Board index » cppbuilder » Re: Is Borland Telling Us to Go Away?

Re: Is Borland Telling Us to Go Away?


2004-06-05 02:09:12 AM
cppbuilder11
"Randall Parker" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote
Quote
Those guys in Scotts Valley are so Machiavellian. By driving off their own
C++
customers they are lulling MS to sleep.
Well, it's not just Microsoft, they're lulling to sleep.... :-)
Quote
If you think MS's next C++ offering is great, well, just imagine how much
better
it would have been in Borland had seemed like it knew what is was doing
for the
last couple of years.
Darn those fiendish Borlandites! I bet poor Bill Gates hardly sleeps at
nights for worrying..... ;-))
Dave
 
 

Re:Re: Is Borland Telling Us to Go Away?

"Dave Jewell" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in message
Quote
ROFL. Jake, you really slay me! :-)))
Naw, that's too messy. Plus it is immoral.
Quote
You might have dropped the "Captain
Jake" nom de plume, but you're obviously still in serious Team Wanna'B
mode.
I have no interest in being on TeamB. I've told you that several times
before.
Quote
Stop trying to defend the indefensible, and people will take you a bit
more
seriously.
LOL. Yeah right, at night when I am lying their in bed I find myself
thinking, "Wouldn't it be wonderful if I could be taken as seriously on the
Borland newsgroups as Dave and Derek?"
[lurking lackeys: don't waste your time with inane rejoinders.]
 

Re:Re: Is Borland Telling Us to Go Away?

"Randall Parker" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in
message news:40bfa6e1$ XXXX@XXXXX.COM ...
Quote
Those guys in Scotts Valley are so Machiavellian. By driving off their own
C++
customers
You know, sometimes I gotta wonder about this newsgroup. I remember the days
when Borland C++ was THE premiere C++ tool. Then Borland lost all their C++
customers after BC++ 4.0 came out. They all went over to Visual C++. That
was nearly TEN YEARS AGO, people!!! C++ Builder has never acheived any great
level of revenue or any great following. Therefore, it seems accurate to say
that Borland lost their C++ customers a decade ago. Yet many on this
newsgroup talk as if Borland has a significant number of existing customers
to lose. It's silly.
--
Read Jake's Blog at blogs.slcdug.org/jjacobson/
Or Get the RSS Feed at blogs.slcdug.org/jjacobson/Rss.aspx
 

{smallsort}

Re:Re: Is Borland Telling Us to Go Away?

"Peter Agricola" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in message
Quote
What makes you think I am not a potential customer?
Out of how many?
One person is not a valid statistical sample.
--
Read Jake's Blog at blogs.slcdug.org/jjacobson/
Or Get the RSS Feed at blogs.slcdug.org/jjacobson/Rss.aspx
 

Re:Re: Is Borland Telling Us to Go Away?

"John Jacobson" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >escreveu na mensagem
Quote
Yet many on this
newsgroup talk as if Borland has a significant number of existing
customers
to lose. It's silly.
May be Borland has a small C++ user base today, I don't know, but it could
sell to hundreds of thousands new ones if they offer the right product!
C++ is the major language in usage today and for some years ahead!
Saulo
 

Re:Re: Is Borland Telling Us to Go Away?

"Peter Agricola" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in message
Quote

"John Jacobson" wrote:
>Wrong. They don't need to know SOME customers' thoughts, they need to
know
>how many customers would be willing to pay for what feature, etc. You
can't
>get that kind of information from newsgroups, because they are not a
very
>good cross-sample of current customers and they don't represent
potential
>customers at all.

What makes you think I am not a potential customer?


Peter


I have a little experience with statistics and probability and I can tell
you, Peter Agricola is the type of customer you want he gives the company
something to ask on a survey. Without people like Peter, Borland would have
no place to start looking for solutions to lose of customer base. It is
often easier to sell something to a person like Peter because you know what
he is looking for. It is the customer who does not know what he wants that
is the harder one to sell to and please with your product.
 

Re:Re: Is Borland Telling Us to Go Away?

"John Jacobson" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in news:40c0c3f5$1
@newsgroups.borland.com:
Quote
Then Borland lost all their C++
customers after BC++ 4.0 came out.
I wasn't around at that time, so why was that? Was it too buggy or what?
--
Cheers, Abraham
 

Re:Re: Is Borland Telling Us to Go Away?

