Board index » cppbuilder » Re: BCB blogs

Re: BCB blogs


2006-06-14 11:09:46 PM
cppbuilder86
Tim Del Chiaro (Borland) wrote:
Quote
We don't have a separate C++ team any longer.
You may not have a separate C++ team, but you do have a blog that goes
by that title. The "C++ Team" blog is different than the delphi blog,
and IMO, contains no content that C++ developers will find informative
or useful. Either delete it, rename it, or make it relevant.
H^2
 
 

Re:Re: BCB blogs

"Harold Howe [TeamB]" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >writes:
Quote
Either delete it, rename it, or make it relevant.

H^2
I vote for option 3.
--
Chris (TeamB);
 

Re:Re: BCB blogs

I'll see what John Kaster says. We will likely either add the Delphi
bloggers who also work on C++Builder to the C++ team list or remove the C++
team blog.
Tim
"Chris Uzdavinis (TeamB)" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in message
Quote
"Harold Howe [TeamB]" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >writes:

>Either delete it, rename it, or make it relevant.
>
>H^2

I vote for option 3.

--
Chris (TeamB);
 

{smallsort}

Re:Re: BCB blogs

The C++ compiler team is essentially spending all their time on bug fixing
right now including old bugs and especially those that affect Boost.
Tim
"Edward Diener" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in message
Quote

Try fixing bugs that go back 4 or more years for a change. Or are you
trying to set a record for the number of years you can still ignore bugs
in the compiler and still have C++ customers ?

 

Re:Re: BCB blogs

Quote
The C++ compiler team is essentially spending all their time on bug fixing
right now
For an update or BDS2007?
 

Re:Re: BCB blogs

For BDS 2007. The only item we're working on for BDS 2006 right now is
Hotfix 7 to resolve the hpp gen issue in QC report 27957.
Tim
"David Perkins" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in message
Quote
>The C++ compiler team is essentially spending all their time on bug
>fixing right now

For an update or BDS2007?
 

Re:Re: BCB blogs

In article < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >,
"Tim Del Chiaro \(Borland\)" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote:
Quote
The C++ compiler team is essentially spending all their time on bug fixing
right now including old bugs and especially those that affect Boost.
There are dozens of reports in QC that are closed and resolved as
"deferred to next release" for the plum hall tests that should be looked
at. For some reason, a keyword query on "plum" doesn't find them, so
you'll have to dig them out of this rather big result set:
<qc.borland.com/wc/qcmain.aspx>
--
-David
Quis custodiet custodes ipsos?
 

Re:Re: BCB blogs

Tim Del Chiaro (Borland) wrote:
Quote
For BDS 2007. The only item we're working on for BDS 2006 right now is
Hotfix 7 to resolve the hpp gen issue in QC report 27957.

Tim

"David Perkins" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in message
news:44908883$ XXXX@XXXXX.COM ...

>>The C++ compiler team is essentially spending all their time on bug
>>fixing right now
>
>For an update or BDS2007?



Is there not any understanding that 'bugs' should be fixed via an
'update' to 'this release', and that 'enhancements' are what creates an
'upgrade' that people pay for in the 'next release'?
Is there not any comprehension as to how rapidly this shoots Borland
(oops, I meant 'DevCo') in the foot, when they've now been promising,
promising, promising about the new 'quality releases' and 'customer
service' for the past many years?
Do you guys not GET IT yet?
I went and saw John Kaster's presentation in Santa Ana last week, and
was somewhat heartened by what he had to say (despite the fact that I
had to travel to a one-on-one presentation to hear things that should be
said, on a regular basis, publically by Borland folk), but when I see
this kind of garbage happening again, I really have to question my own
sanity for believing in Borland products.
I bought BDS2006 as a show of support for having re-invigorated the
product (still actually USING BCB5). I've put off installing it because
I wanted to wait for bugs to be fixed, but to find out that there is no
support for fixing bugs is NOT making me a happy camper.
I will add that I commend John for his presentation, and was somewhat
impressed by the intent/goals of it, but the problems that occurred led
me to believe that it's still in the 'not-ready-for-prime-time' state
that I was afraid of (and you know what I'm talking about, John).
There was some discussion about how the help and documentation problems
are being worked on, and I took it to mean that there would be fixes
available for current product. But if Borland sees customers as a
continuous revenue stream to supply PURPORTED bug fixes (and I say
purported because EVERY TIME Borland has had a product out, they're
always saying that the bugs will be fixed 'in the next release'), then
they have another think coming.
I am publically requesting a clarification on Borland's support and bug
fixing policy. If a satisfactory response is not forthcoming, I am
publically stating that I feel that this falls under the consumer
protection laws, and will submit this case to the California Attorney
General for review.
David Erbas-White
 

