DLL?

> Delphi 2 produces only 32-bit code intended for Win 95, to the best of
> my knowledge. A gripe that some people have with Borland is that D 2 is
> being developed and D 1 ignored, while most clients, including those of
> my firm, still have mainly Win 3.1.

> Regards

> Mark Patterson

Our company develops primarily for the 16 bit market also. While we
originally had every intention of moving to 32 bit, we've found that
there isn't any big advantage for our applications other than the problem
that most people aren't developing components for the 16 bit version any
more.

Maybe if enough of us state our interest in 16 bit it will make a
difference though I doubt it.

Mitch (mit...@rockware.com)

Re:Delphi 2 or not Delphi 2, that is the question


Quote
Mark Patterson wrote:

> Ashley{*word*106}son wrote:

> > I am working on an application in Delphi 1.0 that is to run on Win 3.1
> > workstations and  I am looking at upgrading to Delhpi 2.

> > Does Delphi 2 support 16 bit programs and support VBXs or will I have to
> > install Win32S on the Win 3.1 work stations and upgrade Spread VBX (which
> > is only doing a few simple tasks) to Spread's new OCX control, or perhaps
> > there DLL?

> Delphi 2 produces only 32-bit code intended for Win 95, to the best of
> my knowledge. A gripe that some people have with Borland is that D 2 is
> being developed and D 1 ignored, while most clients, including those of
> my firm, still have mainly Win 3.1.

        Are they really ignoring D1? I thought I heard some stuff about an
upcoming version 1.5 - was that just a rumor?

--
David Ullrich

?his ?s ?avid ?llrich's ?ig ?ile
(Someone undeleted it for me...)

Re:Delphi 2 or not Delphi 2, that is the question


Ashley:

Executables created in Delphi 2.0 will ONLY run on Win95/WinNT. NO win3.1 even
with Win32s.

good luck

Jeff Hutton

DelphiIn article <550u02$...@news.mel.aone.net.au>,
    ash...@u030.aone.net.au (Ashley{*word*106}son) wrote:

Quote

> I am working on an application in Delphi 1.0 that is to run on Win 3.1
> workstations and  I am looking at upgrading to Delhpi 2.
> Does Delphi 2 support 16 bit programs and support VBXs or will I have to
> install Win32S on the Win 3.1 work stations and upgrade Spread VBX (which
> is only doing a few simple tasks) to Spread's new OCX control, or perhaps
> there DLL?
> Is the speed increase of the 32 bit program and database drivers apparent
> to the users using Win32S?
> Are the any problems with Delphi 2,( after what I experienced upgrading to
> Borland C++ 5.0)?
> Thanks in advance
> Ashley

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
This article was posted to Usenet via the Posting Service at Deja News:
http://www.dejanews.com/          [Search, Post, and Read Usenet News!]

Re:Delphi 2 or not Delphi 2, that is the question


Quote
In article <3274DC97.6...@math.okstate.edu> David Ullrich <ullr...@math.okstate.edu> writes:
>        Are they really ignoring D1? I thought I heard some stuff about an
>upcoming version 1.5 - was that just a rumor?
>David Ullrich

They surveyed the market and the VP's made an official announcement here so I
don't think it's a rumor.  But now that the product cycle is under way it
could easily be months until we see a box.

Re:Delphi 2 or not Delphi 2, that is the question


Quote
ash...@u030.aone.net.au (Ashley{*word*106}son) wrote:
>I am working on an application in Delphi 1.0 that is to run on Win 3.1
>workstations and  I am looking at upgrading to Delhpi 2.
>Does Delphi 2 support 16 bit programs and support VBXs or will I have to
>install Win32S on the Win 3.1 work stations and upgrade Spread VBX (which
>is only doing a few simple tasks) to Spread's new OCX control, or perhaps
>there DLL?

Delphi 2 is a 32-bit only.  Also, there are some capatability issues.
If you must support 16-bit, then don't consider Delphi 2.  Also, VBX
controls are 16-bit so Delphi 2 does not support them.

Quote
>Is the speed increase of the 32 bit program and database drivers apparent
>to the users using Win32S?

Applications that I've upgraded from 16 to 32 bit are running faster.
However, it seems to take longer for the 32-bit BDE to initialize, so
there is an initial "hit" when loading the application.

Quote
>Are the any problems with Delphi 2,( after what I experienced upgrading to
>Borland C++ 5.0)?

There are not equivenlent problems.  Delphi 2 was ready (had some
bugs) for shipping.  Borland C++ 5.0 was not.  Delphi 2 is an
excellent (IMHO) product.  Borland C++ 5.0 is simply awful.  If I had
to do it over again, I would have purchased Delphi 2, I would have
stayed with Borland C++ 4.5.

