

Borland Linux Developer Survey 161
Borland is currently running
a poll to test the demand from the Linux community for porting their development tools. What with the Code Warrior folks, and all the IDEs coming around, it's a good signal of interest in the community. As well, Inprise is looking to hire a Seniuor R&D Engineer (for porting Delphi), as well as a Linux Developer Relations Mgr.
Slashdotted !!! (Score:1)
I agree - Borland: Please Pay Attention (Score:1)
With Motif, all executables will need to be statically linked, and nothing would be under 2 megs. That is REALLY BAD..... especially since most software will probably be distributed over the Internet.
Qt would be a good choice *IF* you can work out a licensing deal with Troll Tech to allow commercial development with Delphi out of the box. This would be in everyone's interest - they should be willing to license it, since they'd get a royalty from every Delphi sale and gain a LOT of users.
If you can't work out a deal with the Trolls, I recommend GTK, or maybe developing your own widget set (but please do open source it if you do that).
Thanks
Re:good IDE, bad language (Score:1)
Oh yeah, and WordStar is the best word processor ever written! I'm still more productive in it than I am in most GUI WPs. Sure, it's nothing fancy, but for text editing it's great. Really efficient once you learn the Ctrl codes for cursor movement and other functions.
Delphi is nice (Score:1)
On the other hand, programs built this manner would be difficult to collaborate on or distribute, as you'd have to have Delphi to build or modify 'em. Unless Linux Delphi churned out code that could be built with gpc (is Gnu Pascal still being actively developed? Is it in a usable state?) without a copy of Delphi, it would only be useful for software that's distributed binary-only.
Project Build Tool (Score:1)
A tool which actually did proper dependancies and did silly things like cache headers so dependancy checks didn't take so long.
A tool which didn't require recursive execution which eats up needless CPU and RAM reparsing the same rules over and over and over and over.
A tool which could actually do cross-directory dependancies easily and cleanly.
A tool which did parallel and distributed builds correctly every time.
A tool which actually understands the compilers and interpreters and understands distribution package files in a way as to know what programs are installed and what aren't correctly.
A tool which doesn't require unnecessarily long human edited files
Unfortunatly, working on primarily open source projects makes commercial tools pretty much worthless for this sort of thing. Sigh.
--
Umm... Thats just the server. Big deal. (Score:1)
The day Microsoft ports any of its GUI-based tools over to Linux will be the day Slashdot goes in-freaking-sane.
Too late (Score:1)
Re:Oh yeah! (Score:1)
Screw Inprise. Years ago, Borland dropped their OS2 product like a hot potato and climbed directly in bed with Microsoft. Those of us who were servicing the (then) 20 million OS2 licenses were left stranded on the beach.
I wouldn't use a Borland product if it meant I had to write code on clay tablets in cuniform.
If we could get to their site.... (Score:1)
It seems to be flooded right now with hits, I haven't been able to log in all day!
I certainly want to use borland on Linux....it only makes sense.
Yes. Well,C++Builder with GCC-compatibility. (Score:1)
Then, of course, provide their world-class IDE, with *two-way* tools (the IDE generates code which you can edit, unlike most GUI builders).
And include their huge component library, with pre-compiled components for drag-n-drop database access, FTP, HTTP, POP3, GUI Widgets, etc.
If they get the compiler right, they should be able to (mostly) recompile their components to run on Linux. They could use winelib to help them do this easily (though that would give the apps a Windows look and feel).
So, that's what I'd do if I were Borland (and what I hope they do).
Warren E. Downs, Systems Engineer
Advanced BusinessLink
Good business sense. (Score:2)
On the other hand, the Free software community has done very well for itself in terms of development tools. I can't think of anything we're really lacking that Borland provides. Sure there are somethings but in general, there aren't too many if any development tasks you can't get done already. That leaves me wondering where Delphi, JBuilder, IBM's Visual Age compilers, etc.. all fit in to the linux infrastructure. It provides an attractive option for ISVs who demand support but most OSS/FS projects, if not all, will still use GCC.
I would like to play with Delphi on linux, especially if it can build GTK+ or QT GUIs but I'm not sure I'd shell out the $200 for it and I can't say I know a lot of linux people who would.
