Board index » cppbuilder » Re: Seems RAD C++ has a future

Re: Seems RAD C++ has a future


2004-10-21 09:21:12 PM
cppbuilder34
"Tim Anderson" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in message news:41776741$ XXXX@XXXXX.COM ...
Quote
I asked: "So leaving aside Kylix, what are you offering customers who want
cross-platform apps for Windows and Linux? You've got C++BuilderX but it's
not a RAD tool."

Close to what you wanted to ask?

You'll note from the replies that Borland's stated intention (here at least)
is to have an IDE, with RAD designers, that will target multiple languages
and platforms. This is presented as a long-term goal, not as a specific
product plan. I couldn't get anything more detailed.
The thing is, leaving aside Kylix, as long as there is delphi under
the hood and delphi VCL is a wrapper for win32, it's hard to
see how they will pull off cross platform GUI stuff. Being able to
use multiple platforms (read that cross platform Linux/Unix/Windows)
is much more significant for me than using multiple languages.
It may be a less expensive solution for Borland but I don't see any
value added for me if I can use Delphi or Java in addition to C++.
If I can only achieve cross platform with Java for example and not
C++, then I have no interest.
Additionally, I don't think that I want to wait for the fruition of Borland's
long term goals. Given the time frame for their current products,
it's hard to see that they will ever be achieved.
I'm waiting to see what happens with CBX. If CBX 2 is released and
has some GUI tools or has a price reduced enough for me to use it
with Qt then I'll look at it. It would be especially interesting if there was
a procedure for the IDE to recognize Qt as MSVC7.1 does.
This is all assuming that the current bugs are fixed and there's
a new compiler that is at least as compliant as Microsofts and
there are no problems with the latest Boost stuff and it's using
Dinkumware directly and that Dinkumware can be upgraded
when needed without Borland having to wrap it and ...
 
 

Re:Re: Seems RAD C++ has a future

"Duane Hebert" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote:
Quote
use multiple platforms (read that cross platform Linux/Unix/Windows)
is much more significant for me than using multiple languages.
Is there a commercial market for Linux/Unix GUI apps?
 

Re:Re: Seems RAD C++ has a future

"Leroy Casterline" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in message
Quote
"Duane Hebert" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote:

>use multiple platforms (read that cross platform Linux/Unix/Windows)
>is much more significant for me than using multiple languages.

Is there a commercial market for Linux/Unix GUI apps?
There is in the control industry. I'm not sure about desktop
stuff. Our systems do process control, remote access, plant
management (including database, stats etc) as well as
charting/logging/reporting functions.
Some of our customers have existing Unix systems and want to
keep things on Unix. Many of the larger automotive plants, defense
contractors etc. use *nix systems.
So far we've had to provide interfaces
via TCP but as the systems get larger this is less elegant. We're
in the process of porting things now and it seems to be increasing
our market.
 

{smallsort}

Re:Re: Seems RAD C++ has a future

"Tim Anderson" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >escreveu na mensagem
Quote

I asked: "So leaving aside Kylix, what are you offering customers who want
cross-platform apps for Windows and Linux? You've got C++BuilderX but it's
not a RAD tool."

Close to what you wanted to ask?

You'll note from the replies that Borland's stated intention (here at
least)
is to have an IDE, with RAD designers, that will target multiple languages
and platforms. This is presented as a long-term goal, not as a specific
product plan. I couldn't get anything more detailed.
Hi Tim,
I liked your interview and it was very informative even if they tried, and
in many cases, did not answer what was being questioned.
My question to Mr. Dale about Borland cross-platform would have been much
more incisive. Something like: "Borland advertised 2 years ago
Delphi/Kylix/C++ Builder as the company cross-platform desktop software
development solution and promised a long term commitment on that. Windows
and Linux were addressed as the first OSes in the self propalated slogan:
'Code Once. Compile and Run in Many'. Just after that Borland has frozen
Kylix, announced C++ Builder death and launched C++ BuilderX that has
nothing to do with the previous strategy. What you have to say to the
companies and developers that bought C++ Builder 6 seduced by Borland
promise? Will Borland deliver the promise advertised and sold ?"
Or a more compressed version: "What happened to the 'Code Once. Compile and
Run in Many' solution advertised and sold at high prices to the C++ Builder
developers that have seem the product death announced just 2 years after
that?"
or.. : "What happened to the Borland cross-platform strategy that was
targeting both Windows and Linux simultaneously and now only .NET is being
addressed in the new products releases? (please be specific)!"
When you have an interviewed person that is giving vague answers what you
have to do is put the guy in the corner!
Saulo
 

Re:Re: Seems RAD C++ has a future

Leroy Casterline < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >writes:
Quote
"Duane Hebert" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote:

>use multiple platforms (read that cross platform Linux/Unix/Windows)
>is much more significant for me than using multiple languages.

