Board index » cppbuilder » Re: Interesting things I learned at BorCon2004

Re: Interesting things I learned at BorCon2004


2004-09-20 11:21:31 PM
cppbuilder24
Leroy Casterline < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >writes:
Quote
I'm with you on this. If they do this properly, and support it with
timely bug fixes, and especially if they roll BCB into Diamondback, I
will be happy. The fact that the old management (the people who put us
in this situation in the first place) are gone really helps me to
believe that I can eventually regain the trust that I have had in
Borland in the past.
Just to clairify, if they go ahead with this C++ integration strategy,
it'd be after diamondback has shipped. Diamondback is the codename
for the next version of Delphi, which will likely ship prior to the
December 15 deadline for the C++ decision.
Quote
>I'll be watching closely the Open Letter from Us, to at least sign
>it. And I really hope that the other BCB users out here do the same.

I feel the same way. I think Paul has a great idea here, and the
fact that the C++ team has encouraged it gives me a bit of hope that
someone in Borland management will finally pay some attention to us.
One thing I got out of it is that management has been made well-aware
of the issues. Whatever the outcome, it's a decision by Borland
knowing the ramifications and benefits/consequences.
Quote
Another bit of good news (IMHO) is the prospect of rolling BCB into
Diamondback. This will finally bring BCB out of the shadow of Delphi and
remove it from the 'ugly stepchild' category.
Agreed, but the integrated studio product will still be called Delphi.
Quote
If this is done properly, almost every advance made for Delphi will
simultaneously apply to BCB (and vice-versa). We will now have
access to 3rd-party IDE tools (like CodeRush) that were available
only for Delphi. 3rd-party component vendors will have a larger
market with less work, encouraging them to support (or continue
supporting) the VCL in the face of competition from .NET. I think
this is a win for all VCL developers. Also, this makes BCB
easier/less expensive for Borland to support, hopefully ensuring
that we won't have to repeat the sad experience of this last year.
Agreed again.
Quote
So the bottom line is that even though I'm disappointed by the delay
in a definitive plan from Borland, I am much encouraged by what Paul
has told us. In fact, the more I think about this, the better I
feel. I hope you all feel the same way.
Nothing is a done deal, but the dev teams (both C++ and Delphi) are
both very enthusiastic about making this happen. The execs are the
ones making the decision though.
--
Chris (TeamB);
 
 

Re:Re: Interesting things I learned at BorCon2004

"Ray Mond" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >writes:
Quote
>Circle Dec 15th for Borland's offical word ...

2004?

Yes. ("2004?" was actually asked at the session after the Dec 15 date
was given, received by laughter.)
--
Chris (TeamB);
 

Re:Re: Interesting things I learned at BorCon2004

Chris Uzdavinis (TeamB) < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote:
Quote
Just to clairify, if they go ahead with this C++ integration strategy,
it'd be after diamondback has shipped. Diamondback is the codename
for the next version of Delphi, which will likely ship prior to the
December 15 deadline for the C++ decision.
That's what I expected, and I'm OK with that. As long as I know it's
coming... Where I refer to Diamondback, I should have said BDS.
Quote
One thing I got out of it is that management has been made well-aware
of the issues. Whatever the outcome, it's a decision by Borland
knowing the ramifications and benefits/consequences.
Are you saying that the letters will be of no effect?
Quote
Agreed, but the integrated studio product will still be called Delphi.
A rose by another name.
Quote
Nothing is a done deal, but the dev teams (both C++ and Delphi) are
both very enthusiastic about making this happen. The execs are the
ones making the decision though.
I've been reading in these NG's that BCB is currently profitable. If
that's true, why would the execs want to kill it? I'd think that even if
it weren't profitable it would have great value in making BDS a real
'studio'.
 

{smallsort}

Re:Re: Interesting things I learned at BorCon2004

Leroy Casterline wrote:
Quote
Chris Uzdavinis (TeamB) < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote:
>
>One thing I got out of it is that management has been made well-aware
>of the issues. Whatever the outcome, it's a decision by Borland
>knowing the ramifications and benefits/consequences.

