Board index » cppbuilder » Re: Abandon Ship?

Re: Abandon Ship?


2003-09-23 07:52:40 PM
cppbuilder104
Gillmer J. Derge (TeamB) wrote:
Quote
What would you rather have me do? Like I said, we don't work for
Borland. I can't get VCL support into CBX for you. I can pass the word
on to Borland that people want it.
... and we do, oh boy, we do that. Vehemently.
--
Rudy Velthuis (TeamB)
"Three o'clock is always too late or too early for anything you want to
do."
-- Jean-Paul Sartre (1905-1980)
 
 

Re:Re: Abandon Ship?

Remy Lebeau (TeamB) wrote:
Quote
And I
also realize that even if no more BCB patches/versions are every released,
my products will not die anytime soon. And you know why? Because I can
still use the existing BCB. What a novel idea - when a new product comes
out, keep using the existing products to maintain products that were
written
with them. Wow.
Hello Remy,
I imagine there's probably quite a few people around here that really
wouldn't appreciate the sarcasm. At all.
Yes BCB5/6 will continue to work, but what happens when any sort of
limitation is reached in those products? For example, either a functional
limitation (some sort of bug) or a feature limitation (inability to utilise
new OS features) at any stage in the future will pose a massive stumbling
block. Sure the products will work fine up until then, but when that time
comes don't you think people will be wishing that there was something else
to move onto, or that they had have transitioned off them as soon as they
knew that some time in the future that stumbling block would exist? As for
new projects, until the future of the VCL is clear anyone would be a fool to
start developing a new application that utilises it for the reasons (and
more) i've just mentioned.
No your products wont die if you continue to develop them with BCB6, but how
much will they continue to grow?
That said I understand your calls for patience (and I am/have been
attempting to be patient for quite some time now) and also understand that
you as a TeamB'er are being hassled a little right now. Your above reminder
is I think a bit short sighted and comes across a little condescending.
 

Re:Re: Abandon Ship?

Rudy Velthuis (TeamB) wrote:
Quote
Then speak up about what is really bugging you, i.e. Borland's
information policy
Borlands information policy is really bugging me!
 

{smallsort}

Re:Re: Abandon Ship?

"Marcelo R. Lopez, Jr." < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in
Quote
To everyone else, quit complaining that people are ranting here. No
offense, but if this is a "non-technical" group, then I think Rants
are pretty much well fair game.
Absolutely, but you need to understand we have been ranting all week, and
hearing the same old rant gets tiresome after a while (and I say this as
one of the ranters myself <g>)
Of course we need to allow room for fresh posters to come in and rant. The
published material currently is vexing to say the least, with so little
comment to reassure those of us heavily dependant on VCL.
However, Borland have said they will make an announcement before the end of
the month addressing some of our specific concerns. No matter we believe
this statement should have been available with the initial product
announcement, for whatever reason management have decided to take this time
(I presume) to word a statement as accurately and correctly as possible.
We also know this statement will not be the complete story, as a later
clarification specific to VCL/CLX will follow a few weeks later.
Having ranted, I am settling down and waiting to see what Borland offer.
If they do write off their VCL customers I think they will be committing
suicide, as what new customer will want to invest in the products of such a
company? However, I don't think Borland get to be where they are today by
committing suicide at every opportunity, for all these newsgroups seem to
believe <g>I'll wait and see what they have to offer.
At this point, shouting that VCL is dead and holding the wake run the risk
of making borland think we are too much trouble to support, and so become a
self-fulfilling prophecy.
So my ranting is on hold until the end of the month <g>
I suggest you try to calm down a little (tough nothing but rumour and
inuendo to act on I know) Then pop back in a couple of weeks when the new
announcement is made, and join the party of Ranting (part II) until that
promised clarification appears ;?)
AlisdairM
 

Re:Re: Abandon Ship?

