Board index » delphi » Re: Lino and Delphi

Re: Lino and Delphi


2005-08-04 10:05:13 PM
delphi89
Adam Roslon writes:
Quote
In article <XXXX@XXXXX.COM>,
XXXX@XXXXX.COM says...
>Maybe the users are bored of telling Borland what they need, and the
>lack of capacity to solve common and simple situations in the
>past(releasing a fully functional ide, by example) make they start
>trying to put the rigth ideas in Borlanders?
>
>
>

Speaking of getting bored of telling Borland what to do what ever
happened with the Delphi 2005 survey

bdn.borland.com/article/0,1410,33065,00.html

infopoll.net/live/surveys/s27784.htm

It seemed to be talked about for a day or two then vanished. I'm
really interested in the results. I would like to see what the views of
the Delphi community are as a whole.
Results of the polls are used to better the product. They are not
published to the community. The main reason I have heard is not
wanting to share market research with the competition.
--
Robert Love
Blog: peakxml.com
 
 

Re: Lino and Delphi

Brian Moelk <XXXX@XXXXX.COM>wrote in
Quote
But did you actually *say* anything?
Pay as much attention to Coates as you would any other stock holder.
--
Iman
 

Re: Lino and Delphi

"Iman L Crawford" wrote
Quote

Pay as much attention to Coates as you would any other stock holder.
...with no particular expertise in the software tools business. <g>
bobD
 

Re: Lino and Delphi

siegfriedn writes:
Quote
IMO 'Delphi' is too complex for a small company to maintain. Even for
a company like Borland it is becoming tough, That is probably why
they want to put everything into one IDE.. total madness IMO.
On the contrary, a common IDE solves problems like maintaining the
codebase for the IDE, and including products in the same package (eg
Delphi and C++Builder) saves bundles on production costs.
--
Dave Nottage [TeamB]
 

Re: Lino and Delphi

Quote
Pay as much attention to Coates as you would any other stock holder.
The reason his fif{*word*249} minutes aren't up yet is people keep bring this
guy up as if his option is anything more than an op-ed in a trade rag
that no one reads. I don't get it idiots make comments everyday on the
Internet why are people listening to this loser. He doesn't even have a
clue of what it takes to develop software.
 

Re: Lino and Delphi

Quote
>LOL...although I really appreciate the 24 hours of Delphi, they had a
>captive audience and were preaching to the choir.

Sounds like a part of Marketing 101 to me.
Sure, but that doesn't mean they consider Delphi an integral part of their
ALM strategy. It would be idiotic to have a 24 hours of Delphi and not
mention Delphi.
 

Re: Lino and Delphi

"Adam Roslon" <XXXX@XXXXX.COM>writes
Quote
This just reminded me of something that struck me funny. I was in an end
of the month progress meeting last Friday at one of our client's
facilities. A divisional VP happened to be in town and decided to sit in
on the metteing, after about ten in minutes of listening to technical
flimflam he interrupted the project manager and said I am not interested
in acronyms I just want to know if you have a solution to the problem. I
couldn't help but burst of laughing. it is too bad he doesn't show up for
all the meeting, they would be much shorter and far more productive.
I want to work for that guy. :-)
-Johnnie
 

Re: Lino and Delphi

Quote

tinyurl.com/74adw

Just a couple of comments:
1. There is no need to make the new company private. A spinoff generally
gets more value to shareholders--for both the new and old companies.
2. The spinoff ought to be the Design and Deploy categories. Develop
ought to retain the Borland name. For those aspects which are already
integrated, suitable licensing deals could be arranged.
Both companies would have substantial revenues. And more importantly, both
would be forced to focus on their own niches to be sucessful. The Develop
category is still huge, and seeing more of the revenue generated by it
reinvested in the Delphi/C++ Builder/JBuilder products (and whatever else
they envision) would be welcome.
But of course, the BOD would have to agree to explore such things. Given
that Mr. Coates has found it necessary to make an independent proposal, it
seems that the current BOD as well as current management has no interest in
this.
 