Warn them off Motif (Score:1)
Re:Do UNIX developers even use these? (Score:1)
Sure, each new version (TPW 1.5, BPW 7.0, Delphi...) was more bloated than the previous one, but they definitely could do wonderful tools for not-so-powerful boxes at that time.
Dunno if I would go back to any mono-platform devel tool, though.
Re:Look out! (Score:1)
The MS announcement should be read for what it is, they paied for using our software patents ($100 million) and bought some stock. That's common practice in settlements like this. Please note that the "preferred stock" is a legal term and that MS doesn't have any representation in the board of directors. Our direction hasn't changed a bit since we closed the deal.
Instead of listening to whispers
Take care,
Paolo Ciccone
JBuilder R&D
Re:What choices? (Score:1)
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
Re:Slashdotted !!! (Score:1)
Will try this weekend.
Re:Slashdotted !!! (Score:1)
www5.inprise.com is NOT working (Score:1)
Is Borland broke? Or is it the
Yes! I will buy! (Score:1)
hits the shelves, in much the same way I have
for windows, but this time i'll be even happier
Re:I would like to have them IF... (Score:1)
If I buy a commercial compiler it is because I
want to be free to sell my code without having
to reveal my source code to the world.
Borland is well aware of our needs as software
developpers and would not tie us to libraries
that we can't use without either giving all the
source away or paying huge prices for a license.
As for using QT if you wish I fail to see why
you couldn't do it. With Borland C++ I've always
bought the source code of the libraries. Just
rewrite the libraries to suit your needs.
Re:Borland + Linux???? (Score:1)
Borland dropped support for OS/2 for
political reasons.
Borland's bread and butter lies with winblows
and pissing off Microsoft by releasing an
OS/2 version didn't help them getting support.
Now is a different world with the government's
lawsuit.
Re:Not interested (Score:1)
refuse to port software to Linux because it
is too much work. Our bread and butter is
on winblows whether or not we like it.
The tools on Linux for the most part require
that we release the source code which is
completely out of the questions.
As for Xemac :
HA!HA!HA!HA!HA!HA!HA!HA!HA!HA!HA!HA!HA!HA!HA!HA
HA!HA!HA!HA!HA!HA!HA!HA!HA!HA!HA!HA!HA!HA!HA!HA
I installed this and shit
It has been removed not very long after
the large vocabulary of swears that had to
used. What a bloated piece of shit! I can say
the X version is better than the console
version but that's about it.
I prefer a good IDE like Borland's idea.
Actually I would love an IDE absolutely
identical to that of Borland C++ 3.1 for DOS.
I'd live with the one like on winblows as a
second choice.
Rhide is too unstable folks, not a valid
choice, it won't even compile under SuSE 6.1
anyhow. It kept crashing when I used in
with Slackware, Redhat 4.2, 5.1 and 5.2
Re:the need for productivity (Score:1)
YES! (Score:1)
This would be a REAL boost on Linux and Delphi (of course), and Borland knows this.
I like this, I really like this
Can I get an amen from the congregation! (Score:1)
I am grateful that there are code monkeys out there that enjoy low-level programming. We are forever indebted to them, but . . .
I don't thing my company is going to pay me to write device drivers or hack the kernel. They need rapidly developed, quality apps. Delphi has been an excellent tool to accomplish this, even with the limitations inherent to Win32.
Delphi for Linux would help immensely in the push to the desktop and I would be the first one on my block to purchase it.
Absolutely (Score:1)
some more Borland/Inprise/InterBase advocacy: (Score:2)
"Now I wonder what their current relationship with InterBase (Inprise?) is."
'borland.com' is a division of Inprise; even before they brought back the name in this *corporate* sense, the *products* still used the old brand. They were and are 'Borland Delphi (etc), from Inprise', only now with an inserted 'from borland.com, a division of'.
The middleware, Entera, Visibroker, and so on, is and was branded Inprise; they reserve the Borland name for the development tools.
And InterBase is, at it has been for years, owned by InterBase Corp. (or Inc, whatever), a wholly-owned subsidiary of Inprise (formerly of Borland).
"As far as I know, InterBase grew out of an independent team of programmers long ago before Borland came to scene. Or am I wrong?"
Yes and no.
