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

Re: What is next for C++ Builder?


2004-06-29 02:38:50 AM
cppbuilder30
A few corrections Jake...
Captain Jake wrote:
Quote
Pascal was not invented by the guys that did Delphi. Nor was C# invented by the
architects of the current Delphi language. Anders H. did not architect the
current Delphi language, which has a number of constructs that were added after
Anders H. left for MSFT. Niklaus Wirth created Pascal, which was then later
made into an OOP language by Anders and Borland.
Not 100% true. Apple and Niklaus Wirth came up with Object Pascal.
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
Quote
Several constructs in Delphi,
such as interfaces, are used very heavily by a large segment of the Delphi
community, but interfaces were added in D3, and Anders was long gone by then.
Ditto for several other very useful definitive features of the Delphi language
such as function overloading, and so
on. To say that Delphi was created by Anders is misleading, at best.
Even more misleading based on my comments above. :-)
Cheers,
Kevin.
 
 

Re:Re: What is next for C++ Builder?

"Daniel Bissett" wrote:
Quote
It seems to me that the best marketing move that Borland could make
right now to prevent further deterioration of the marketing situation
would be make a commitment to regular patches. This would go a long way
with a lot of people.
I see four problems:
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
 

Re:Re: What is next for C++ Builder?

Kevin wrote:
Quote
OK, I know what FUD is, what's FUDD? :-) "Fear Uncertainty and Doubt
Damnit"!??
Think wabbits.
--
Ken
planeta.terra.com.br/educacao/kencamargo/
* this is not a sig *
 

{smallsort}

Re:Re: What is next for C++ Builder?

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:
Quote
I R T wrote:


>>....a version 9 is very likely.
>
>But that is just rumour and speculation.


Exactly and that's why I ended the sentence in 'very likely'. You OTOH
wrote a sentence that stated BCB was dead and you have no proof that it
is.

 

Re:Re: What is next for C++ Builder?

Gillmer J. Derge [TeamB] wrote:
Quote
There are no new releases scheduled for any Borland product. For better
or for worse (I'd say worse), Borland doesn't operate that way. This is
no more a sign of CBX's death than the fact that the morning TV news
broadcast didn't mention that you woke up this morning is a sign of your
death. They just don't do that.
Borland has publically committed to a Delphi v9, hasn't it?
 

Re:Re: What is next for C++ Builder?

Andrue Cope [TeamB] wrote:
Quote
Now /that/ sentence I have no objection to. I've posted similar
sentiments here and through the TeamB communication channels. I agree
entirely. It's terrible the way Borland are handling this whole debacle
and making BCB look like a dead product line is the least of the issues
that concern me.

My objection to IRT was that he was posting messages that read like a
statement of fact. He posted "The killing of CBX is true.". The English
language may have some odd quirks but that sentence is unambiguous and
unless IRT is privy to information that I am not (highly unlikely) I
cannot allow it to stand without comment.
Andrue,
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.
 

Re:Re: What is next for C++ Builder?

Randall Parker wrote:
Quote
Borland has publically committed to a Delphi v9, hasn't it?
I don't really follow Delphi stuff very closely, but as far as I know
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]
 

Re:Re: What is next for C++ Builder?

Randall Parker wrote:
Quote
Is it any less rumor and speculation to say that there might be a BCB
v9 than to say that there will not be?
To say there *might* not be a BCB V9 is rumour and speculation.
To say there *will not* be another BCB if FUD.
Quote
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.
I'm not convinced Borland are overjoyed at speculation on a possible
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)
 

Re:Re: What is next for C++ Builder?

Kenneth de Camargo wrote:
Quote
Think wabbits.
:-)
 

Re:Re: What is next for C++ Builder?

Kevin < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in message
<40e065b8$ XXXX@XXXXX.COM >
Quote

Even more misleading based on my comments above. :-)
True. I gladly stand corrected and vindicated at the same time.
--
***Free Your Mind***
Posted with JSNewsreader-BETA 0.9.3.147
 

Re:Re: What is next for C++ Builder?

Captain Jake wrote:
Quote
True. I gladly stand corrected and vindicated at the same time.

I thought you'd appreciate the correction!
 

Re:Re: What is next for C++ Builder?

"Alisdair Meredith" <alisdair.meredith@ XXXX@XXXXX.COM >
wrote
Quote
To say there *might* not be a BCB V9 is rumour and speculation.
To say there *will not* be another BCB if FUD.
Equally:
To say that there *might* be a BCB V9 is rumour and speculation.
To say there *will* be another BCB is FUD.
Quote
I'm not convinced Borland are overjoyed at speculation on a possible
BCB9 that starts building expectation for a product different to what
they may ultimately choose to offer.
Agreed. Which is why the sooner they "ultimately choose" what's going to be
on offer, and tell us about it, the better.
Quote
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!)
If it relieves stress, then it does help. ;-)
Quote
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.
The surest way for Borland to kill BCB is by endlessly dithering and not
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
 

Re:Re: What is next for C++ Builder?

Alisdair Meredith wrote:
Quote
Randall Parker wrote:


>Is it any less rumor and speculation to say that there might be a BCB
>v9 than to say that there will not be?


To say there *might* not be a BCB V9 is rumour and speculation.
To say there *will not* be another BCB if FUD.
Oh come on. 6 months ago the statement that there will not be about BCB rev was
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.
Quote
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.
So then it is in Borland's interest for us to believe there will be another release.
But apparently Borland's top management does not think it is in their interest to
tell us there really will be another release.
 

Re:Re: What is next for C++ Builder?

Dave Jewell wrote:
Quote
"Alisdair Meredith" <alisdair.meredith@ XXXX@XXXXX.COM >
wrote


>To say there *might* not be a BCB V9 is rumour and speculation.
>To say there *will not* be another BCB if FUD.


Equally:

To say that there *might* be a BCB V9 is rumour and speculation.
To say there *will* be another BCB is FUD.
I guess Borland doesn't want us to be certain.
Quote
The surest way for Borland to kill BCB is by endlessly dithering and not
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, So totally Exactly. It amounts to blaming the victims.
 

Re:Re: What is next for C++ Builder?

Randall Parker wrote:
Quote
Oh come on. 6 months ago the statement that there will not be about
BCB rev was 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?
You have a good point, but I'm going to split hairs here to try to
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>
Quote
To me Borland is trying to have it both ways and I will not let them.
No, Borland are saying nothing at all. Having both way, all ways, any
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.
Quote
If some guy wants to post here and say there will not be another
release that seems well within the bounds of reasonable speculation.
This is a hair I believe does need splitting.
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.
Quote
So then it is in Borland's interest for us to believe there will be
another release. But apparently Borland's top management does not
think it is in their interest to tell us there really will be another
release.
I do not believe it is in anyone's interest to leave the cloud of
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)