Re: Lino and Delphi

Quote
You should be, though. For the reasons Wayne gave, a strong enterprise
market for Delphi means life gets easier for small and independent Delphi
users. Disappearance from corporate desks means eventual further
marginalization and death.
Yes, but ultimately, like I said before, how well Delphi does comes down to
the value Delphi in and of itself offers.
Quote
Too many small developers say "I don't need [modeling, source control,
requirements management]" when they should be realizing that, while they
may
not use them, their integrated existence vastly increases Delphi's
potential
reach and market share, aiding us all.
Well, I need many of those things, I just don't need it tightly integrated
and from one vendor. To me, there is nothing really exciting about software
that helps manage the process of software development. I certainly have my
opinions and experiences as to what methodology works and what doesn't work.
But in most cases simple, effective (and in some cases free) software work
quite well in supporting the software development process.
Can there be improvements in the process and is there a market for ALM
products? Sure. Are they exciting for me? Not really.
My main issue is that the focus of Borland (as a whole) has shifted away
from making the best development tools for developers to pushing CaliberRM,
Together and more process oriented products to IT managers.
For example, the lack of including a Win32 profiler for Delphi is negligent.
IMO, if they were really focused on making the best tools, they would have
put one in a long time ago.
Quote
Calls for Delphi to go it alone strike me as calls for a restaurant to
reduce its menu to one item because that is what I happen to order. The
only
possible result is the restaurant going out of business.
That's not how I see it. it is about making Delphi an important product by
making it the only product. If Borland starts to treat Delphi as an
integral part of their overall strategy, then I would be very happy.
 

Re: Lino and Delphi

Quote
In the long term, however--MS tolerates major 3rd party add-ins to its
toolset only as a catch-up measure--until they can grok the idea and
acquire
the necessary code. If Borland hangs its SDO/ALM vision on integration
with
MS tools, it has several possible futures but none of them good: see
Stacker, Sybase, Visio, et. al.
So when MS catches on to SDO/ALM and crushes Borland with something
like....oh I don't know...the MS VS Team System? Borland's long term plan B
is to dust off Delphi to save the day?
 

Re: Lino and Delphi

Quote
All I have ever used Delphi for are enterprise level architectures. I've
never used Delphi (for pay) as a desktop application generator.
Good point, me too. ;)
Quote
There is no technical reason why Delphi cannot be included in Borland's
Enterprise level marketing.
Exactly.
 

Re: Lino and Delphi

Quote
Give us an example of the type of language-only company you envision that
has anywhere near Delphi's current reach.
Delphi would have a leg up on many of its competitors because of it's
heritage, but companies like RealBasic and Eiffel seem to be stable and
alive. I am not saying it is great, but it is better than being milked until a
slow death in the New Borland....
 

Re: Lino and Delphi

Bob Dawson writes:
...
Quote
Understood. It remains, however, that Ent and Architect sales may
still help subsidize the Pro level product, where the upgrade
discount is much greater than it is for the higher SKUs.
I always buy the Enterprise version (Architect came after D6) because I need
connection to db servers and other features, so that does not help me :-)
Ralf
 

Re: Lino and Delphi

Quote
Pay as much attention to Coates as you would any other stock holder.
Well...the whole post struck me as being quite obvious.
 

Re: Lino and Delphi

Quote
The reason his fif{*word*249} minutes aren't up yet is people keep bring this
guy up as if his option is anything more than an op-ed in a trade rag
that no one reads. I don't get it idiots make comments everyday on the
Internet why are people listening to this loser. He doesn't even have a
clue of what it takes to develop software.
I think the reason why people with experience in software development are
bringing it up is that they agree with him or share his thoughts. The
reason why I discuss it is because I think it is an idea worth serious
consideration and I am concerned about the way Borland has managed Delphi
recently.