Board index » cppbuilder » Re: What is next for C++ Builder?

2004-06-29 02:38:50 AM
cppbuilder30
A few corrections Jake...
Captain Jake wrote:
Borland then adopted this "standard" to produce their earlier
object-oriented Turbo Pascal language enhancements. So Anders can be
attributed to even less of the actual language enhancements AFAIK. He
(and others at Borland) was merely smart enough to see what was going on
around them and incorporate it into their product.
Here's a link on the Borland site acknowledging Delphi's Object Pascal
heritage (and mentions it as Apple's language):
community.borland.com/article/0%2C1410%2C20803%2C00.html
Cheers,
Kevin.
 

"Daniel Bissett" wrote:
1. They have to make their mind up what way to go with C++ (this seems to be
a {*word*156}e).
2. They made a commitment in the first letter. It made no difference.
3. Who or what department should make marketing decisions?
4. Who explains Borland about marketing?
Peter
 

Kevin wrote:
--
Ken
planeta.terra.com.br/educacao/kencamargo/
* this is not a sig *
 

{smallsort}

Andrue,
Is it any less rumor and speculation to say that there might be a BCB v9 than to say
that there will not be?
Seems to be that Borland is trying to have it both ways here. It wants BCB customers
to stick around and so it doesn't mind rumors that benefit it in that regard. But it
is not willing to commit publically to a v9 release.
Andrue Cope [TeamB] wrote:

Gillmer J. Derge [TeamB] wrote:
 

Andrue Cope [TeamB] wrote:
Borland does not deserve the benefit of the doubt. In some earlier C++ open letter
(before BCBX's release if memory serves) they claimed they were going to really
support a C++ product with timely fixes. Well, ha, a living product gets fixes. A
product that does not get fixes is a parrot nailed to a perch.
I think we should assume something is dead until Borland proves otherwise. Things
have progressed to the point where IRT's assumption makes sense.
I fix bugs routinely and send out new builds to customers. Borland may think they
can't release fixes that often because they can't afford the testing of the new fix
levels. But they could release beta patch revs and then wait to see if anything was
broken.
Some of these unfixed bugs have got to be one day or one week fixes. I'd take
seriously the idea we should think of them as a Norwegian Blue pining for the fjords
if they'd show small signs of life in their two C++ products. But until then I think
they are dead parrot.
 

Randall Parker wrote:
they've committed to another version of Delphi, but a) I'm not sure if
they've committed to it being called "Delphi 9" and b) regardless of
what it's called, I don't think it's "scheduled" other than for some
time in the not too distant future.
--
Gillmer J. Derge [TeamB]
 

Randall Parker wrote:
To say there *will not* be another BCB if FUD.
BCB9 that starts building expectation for a product different to what
they may ultimately choose to offer.
That is probably why there is no-one (from Borland) here commenting
publically.
I agree we are long overdue hearing about the future
direction/products, but unfortunately sitting discussing how awful it
all is does not help (although it might relieve stress!)
The surest way to kill BCB is to tell Borland you already believe it is
dead and you are migrating to competing products. Without customers,
they have no incentive to produce a product.
AlisdairM(TeamB)
 

Kenneth de Camargo wrote:
 

Kevin < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in message
<40e065b8$ XXXX@XXXXX.COM >
--
***Free Your Mind***
Posted with JSNewsreader-BETA 0.9.3.147
 

Captain Jake wrote:
 

"Alisdair Meredith" <alisdair.meredith@ XXXX@XXXXX.COM >
wrote
To say that there *might* be a BCB V9 is rumour and speculation.
To say there *will* be another BCB is FUD.
on offer, and tell us about it, the better.
announcing a clear, cohesive and credible product strategy. *THAT* is what
will make customers migrate to competing products. Please don't blame the
customers for this continuing debacle!
Dave
 

Alisdair Meredith wrote:
official doctrine. BCB was "end-of-lifed". Now all we have to the contrary is a rumor
planted by a Borlander. What was the purpose of that rumour? To make it possible to
label anyone who says there will not be a v9 as a spreader of FUD?
To me Borland is trying to have it both ways and I will not let them. If some guy
wants to post here and say there will not be another release that seems well within
the bounds of reasonable speculation.
But apparently Borland's top management does not think it is in their interest to
tell us there really will be another release.
 

Dave Jewell wrote:
 

Randall Parker wrote:
crawl out of the hole I have dug <g>
BCB6 was officially end-of-lifed, as was C++ support for 32 bit
Windows. A plan to support C++/VCL under .NET was to be announced in
some forthcoming open letter (that never forthcame) that would have
been another BCB, in the same way Delphi8 was another Delphi.
Since then there has been a change of management at Borland, the open
letter failed to ship, and we have no idea of current Borland C++
strategy, wrt to BCB or CBX. Anders publically stated in his blog
consideration of BCB9, but despite all rumours here to the contrary I
have not bought this as a 'done deal' yet either.
Right now there is no public statement of what Borland plan for C++,
including whether or not a future revision of BCB is on the cards (even
for Win32) Such a statement is woefully overdue, but any attempt to
say 'Borland have killed BCB' is currently FUD. To say "BCB is dying
from lack of public support" might be another matter, but I've split
hairs as fine as I can manage right now <g>
which ways is purely a matter of newsgroup speculation. To be honest,
I don't believe the senior managers who make such product decisions
even read these groups, or are particularly aware of their content.
Again, that is regrettable, but that is how they run their business.
No matter how we complain here (or elsewhere, and we do) that is not
changing anytime soon.
There is a big difference between stating you *believe* there will not
be another release, and outright claiming as a fact that there will not
be another release. The only people who have this knowledge are not
currently talking.
uncertaintly{*word*154} over the C++ product lines, I'm sure we all agree
on that.
From what I understand, even Borland agree on that, and are working on
correcting matters. I admit that I don't understand why this is taking
so long and am low on patience myself. Howver, I don't work for a
large publically listed company and the concerns that go with that, so
there is a good chance I will never understand the problems that are
holding the info up.
AlisdairM(TeamB)