Are you saying that the letters will be of no effect?
I don't think so. I mean both that I don't think that's what Chris is
saying and that I don't think it's true. Borland management suggested
letters, so I've got to believe there's at least a chance they could
have an impact.
Quote
I've been reading in these NG's that BCB is currently profitable. If
that's true, why would the execs want to kill it?
I think we're all wondering the same thing. It's hard to say, but I'll
speculate anyway ... :-)
You've probably also read something in the NG's about a 10 to 1 ROI.
Presumably that's at least part of the issue. Even if it's profitable,
is it / will it be profitable enough? There also might be concerns
about how it fits in with CBX, whether it will impact CBX sales, and if
so how much.
Quote
I'd think that even if
it weren't profitable it would have great value in making BDS a real
'studio'.
Indeed.
--
Gillmer J. Derge [TeamB]
 

Re:Re: Interesting things I learned at BorCon2004

Leroy Casterline < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >writes:
Quote
Chris Uzdavinis (TeamB) < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote:

>Just to clairify, if they go ahead with this C++ integration strategy,
>it'd be after diamondback has shipped. Diamondback is the codename
>for the next version of Delphi, which will likely ship prior to the
>December 15 deadline for the C++ decision.

That's what I expected, and I'm OK with that. As long as I know it's
coming... Where I refer to Diamondback, I should have said BDS.
Ok.
Quote
>One thing I got out of it is that management has been made well-aware
>of the issues. Whatever the outcome, it's a decision by Borland
>knowing the ramifications and benefits/consequences.

Are you saying that the letters will be of no effect?
No I'm not saying that! Some followup letter would be useful. The
letter will have the greatest impact if it highlights really important
projects that would be affected. For example, even if you're a small
BCB developer, you might sell your BCB-produced products to big
companies or governments. Such projects will carry a lot of weight in
helping convince Borland to make the right decision about BCB. It'd
demonstrate that not continuing with BCB would hurt more than just
Borland's immediate customers, but would have wider-reaching
ramifications affecting their customers' (big) customers.
Quote
>Agreed, but the integrated studio product will still be called Delphi.

A rose by another name.
I agree. Some people might object, but as long as the product carries
on, the name is irrelevant. (Plus it'd be nice to get several
languages for the price of one...)
Quote
>Nothing is a done deal, but the dev teams (both C++ and Delphi) are
>both very enthusiastic about making this happen. The execs are the
>ones making the decision though.

I've been reading in these NG's that BCB is currently profitable. If
that's true, why would the execs want to kill it? I'd think that even if
it weren't profitable it would have great value in making BDS a real
'studio'.
CBX is trying to crack into new markets that BCB cannot target, like
some big companies that still use command line tools, etc.
BCB is profitable, but not wildly so, and the amount of profit is
slowly declining. When a ship is off course, the wheel must be turned
or it'll eventually run aground.
--
Chris (TeamB);
 

Re:Re: Interesting things I learned at BorCon2004

Chris Uzdavinis (TeamB) < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote:
Quote
CBX is trying to crack into new markets that BCB cannot target, like
some big companies that still use command line tools, etc.
Yes, and I wish them success on that.
Quote
BCB is profitable, but not wildly so, and the amount of profit is
slowly declining. When a ship is off course, the wheel must be turned
or it'll eventually run aground.
I wonder if my letter should mention WHY (IMHO) the profit has been
declining? Things like:
1) Products released before they're ready.
2) Lack of timely patches.
3) Serious bugs that persist from one version to the next. I'm thinking
specifically about the linker bug(s) here. How many years did we have to
live with that{*word*154} over our heads before Borland finally released a
fix?
4) Lack of communication to existing customers. When a patch is
released, every CBuilder Developer should receive notification.
For example, I talk with the engineering director of a small company
from time to time (in hopes of drumming up business). They went with BCB
(4 or 5, don't remember which they started with) on my recommendation,
and were happy enough with it that he called me to thank me for
mentioning it to them. I spoke with them a few months ago and they were
quite unhappy with BCB6. They were surprised when I mentioned that
several patches had been released for it - they were using it as it came
out of the box! Why weren't they notified when the patches were
released?
5) A compiler that has received very little attention. At one time,
Borland produced the best C++ compiler money could buy. It's been
ignored to the point that it's not nearly up to{*word*47}compliance-wise or
speed-wise (speed of generated code). It's still good enough for the
work I do, but how many others have gone in a different direction for
this reason alone?
6) Signals from Borland that BCB was not a priority. An obvious one:
Delphi 9 is right around the corner, but BCB 6 is still the current
release.
7) How long has it been since BCB has been *marketed*? It's the best C++
solution for most Win32 work, but Borland has long acted as if it didn't
exist.
 