Is there a commercial market for Linux/Unix GUI apps?
Yes, but not shrinkwrap types of applications. GUIs on linux, IMHO,
will tend to be for custom projects, not widespread distribution. The
author will work directly with the customer, rather than writing it in
advance for the masses, expecting them to come with wallet in hand.
When linux penetrates the desktop more, this may change.
--
Chris (TeamB);
 

Re:Re: Seems RAD C++ has a future

Duane Hebert wrote:
Quote

I'm waiting to see what happens with CBX. If CBX 2 is released and
has some GUI tools or has a price reduced enough for me to use it
with Qt then I'll look at it. It would be especially interesting if there was
a procedure for the IDE to recognize Qt as MSVC7.1 does.
This is all assuming that the current bugs are fixed and there's
a new compiler that is at least as compliant as Microsofts and
there are no problems with the latest Boost stuff and it's using
Dinkumware directly and that Dinkumware can be upgraded
when needed without Borland having to wrap it and ...

If they get that done, we'd definitely use it!
 

Re:Re: Seems RAD C++ has a future

"Chris Uzdavinis (TeamB)" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in message
Quote
>Is there a commercial market for Linux/Unix GUI apps?

Yes, but not shrinkwrap types of applications. GUIs on linux, IMHO,
will tend to be for custom projects, not widespread distribution. The
author will work directly with the customer, rather than writing it in
advance for the masses, expecting them to come with wallet in hand.

When linux penetrates the desktop more, this may change.
Well, as I said, I don't think there's a big market for desktop apps,
but for HMI interfaces it's a different story. And when you factor
in the remote access via desktops it amounts to a fair amount.
This doesn't necessarily mean working directly with the customer.
In our case we develop the app generically and it's configured
for each job based on hardware requirements. We don't build
a new app for each client. So in that sense it's similar to a
shrink wrap product. There's a fairly large market for this
internationally.
 

Re:Re: Seems RAD C++ has a future

"Russell Hind" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in message news:4177d02a$ XXXX@XXXXX.COM ...
Quote
Duane Hebert wrote:
>
>I'm waiting to see what happens with CBX. If CBX 2 is released and
>has some GUI tools or has a price reduced enough for me to use it
>with Qt then I'll look at it. It would be especially interesting if there was
>a procedure for the IDE to recognize Qt as MSVC7.1 does.
>This is all assuming that the current bugs are fixed and there's
>a new compiler that is at least as compliant as Microsofts and
>there are no problems with the latest Boost stuff and it's using
>Dinkumware directly and that Dinkumware can be upgraded
>when needed without Borland having to wrap it and ...
>

If they get that done, we'd definitely use it!
I think that we'd seriously consider it as well. At that
point it would be a matter of price/utilitiy decision.
We would also have to our confidence level in Borland's
committment improve a bit though.
As I've said before, this is what we expected when
Borland rolled out CBX. Now, Borland will have to
offer something superior to what we are currently using
in order to sway our choice. A year ago, we wouldn't
have considered any other vendor.
 

Re:Re: Seems RAD C++ has a future

Duane Hebert wrote:
Quote

I think that we'd seriously consider it as well. At that
point it would be a matter of price/utilitiy decision.
We would also have to our confidence level in Borland's
committment improve a bit though.

As I've said before, this is what we expected when
Borland rolled out CBX. Now, Borland will have to
offer something superior to what we are currently using
in order to sway our choice. A year ago, we wouldn't
have considered any other vendor.

So did I. The edg-based compiler with DinkumWare looked promising, I
liked the IDE but the given the lack of support for it since its
release, and its buggy state to date, the thing that would stop us using
a Borland product now is the complete lack of support, or even interest
in the C++ product line for win32 development (and I don't just mean VCL
here, just the fact that the win32 compiler hasn't been updated in a
long time.
Cheers
Russell
 

Re:Re: Seems RAD C++ has a future

Saulo I. Regis < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote:
Quote
[...]