Borland acquired InterBase with its buy-up of Ashton-Tate; you know, the guys behind dBase? It was a Borland product for a while, but got spun out into its own subsidiary long (a year, two?) before the name change to Inprise.
So you're wrong, if you meant to imply that Borland bought out the independant gang *directly*; but you're right in that there *was* such a gang (ex-employees of something big -- DEC, perhaps?), that was bought up by Ashton-Tate. I remember a few years ago, when Borland dBase wasn't doing too well and everybody was saying how stupid it was of Borland to buy A-T, how some columnist (might have been John Dvorak, of all people) wrote that perhaps that didn't matter; that perhaps the secret crown jewel that Borland was *really* after was InterBase.
Anyway, InterBase has kind of come full circle, in that it now is a corporation of its own again. Except that it's a subsidiary, of course.
"This way or that way, Linux developers should really take a look into InterBase DBMS. BTW, they still offer (oldish) 4.0 for Linux free of charge."
Yup! See my URL above? Yes, I *did* change it a few months back -- because IB moved the download! Before that, it pointed to where IB4/Linux was *then*; I must have had it for over a year now, altogether.
"Combined with the open-sourced AOLserver (see previous Slashdot story) with AOLserver driver for InterBase, it can be helluva web/db application tool."
Don't forget to go to http://www.photo.net/wtr/ and check out the whole -- freely downloadable, Open Source? -- interactive web site system by Philip Greenspun!
Christian R. Conrad
MY opinions, not my employer's - Hedengren, Finland.
Developers! This is your chance! (Score:1)
Go vote!
Re:I would like to have them IF... (Score:1)
you from selling source code written and tested
with it, or the binaries that it compiles from
that code.
If you think that's the license for the GNU
compiler GCC, you are mistaken.
Re:Borland + Linux???? (Score:1)
How about it?: subscribe to the newsgroup comp.os.cpm, and there you'll find a fellow with a site that has TP/CPM, TP/CPM86, and a bunch else ready for download. CP/M ain't exactly dead yet, despite rumors to that effect.
(Borland denies ever selling such a product now, it seems.)
Re:YAACT (Yet Another AC Troll) (Score:2)
Not to mention that standarization is very important in some corporate environments. I imagine it would be much easier to add/replace developers if you had a standard IDE system rather than one or two guys custom emacs macros and shell scripts. This might impair on an individual developer's flexibilty, but allows management to treat developers more like resources and reduces the amount job-security-enhancing voodoo involved.
--
Re:Borland + Linux???? (Score:1)
VDKBuilder - a C++/GTK wrapped IDE (Score:1)
very well (just passed the one year anniversary mark - congrats Mario & team!). It's all opensourced, and is based upon a library (VDK) that is similar to Borlands OWL/VCL (hence then name). It's got an editor, project manager, widget inspector, and GUI builder. The only thing it lacks up to this point is a good bugger (which I'm sure is on the way). Why not give it a try? http://www.guest.net/homepages/mmotta/vdkbuilder/
You should be - portability to windows (Score:1)
How would you like to be able to write one program to work in Windows and on Linux?
Re:IDEs on Linux? (Score:1)
Borland-Inprise-InterBase ... some advocacy (Score:1)
Borland deserves some credits from us Linux folks. I've always had good times with Borland tools - from Turbo C coding in old DOS days till these days.
Now I wonder what their current relationship with InterBase (Inprise?) is. As far as I know, InterBase grew out of an independent team of programmers long ago before Borland came to scene. Or am I wrong?
This way or that way, Linux developers should really take a look into InterBase DBMS [interbase.com]. BTW, they still offer (oldish) 4.0 for Linux free of charge [interbase.com]. Combined with the open-sourced AOLserver (see previous Slashdot story) with AOLserver driver for InterBase [lavsa.com], it can be helluva web/db application tool.
Re:jobs at Borland, Delphi for Linux (Score:1)
You worked there for more than a year, you tell us. If you went in for the sort of unsubstantiated whiteanting you display here, small wonder they gave you the bullet, and deservedly so. Take your word for it? NO CHANCE.
B) The Delphi IDE has no architecture at all! It is one big mess and it will be difficult to port to any other system. Good luck!
I guess I can agree that the IDE has suffered from creeping featurism along with most of its competitors. Still, it works well enough.