Adam Versteegen wrote:
Quote
Rudy Velthuis (TeamB) wrote:

>Then speak up about what is really bugging you, i.e. Borland's
>information policy

Borlands information policy is really bugging me!
<g>
--
Rudy Velthuis (TeamB)
"Any man who is under 30, and is not a liberal, has not heart; and any
man who is over 30, and is not a conservative, has no brains."
- Sir Winston Churchill (1874-1965)
 

Re:Re: Abandon Ship?

AlisdairM wrote:
Quote
No matter
we believe this statement should have been available with the initial
product announcement,
I agree, but such things are not always possible.
--
Rudy Velthuis (TeamB)
"There is no reason anyone would want a computer in their home."
-- Ken Olson, president, chairman and founder of Digital Equipment Corp.,
1977
 

Re:Re: Abandon Ship?

Quote
>AlisdairM wrote:
>No matter
>we believe this statement should have been available with the initial
>product announcement,
"Rudy Velthuis (TeamB)" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in
Quote
I agree, but such things are not always possible.
It is a matter of Borland priorities. I would be shocked if this newsgroup
reaction is a surprise to management. Certainly Anders/JohnK would know
what to expect, even if those further up chose not to hear (although any
speculation of internal Borland communication goes beyond my knowledge <g>)
So despite the knowledge of "they're gonna scream" Borland deemed it better
to announce a new product and *deliberately* leave a vaccuum of information
regarding VCL/CLX support for the rest of the month.
The alternative was simply to hold back the announcement until the press
release regarding VCL/CLX support was also ready.
For some reason, announcing early was more important than reassuring
existing customers. I can't imagine what that reason was, and I guess we
will never know. But someone, somewhere in Borland has made this judgement
call and the screams on this newsgroup are the payback.
The result is that TeamB get to field the flak, JohnK and AndersO feel our
wrath (sorry guys) and whatever benefit announcing early brings is probably
seen somewhere else entirely.
I guess anyone that is in a position to know why this decision was made is
not in a position to comment though.
[And lest anyone else reading forget, this newsgroup may bring out the more
passionate BCB users, but it is a very small portion of the customer base.
We can scream long and loud and make John/Anders life hell, but on
Borland's bottom line we don't count for much. I hope we make a good
'litmus test', but that is probably as far as we go.]
AlisdairM
 

Re:Re: Abandon Ship?

AlisdairM wrote:
Quote
>>AlisdairM wrote:

>>No matter
>>we believe this statement should have been available with the initial
>>product announcement,

"Rudy Velthuis (TeamB)" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in
news:xn0d3mz44crbv9013rudyspc@none-8cxr845nph:

>I agree, but such things are not always possible.

It is a matter of Borland priorities.
There may be more aspects to this than you know. I would be very careful
judging a situation without knowing such facts.
--
Rudy Velthuis (TeamB)
"Vote early and vote often."
- Al Capone (1899-1947)
 

Re:Re: Abandon Ship?

It's funny how after the newsgroups came back up, my response to you was
somehow mysteriously gone....
I guess an older backup was used to restore the newsgroup structure....
"Rudy Velthuis (TeamB)" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in message
Quote
Ed Mulroy [TeamB] wrote:

>"...YOU MIGHT WANT TO INFORM SOMEBODY WHO DOES..." - he posted a message
>saying that he has arranged for the VP to address your concerns. Why
>are you beating him up to that which you know from his message that has
>already done?

Sometimes, people who are enraged don't read properly. <vbg>
--
Rudy Velthuis (TeamB)

"A hen is only an egg's way of making another egg." -- Samuel Butler
 

Re:Re: Abandon Ship?

"Marcelo R. Lopez, Jr." < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in message
Quote
I guess an older backup was used to restore the newsgroup structure....
Obviously. While the server was down, they obviously couldn't accept new
messages, so there would not be any up-to-the-last-minute backup available
to restore with, now would there? ;-)
Gambit
 

Re:Re: Abandon Ship?

