Board index » kylix » Re: Bill Todd's comments in Delphi Informant

Re: Bill Todd's comments in Delphi Informant


2003-07-14 04:57:55 PM
kylix1
Quote
Which is why Linux remains a marginal player.

Up to the point when security issues, data exchangeability issues, EULA
issues and price of the commercial software become unbearable (see start
of thread "bright future..."
-Michael
 
 

Re:Re: Bill Todd's comments in Delphi Informant

Quote
Why would they drop a chance to develop a market where Microsoft
doesn't play in??
Microsoft does play in the Linux market. Not developing for it but
trying to extinguish it.
Perhaps Borland management believes MS will succeed doing that.
-Michael
 

Re:Re: Bill Todd's comments in Delphi Informant

"Phil Shrimpton" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in message
Quote
This is really no different to Windows, where MS tests, patches,
rebuilds all the software that comes with the OS, but it is up to the
manufacture of other software to test and update their software to be
compatible.
MS runs *extensive* compatibility tests using non-MS software that is
available in the marketplace. One of the products they test is Delphi.
 

{smallsort}

Re:Re: Bill Todd's comments in Delphi Informant

Dan Palley wrote:
Quote
According to Oracle's web site, they support *exactly* two Linux
distributions (those based on UnitedLinux (i.e. SUSE) and RedHat AS).

Exactly, they can and they do.. if they want the database to work
correctly on a Linux version they choose to support then it is theirs
responsibility to do the testing to make the database reliable..
A commercial product like a database has a specific character and
purpose, it can be limited (supported on any particular distro
version). Oracle is somewhat "expensive" software and it is optimized
to run on one or two particular distros, so to use the particular
distro is the reasonable choice .. and Oracle's responsibility is to
make sure that theirs software performs on it as good it is possible.
From the Oracle's customer perspective it really does not matter
what distribution is used since the client knows that oracle is
optimized and tested for it and on this distribution and that because
it runs on a dedicated for the purpose Linux box. Most of all, the
fact of running oracle on this particular supported distro does not
demising the original purpose of the product.
Kylix as a product has distinctively different character and purpose.
In case of Kylix it is also perfectly okay to select a particular
brand of Linux and test the product on it, as long as it will not
defeat the whole purpose of the tool (developing for Linux platform).
Problem: The development cycle of Linux does not corespondent to the
development cycle of Linux, and in time Kylix will become obsolete if
nothing change in this respect.
In my opinion, a development tool for any operating system should be
capable of providing sufficient support for the existing, current
technology or be upgrade in a reasonable time frame, since the
developers also need the time to develop theirs application to a
current Linux technology, because the customer most likely will not
want to use your product based on 2 years old Linux technology, but
rather a current Linux technology. And how it can be done if the
developer at the first place... has a hard time to run the development
system by itself, not to mention to develop software for the current
Linux software base and subsystems ?
juliusz
--
InstallMade - Kylix-specific installer/builder
www.superobject.com/installmade/
Packages: tar.gz, self-installable, RPM, LCR,
and creates standalone executables.
 

Re:Re: Bill Todd's comments in Delphi Informant

Ender wrote:
Quote
Please forgive me but i'm not understand why TCO of Linux based system is
deffinitely lower. I'm see only one thing - initially Linux is cheapier and
this may be look attractive.
It is very simple, you do what you think is right; any projected TCO
should be calculated on a individual basics. The general idea is to
make a "Best bang for a bug" and in the same time do not prejudice the
project by selecting inappropriate to the purpose solution, even if it
is cheaper or easier to do.. and consequently increase the TCO on the
long run, for example do to a security issues etc.
juliusz
--
InstallMade - Kylix-specific installer/builder
www.superobject.com/installmade/
Packages: tar.gz, self-installable, RPM, LCR,
and creates standalone executables.
 