Re:Re: Interesting things I learned at BorCon2004

Leroy Casterline wrote:
Quote
I wonder if my letter should mention WHY (IMHO) the profit has been
declining? Things like:
My personal opinion is that it shouldn't. Not because those aren't all
valid complaints but because I don't think they'll do anything to
convince them to implement a C++ personality in Delphi. If anything it
might make them less likely to do it, because you're pointing out all
the additional issues they'll need to consider in order to do it properly.
My suggestion is focus on the one thing we know they care about -- money
-- and leave it at that for now. Complain about the rest of that stuff
after they decide to continue the product. If they don't take that
step, the rest doesn't really matter anyway.
--
Gillmer J. Derge [TeamB]
 

Re:Re: Interesting things I learned at BorCon2004

Quote
I wonder if my letter should mention WHY (IMHO) the profit has been
declining?
Feel free to mention these things, but be careful how you word them.
Your letter should not come of sounding like you are telling Borland how
to run its business. They don't like that.
IOW, don't make the claim that BCB would have sold 100k more copies if
Borland offered a patch, because you simply don't know that to be the
case. Instead, just tell them your own experiences. For example, maybe
you didn't upgrade to BCB6 because it had a bad linker bug. Or maybe
your company started a new project in MSVC because borland didn't
communicate a roadmap.
Let them connect the dots between your complaints and their bottom line.
H^2
 

Re:Re: Interesting things I learned at BorCon2004

Harold Howe [TeamB] wrote:
Quote

>I wonder if my letter should mention WHY (IMHO) the profit has been
>declining?


Feel free to mention these things, but be careful how you word them.
Your letter should not come of sounding like you are telling Borland how
to run its business. They don't like that.
One more thing, keep in mind that the people who will decide the fate of
BCB have not been with the company for very long. They probably don't
want to hear about how Borland screwed up 3 years ago by not releasing a
BCB5 IDE patch.
H^2
 

Re:Re: Interesting things I learned at BorCon2004

Leroy Casterline < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >writes:
Quote
I wonder if my letter should mention WHY (IMHO) the profit has been
declining? Things like:

1) Products released before they're ready.

2) Lack of timely patches.

3) Serious bugs that persist from one version to the next. I'm thinking
specifically about the linker bug(s) here. How many years did we have to
live with that{*word*154} over our heads before Borland finally released a
fix?

4) Lack of communication to existing customers. When a patch is
released, every CBuilder Developer should receive notification.
[snip]
All these points are valid. Mentioning them will not hurt.
On the other hand, everybody at Borland knows them already. New points, such
as what Chris mentioned, will make your position more, e.g. "X are a customer
of mine, and if they ask me why it takes me so long for the next release of
my product, I'll have to tell them that I have to port to a new tool because
Borland screwed me up." The power of such an argument is proportional to
exp(sizeof(X)).
 

Re:Re: Interesting things I learned at BorCon2004

Harold Howe [TeamB] wrote:
Quote
For example, maybe you didn't upgrade to BCB6 because it had a bad
linker bug.
Now you mention it, the specific reason we DID upgrade to BCB6 was that
it fixed a bad linker bug from the previous version! That single
bug-fix swung the upgrade for us, and that is probably how to word it.
AlisdairM(TeamB)
[Yes, we literally upgraded for a single bug fix, and might even do so
again for the right bug]
 

Re:Re: Interesting things I learned at BorCon2004

"Alisdair Meredith" wrote:
Quote
[Yes, we literally upgraded for a single bug fix, and might even do so
again for the right bug]
I don't want to pay for a bug fix. I don't mind to pay for supporting a new
feature, even if I haven't asked for it. When uncle Bill introduces themes I
don't care about that but sooner or later my customers are asking for it. So
I would pay for theme support in VCL, if that could.
If I have to write a letter to make that clear to the _management_ of my
supplier I will rather look for another supplier!
Peter
 

Re:Re: Interesting things I learned at BorCon2004

"Alisdair Meredith" <alisdair.meredith@ XXXX@XXXXX.COM >
wrote:
Quote
Now you mention it, the specific reason we DID upgrade to BCB6 was that
it fixed a bad linker bug from the previous version! That single
bug-fix swung the upgrade for us, and that is probably how to word it.
AlisdairM(TeamB)
[Yes, we literally upgraded for a single bug fix, and might even do so
again for the right bug]
Yes, that's why *I* upgraded to BCB6 as well. I didn't do it until I ran
into the LME errors in BCB5.
 

Re:Re: Interesting things I learned at BorCon2004

Chris Uzdavinis (TeamB) wrote:
Quote
(Plus it'd be nice to get several
languages for the price of one...)
Do you think this is even remotely likely? (the pricing policy, I mean)
--
Ken
planeta.terra.com.br/educacao/kencamargo/
* this is not a sig *
 

Re:Re: Interesting things I learned at BorCon2004

"Harold Howe [TeamB]" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >writes:
Quote
One more thing, keep in mind that the people who will decide the fate
of BCB have not been with the company for very long.
History tells us that they will not remain with the company for
too long.