My question to Mr. Dale about Borland cross-platform would have been much
more incisive. Something like: "Borland advertised 2 years ago
Delphi/Kylix/C++ Builder as the company cross-platform desktop software
development solution and promised a long term commitment on that. Windows
and Linux were addressed as the first OSes in the self propalated slogan:
'Code Once. Compile and Run in Many'. Just after that Borland has frozen
Kylix, announced C++ Builder death and launched C++ BuilderX that has
nothing to do with the previous strategy. What you have to say to the
companies and developers that bought C++ Builder 6 seduced by Borland
promise? Will Borland deliver the promise advertised and sold ?"
LOL! That's a good one. However, despite the
grammatical evidence, this actually is not a
question, but a statement. :o>
Quote
[...]
Saulo
Schobi
--
XXXX@XXXXX.COM is never read
I'm Schobi at suespammers dot org
"The presence of those seeking the truth is infinitely
to be prefered to those thinking they've found it."
Terry Pratchett
 

Re:Re: Seems RAD C++ has a future

Leroy Casterline < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote:
Quote
"Duane Hebert" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote:

>use multiple platforms (read that cross platform Linux/Unix/Windows)
>is much more significant for me than using multiple languages.

Is there a commercial market for Linux/Unix GUI apps?
We sell apps for Linux, which are used on
servers. It's mostly command line stuff or
Apache plugins. However, the same code runs
on many other platforms as well. (Some as
server, some as desktop apps.) I don't think
we ever would have started these as Linux
apps.
Schobi
--
XXXX@XXXXX.COM is never read
I'm Schobi at suespammers dot org
"The presence of those seeking the truth is infinitely
to be prefered to those thinking they've found it."
Terry Pratchett
 

Re:Re: Seems RAD C++ has a future

"Hendrik Schober" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in message news:4178c81f$ XXXX@XXXXX.COM ...
Quote
We sell apps for Linux, which are used on
servers. It's mostly command line stuff or
Apache plugins. However, the same code runs
on many other platforms as well. (Some as
server, some as desktop apps.) I don't think
we ever would have started these as Linux
apps.
We do much the same but we also supply HMIs
that present the user with a GUI to interact with
the controls. Many customers still request this
in Linux as they feel it's more stable. I don't really
agree with this concept any longer but you can't
generally convince clients.
 

Re:Re: Seems RAD C++ has a future

Duane Hebert < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote:
Quote
[...]

We do much the same but we also supply HMIs
that present the user with a GUI to interact with
the controls. Many customers still request this
in Linux as they feel it's more stable. I don't really
agree with this concept any longer but you can't
generally convince clients.
Our stuff is mostly about automation, so
command line stuff very common.
Schobi
--
XXXX@XXXXX.COM is never read
I'm Schobi at suespammers dot org
"The presence of those seeking the truth is infinitely
to be prefered to those thinking they've found it."
Terry Pratchett
 

Re:Re: Seems RAD C++ has a future

"Saulo I. Regis" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in message
Quote
"Tim Anderson" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >escreveu na mensagem
news:41776741$ XXXX@XXXXX.COM ...
or.. : "What happened to the Borland cross-platform strategy that was
targeting both Windows and Linux simultaneously and now only .NET is being
addressed in the new products releases? (please be specific)!"
This (along with your other versions) is an excellent question; I think
Dale's answer would be that CLX and Kylix failed in the market.
For what *I* think see here:
www.itwriting.com/blog/
Tim
 

Re:Re: Seems RAD C++ has a future

"Duane Hebert" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >escreveu na mensagem
Quote

The thing is, leaving aside Kylix, as long as there is delphi under
the hood and delphi VCL is a wrapper for win32, it's hard to
see how they will pull off cross platform GUI stuff. Being able to
use multiple platforms (read that cross platform Linux/Unix/Windows)
is much more significant for me than using multiple languages.
It may be a less expensive solution for Borland but I don't see any
value added for me if I can use Delphi or Java in addition to C++.

If I can only achieve cross platform with Java for example and not
C++, then I have no interest.
Well said!
And that is why I believe that if Borland would be truly going for a
cross-platform solution it would have do be done in C++!
Quote
Additionally, I don't think that I want to wait for the fruition of
Borland's
long term goals. Given the time frame for their current products,
it's hard to see that they will ever be achieved.
It's becoming more and more clear that Borland converted itself to .Net!
Quote
I'm waiting to see what happens with CBX.
The expected 15'Dec announcement of the long-term strategy for C++ from
Borland will clarify everything for sure!
Saulo