Board index » delphi » Re: Thinking Clearly

Re: Thinking Clearly


2006-07-11 12:44:02 AM
delphi215
Jan Derk writes:
Quote
Actually, selling ECO as a VS add-in is the only sensible thing to do.
I'm not sure if it is the only sensible thing to do, but IMO, it is an
option worth considering regardless of its continued coupling with BDS.
Quote
Who would you target if you owned a .NET add-on? The
435.323.934.345.453 Visual Studio .NET users or the 3 Delphi.NET users.
Hyperbole doesn't help here. Besides, DevCo has to view ECO as an asset
in relation to another one of their assets: BDS.
Quote
Plus Delphi's competitive advantage is in native code department and
I agree that Delphi's significant advantage in in the native code side.
Quote
most native coders are no-nonsense types who don't care much about
fluff like ECO anyway.
I disagree completely with this. ;)
--
Brian Moelk
Brain Endeavor LLC
XXXX@XXXXX.COM
 
 

Re: Thinking Clearly

Brian Moelk writes:
Quote
The point is that it increases the difficulty in bringing over code
Win32 that is in all probability to use SysUtils.
Yes, it does.
--
Nick Hodges
Delphi/C# Product Manager - Borland/DevCo
Read my Blog -- blogs.borland.com/nickhodges
 

Re: Thinking Clearly

"Nick Hodges (Borland/DevCo)" <XXXX@XXXXX.COM>writes:
Quote
Please don't confuse the issue.
I nominate this discussion thread the "most ironically titled"
in recent non-tech history. ;-)
Rick Carter
XXXX@XXXXX.COM
Chair, Delphi/Paradox SIG, Cincinnati PC Users Group
 

Re: Thinking Clearly

Jan Derk writes:
Quote
Plus Delphi's competitive advantage is in native code department and
most native coders are no-nonsense types who don't care much about
fluff like ECO anyway.
Calling ECO "fluff" doesn't do much to enhance your credibility.
Randy
--
 

Re: Thinking Clearly

Brian Moelk writes:
Quote
The point is that it increases the difficulty in bringing over code
Win32 that is in all probability to use SysUtils.
Actually, it makes it less easier. ;-)
--
Nick Hodges
Delphi/C# Product Manager - Borland/DevCo
Read my Blog -- blogs.borland.com/nickhodges
 

Re: Thinking Clearly

lurkio writes:
Quote
What I would really like to know is which of those two groups of
"many developers" is the larger, which is growing and which
is not growing (or perhaps even shrinking). And I think that
knowledge has to have some bearing on where DevCo's Delphi .NET
strategy goes from here.
Certainly, but I don't think DevCo will share that information even if
they had it.
Quote
And, BTW, despite obviously being on Brian's side of the fence in
this argument I'd gladly eat humble pie if there is clear
evidence that the current approach is genuinely working and that
the majority of the user base (or even a tangibly growing minority)
are employing Delphi in its current form for their .NET development
purposes.
Agreed; I love pie. I had some great chocolate pie yesterday.
The only problem is what constitutes "clear evidence" and "genuinely
working". Also, I suspect that there would be a large objection from
the other side to the criteria of "majority".
--
Brian Moelk
Brain Endeavor LLC
XXXX@XXXXX.COM
 

Re: Thinking Clearly

Brian Moelk writes:
Quote
I'm not certain that there is any significant difference from a
business perspective between .NET and Win32 as a platform..
Some of our clients are running our code on Win32 machines where
they're not interested in installing .NET in order to make it work (if
it targetted .NET). Some of the same code is being used in .NET for
ourselves and other clients.
So I am absolutely *positive* there's a significant difference from a
business perspective.
--
Dave Nottage [TeamB]
 

Re: Thinking Clearly

"Andre Kaufmann" <XXXX@XXXXX.COM>writes
Quote
Nick Hodges (Borland/DevCo) writes:
>Dan --
>
>Agreed -- it is a nit. ;-)
>
>One point to make is that you can build an application in VCL.NET and
>it is /very/ much *backwards* compatible -- that is, an application
>built in VCL.NET will be very easy to port back to Win32. In fact, if
>someone were wanting to do cross-compatible development, I would recommend
>doing just that -- build it in VCL.NET, and then compile it for Win32.

