Board index » cppbuilder » Re: Your experiences with BCB 2006?

Re: Your experiences with BCB 2006?


2006-02-14 10:35:41 AM
cppbuilder101
In article <43f0fb14$ XXXX@XXXXX.COM >,
"Duane Hebert" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote:
Quote
Who's complaining? This is a thread about Borland making their
product better.
Edward has been. What I said was in direct response to his comment
that people shouldn't upgrade to BCB2006
Quote
If someone says that it needs to be more compliant, faster or whatever,
jumping in with "Which BCB is better than this one?" doesn't add much
does it?
But that isn't what he said. he said that it wasn't worth upgrading
to BCB2006. I was trying to point out that it was absurd to keep using
an old version of BCB when there have been hundreds of compiler fixes in
the new version.
Quote
To some of us,
a better compliance rating is important.
Didn't I explicitly state that I thought compliance should have the
highest possible priority?
Quote
Some of us are being forced
to competitors because of compliance, lack or cross platform support
and other things.
Then say that, don't say that sticking with an old version is better
than getting the upgrade.
--
-David
Nihil curo de ista tua stulta superstitione.
 
 

Re:Re: Your experiences with BCB 2006?

In article <43f0f7b4$ XXXX@XXXXX.COM >,
Edward Diener < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote:
Quote
What does BCB2006 but me that BCB6 does not have except for a smoother
IDE.
Hundreds of compiler bugs have been fixed. I agree that there are
plenty left to be fixed, but you're throwing out the baby with the bath
water if you skip the upgrade and stick with an old version.
Quote
Also, unless you are living in a
C++ shell, you must know that VS Studio 2005 is out and it is a very
good environment for either straight C++ programming and of course for
.NET C++/CLI programming, with a highly compliant C++ compiler.
Maybe that is why we can't agree. I cannot stand VS Studio 2005. I do
not see it as a viable replacement for BCB, and I have no interest in
.NET. If you're not using BCB any more, why stick around here?
--
-David
Nihil curo de ista tua stulta superstitione.
 

Re:Re: Your experiences with BCB 2006?

David Dean wrote:
Quote
In article <43f0fb14$ XXXX@XXXXX.COM >,
"Duane Hebert" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote:

>Who's complaining? This is a thread about Borland making their
>product better.

Edward has been. What I said was in direct response to his comment
that people shouldn't upgrade to BCB2006
Valid criticism and perceptive thought is always put down as
"complaints" by those who disagree. It is an old, old practice going
back thousands of years.
 

{smallsort}

Re:Re: Your experiences with BCB 2006?

Edward Diener wrote:
Quote
It is people like you who have allowed Borland to do such a bad job
with C++ Builder
Actually it is people like David that have helped improve BCB 2006 and
future versions.
--
www.jed-software.com
jedqc.blogspot.com
 

Re:Re: Your experiences with BCB 2006?

David Dean wrote:
Quote
In article <43f0f7b4$ XXXX@XXXXX.COM >,
Edward Diener < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote:

>What does BCB2006 but me that BCB6 does not have except for a smoother
>IDE.

Hundreds of compiler bugs have been fixed. I agree that there are
plenty left to be fixed, but you're throwing out the baby with the bath
water if you skip the upgrade and stick with an old version.
I already have BCB6, and have no need to upgrade anything.
Quote

>Also, unless you are living in a
>C++ shell, you must know that VS Studio 2005 is out and it is a very
>good environment for either straight C++ programming and of course for
>.NET C++/CLI programming, with a highly compliant C++ compiler.

