Board index » cppbuilder » Borland Fritters Away Hopes Once Again

2004-05-26 09:06:08 AM
cppbuilder108
Every time Borland drops hints it is about to lay out a future path for C++ users and
then proceeds not to do so costs it some customers and some good will.
Robert E., you made a mistake by even mentioning an open letter. If Borland is not
prepared to commit to a date to release such a letter then Borland should make no
hints about releasing one. We are several months past the last such date and so I'm
not even sure that a commitment to release by a firm date is even worth mentioning.
Either release the letter or never ever mention it except to say that Borland
withdraws any pledge to release a letter.
The tone here grows sour once again in spite of the hope a couple of Borlanders have
given us that there really will be another version of BCB. I wish Borland would learn
a lesson from this.
 

Too many promises have been made and nothing much has happened since the
last open letter - regarding VCL support.
What´s the problem in releasing an open letter ?
For Delphi so much features of the next version have been preanounced -
why that´s not possible for BCB / BCBX ?
I´m somewhat disappointed about that there might be a new BCB version,
since so much time and effort has been used and possibly wasted for BCBX, which
i had expected to be (before it has been released) a BCB merged with Delphi
in a single IDE, like VS.
I still would favorize a single IDE hosting all compilers.
There isn´t that much time to add all the features i´m missing in BCB,
like (much) better project management, faster Code Insight, 64 bit compiler, .NET support.
Much better than releasing an open letter would be to release another service pack
for BCB6 - asap - and not a new bugfix version with not much value added i have to pay for.
That would IMHO gain much more confidence than an open letter.
(E.g. the linker problem with multiple instances of template class static variables is driving me crazy
does anybody know a simple workaround ?)
After that a clear roadmap what to expect from a new BCB version and when it´s to be released
would be the next correct step...
Andre
 

Andre,
I agree that release of a new service pak for v6 would be a wise move on Borland's
part. If they were to fix a few of the nastier bugs they'd greatly improve the
attitudes of existing customers.
In fact, if they fixed some of the bugs in v6 that keep v5 people from upgrading then
they could get some v6 upgrade sales and some of those with Software Assurance sales
as well as everyone gets psyched for v9.
Andre Kaufmann wrote:

{smallsort}

"Randall Parker" wrote in message:
/sten
 

Andre Kaufmann wrote:
const integers, for which we use enums. There are various
advantages/disadvantages to this trade-off (discussed in
Josuttis/Vandeoorde Templates book)
Beyond that I can only guess you are instantiating the template in
multiplle translation units, maybe even in different libs. You may be
able to solve this with explicit template instantiation, but that is a
guess rather than something I have tried.
Follow-up set for .ide
AlisdairM (TeamB)
 

Andre Kaufmann wrote:
[...]
seen where it is not needed by means of #ifdef's. I'm sorry but I don't
have the details at hand at the moment. Is this in a monolithic
executable or in a library (static or dynamic)?
I'll try and find some of my old notes.
Cheers,
--
Nicola Musatti
Team Thai Kingdom
 

"Randall Parker" wrote:
just said there was talk about the release of an open letter. That people
got e{*word*277}d by that is something I don't understand. And I was not the only
one who has warned there was nothing to get e{*word*277}d about yet. It's not
Robert's fault people don't want to listen.
mentioned a version 9 release. That's all. I don't get e{*word*277}d by the
possibility of a new release. Maybe about features in that new release when
it arrives. But about features we don't know nothing. So I think there is
nothing to get e{*word*277}d about. When you don't get e{*word*277}d, you don't get
disappointed later. I hope people here would learn a lesson from this.
Peter
 

What did you expect to happen? Borland has been consistent with their
behavior. Even if they do something, it's way to late.
 

I think the worst part is that You don't know if You should stay with BCB or
turn to X - I don't want to buy the X if a BCB 9 is on its way, and so I
wait and wait and wait. It is a firm rule when some means of transportation
is delayed that you should inform the waiting passengers of what's
happening - it eases the waiting and softens angry feelings. I don't
understand why this rumor of a letter should be released just when feelings
had subsided. greetings hans
"Bob" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >skrev i meddelandet

You would think that Robert or someone would be on here to placate the angry
horde [sic], let us know that the vampires are looking over the letter and
will release it when they have butchered all technical content out of it.
G.
 

"Hans Jönsson" wrote :
Why would you even consider BCBX (today), if you like BCB for it's RAD
capabilities, BCBX is no option given its current state.
If you're using BCB to do console apps (etc), move to Microsoft, GNU, Watcom
or... BCBX.
/sten
 

Just move to .NET. It was written by Anders Hejlsberg.
 

"Sten Larsson" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in message
...
 

I like BCB for its RAD capabilities and would therefore like Borland to go
on to BCB 9. If BCB is s{*word*99}ped however then I will have to change my
programming and since I like to write c++ programs in the "relisoft style"
encapsulating the GUI:s in c++ classes, X could be an alternative (meaning a
lot of library buildning unless accepting wx). I don't want to start
programming in pascal again but I have also considered Java. It is however
difficult to break one's habit at 59. greetings hans
"Sten Larsson" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >skrev i meddelandet

The team has been asked not to release any more information about the
new product.
I'll tell you this - customer posts in these newsgroups are being read.
In addition to airing their greviances, some folks went in to some
detail about what they wanted from an IDE, and many thought that in
concept (but not in implementation), CBX was a better IDE.
The whole motivation behind using an IDE written in Java is that
JBuilder already has an extremely sophisticated framework that can
quickly be ported anywhere.
Already, a lot of the user interface of the PrimeTime (JBuilder)
cross-platform IDE has been copied to the new Galileo (Delphi)
windows-only IDE. Delphi has better support for form design than
JBuilder because native code uses GUIs more heavily than java does.
One senior engineer noted that while folks seem to be divided over which
IDE they liked better in concept, the urgent need for VCL support was
unanimous among newsgroup posters. Historically, BCBs role has been C++
flavored Delphi, which allows C++ speakers to use the components written
in Pascal in their native toungue. Aside from questions of how
effectively it plays this role ( linker issues, template support, IDE
issues ) is this what you want from it?
Your best source of early information in any sort of detail is to sign
an NDA and become a beta tester.
In addition to the Develper Relations team, you can address any concerns
you have about attentiveness to customer concerns (e.g. open letters) to
your sales representative, if you work with one.
Graham Reeds wrote: