Board index » delphi » Re: Lino and Delphi

Re: Lino and Delphi


2005-08-04 05:09:46 AM
delphi167
Brion L. Webster writes:
Quote
I threw it in just for you!
Hey, I am going to be mentioning Intrabuilder in my talk in Houston!
--
Nick Hodges -- TeamB
Lemanix Corporation -- www.lemanix.com
Read my Blog -- www.lemanix.com/nick
 
 

Re: Lino and Delphi

Brian Moelk writes:
Quote
Sure, but you can certainly understand the argument that it is less of
a strategic imperative if they are separate companies.
I guess so, but given that the market is clearly headed in that
direction -- see Visual Studio Team System -- I don't see why Delphi
wouldn't keep up.
--
Nick Hodges -- TeamB
Lemanix Corporation -- www.lemanix.com
Read my Blog -- www.lemanix.com/nick
 

Re: Lino and Delphi

TObject writes:
Quote
I think Borland should concentrate on Delphi, not abandon it.
It's all well and good to say that, but it is becoming clearer every day
that this isn't happening and isn't going to happen. So, given that,
what to do?
Quote
Delphi is perfectly capable of bringing large money if it is treated
as the first class citizen rather than cash cow.
I couldn't agree more. See above.
--
Nick Hodges -- TeamB
Lemanix Corporation -- www.lemanix.com
Read my Blog -- www.lemanix.com/nick
 

Re: Lino and Delphi

From the article:
Quote
>of taking its profit and rerouting it to ALM and SDO investments. Is this
>true?
>The answer, unfortunately, is yes, it is true.
So when you spin off Delphi you only have a money loosing company left. The
only way this works out if
a. someone is willing to spent a lot off money to get the ALM/SDO succesful.
b. You sell Delphi for an enormous amount shifting the burden to the Delphi
'startup'
Both strategies sound like a sure way to a chapter 11 status for either
Delphi or the Non-Delphi company.
Maybe the question should be: why aren't we making money on this overhyped
ALM/SDO stuff? The only answer I can imagine is: because only the people who
talk about it actually make a profit from it.
Netto: let's hope option a. is the outcome of all this.
regards,
Martin
 

Re: Lino and Delphi

"Nick Hodges [TeamB]" <XXXX@XXXXX.COM>writes
Quote
Brian Moelk writes:

>Sure, but you can certainly understand the argument that it is less of
>a strategic imperative if they are separate companies.

I guess so, but given that the market is clearly headed in that
direction -- see Visual Studio Team System -- I don't see why Delphi
wouldn't keep up.

Well, "keeping up" is the key. And there are some key areas that DELPHI THE
PRODUCT needs to keep up with before it starts expanding into entirely new
territory. Delphi-the-product needs a native 64-bit compiler otherwise, it
will not continue to be a credible development tool. We Win32 Delphi
Developers don't need it now. But we need it to be announced that a 64-bit
compiler is scheduled for development at least by 2009, but preferably 2008.
Win32 developers would have to wait, but that is OK, at least we can have a
plan of migration for our existing source code, running on the same API it
was originally developed for. that is what will provide the maximum ROI for
Win32 Delphi customers. I see no reason why I should s{*word*99} a single line of
my Win32 code if I don't have to. And the fact is, I shouldn't have to,
since a logical upgrade path has already been provided by MS, namely the
Win64 API.
-- d
---------------------------------------------------
Need to see what's happening?
Check out the Delphi Community Blog Aggregator
delphi.flashblogger.com
 

Re: Lino and Delphi

Quote
I guess so, but given that the market is clearly headed in that
direction -- see Visual Studio Team System -- I don't see why Delphi
wouldn't keep up.
They probably would, but if they were a separate company, I suspect they'd
push to integrate with the VS Team System over Borland's ALM/SDO stuff
(unless of course they have already done most of that work) for the same
reasons why Borland would push to integrate VS over BDS.
Brion was saying that Borland's ALM/SDO wouldn't focus as much on BDS
integration and I think that is a fair assesment. IOW, any integration of
BDS and Borland's ALM/SDO products would be done by Delphi Inc., not
Borland.
 