I guess there would be some merit in starting the IDE afresh for Linux with a reduced set of features - after all, the main benefits of Delphi are the component and object pascal features.
I challenge you to put your money where your mouth is and join up with either the Lazarus/VDK project, or the Megido project, both of whom are attempting to produce Open Source ports of Delphi for Linux using the Free Pascal compiler and GTK+. Prove that the problems you had were caused by Borland and not by you.
(I'd go for Lazarus myself - the Megido guys can't even keep up with offers of help on their mailing lists).
Re:What about JBuilder? (Score:1)
Re:YAACT (Yet Another AC Troll) (Score:1)
Corporate programmers need tools for their platform of choice. Interoperability is less of an issue. This promotes linux in the Corporate world. This is a Good Thing (TM) because a bigger market means more Linux-friendly SW and HW to choose from.
Not everyone is a free software fanatic. I [have paid & will pay] for quality software on my OS of choice.
Now go away.
Re:Oh yeah! (Score:1)
I think this would be great. It's a few years since I use Borland C++ but I remember having a good time with it.
Re:They're already hiring (Score:1)
can't spell the word "definitely". Is "Sr."
short for "Sen~or"? Maybe he should have just
ended his response with "D00d!"
:-P
Re:Borland + Linux???? (Score:1)
The other port was Turbo Pascal for the Mac, which they did long ago.
The main problem with Borland (or any other vendor) porting tools to Linux, or developing tools for Linux, is that so many here seem to think that the Linux/Unix way is the only way, and won't buy the tools after they lobby for the vendor to produce.
Historically, non-Windows has meant unprofitable. As large as the computer industry is, the developer subset is much smaller, and the Linux developer subset may not support any commercial tools.
The execrable state of Linux installation, configuration, and documentation, all speak to the reality that Linux is a cult system, best suited to geeks with Unix in their backgrounds.
Oh, and before you flame me for that, I am a geek with almost no Unix in my background, but who wants almost desperately to move away from Windows. Linux has been my first pick for an alternative, and the complaints I make are based on a couple of months of intensely disappointing experience.
the need for productivity (Score:1)
After all these years of language and IDE development, it should be painfully obvious to anyone who reads
The single most valuable lesson we should all take from Windows is that freedom to choose is essential. This is what MS seek to eliminate, as they strive to control the desktop; it's what Linux strives to return, as it competes with Windows. And, it's what BeOS also offers, in another different flavor.
What I want most is to be able to develop solutions which are not portable (portability is one of the most misused and abused terms in our industry) but are platform agnostic. I want to be able to present users with a hybrid system in which each PC is used for what it does best, and the software environment presents a toolset which is consistent in its presentation on each platform.
The answer to this will not come from Wine, or any other emulator, but from development tools which make make such design and development economically practical.
Language isn't the issue: Borland can offer C++ or Pascal or Java, all of which they already support on Windows.
In the world in which programming is done for more than a hobby, productivity is a major concern, and Borland tools have kept me more productive in Windows than any others. I have no doubt that they will do the same for me under Linux. I am impatient to have them.
What excites me is not becoming intimate with the inner workings of the OS or gcc, or egcs, but the prospect of producing highly effective and stable applications in a short timeframe. That's what RAD is about, and RAD is what Borland's tools are about.
Re:They're already hiring (Score:1)
I hope you will get the URL problem fixed. Soon!
Re:Borland porting tools to Linux (Score:1)
Some of the die-hard gcc folks tend to overlook that what promotes Linux growth is good for all.
Re:What about JBuilder? (Score:1)
On their site, you can also see that they will preview JBuilder for Linux at their developers conference later this month.
Re:good IDE, bad language (Score:1)
Multiple inheritance sucks beyond any other language issue. It is not necessary, and mostly provides yet another way for things to be buggy.
Java style is best left to Java. Let each tool do its best in native form.
Container classes have been implemented in third party components for Delphi.
As to Eiffel... well, that would give them a truly no-sale tool, wouldn't it? Any commercial software company needs customers to survive. From whence would customers appear for Eiffel? All indications are that it is an interesting intellectual exercise (as is Oberon) but no risk of becoming a popular tool.
