Board index » cppbuilder » Re: (Microsoft) The Future of Delphi?

2008-02-29 09:29:07 PM
cppbuilder76
Glynn Owen wrote:
<snip>
expensive than an apple. (the fruit)
--
 

Rita wrote:
<snip>
lost there..
--
 

"Kryvich" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >
I've got to do sports, take care of the familly, clean the house, whatever.
Personally I hardly touch my computer at home.
 

{smallsort}

"Yogi Yang 007" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in message
day of productivity for every week I use it as compared to my experiences
with Visual C++ when I had to use it for a project, I consider it to be one
of the cheapest tools on my computer. If I were a programming hobbyist, I'm
sure I'd look at it differently, but for use in a commercial enterprise, it
still can't be beat.
Cheers,
Van Swofford
Tybee Jet Corp.
 

Charles B wrote:
has its price point, Delphi has its price point. I look at the products
and what they offer and make a purchasing decision. Do I care what the
vendor does to reduce the cost?
Certainly there are some cases when one's m{*word*203}imperative can persuade
them choose to purchase a higher priced product because they do care
about how that vendor reduces costs. This may apply to you in this
case, however this is hard to justify IMO because of the following
statement:
Netbeans is what I'm using for Ruby development and it's excellent. The
reality is that the developer tool landscape has changed greatly with
open source and large companies using them as a strategic asset for
larger platform plays.
Sorry...but I think if you're going to point the finger at Microsoft,
you should take a look at IBM and Sun first.
things from his perspective. It's his reality and it aligns with many
Delphi developers reality.
So many Delphi developers here are so ingrained with and loyal to
CodeGear and Delphi that IMO, they refuse to see the virtues of other
programming paradigms/frameworks/tools to their own peril.
--
Brian Moelk
Brain Endeavor LLC
XXXX@XXXXX.COM
 

albert drent < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote:
for their OS, the better for their OS.
(Read www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/APIWar.html.)
--
XXXX@XXXXX.COM is never read
I'm HSchober at gmx dot de
"A patched buffer overflow doesn't mean that there's one less way attackers
can get into your system; it means that your design process was so lousy
that it permitted buffer overflows, and there are probably thousands more
lurking in your code."
Bruce Schneier
 

"TJC Support" wrote:
builders for $140, what does the latest Delphi RAD Studio professional sell
for? :^)
 

Glynn Owen wrote:
They need to have the big ticket Architect and Enterprise Licenses, but
they need a more reasonably priced Pro or standard version.
The corp users are going to get the high end SKUs anyway, why not make
it more affordable for the average person? CodeGear still does not get
it in this regards.
The pro version is not that bad if you have been with it since the
begining, I only paid full price for pro a long time ago when it was at
version 2 and kept with the upgrades and now have SA, but for the new
user 999 or whatever it's at now is a little steep.
 

"I.P. Nichols" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in message
I have to waste trying to get it set up and software that worked on XP to
work right on Vista, I think $140 for the OS is too much. Vista probably
cost me about $5000 or more in lost time trying to move my development
system over to it last year. Maybe they should be paying me to use it? :^)
Then when I consider how valuable my time is in a commercial environment,
and how much of it Delphi saves me compared to MS development tools, I think
Delphi is cheap. I guess it all depends on how you value things and the
environment they're used in. For me, purchase price is just the initial
component in total cost of ownership, and while Delphi loses on the front
end, it way more than makes up for it in the years I use it after purchase.
Cheers,
Van
 

En Fri, 29 Feb 2008 14:32:41 +0100, Sjors de Bakfiets Imam
< XXXX@XXXXX.COM >escribi?
work.
After that I maitained BCB4 until the arrival of BDS passing the versions
5 and 6... I evaluate the BDS and then I turned to Visual Studio 2003 and
from now I'm using Visual Studio 2008 (C#, C++/CLI and MFC C++). .NET is
very very very buggy with C# and more with C++/CLI (languages are Ok, the
problems cames with .NET itself), but C++ with MFC is superior to any
other tool (of course, it is not RAD, but MS compilers are a lot better
than Borland ones).
--
Microsoft Visual C++ MVP
========================
Mi blog sobre programación: geeks.ms/blogs/rfog
Mi blog sobre literatura: rfog.blogsome.com
Libros, ciencia ficción y programación
========================================
El hombre se complace en enumerar sus pesares, pero no enumera sus
alegrías.
-- Dostoiewsky.
 

Glynn Owen wrote:
 

"Brian Moelk" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in message
gone bust because they couldn't compete with a 'free' product from MS and
all you are left with is the choice of VS or nothing at whatever price they
then decide to charge, as there is no competition.
Largely supposition of course, but that is what has happened in the
supermarket business and others.
CB
 

On Fri, 29 Feb 2008 07:43:03 -0600, TJC Support wrote:
consider acceptable for Win32 development, especially now that
Microsoft did CodeGear a favour and took VB out of the game. (I've
also suffered the trials of Visual C++)
--
Marc Rohloff [TeamB]
marc -at- marc rohloff -dot- com
 

Tony Caduto wrote:
should be able to be built into the very first project (if it's worth
doing at all). And upgrading at less than 50% after that is 'cheap'
IMHO.
--
Andy Syms
Technosoft Systems Ltd
 

"Hendrik Schober" schrieb:
about the direction application development is taking and why. I couldn't
agree more with the author.
Best Regards,
Danijel Tkalcec