What's the point of developing a VCL.NET application and compiling it for
Win32 ? In that case I don't need .NET.
IMHO VCL.NET is good for porting Win32 code to .NET, not the other way
round. If I use .NET framework classes I cannot go back (easily), if I
don't use .NET framework classes, why would I compile to .NET at all ?
It's not the *application* but the *library* that is important in the long
term. Your code assets are more valuable than an individual application.
You may create library functionality that you want to use in different
applications, with different targets.
Dan
 

Re: Thinking Clearly

"Brian Moelk" <XXXX@XXXXX.COM>writes
Quote
Bob Dawson writes:
>"Brian Moelk" wrote
>>Yes, only if .NET code migration is important to you.
>
>'Code migration' is a deceptive term, since migration generally implies
>one-way. Cross-platform (win32/.NET) development will continue to be a
>significant reality for some years.

I contend that "Cross-platform" is also deceptive. Certainly I agree
that cross-platform and multi-platform development will continue to be
important.

Cross-platform is more important when one is talking about Windows and
Linux, or Windows and OSX. These are things that make a difference in
deployment strategies, TCO, user interface, etc.
I'd encourage you to think more in terms of your code library than specific
applications.
While you may have no need for cross platform *applications*, you may want
to create different applications but use the same code.
Dan
 

Re: Thinking Clearly

Randy Magruder writes:
Quote
Calling ECO "fluff" doesn't do much to enhance your credibility.
The total absence of real world applications written in ECO doesn't do
much to enhance ECO's credibility.
You are probably aware of the list of good quality application built
with Delphi:
delphi.wikia.com/index.php/Good_Quality_Applications_Built_With_D
elphi
How many of the applications on that huge list were built using ECO?
I'll provide you with a hint: It sounds like zero.
Jan Derk
 

Re: Thinking Clearly

Dan Barclay writes:
Quote
I'd encourage you to think more in terms of your code library than specific
applications.
In that respect, I don't see much tangible difference between .NET or
Win32 as Interop is a perfectly suitable solution. This is something
.NET has been designed to do: leverage "legacy" code.
But if one leverages VCL.NET it means that that code needs to run in a
fully-trusted environment. It also means that various .NET techniques
cannot be leveraged to full benefit.
IMO, it is a nice quick/dirty porting solution, but not as a permanent
one because it is not the *best* .NET solution at least as it stands now.
Quote
While you may have no need for cross platform *applications*, you may want
to create different applications but use the same code.
Sure, and in those cases n-tier solutions or interop are completely
acceptable solutions to me.
--
Brian Moelk
Brain Endeavor LLC
XXXX@XXXXX.COM
 

Re: Thinking Clearly

Jan Derk writes:
Quote
I'll provide you with a hint: It sounds like zero.
Are all the apps in the whole world that are written with Delphi listed
there?
Are you saying that if it is not listed on that Wiki page, then it
doesn't exist? I would be hard pressed to by that assertion.
I know for a fact that there are 'real world' ECO applications -- but
they aren't public applications that might be listed in a site like
that.
--
Nick Hodges
Delphi/C# Product Manager - Borland/DevCo
Read my Blog -- blogs.borland.com/nickhodges
 

Re: Thinking Clearly

Jan Derk writes:
Quote
Randy Magruder writes:

>Calling ECO "fluff" doesn't do much to enhance your credibility.

The total absence of real world applications written in ECO doesn't do
much to enhance ECO's credibility.
Hm, you're out of date. There are applications and web sites written
with ECO. I know Peter Morris did his HowToDoThings.com web site with
ECO. I think Bob Swart's site is done with ECO, and I know there is a
commercial application a guy wrote in Australia with ECO. I have heard
of more, but those are the ones that just pop right into my mind.
Or do we have a definition issue with "total absence of" or "real world
application"?
Randy
--
 

Re: Thinking Clearly

Jan Derk writes:
Quote
How many of the applications on that huge list were built using ECO?

I'll provide you with a hint: It sounds like zero.
A lot of the new BDN work is being done with ECO. IIRC, Pete Morris
built his website using ECO.
--
Brian Moelk
Brain Endeavor LLC
XXXX@XXXXX.COM
 

Re: Thinking Clearly

Jan Derk writes:
Quote
How many of the applications on that huge list were built using ECO?

I'll provide you with a hint: It sounds like zero.
Although nearly all of those apps predate ECO -- many of them in fact
predate .NET 1.0 -- I do see a Bold application in there. I don't
think it is really a fair question, but I also think you made up your
answer.
--
Craig Stuntz [TeamB] ?Vertex Systems Corp. ?Columbus, OH
Delphi/InterBase Weblog : blogs.teamb.com/craigstuntz
Want to help make Delphi and InterBase better? Use QC!
qc.borland.com -- Vote for important issues