Board index » cppbuilder » Not particularly interested.

Not particularly interested.


2004-06-02 09:47:20 PM
cppbuilder42
In a previous thread, on upgrade from BCB V5 to V6, there were a number of
comments on why many people did not upgrade from V5 to 6.
I also didn't upgrade, and the primary reason was due to the responses in
these newsgroups.
When V6 was released, I waited for users reactions. The ones that struck me
were in the form of "nothing new in this version for me" and "still have the
old bugs, especially in IDE".
Neadless to say, on my recommendation, my company waited before upgrading.
As the {*word*75}ing continued, we still waited, and waited. And never upgraded.
Borland, it seems have not realised that these newsgroups, while informal,
have a major impact on the developers desire to upgrade. Upgrading has never
been a simple matter of buying the latest version, installing and then
simply recompiling. I cannot remember an upgrade where you can do this in
BCB. (If my memory serves me correctly, Turbo C and then BC++ needed small
tweeks in the make files, and upgrades were much less problematic).
An upgrade takes time, at least a few weeks for each (major) application,
time which if costed is far greater than the price of the upgrade. Anyway,
we never went beyond BCB5.
With the final announcement that BCB was dead, we decided to look for other
compilers. MS was the only choice, as noone really wanted to invest time in
learning Delphi.
The latest announcement (even as I write this I don't even think it is an
announcement) of the BCB9 doesn't really mean very much.
1) This is NOT an officially announced.
2) There is conflicting information coming out of non-official sources of
Borland
3) We do not know any details of compiler bases etc etc etc
4) Even it it becomes officially announced, how long before it is released.
If the open letter #3 or is it #2 doesn't see the light of day, what chance
of a new version? I think a letter is a simpler "product" than a compiler!
If you haven't guessed by now, I am absolutely pissed off! I don't give a
damn (or stronger) if V9 or whatever is released, I won't be recommending
it.
I have worked with companies using TC back in (think) 1985 and have
personally bought, or recommended *ALL* Borland C products up until V5.
My personal opinion is that Borland couldn't give a {*word*81} about C++
develeopers, and these anouncements about product / letters are a joke.
Well the joke's on Borland. I won't spend another cent on this company, and
will not recommend to other developers or company's to either.
I have simply had enough, have bitten the bullet, and though there is a
large amount of work to do, am confident that I have done the right thing in
switching to MS.
Well, that is enough of venting of spleen. I will linger here for a long
time yet, because I miss the people and the group.
 
 

Re:Not particularly interested.

Just my own two cents on this one. We have a large BCB 5 project with a
double digit team of developers. We started in BC++ 4 and migrated from
16bit to BCB++ 3 to a 32 bit actual GUI product. That was a hard learning
curve going from OWL to VCL but it worked out and in the end helped our
company move forward, expecially compared to what was available at the time.
Next we migrated from BCB 3 to 5 and it took 3 days. Our application has
reached the max # files supported by BCB 5 thus we stack multiple classes in
cpp files. It takes an enormouse amount of time to compile etc.. etc.. so
this isn't a minor item to tackle. We use a lot of components, VCL and STL.
Next (within the last year) we were looking into a web offering and
technological leap for our product(s). We had a situation where some people
internally tried converting to BCB 6 as we purchased an initial small amount
of licenses to do a feasibility of the upgrade as we wanted to use the "web"
type features. They said it couldn't be done... they spent a lot of time
etc.. etc.. but one person was able to do the upgrade again in 3 days. Same
guy who did the previous update from 3 to 5. It isn't an issue of whether or
not an upgrade can be done or how easy it was done... that depends on your
expereince. Obviously some projects may hit stumbling blocks we did also.
VCL changes, STL changes, compiler changes... but it takes time to research
and know what to look for. But I must say this, though I have respected
Borland since using Delphi 1 frim its begginning:
We didn't choose to go with BCB 6, not because it didn't have anything new.
It had web services, datasnap and a whole infrastructure of web offering.
The migration would have been fine. But for the first time in my career i
saw Microsoft exceed Borland with .NET. I have always despised Visual
Studio. Now It has been my IDE for the last 8-9 months and we have a very
impressive web offering in C# using ASP.NET in a multi-tier architecture.
Microsoft has finally caught up and long passed Borland. We (during R&D
phase) looked at Java and other technologies, but finally realized .NET
offered in its framework and Enterprise Services has answered the
development community. Since the uncertaintly of Borland via C++, and
falling behind in its product offering this time frame gave us a chance to
explore and now move on. IT is unfortunate that they lapsed during the past
2-3 years as they did, and it will cost them. My hope is that I am wrong in
this evaluation as I still enjoy the product Brand and its past success. I
know however it is too late for us and wonder how many others are in the
same boat?
My 2 cents
"William Bates" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in message
Quote
In a previous thread, on upgrade from BCB V5 to V6, there were a number of
comments on why many people did not upgrade from V5 to 6.

I also didn't upgrade, and the primary reason was due to the responses in
these newsgroups.

When V6 was released, I waited for users reactions. The ones that struck
me
were in the form of "nothing new in this version for me" and "still have
the
old bugs, especially in IDE".

Neadless to say, on my recommendation, my company waited before upgrading.
As the {*word*75}ing continued, we still waited, and waited. And never
upgraded.