Quote
>Thanks in advance
>Ashley

Mike Sherrane.

sherr...@bluemtn.com                blue mountain software

Our motto: "Work hard,have fun,make money."
(Delphi,Progress,C++, & Rad.  Atlanta, Georgia. 770-875-TECH(8324))
www.bluemtn.com
e-mail: i...@bluemtn.com

Re:Delphi 2 or not Delphi 2, that is the question


Quote
Jacques Guy wrote:

> I purged my hard disk of Delphi 1 soon after having installed it,
> annoyed as I was at its bloated proportions (even though I had
> done a minimal installation). Further annoyed at the lack of
> proper documentation. Last night I reinstalled it, and wished
> I had not, for in the meantime I had had a taste of Oberon for
> Windows. Compared to it, Delphi is not only bloated but also
> clunky. And the bloat is not only in the amount of disk it takes,
> but also in the syntax of the language. Oberon for Windows, on the
> other hand, is a SUBSET of Pascal. It comes on four (count 'em,
> FOUR) disks, and occupies a paltry 5 meg, complete  with on-line
> documentation and examples. You can download the educational version
> (which is free) from ftp.inf.ethz.ch where it lives in /pub/Oberon/OberonF/
> and yes, in runs in Windows 3.1, 95 and NT.  The language is very
> close to Pascal, but much more elegant and functional. So why
> bother with Delphi 1 or whatever?

I dunno?  Maybe it has to do with power, ease of use, flexibility,
support for ActiveX, packages, *full* Pascal compatibility-not just a
*subset*, development tools availability...  Stop me when you see the
light.  :)

Derek

P.S.  But, if you wish to be stuck in a little village far away from the
madding crowd, with few customers and little chance of true success on
the financial level... Well, more of the pie left for me.  TTFN!

Re:Delphi 2 or not Delphi 2, that is the question


I purged my hard disk of Delphi 1 soon after having installed it,
annoyed as I was at its bloated proportions (even though I had
done a minimal installation). Further annoyed at the lack of
proper documentation. Last night I reinstalled it, and wished
I had not, for in the meantime I had had a taste of Oberon for
Windows. Compared to it, Delphi is not only bloated but also
clunky. And the bloat is not only in the amount of disk it takes,
but also in the syntax of the language. Oberon for Windows, on the
other hand, is a SUBSET of Pascal. It comes on four (count 'em,
FOUR) disks, and occupies a paltry 5 meg, complete  with on-line
documentation and examples. You can download the educational version
(which is free) from ftp.inf.ethz.ch where it lives in /pub/Oberon/OberonF/
and yes, in runs in Windows 3.1, 95 and NT.  The language is very
close to Pascal, but much more elegant and functional. So why
bother with Delphi 1 or whatever?

Re:Delphi 2 or not Delphi 2, that is the question


Dear Fellow Readers,

This interesting subject belongs to news:comp.lang.pascal.delphi.misc
but _not_ to news:comp.lang.pascal.borland

Please let's trim our "Newsgroups:" header accordingly when
continuing on this.

Folloups redirected to news:comp.lang.pascal.delphi.misc

 comp.lang.pascal.ansi-iso Pascal according to ANSI and ISO standards.
 comp.lang.pascal.borland  Borland's Pascal incl. Turbo Pascal (not Delphi!)
 comp.lang.pascal.mac      Macintosh based Pascals.             ^^^^^^^^^^^
 comp.lang.pascal.misc     Pascal in general and ungrouped Pascals.

 comp.lang.pascal.delphi.advocacy Contentious issues related to Delphi.
 comp.lang.pascal.delphi.announce Delphi related announcements. (Moderated)
 comp.lang.pascal.delphi.components.misc General component issues.
 comp.lang.pascal.delphi.components.usage Using pre-written components.
 comp.lang.pascal.delphi.components.writing Writing Delphi components.
 comp.lang.pascal.delphi.databases Database aspects of Borland Delphi.
 comp.lang.pascal.delphi.misc General issues with Borland Delphi.
 comp.sources.delphi Delphi and ObjectPascal source code. (Moderated)

   All the best, Timo

....................................................................
Prof. Timo Salmi   Co-moderator of news:comp.archives.msdos.announce
Moderating at ftp:// & http://garbo.uwasa.fi archives  193.166.120.5
Department of Accounting and Business Finance  ; University of Vaasa
mailto:t...@uwasa.fi  <URL:http://uwasa.fi/~ts>  ; FIN-65101,  Finland

Re:Delphi 2 or not Delphi 2, that is the question


In <555spv...@camel0.mindspring.com>, sherr...@atl.mindspring.com (Michael H. Sherrane) writes:

Quote
>There are not equivenlent problems.  Delphi 2 was ready (had some
>bugs) for shipping.  Borland C++ 5.0 was not.  Delphi 2 is an
>excellent (IMHO) product.  Borland C++ 5.0 is simply awful.  If I had
>to do it over again, I would have purchased Delphi 2, I would have
>stayed with Borland C++ 4.5.