Re:Re: BCB blogs

My comment that we aren't actively working on any other C++ compiler
hotfixes for BDS 2006 right now doesn't mean there couldn't be additional
compiler-related hotfixes in the future or any other hotfixes for that
matter. And it definitely does not mean BDS 2006 is an unsupported product.
Quote
had to travel to a one-on-one presentation to hear things that should be
said, on a regular basis, publically by Borland folk)
Well I tried to give some insight into what we are working on and you end up
threatening legal action. That definitely discourages me from sharing any
information publically in the future.
Tim
"David Erbas-White" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in message
Quote
Tim Del Chiaro (Borland) wrote:
>For BDS 2007. The only item we're working on for BDS 2006 right now is
>Hotfix 7 to resolve the hpp gen issue in QC report 27957.
>
>Tim
>
>"David Perkins" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in message
>news:44908883$ XXXX@XXXXX.COM ...
>
>>>The C++ compiler team is essentially spending all their time on bug
>>>fixing right now
>>
>>For an update or BDS2007?
>
>
>

Is there not any understanding that 'bugs' should be fixed via an 'update'
to 'this release', and that 'enhancements' are what creates an 'upgrade'
that people pay for in the 'next release'?

Is there not any comprehension as to how rapidly this shoots Borland
(oops, I meant 'DevCo') in the foot, when they've now been promising,
promising, promising about the new 'quality releases' and 'customer
service' for the past many years?

Do you guys not GET IT yet?

I went and saw John Kaster's presentation in Santa Ana last week, and was
somewhat heartened by what he had to say (despite the fact that I had to
travel to a one-on-one presentation to hear things that should be said, on
a regular basis, publically by Borland folk), but when I see this kind of
garbage happening again, I really have to question my own sanity for
believing in Borland products.

I bought BDS2006 as a show of support for having re-invigorated the
product (still actually USING BCB5). I've put off installing it because I
wanted to wait for bugs to be fixed, but to find out that there is no
support for fixing bugs is NOT making me a happy camper.

I will add that I commend John for his presentation, and was somewhat
impressed by the intent/goals of it, but the problems that occurred led me
to believe that it's still in the 'not-ready-for-prime-time' state that I
was afraid of (and you know what I'm talking about, John).

There was some discussion about how the help and documentation problems
are being worked on, and I took it to mean that there would be fixes
available for current product. But if Borland sees customers as a
continuous revenue stream to supply PURPORTED bug fixes (and I say
purported because EVERY TIME Borland has had a product out, they're always
saying that the bugs will be fixed 'in the next release'), then they have
another think coming.

I am publically requesting a clarification on Borland's support and bug
fixing policy. If a satisfactory response is not forthcoming, I am
publically stating that I feel that this falls under the consumer
protection laws, and will submit this case to the California Attorney
General for review.

David Erbas-White
 

Re:Re: BCB blogs

Tim Del Chiaro (Borland) wrote:
Quote
The C++ compiler team is essentially spending all their time on bug fixing
right now including old bugs and especially those that affect Boost.

Tim
That is excellent news.
But since the next release is still some months away it would be helpful to get a
compiler rev of what you've fixed so far...
 

Re:Re: BCB blogs

The direct comment I was referring to went (chronologically) like this:
Tim Del Chiaro: "The C++ compiler team is essentially spending all their
time on bug fixing right now."
David Perkins: "For an update or BDS2007?"
Tim Del Chiaro: "For BDS 2007. The only item we're working on for BDS
2006 right now is Hotfix 7 to resolve the hpp gen issue in QC report 27957."
David Erbas-White: a rant on Borland not doing any upgrades for the
compiler, based on Borland's history of not supporting the product, and
the above statements.
Tim Del Chiaro: a declaration that despite the fact that we're not
working on any updates, the fact that we might would be our defense
against anyone claiming we don't support or product.
My comment about legal action was/is based on the pattern of (lack of)
support for the product. You've done nothing in this statement, in any
way, shape, or form, to indicate that there is active support for the
(current) compiler problems.
Thanks for the answer...
David Erbas-White
Tim Del Chiaro (Borland) wrote:
Quote
My comment that we aren't actively working on any other C++ compiler
hotfixes for BDS 2006 right now doesn't mean there couldn't be additional
compiler-related hotfixes in the future or any other hotfixes for that
matter. And it definitely does not mean BDS 2006 is an unsupported product.


>had to travel to a one-on-one presentation to hear things that should be
>said, on a regular basis, publically by Borland folk)


Well I tried to give some insight into what we are working on and you end up
threatening legal action. That definitely discourages me from sharing any
information publically in the future.

Tim

"David Erbas-White" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in message
news:4490950f$ XXXX@XXXXX.COM ...