Re: Lino and Delphi

Martin Brekhof writes:
Quote
So when you spin off Delphi you only have a money loosing company
left.
Not true. Delphi makes money. that is one of Lino's points. Delphi is
used to fund other parts of the company. Delphi profits aren't used to
improve Delphi, they are spent on other areas.
--
Nick Hodges -- TeamB
Lemanix Corporation -- www.lemanix.com
Read my Blog -- www.lemanix.com/nick
 

Re: Lino and Delphi

Brian Moelk writes:
Quote
They probably would, but if they were a separate company, I suspect
they'd push to integrate with the VS Team System over Borland's
ALM/SDO stuff (unless of course they have already done most of that
work) for the same reasons why Borland would push to integrate VS
over BDS.
Assuming that "New Borland" would own a big chunk of "Delphi, Inc.", I
fail to see how they /wouldn't/ work to ensure Delphi's success.
--
Nick Hodges -- TeamB
Lemanix Corporation -- www.lemanix.com
Read my Blog -- www.lemanix.com/nick
 

Re: Lino and Delphi

Brian Moelk writes:
Quote
IOW, any integration of
BDS and Borland's ALM/SDO products would be done by Delphi Inc., not
Borland.
I guess I don't see that at all. Why would "New Borland" pass up a
lucrative opportunity?
--
Nick Hodges -- TeamB
Lemanix Corporation -- www.lemanix.com
Read my Blog -- www.lemanix.com/nick
 

Re: Lino and Delphi

Quote
Not true. Delphi makes money. that is one of Lino's points. Delphi is
used to fund other parts of the company. Delphi profits aren't used to
improve Delphi, they are spent on other areas.

I should have said it better: the company that is left over after Delphi is
gone is a money loosing company (the Delphi-company would be the profitable
one).
regards,
Martin
 

Re: Lino and Delphi

Quote
Assuming that "New Borland" would own a big chunk of "Delphi, Inc.", I
fail to see how they /wouldn't/ work to ensure Delphi's success.
Then they really aren't separate companies. ;)
But, yes, a lot depends on the way the deal is structured. And certainly
there is motivation on both ends to play nicely with others regardless of
who they are; but everyone on Windows needs to play ball with MS.
 

Re: Lino and Delphi

Quote
I guess I don't see that at all. Why would "New Borland" pass up a
lucrative opportunity?
Because it is not as lucrative as VS.NET and they have limited resources?
 

Re: Lino and Delphi

Brian Moelk writes:
Quote
Then they really aren't separate companies. ;)
Well, sure they are. One just owns a chunk of the other. If you don't
want to view that as "separate companies", okay, we can go with that.
But however you view it, I think Lino's right: Delphi needs to be out
from under the burden of footing the bill for the ALM push.
--
Nick Hodges -- TeamB
Lemanix Corporation -- www.lemanix.com
Read my Blog -- www.lemanix.com/nick
 

Re: Lino and Delphi

Quote
I agree. However, it may be time to "eject" JBuilder...

 

Re: Lino and Delphi

"Brian Moelk" <XXXX@XXXXX.COM>writes
Quote
>Well, I have been suggesting Delphi's best interests are not Borlad's for
over
>a year now. Here's two quick links I googled:

I bow to you, The Amazing Kreskin!

Just a simply analysis of the "facts on the ground", dear boy.
And absolutely no fear of speaking the truth even its an unpopular thing to
do...
Its not like I don't have a vested interest in seeking the truth. The truth
is important, especially when you've got ten years of source code bound up
in a toolset that should get better treatment than it has from its "keeper".
-- d
---------------------------------------------------
Need to see what's happening?
Check out the Delphi Community Blog Aggregator
delphi.flashblogger.com
 

Re: Lino and Delphi

Brian Moelk writes:
Quote
Because it is not as lucrative as VS.NET and they have limited
resources?
Okay, I can see that.
What if "Delphi, Inc" has a VS.NET plug-in?
--
Nick Hodges -- TeamB
Lemanix Corporation -- www.lemanix.com
Read my Blog -- www.lemanix.com/nick