The Borland IDE supports more than the old Wordstar style interface. Brief and Epsilon mappings are also supported. Perhaps they could be persuaded to add Emacs, for those of you who appreciate that abomination. See? Each of us hates something.
I'm ready (Score:1)
The beauty of Delphi/CBuilder is the freedom they give to refocus on the real purpose of the app: getting some tasks done. In the best of all worlds, the GUI is simply a nice way of packaging a good tool so that it is easier to use. In Windows (and in X) the GUI management coding is tedious in the extreme. And there are way too many calls to remember.
In Delphi I routinely construct interfaces which would drive me crazy without such an effective tool. Without Delphi, I would not have ventured into developing Windows apps at all, but would have refocused on embedded apps.
My checkbook is ready, Borland. Bring on the tools!
I will buy! (Score:1)
Re:IDE needs (Score:1)
As much as I hate the C language, I am willing to move to it, if it is all that is supported on Linux. Life would be much better, however, with choices.
My main concern with Linux is for my own productivity. Having used Delphi since it came out, I will hate developing in any language which does not give me such a strong tool.
Re:jobs at Borland, Delphi for Linux (Score:1)
I can take Borland's word on their future plans, as I have history with their product. Taking your word, even for where you may have worked, much less in what capacity, would be a leap of faith. And you offer nothing on which such faith might be built.
Oh yeah! (Score:1)
Huh? (Score:1)
Re:Slashdotted !!! (Score:1)
Not too surprising, tho
Re:just don't throw out Ye Olde dBase code yet (Score:1)
www.dbase2000.com [http] is their website.
IDE needs (Score:1)
Oh yeah, and those of you who mentioned using Qt should check out www.kdevelop.org. KDevelop is still experimental, but actually quite good: Visual dialog builder, complete project management, class browser, integrated debugger, etc. And you don't have to use it for or with KDE if you don't want to.
--JZ
Slashdot missed the scoop + Delphi Praise (Score:1)
I also agree with the other post under this parent about several issues:
1) I get paid to write Delphi code. Not linux apps. HOWEVER, if our linux server ever went down, we'd all have to go home
2) Compared to the learning curve of C++, Object Pascal (the language behind Delphi) is a breeze to learn. Combined with a good Visual Component Library, Delphi apps are small, fast, and easy to maintain.
3) If Borland/Inprise is really serious about Linux development tools, I suspect JBuilder will be first out of the gate. It's gotten high praise from many developers and it was the main driving force behind the MS + Inprise deal a few months ago. I suspect that MS's J++ tool will be getting some serious modifications after the influx of Java technology from Inprise.
Re:Borland + Linux???? (Score:1)
Also..haven't MS bought some Inprise stock???
Agreed, but... (Score:1)
The last somewhat decent argument Microsoft has against Linux is a dearth of available applications. Anything that helps fill this gap is a good thing. And for Linux's traditional geek following, the fact that Borland has always made great software means that they're starting from a position of respect. I've always considered Borland's tools and applications to be far superior to Microsoft's, and seeing Borland lose to Microsoft's inferior products is one of the things that made me grow to hate the whole Windows culture. (And don't give me that tired illogical standards argument.)
Finally, if Borland brings its RAD tools to Linux, the corporate development world will have one more great reason to use Linux. Lots of corporate IT shops use RAD tools such as Delphi and (ptui!) Visual Basic. Delphi is far superior to Visual Basic, so it's quite fitting that it should become Linux's RAD 3.5GL
Borland IDE (Score:1)
Oh yeah, Borland site is still
Re:GNU better? (Score:1)
Wishful thinking?
Borland offers the one thing Linux doesn't lack (Score:1)
Desktop functionality would be a read plus and I figure that porting between desktops is probably much easier than porting between Operating Systems anyway. I am not sure I would use something propietary though (no flames please, use whatever software you please).
Besides, unless Borland change thier product non-trivially, I don't think Delphi or C Builder would blend well with linux anyway.
Oh, before I posted this, there were no comments so I am going to make a prediction. NO, I don't think this is to get back at Microsoft. It is simply a business exploring a new market. Microsoft will too (in fact, they already have frontpage for Linux).