"John Jacobson" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote
Quote
[lurking lackeys: don't waste your time with inane rejoinders.]
A lackey. Hmmm..... "a person who tries to please someone in order to gain
a personal advantage" according to one of the definitions I found on the
Web. Thing is, I'm not trying to gain any sort of advantage.
I found another great example of a lackey here:
tinyurl.com/3d94e
Jake - that one's just for you. ;-)
Dave
 

Re:Re: Is Borland Telling Us to Go Away?

Dave Jewell wrote:
Quote
Jake - that one's just for you. ;-)
FYI, I'm about to start cancelling. Call these messages personal
attacks, off topic, whatever you want. Either way they really don't
need to be here.
--
Gillmer J. Derge (TeamB)
 

Re:Re: Is Borland Telling Us to Go Away?

abraham wrote:
Quote
"John Jacobson" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in news:40c0c3f5$1
@newsgroups.borland.com:


>Then Borland lost all their C++
>customers after BC++ 4.0 came out.


I wasn't around at that time, so why was that? Was it too buggy or what?

Borland had the best DOS C++ around, bar none, with BC++ 3.1. When they
went to version 4.0, it was Windows-only (as an IDE), but would
'support' work in DOS. The problem was, it didn't do DOS very well, and
there was still a fair amount of DOS work being done, and since it was a
first pass at a Windows IDE, it had problems in that arena do (Win 3.1,
obviously). As a side note, I know many places that are STILL using
Borland C++ 3.1 for doing embedded systems work.
Borland eventually made improvements in their Windows product, and by
the final Borland C++ 5.02, it was again the winner of the class of Win
3.1 development systems. I don't know how much of a drop there was from
3.1 to 4.0, nor how much they gained back from 4.0 to 5.0, but that is
my 'outside perception' of how things went.
When they came out with BCB, it was NOT viewed (and is not viewed) as a
C++ platform by most programmers, so they went to VS. However, BCB was
the best RAD platform for using C++ code in Win32 (IMHO). It allowed
continued use of existing code/algorithms, but unfortunately it has
always been the ugly stepchild of Delphi, so neither Borland nor the
user community embraced it as such. I would view it more as the idiot
savant -- it certainly had its place, and I would prefer that it had
continued, but you had to RECOGNIZE that it was C++ on a VCL base, if
you wanted to use it effectively. The fact that you can't use C++
components in Delphi has really made BCB component development a dead
end, and it didn't help that Borland is supported by what must be one of
the worst marketing departments on the planet.
All that is my $.02, and recollection of how things were...
David Erbas-White
 

Re:Re: Is Borland Telling Us to Go Away?

Lack of sufficient C++ RTTI !
abraham wrote:
Quote
I always wonder why it's such an impossible task to make a pure C++ RAD
tool. If VB and Delphi can handle visual GUI building, code completion,
code insight, etc. why can't C++ handle it?

 

Re:Re: Is Borland Telling Us to Go Away?

David Erbas-White < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in news:40c0d066$1
@newsgroups.borland.com:
Quote
but you had to RECOGNIZE that it was C++ on a VCL base
I always wonder why it's such an impossible task to make a pure C++ RAD
tool. If VB and Delphi can handle visual GUI building, code completion,
code insight, etc. why can't C++ handle it?
--
Cheers, Abraham
 

Re:Re: Is Borland Telling Us to Go Away?

May be in the next C++ standard. They are working on it.
abraham wrote:
Quote
Maybe it's impossible to make this beast?
 

Re:Re: Is Borland Telling Us to Go Away?

Boian Mitov < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in
Quote
Lack of sufficient C++ RTTI !
Maybe it's impossible to make this beast?
--
Cheers, Abraham
 

Re:Re: Is Borland Telling Us to Go Away?

"abraham" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in message
Quote
David Erbas-White < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in news:40c0d066$1
@newsgroups.borland.com:

>but you had to RECOGNIZE that it was C++ on a VCL base

I always wonder why it's such an impossible task to make a pure C++ RAD
tool. If VB and Delphi can handle visual GUI building, code completion,
code insight, etc. why can't C++ handle it?
IIRC, Optima++ was a pure C++ RAD tool.
--
Read Jake's Blog at blogs.slcdug.org/jjacobson/
Or Get the RSS Feed at blogs.slcdug.org/jjacobson/Rss.aspx