Maybe that is why we can't agree. I cannot stand VS Studio 2005. I do
not see it as a viable replacement for BCB, and I have no interest in
.NET.
Good for you. Everyone has the perfect right to use whatever they wish
for enjoyment and success in life.
Quote
If you're not using BCB any more, why stick around here?
You have a great deal of presumption to think you know what software I
use ? As far as "sticking around here" I will speak the truth whenever I
am interested in doing so, even if all others disagree. The truth,
despite your propaganda about 'hundreds of bugs fixed', is that Borland
has done an abominable job supporting their C++ programmers, and I see
no reason to even consider supporting them with my money unless they
actually change that. My comments in speaking on this NG is an effort to
get Borland to better support me and other C++ programmers and you will
certainly not stop me from making them.
It is people like you who have allowed Borland to do such a bad job with
C++ Builder and still feel good about marketing such a deficient
product. You see all those bugs fixed by Borland, after 3-5 years of
doing absolutely nothing about them, and ignore all those bugs still not
fixed after 3-5 years of doing absolutely nothing about them. I am not
nearly so enthralled by that track record as you are, and would frankly
be thoroughly ashamed if I put out any software with that same sort of
long-term neglect.
I am not here to put Borland down but rather get them on their feet
again regarding C++ and their own support of it. That can only be done
by being honest, not soft-soaping their failings. Nonetheless it is a
free world and if you are happy with the state of C++ Builder 2006, and
are not worried, or affected, about the C++ compiler bugs still not
addressed, and the continued lack of C++ compliance in a number of
areas, and if you have no need to consider programming in areas which
C++ Builder 2006 does not support such as .NET, I can understand why you
would spend your money to buy it, whatever your personal reason is for
doing so.
 

Re:Re: Your experiences with BCB 2006?

JED wrote:
Quote
Edward Diener wrote:


>It is people like you who have allowed Borland to do such a bad job
>with C++ Builder


Actually it is people like David that have helped improve BCB 2006 and
future versions.

Sorry to disagree, but one of the big problems with Borland and BCB has
historically been the uncertainty surrounding their support of it.
There is no way anyone can argue that there has been up-and-down support
for it, PARTICULARLY over the past 3-4 years. The announcement of Kylix
seemingly killed BCB, the announcement of BDS seemingly revived it, but
within 60 days of the release of BDS, the announcement of 'searching for
a buyer' for the product adds sufficient uncertainty to make continued
use problematic.
If the product had simply died, we would (at some point in time) been
'forced' to go to another product -- but{*word*154} in there because it
keeps getting snatched from the fire holds out sufficient hope that
we've been able to keep using it. The problem is, this is no way to
make long-term, sound business decisions. There will (more and more
obviously) come a point where we are FORCED to another product, with
better support, and we will be that much further behind because of the
false beliefs we've had in Borland.
Yes, that's our fault (believing in Borland) -- but it's Borland who
continually leads us on with false hopes and promises...
David Erbas-White
 

Re:Re: Your experiences with BCB 2006?

Quote

It sure beats BCB 3-6 though. I cannot imagine any reason to stick
with those instead of upgrading to BCB2006. What version of BCB are you
using that is better than 2006?

--
All though I have BDS 2006 Ent., I'm still using BCB4.
The main reasons are...
Far too many IDE crashes.
The lack of a "ClassExplorer".
And the weird positioning of the Toolbar Palette.
I am far more productive in BCB 4 than I am with BDS2006.
 

Re:Re: Your experiences with BCB 2006?

Quote

Don't for get to check out John kaster's bug fix report for BCB

bdn.borland.com/article/0,1410,33338,00.html

C++Builder QC resolutions 77 published resolutions 1351 total
resolutions 1428


Query for all C++ resolved on build
qc.borland.com/wc/qcmain.aspx
gives 1516 resolutions - post Update #1
A lot these seem to have been "Pulled"...
What does that mean?
 

Re:Re: Your experiences with BCB 2006?

Quote
If the product had simply died, we would (at some point in time) been
'forced' to go to another product -- but{*word*154} in there because it keeps
getting snatched from the fire holds out sufficient hope that we've been
able to keep using it. The problem is, this is no way to make long-term,
sound business decisions. There will (more and more obviously) come a
point where we are FORCED to another product, with better support, and we
will be that much further behind because of the false beliefs we've had in
Borland.

Yes, that's our fault (believing in Borland) -- but it's Borland who
continually leads us on with false hopes and promises...

David Erbas-White
I agree 100%.
 

Re:Re: Your experiences with BCB 2006?

Quote
From what we already know from roadmap .NET 2.0 support is coming with
Highlander.

I'm sure that the IDE and more specifically C++ personality will have more
enchantments in the next release.

Listen to your statement...
This product just shipped in January of this year and 1 month later we need
a new release to
fix all of the problems in the current release!!
Very shotty work Borland!!
We need a service pack bad...and a "ClassExplorer" like plugin.
 

Re:Re: Your experiences with BCB 2006?

On Mon, 13 Feb 2006 22:23:48 -0500, Edward Diener
< XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote:
Quote
I am not here to put Borland down but rather get them on their feet
again regarding C++ and their own support of it.
Have you not heard that Borland is exiting/selling the compiler/IDE
business? No criticism will prompt>>Borland<< to do anything at this
point.
We can only hope that the buyer will do better.
---
Michael McCulloch
 

Re:Re: Your experiences with BCB 2006?

Edward Diener wrote:
Quote
David Dean wrote:

>In article <43f0fb14$ XXXX@XXXXX.COM >,
>"Duane Hebert" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote:
>
>>Who's complaining? This is a thread about Borland making their
>>product better.
>
>
>Edward has been. What I said was in direct response to his comment
>that people shouldn't upgrade to BCB2006


Valid criticism and perceptive thought is always put down as
"complaints" by those who disagree. It is an old, old practice going
back thousands of years.
Edward,
Randall was asking from us the experiences we have had with 2006, not
the Upgrading opinions. At least that was not a valid criticism and
perceptive thought. If we want to have a better compiler we must upgrade
and give support to Borland. If we don't give support to Borland, the
community would not benefit what Borland would offer in the future.
Sabetay
Sabetay
 

Re:Re: Your experiences with BCB 2006?

Compared with the amount of work that had to take place in order to add
C++ personality to BDS and the amount of work that was needed to enhance
the Delphi and C# personalities it is completely understandable for me
that there is no way to get the full set of features available for
Delphi personality in C++. It will take some time until both
personalities have equal set of features.
I'm sure that lots of this will be addressed in Highlander.
Regarding the update there was statement that Update 2 is coming.
Doychin
 

Re:Re: Your experiences with BCB 2006?

Are you expecting to be 100% productive in few minutes when you switch
completely different IDEs?
It is a slow process of getting used to the new look & feel of BDS. But
after some time it pays back when you start using the all new stuff that
you get with BDS 2006.
Doychin
Relaxin wrote:
Quote
>It sure beats BCB 3-6 though. I cannot imagine any reason to stick
>with those instead of upgrading to BCB2006. What version of BCB are you
>using that is better than 2006?
>
>--
All though I have BDS 2006 Ent., I'm still using BCB4.

The main reasons are...

Far too many IDE crashes.
The lack of a "ClassExplorer".
And the weird positioning of the Toolbar Palette.

I am far more productive in BCB 4 than I am with BDS2006.


 

Re:Re: Your experiences with BCB 2006?

Relaxin wrote:
Quote
All though I have BDS 2006 Ent., I'm still using BCB4.
Far too many IDE crashes.
That I truly find hard to understand. I have personally put the BDS2006
IDE through hell over the last two months and never yet had a crash or
even a caught AV from it. Given that BCB4 was probably the second worst
BCB IDE (after the infamous BCB3) I'm astonished at your comment.
I can only tentatively guess that you have a lot of third party
components installed and that they are destabilising your installation.
Either that your hardware/configuration issues.
Quote
The lack of a "ClassExplorer".
I thought ClassExplorer didn't appear until BCB5 (or even 6)? Hard to
be sure because I've never got on with that kind of thing and all I
really know about CE was that it was best to get rid of it to remove at
least a few of the AVs in the IDE.
Overall I really don't understand how you would prefer to stay with
BCB4 rather than switch to BDS2006. I used to encourage BCB4 users to
upgrade to BCB5 and then BCB6 (even through the darkest times of
Borland's silly decisions) because they offered so much more. To still
be stuck with BCB4 when BDS2006 is out there...I really, seriously
think you are doing yourself an injustice.
--
Andrue Cope [TeamB]
[Bicester, Uk]
info.borland.com/newsgroups/guide.html