--
Re:Huh? (Score:1)
I downloaded it out of curiousity, to see what it says in the README files. Took a LONG time to download. Not going to install it though, I don't trust Microsoft enough to let them loose on my system. Besides, I don't think I would trust any binaries that big unless it was RPM or something.
--
Re:Do UNIX developers even use these? (Score:1)
--
Re:good IDE, bad language (Score:1)
English as a language sucks rocks. It doesn't have a word for hottentottententententoonstelling and like Delphi it has no container classes.
Next time try to distinguish between language and product. Oh, and sign your name.
Maybe senor Rob was out shopping for a dictionary (Score:1)
I'm sorry for the convoluted tie-in to prevent off topic moderation, but I could'nt resist.
Borland + Linux???? (Score:1)
Turbo Pascal for OS/2 anyone? I can't remember any other non-Windows product from Borland. (except for Interbase, which was Unix-based when they bought it)
Re:Borland + Linux???? (Score:1)
Funny thing: Borland never managed to produce a Turbo Pascal for OS/2, while two guys (in Germany I believe) wrote a full clone of Turbo Pascal with IDE and Delphi compatibility.
YAIDE, what about brief? (Score:1)
Since there are so many other compilers/IDEs/tools what are they going to do to make it worth buying?
All very well voting yes, but if the Linux community doesnt put its money where its mouth is. They (and others) wont repeat it....
My tuppence ha'penny worth.
Beth
Re:What about JBuilder? (Score:1)
JBuilder for Solaris... Quite cool...
Almost the entire thing is written in
java (unlike JB3 for win).
And really good performace.
Once the JDK 1.2 for linux firms up
they should be able to port it
rather quickly.
GNU better? (Score:1)
I would like to have them IF... (Score:1)
... (Not a deciding factor but a nice thing to have) they create a system that allows programming for Win32 as well. One IDE for multiple platforms.
...they keep the product up to par with their Win counterparts.
I use CBuilder 3, JBuilder 2, and I am trying to find a copy of JB3 locally. They all are top notch rapid development enviroments that do not intrude with special tags in the code or any nonsense like that (Unlike Symantec Visual Cafe 3...)
RB
speaking of netshow (Score:1)
it tells me that it needs a codec i cannot seem to find.
NetShow (Score:1)
Re:good IDE, bad language (Score:1)
I prefer interfaces myself...
Also I have done little work in Delphi lately, exactly because most of my development is now done on Linux. If and when Delphi/Linux comes out, I'm sure to take a look at it.
I specially appreciated that they ask on the survey what widget set we'd prefer!
Wake up, people! (Score:1)
My personal opinion on this(somebody who programs Unix and NT for a living using all kinds of tools like C++, Perl, Smalltalk, Delphi and Java):
Delphi port is the most significant Linux port there is. Netscape and Oracle ports are nothing comparing to push this would give to Linux. There is simply nothing out there that gives comparable performance, convenience and productivity. Not even close. I'd give my money to Borland any day for this thing.
... but don't give them your address (Score:1)
What about JBuilder? (Score:1)
Java2 support is important for Linux.
Not /. 'd (Score:1)
Oh yeah, my opinion is that the link to the site is not correct. I am not sure that the much fabled
Re:good IDE, bad language (Score:1)
You know, the choice of a programming language is like a religion; personal. No one is give you crap about the language you choose, right ?
Re:YAIDE, what about brief? (Score:1)
www.eagle-software.com
Re:Are you actually going to buy it? (Score:1)
Re:Look out! (Score:1)
Borland/Inprise is still very much an independent company. MS did not purchase any voting stock, just common.
I recently talked to an area sales rep for Inprise. His statement was to the effect,"There is nothing like making your arch enemy give you a lot of money".
Re:Message from Borland (Score:1)
Re:Delphi is nice (Score:1)
Actually there is the MEGIDO project being done by some programmers in Isreal. Sorry, I forgot the web address.
They are basing it on FreePascal and hope to be Delph2 (or 3) Object Pascal complient, not counting the Win32 stuff. How they would run the VCL is anybodys guess.
Re:some more Borland/Inprise/InterBase advocacy: (Score:1)
Alexander Staubo
earlybird@mop.no
Secret Linux funding by MS? (Score:1)
Prediction: In a year MS buys the rest of Inprise (or just the Borland part) and suddenly has a full lineup of Linux development tools in its hands.