That's right Mike, and let's abandon every customer who's invested in that
technology, only 7 scant years after they had to start the migration over
from OWL.wxWindows smells so much like, that it's not even FUNNY.
Yet, if you look at OWL ( or OWLnEXT ), you'll see that there's stuff in
there that isn't even IN wxWindow.
If Borland wants to "pursue" cross platform C++ customers, fine, but it
shouldn't be at the cost of the VCL supporting folks that have stood by
Borland to date. C++ "strength" isn't necessarily cross platform
programming, you can still create C++ programs that won't cross platforms
( as long as I get to decide which end is UP ). It's the runtime library
that folks have always strived to make "cross platforms", but as long as you
get to decide which end is up in the data stream, any code can foil your
cross platform dreams.
You're missing the point, Mike. Maybe his analogy may not have been terribly
accurate, but the POINT is still very much valid.
"It" only makes sense, if you disregard the needs of your current customer
base. And frankly I've yet to see anyone who's developed a C++Builder app
that was SUPPOSED to run on OS X ( or Solaris ). Which means, that up to
now, Borland C++ customer base has ALWAYS been Windows ( until Kylix ), for
the past decade and a half ( actually more, but I'm being conservative ). So
given that, If you've been around Borland products for any reasonable length
of time, "cross-platform" C++ hasn't really been a real.....big....issue.
So fine, for you "cross platform" may be paramount, good for you. But for
MOST of Borland's present customer base, it isn't really of high importance.
For that matter, I don't know too many BCB programmers that will switch to
Delphi just because they want to keep on using the VCL. So offering Delphi
to them, doesn't make a whole lot of sense.
"Mike Vance" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in message
Quote
>Delphi users will have to ask the inevitable question: "Are we next"

Bad analogy. The VCL always has been about Delphi. Period. Borland
realizes that and is now trying to leverage C++'s real strength, which
is not it being a RAD visual development tool. C++'s strength is in
cross-platform programming and the VCL will always be tied to windows.
This move for their C++ line away from the VCL makes sense. C++ has its
strengths and Delphi has its strengths, and what Borland is doing with
C++Builder makes sense if looked at carefully.

--
Mike Vance
 

Re:Re: Abandon Ship?

"Remy Lebeau (TeamB)" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in message
Quote
Obviously. While the server was down, they obviously couldn't accept
new
messages, so there would not be any up-to-the-last-minute backup
available
to restore with, now would there? ;-)
Also, this particular group was hit hard by the "last 500 messages"
rule. The most recent 500 messages were restored, which for
b.p.cppbuilder.non-technical last week means we got about 5 minutes
worth of traffic restored. :-)
--
Gillmer J. Derge (TeamB)
 

Re:Re: Abandon Ship?

Ouch ! Oh well.....c'est la vie...
"Gillmer J. Derge (TeamB)" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in message
Quote
"Remy Lebeau (TeamB)" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in message
news: XXXX@XXXXX.COM ...
>Obviously. While the server was down, they obviously couldn't accept
new
>messages, so there would not be any up-to-the-last-minute backup
available
>to restore with, now would there? ;-)

Also, this particular group was hit hard by the "last 500 messages"
rule. The most recent 500 messages were restored, which for
b.p.cppbuilder.non-technical last week means we got about 5 minutes
worth of traffic restored. :-)

--
Gillmer J. Derge (TeamB)

 

Re:Re: Abandon Ship?

Marcelo R. Lopez, Jr. wrote:
Quote
That's right Mike, and let's abandon every customer who's invested in
that technology, only 7 scant years after they had to start the
migration over from OWL.
You are saying that as if Borland has actually said they would. Don't you
get tired of making assumptions and posting them as truths?
--
Rudy Velthuis (TeamB)
"We have art to save ourselves from the truth."
- Friedrich Nietzsche (1844-1900)
 

Re:Re: Abandon Ship?

"Rudy Velthuis (TeamB)" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in message
Quote
You are saying that as if Borland has actually said they would.
Don't you get tired of making assumptions and posting them
as truths?
Yes, please stop doing so. Until you have a DEFINITIVE answer from Borland
one way or another, please stop making unsubstantiated assumptions.
Gambit