We switched from C++ 4.5 to Delphi and may have to switch back (quite
a nightmare...) so I was wondering what you disliked about C++  5.0?

Please e-mail if you don't think it appropriate to answer it here, though
I thought most programmers would be interested.

Burt

Re:Delphi 2 or not Delphi 2, that is the question


In <3274FFFA.5...@DarkElf.reno.nv.us>, Jason Wallace <E...@DarkElf.reno.nv.us> writes:

Quote
>Ashley{*word*106}son wrote:
>> Is the speed increase of the 32 bit program and database drivers
>> apparent to the users using Win32S?

>  A nice speed increase, but it won't work with the Win32s, so it
>doesn't really matter...

I haven't seen anything but a severe degredation in performance with the
32bit product. Are you aware of something we may be missing, or are
you speaking with Borland's hype glasses yet before your optomistic
eyes...   (smile)

Seriously though, we have an app under development (huge) that is MUCH
faster under Delphi 1 (database).

Thinking we must be nuts after hearing the hype we did a lot of unbiased
benchmarking of accesing tables every way we could think of. Delphi 1
wins every time, and THAT is running the 16 bit code while in Win95 and
NT, not under win3.11 where Delphi 1 code REALLY beats out the same
32 bit code running under NT.

But hey, I'm a positive thinker, what are your thoughts?

I think the C++ of Delphi 2's preprocesor is just plain 'bad' at what it
does compared to the 'real' pascal compiler of Delphi 1.

burt

Re:Delphi 2 or not Delphi 2, that is the question


In <3274FB1A.2...@rockware.com>, "Mitch Wolberg (Development & Support)" <rockw...@rockware.com> writes:

Quote
>Mark Patterson wrote:
>Our company develops primarily for the 16 bit market also. While we
>originally had every intention of moving to 32 bit, we've found that
>there isn't any big advantage for our applications other than the problem
>that most people aren't developing components for the 16 bit version any
>more.

If you buy the source code though, usually very little tweaking need be done to
make a 16 bit component.

The advantage to Delphi 1 is readily apparent, and that is raw speed. We've
done severe benchmarking in order to demonstrate to our fearless leader that
Delphi 1 wins on all counts. Only in Math is D2 superior.

My own theory is that since Delphi 2 is no longer pascal but a mere C++
pre-processor, we lose all the elegance and efficiency of the pascal
compiler and end up with bloated C++ (no preprocessor will ever be as
efficient as a good C programmer in it's translation).

Naturally we run into the industry swallowed lie that 32 bit code is
faster than 16 bit code. Obviously it is not and any asembly language
programmer can demonstrate it isn't. The cpu runs at the same speed
and can use 32 or 64 bit wide registers if need be, though 90% of any
code developed never bothers with anything greater than 16 bit wide
registers.

I have to admit my own shock at discovering that NT 3.51 runs Delphi 1
code MUCH faster than it does the same code compiled with Delphi 2,
ESPECIALLY when one considers that NT must use the WOW emulation/
thunking layer.

Microsoft should be shut down and let real programmers take over. THEN
maybe we could actually have 32 bit code that runs as fast as 16 bit
code.

If anyone wants simple proof, grab a TImage, put it on a form, load a
fairly large bitmap on it and move it around.

Delphi 1 is lighting fast, Delphi 2 almost lets you count the pixels as
they are being drawn.

Database wise we have to deal with the VERY bad 32 bit BDE, so with
that in mind I can only say that Delphi 2 EVENTUALLY has the potential
to beat Delphi 1. But for now the 16 bit BDE is so much faster that there
just isn't any competition.

For proof there just set up some tables and open and close them a few
hundred times and time it with a TTimer. Delphi 1 kicks Delphi 2 all
over the place. But again, I blame the BDE for now.

b...@eau.net

Re:Delphi 2 or not Delphi 2, that is the question


Quote
> I am working on an application in Delphi 1.0 that is to run on Win 3.1
> workstations and  I am looking at upgrading to Delhpi 2.
> ....................

Delphi Version 2 only supports Win95 and NT. Also it only works with
OCXs. I would be supprised if it works Win32S - I suppose its worth a
try.

RALPH.

Go to page: [1] [2]

Other Threads