It's MS' secret plan to develop Linux tools without MS actually doing it themselves! As part of this, Borland makes their C++ tools compatible with VC++ (notice the part about MFC mentioned in the press release) with some kind of compatibility layer, and MS secretly ports their business apps -- like Office -- to Linux. NT/Win2K dies. MS offers migration tools and an emulated environment (can you say "VMware"?) for legacy NT/Win2K customers. Everybody's happy.
(I'm not crying "Conspirary!" here. I'm crying "Yeah! Go for it!")
Alexander Staubo
earlybird@mop.no
Re:www5.inprise.com is NOT working (Score:1)
Internal Server Error 500
- ------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------
Exception: EDBEngineError
Message: An error occurred while attempting to initialize the Borland Database Engine (error $2A04)
That's what you get you use your own inferior database engine. For what it's worth, the BDE has always been one of Borland's shoddiest and most redundant -- given the existence of ODBC -- products. Nothing like Delphi, for example. Let's hope they won't port the BDE to Linux as well. (*Shudder*)
Re:Secret Linux funding by MS? (Score:1)
What's this patent infringement suit you're talking about though?
MS' goal is not just to dominate the OS market, but to dominate the mainstream software market, which they are able to dominate more easily by being in control of the OS market. If they had devtools, Office etc. but not Windows, they would be an inferior position, and certainly not in control.
While a closed-source "Delphi for Linux" (or whatever) would be less of a boon than an open-source one, think about all the products being opened up these days: QuickTime, Netscape/Mozilla, AOLServer, MacOS/Darwin, the list goes on and on. Open Source has become a "hit". By the time Inprise is ready to get their Linux stuff out the door, they'll have seen the light, too. Or, if they haven't, they'll open the source out of sheer embarrassment of being the last closed-source software vendor left.
Re:Secret Linux funding by MS? (Score:1)
Thanks for the info. I guess I missed the part about the patent infringment stuff.
> Did Borland sell out or lose out? I think not!
I didn't say anything about "selling out". We're not talking about some kind of Rebel Force here. Inprise/Borland is a software company. They can partner with anyone they like. Lately they've been MS' beds; all I did was outline a possible direction for them (ie., MS partners with Inprise because it gives them an escape road to Linux development) given this.
> Looks like they are heading in this direction already - see http://www.borland.com/techvoyage/jediinitiative.h tml
Nah. At least not now. They're woefully under-coordinated, and has been since the inception. Besides, the JEDI are about "open source", but rather about helping Inprise translate C header files to ObjectPascal. (Oddly enough Inprise could have integrated their C/C++ front end compiler into Delphi and the problem would have been resolved, and JEDI totally redundant.)
They're already hiring (Score:2)
http://www.inprise.com/about/hr/99083.html
"Senior engineering position responsible for research and development of major subsystems of Delphi for Linux. Work with the entire team to create Delphi for Linux."
Also the following was posted on the Borland news server a couple of days ago :
The job offer is definately not a joke . In fact it's not the only job available for Linux at Borland, there are more available right now including for C/C++ on Linux. I wouldn't go so far as to say that we are working on things "in secret", but I will say that we are not yet prepared to make any public announcements. Stay tuned...
Michael Swindell
Sr. Product Manager
Borland Developer Solutions, Inprise Corporation
Re:The early days (Score:1)
Yes, Turbo C. I didn't much care for Pascal then, and don't now. (I also went to UC San Diego and thus had access to UCSD Pascal, making price somewhat moot. there.)
It was the first cheap C compiler for the PC. That was what was important to me, at least, and judging from Borland's sales at the time, many others as well. Up until then, C seemed to be mostly a big-iron thing (relatively speaking).
One might note that their fortunes went down as their price went up, though that is most likely coincidental. It did light a fire under other vendors, though. Borland wasn't alone at that $99 price for long.
Yeah, I submitted it last Friday too... (Score:1)
Re:Slashdot missed the scoop a week ago (Score:1)
Iteresting points here are:
1) Borland R&D is moving from R to D of a full toolset for Linux (Java, CBuilder, Delphi)
2) An new product development & hiring that starts soon after a big cash infusion cannot be a coincidence. This is most likely financed with Microsoft's money.