>Tim Del Chiaro (Borland) wrote:
>
>>For BDS 2007. The only item we're working on for BDS 2006 right now is
>>Hotfix 7 to resolve the hpp gen issue in QC report 27957.
>>
>>Tim
>>
>>"David Perkins" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in message
>>news:44908883$ XXXX@XXXXX.COM ...
>>
>>
>>>>The C++ compiler team is essentially spending all their time on bug
>>>>fixing right now
>>>
>>>For an update or BDS2007?
>>
>>
>>
>Is there not any understanding that 'bugs' should be fixed via an 'update'
>to 'this release', and that 'enhancements' are what creates an 'upgrade'
>that people pay for in the 'next release'?
>
>Is there not any comprehension as to how rapidly this shoots Borland
>(oops, I meant 'DevCo') in the foot, when they've now been promising,
>promising, promising about the new 'quality releases' and 'customer
>service' for the past many years?
>
>Do you guys not GET IT yet?
>
>I went and saw John Kaster's presentation in Santa Ana last week, and was
>somewhat heartened by what he had to say (despite the fact that I had to
>travel to a one-on-one presentation to hear things that should be said, on
>a regular basis, publically by Borland folk), but when I see this kind of
>garbage happening again, I really have to question my own sanity for
>believing in Borland products.
>
>I bought BDS2006 as a show of support for having re-invigorated the
>product (still actually USING BCB5). I've put off installing it because I
>wanted to wait for bugs to be fixed, but to find out that there is no
>support for fixing bugs is NOT making me a happy camper.
>
>I will add that I commend John for his presentation, and was somewhat
>impressed by the intent/goals of it, but the problems that occurred led me
>to believe that it's still in the 'not-ready-for-prime-time' state that I
>was afraid of (and you know what I'm talking about, John).
>
>There was some discussion about how the help and documentation problems
>are being worked on, and I took it to mean that there would be fixes
>available for current product. But if Borland sees customers as a
>continuous revenue stream to supply PURPORTED bug fixes (and I say
>purported because EVERY TIME Borland has had a product out, they're always
>saying that the bugs will be fixed 'in the next release'), then they have
>another think coming.
>
>I am publically requesting a clarification on Borland's support and bug
>fixing policy. If a satisfactory response is not forthcoming, I am
>publically stating that I feel that this falls under the consumer
>protection laws, and will submit this case to the California Attorney
>General for review.
>
>David Erbas-White



 

Re:Re: BCB blogs

David Erbas-White wrote:
Quote
My comment about legal action was/is based on the pattern of (lack
of) support for the product. You've done nothing in this statement,
in any way, shape, or form, to indicate that there is active support
for the (current) compiler problems.
support.borland.com/index.jspa
--
Compact Framework for Delphi 2006: www.jed-software.com/cf.htm
QualityCentral Windows Client: www.jed-software.com/qc.htm
Visual Forms IDE Add In: www.jed-software.com/vf.htm
 

Re:Re: BCB blogs

Tim Del Chiaro (Borland) wrote:
Quote
I'll see what John Kaster says. We will likely either add the Delphi
bloggers who also work on C++Builder to the C++ team list or remove the C++
team blog.
Note that a little C++ specific blogging would be much appreciated; Eli
had a good start, but gave up too soon. In my opinion IDE related issues
may well be treated in a single group, but language specific information
should be kept separate.
Cheers,
--
Nicola Musatti
Team Chutney's
 

Re:Re: BCB blogs

David Erbas-White wrote:
Quote
My comment about legal action was/is based on the pattern of (lack of)
support for the product. You've done nothing in this statement, in any
way, shape, or form, to indicate that there is active support for the
(current) compiler problems.
I _really_ think this is enough now. We should all send our BDS Suites to
Borland and try to get our money back. Using their tools is nearly insane.
First we were promised to get a quality release and all we got was a
product full of (sometimes severe) bugs and now we don't even get a fix for
this bugs and should instead buy a new version. What kind of business
practice is this?
Gunnar
 

Re:Re: BCB blogs

I personally don't understand your problem.
I use BDS2006 every day and have a lot of components installed
and I dont' see this level of problem at all. The only problem
that I get is on my home machine it AVs on exit but I can cope
with that.
BDS2005 is a totally different beast - I never used that due to it's
problems
:(
Rgds Pete
"Gunnar Beushausen" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in message
Quote
David Erbas-White wrote:
>My comment about legal action was/is based on the pattern of (lack of)
>support for the product. You've done nothing in this statement, in any
>way, shape, or form, to indicate that there is active support for the
>(current) compiler problems.

I _really_ think this is enough now. We should all send our BDS Suites to
Borland and try to get our money back. Using their tools is nearly insane.
First we were promised to get a quality release and all we got was a
product full of (sometimes severe) bugs and now we don't even get a fix
for
this bugs and should instead buy a new version. What kind of business
practice is this?

Gunnar