Re:Re: Bill Todd's comments in Delphi Informant

Kevin wrote:
Quote
Don't read too much into that. It still says "Happy New Year" on the
BDN Delphi page. ;-)

Well, it may explains everything .. probably they are testing some
time-space device with the newest version of Kylix.. and that's why it
is appearing to the outside world that noting is happening but in
reality the positively charged Kylix 4 is almost ready to be released.
Did I get it right? ;-)
Quote
Nothing new since end of 2002 hey? What about the GLIBC article here
dated April 22, 2003:

bdn.borland.com/article/0,1410,29968,00.html
Not to be picky, but this patch was needed several month before the
patch was released - the problem of package loading on Kylix C++ ;
the introduction of the newest distribution resolved the problem
automatically, however many new problems surface do to a completely
new version of glibc. The timing is a very impotent factor if patches
to be effective. In other words, the fact of releasing a patch by
itself does not mean anything, when ( how soon) the patch is released
matters, so it can be of help to developers when they need it.
juliusz
--
InstallMade - Kylix-specific installer/builder
www.superobject.com/installmade/
Packages: tar.gz, self-installable, RPM, LCR,
and creates standalone executables.
 

Re:Re: Bill Todd's comments in Delphi Informant

Quote
Oracle doesn't not have problem with doing testing with
distributions they want the product to work with...
According to Oracle's web site, they support *exactly* two Linux
distributions (those based on UnitedLinux (i.e. SUSE) and RedHat AS).
Dan
 

Re:Re: Bill Todd's comments in Delphi Informant

"Dan Palley" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in message
Quote
According to Oracle's web site, they support *exactly* two Linux
distributions (those based on UnitedLinux (i.e. SUSE) and RedHat AS).
And if I'm not mistaken, they only support certain "certified" versions as
well.
This may be Ok for a product which normally resides on a dedicated server
but it is hopelessly impractical for desktop software.
 

Re:Re: Bill Todd's comments in Delphi Informant

Rosimildo da Silva wrote:
Quote
JQP and Alesandro Fredericci are known to *hate* anything that is not
directly related with Windows and MS.
On the one end of the spectrum we have Microsoft fans like Alessandro
(he's not the best example because he does make valid points for
Microsoft, but is still quite biased to the Microsoft platforms by
virtue of the fact that he has had most exposure to Windows) and then on
the other end of the spectrum there are people like yourself Rosimildo.
You are also strongly biased, but in the opposite direction IMO. It
is quite funny reading this statement from you:
Quote
Things that they say makes no
sense sometimes, it just pure hate of not being MS or Windows.
Don't be so critical of people who have differing opinions from your
own. You sometimes come across this way too! :-)
Cheers,
Kevin.
 

Re:Re: Bill Todd's comments in Delphi Informant

Michael Schnell wrote:
Quote
Microsoft does play in the Linux market. Not developing for it but
trying to extinguish it.

Perhaps Borland management believes MS will succeed doing that.
I doubt that. It simply isn't logical that Microsoft will be able to
extinguish Linux. Open Source in general is not anything that Microsoft
can fight politically, legally or economically. Even if they have some
limited success in the U.S. it will continue to develop internationally.
I predict that Microsoft will eventually start writing software for
Linux. Although, they may do it through 3rd parties. They've already
done this with Windows Media technologies. There is a third party
developing Windows Media stuff for Linux on behalf of Microsoft.
Cheers,
Kevin.
 

Re:Re: Bill Todd's comments in Delphi Informant

Michael Schnell < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in message news:< XXXX@XXXXX.COM >...
Quote
publishing that Linux is "un-American"
LOL! no wonder the non-U.S. world is embracing it.
 

Re:Re: Bill Todd's comments in Delphi Informant

"Eric Engler" wrote
Quote

But his comment about Borland's dissatisfaction with Kylix in the
marketplace seems to be on target.
Anyway, for those of you who don't follow delphi.non-tech, go there and read
Danny Thorpe's reaction to my posting (thread "Will Delphi 8 be Linux
compatible?") today... those are encouraging sounds!
Kristofer