3) If I write an open source, free, GPL'd program, what use is that if you can't compile it without a closed-source, paid-for, proprietary compiler?
4) Even though Delphi rocks (and is IMHO, and the HO of the rest of the programmers here, a *great* language), what market penetration is it likely to get in the presence of good, stable, free C++ compilers.
5) How much commonality between Win/Delphi and Linux delphi can there be? Same IDE - yes. Same language - yes. Same non-visual classes - yes. Same Visual component library - I think not. Porting Delphi apps from Win to Linux won't be a no-brainer.
Re:Secret Linux funding by MS? (Score:1)
I very much doubt it. This may be wishfull thinking, but I'd like to see this as a scenario of Borland using MS's own money against them.
Borland's goals are not MS's goals. MS's goals, as far as I can see, are to dominate the OS market, and thereby extend that into domination of all other software markets. Borland's goal, IMHO is to gain share in the the development tools market. In this they compete with MS, against MSVC, VB, etc. In as much as Borland tools make windows apps which sell windows OS licences, they are partners with MS.
I do not think that MS put Borland up to this. I think thier customers did. The way I read it, MS paid over a lot of money to avoid a long and costly patent infrigement suit. They have little control over Borland.
Much as I like Delphi and use it daily, I am still nervously questioning the possible results of closed-source development environments on Linux.
Re:Secret Linux funding by MS? (Score:1)
"Microsoft also paid Inprise $100 million for the rights to use Inprise-patented technology in Microsoft products and to settle a number of long-standing patent and technology licensing issues. "
I believe from old threads on threads on nntp:forums.borland.com/borland.public.delphi.non
Or just consider this bit of an old post that I dug up on Deja:
> Well, there was one key phrase in the news release (which probably
>explains why the MS site is silent on this deal) and that is "to settle
>outstanding patent and licensing issues". A little spelunking in the patent
>listings reveals some interesting stuff. It seems that Borland has a patent
>on fly-over hints, and RAD two-way tools (was assigned to Borland just
>yesterday it looks like) among other things.
>One thing that really struck me
>is that several years ago, Borland got a patent on a property-method-event
>programming environment for "context-free" components IN STANDARD C++. This
>sounds very much like COOL. And then of course there are all the spreadsheet
>patents that Borland holds, which almost read like a functional spec for
>Excel.
Why do you think MS gave Borland wads of dough? Because they had to much cash and wanted to spead the wealth!?!? I repeat, MS's options in this matter were
1) Pay up, cover up, and save face with licensing agreements and handshakes
2) 2) Go to court, get bad publicity and pay up anyway.
Did Borland sell out or lose out? I think not! They had to promise to support the next generation of MS's windows technologies. Like they weren't going to do so anyway just to keep a competitive advantage. What, was MS actually scared that Borland would pull out of the Windows market and sell only UNIX dev tools instead?!?
> MS' goal is not just to dominate the OS market, but to dominate the mainstream software market,
> which they are able to dominate more easily by being in control of the OS market
Agreed, I tried to say that, sorry if it didn't come across. Embrace and extend all the way.
> While a closed-source "Delphi for Linux" (or whatever) would be less of a boon than an open-source one,
> think about all the products being opened up these day
> open the source out of sheer embarrassment of being the last closed-source software vendor left
One can but hope. Maybe we'll end up with the VCL being open-source (Source shipw with Delphi already), with Borland coordinating the fixes and extensions. Looks like they are heading in this direction already - see http://www.borland.com/techvoyage/jediinitiative.
Re:jobs at Borland, Delphi for Linux (Score:1)
> from creeping featurism along with most of
> its competitors. Still, it works well enough.
Hm, I'm not so sure of that. The Delphi IDE has in delphi 4 been the buggiest part of the whole system. Even after the third patch it's not quite right.
This is s good indicator of achitecture problems in the current release.
Borland porting tools to Linux (Score:1)
I just spent a year writing a cutting edge app for my industry in Delphi for the Win32 OS. If I could compile a Linux version of this, it could save me a whole boatload of work, not to mention my honor.
Re:good IDE, bad language (Score:1)
Re:YAIDE, what about brief? (Score:1)
http://www.crisp.com
Cheers!