Borland, it seems have not realised that these newsgroups, while informal,
have a major impact on the developers desire to upgrade. Upgrading has
never
been a simple matter of buying the latest version, installing and then
simply recompiling. I cannot remember an upgrade where you can do this in
BCB. (If my memory serves me correctly, Turbo C and then BC++ needed small
tweeks in the make files, and upgrades were much less problematic).

An upgrade takes time, at least a few weeks for each (major) application,
time which if costed is far greater than the price of the upgrade. Anyway,
we never went beyond BCB5.

With the final announcement that BCB was dead, we decided to look for
other
compilers. MS was the only choice, as noone really wanted to invest time
in
learning Delphi.

The latest announcement (even as I write this I don't even think it is an
announcement) of the BCB9 doesn't really mean very much.

1) This is NOT an officially announced.
2) There is conflicting information coming out of non-official sources of
Borland
3) We do not know any details of compiler bases etc etc etc
4) Even it it becomes officially announced, how long before it is
released.
If the open letter #3 or is it #2 doesn't see the light of day, what
chance
of a new version? I think a letter is a simpler "product" than a compiler!

If you haven't guessed by now, I am absolutely pissed off! I don't give a
damn (or stronger) if V9 or whatever is released, I won't be recommending
it.

I have worked with companies using TC back in (think) 1985 and have
personally bought, or recommended *ALL* Borland C products up until V5.

My personal opinion is that Borland couldn't give a {*word*81} about C++
develeopers, and these anouncements about product / letters are a joke.

Well the joke's on Borland. I won't spend another cent on this company,
and
will not recommend to other developers or company's to either.

I have simply had enough, have bitten the bullet, and though there is a
large amount of work to do, am confident that I have done the right thing
in
switching to MS.

Well, that is enough of venting of spleen. I will linger here for a long
time yet, because I miss the people and the group.


 

Re:Not particularly interested.

...
. We (during R&D
Quote
phase) looked at Java and other technologies, but finally realized .NET
offered in its framework and Enterprise Services has answered the
development community. Since the uncertaintly of Borland via C++, and
falling behind in its product offering this time frame gave us a chance to
explore and now move on.
...
I went the other direction, my main project (BCB5) now uses a layer of Java
plumbing underneath. We wrote a JNI manager that loads up Java if it's
around, and we wrote C++ class wrappers for the Java classes we use. It's
admittedly messy work compared to using an integrated .NET IDE, but there is
a lot of Java infrastructure out there we were able to use, like Apache
Axis. It just takes the right people to make it work.
The portability of the Java layer, even though its not the entire app, is
now an asset we have in our back pocket. (It's a mystery to my why nobody
has come to market with a nice C++ ->Java interfacing layer. If I had
enough people to write wrappers for the entire Java API, I'd do it myself. I
can only imagine what a killer BCX would be with a portable windowing
framework like WX and full access to Java's enterprise capabilities.
Goodness gracious.)
On top is a layer of VCL and com to do Windows stuff. It's great. I have to
say it, I love BCB. Some days, I think to myself, me and BCB, we can do
anything. I'll go to VC if I have to, but I'd rather have some real
information to base a decision on. That's why this particular silence is so
un-golden.
Patrick
 

{smallsort}

Re:Not particularly interested.

On Wed, 2 Jun 2004 13:37:14 -0700, <softcoder>wrote:
Quote
Now It has been my IDE for the last 8-9 months and we have a very
impressive web offering in C# using ASP.NET in a multi-tier architecture.
Microsoft has finally caught up and long passed Borland. We (during R&D
phase) looked at Java and other technologies, but finally realized .NET
offered in its framework and Enterprise Services has answered the
development community.
Can you provide a URL or more details on your product? I would like to
know and see what kind of app you've produced with .NET.
I am in an engineering/technical field and .NET doesn't yet appeal to
me as a development environment for desktop apps that must manage
real-time plots and perform various types of communications with a
variety of scientific instruments. But, I am still learning about the
GUI development options -- but managed C++ seems too unwieldy for my
tastes and I'm not ready to buy into C#.
As a web app development platform it does seem to have strengths.
I also run a small shareware business serving the general public and
.NET just isn't a viable alternative yet in that marketplace. It would
put me at a severe disadvantage to my competitors that deliver
smaller, faster Win32 apps.
---
Michael McCulloch
 

Re:Not particularly interested.

www.total-care.com
Our web product hasn't been setup for demo or sales info yet, as we just
completed beta a couple weeks ago. Shouldn't be too long before its there
though.
Thanks
"Michael McCulloch" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in message
Quote
On Wed, 2 Jun 2004 13:37:14 -0700, <softcoder>wrote:

>Now It has been my IDE for the last 8-9 months and we have a very
>impressive web offering in C# using ASP.NET in a multi-tier architecture.
>Microsoft has finally caught up and long passed Borland. We (during R&D
>phase) looked at Java and other technologies, but finally realized .NET
>offered in its framework and Enterprise Services has answered the
>development community.

Can you provide a URL or more details on your product? I would like to
know and see what kind of app you've produced with .NET.

I am in an engineering/technical field and .NET doesn't yet appeal to
me as a development environment for desktop apps that must manage
real-time plots and perform various types of communications with a
variety of scientific instruments. But, I am still learning about the
GUI development options -- but managed C++ seems too unwieldy for my
tastes and I'm not ready to buy into C#.

As a web app development platform it does seem to have strengths.

I also run a small shareware business serving the general public and
.NET just isn't a viable alternative yet in that marketplace. It would
put me at a severe disadvantage to my competitors that deliver
smaller, faster Win32 apps.

---
Michael McCulloch