Board index » delphi » Re: Future of Delphi 7.x - need official word from Borland

Re: Future of Delphi 7.x - need official word from Borland


2005-01-26 05:07:10 PM
delphi186
"Edmund" <XXXX@XXXXX.COM>a écrit dans le message de news:
41f75425$XXXX@XXXXX.COM...
Quote
I *hope* you mean 2005, because if 2500 exists, I must be
living under some rock in the boonies.
This refers to the penchant some folks have for using 2K5 as an
'abbreviation' for 2005 when it actually infers 2500.
Joanna
Consultant Software Engineer
TeamBUG support for UK-BUG
TeamMM support for ModelMaker
 
 

Re: Future of Delphi 7.x - need official word from Borland

Captain Jake sighed and writes::
Quote
>So what's your point?


That it is silly to expect them to, now.

I agree on that point, but with a bit of disappointment. I have
D7 myself, and have upgraded it to the update 1.
The problem I have with this is that they can do this ad infinitum.
This is what I am a bit bitter about. They can release a version
and take their sweet time to release an update and by the time
they do, a new version will be out with the problems fixed(and
more bugs introduced).
I understand the need for profit, since Borland is a profit-
orientated company; but when customers become embittered by
this process (buy version, wait for update, (if update exists,
download), if not a new version comes out, go back to step one).
So to Eyal, it will certainly be a cold day in a hot place
before Borland gives a flying two-way-trip about old versions.
Am I irked? Yes. Do I have an endless supply of money to
keep up with Borland's thirst for producing new versions
every year or two? No.
But what I am looking forward to is the next version which
supposedly has Delphi and C++ together.
Edmund
 

Re: Future of Delphi 7.x - need official word from Borland

"Joanna Carter (TeamB)" <XXXX@XXXXX.COM>writes
Quote
"Edmund" <XXXX@XXXXX.COM>a écrit dans le message de news:
41f75425$XXXX@XXXXX.COM...
>I *hope* you mean 2005, because if 2500 exists, I must be
>living under some rock in the boonies.
This refers to the penchant some folks have for using 2K5 as an
'abbreviation' for 2005 when it actually infers 2500.
Well, I'd think that 2K5 ought to be understood as 2005, no matter
whether it is confusing or not. 2.5K, however, should be understood as 2500
indeed.
Alan.
 

Re: Future of Delphi 7.x - need official word from Borland

Captain Jake sighed and writes::
Quote

Indeed. For example, Windows XP is the most complicated Windows yet, but it
is rock solid, especially compared to the much simpler Win9x series or the
patheic but much simpler Win16 versions of Windows.
Depends, really. I can simply make Windows XP hang there by just viewing
the Network Neighbourhood. I don't like WinXP. Hate it in fact.
It might be 'stable', but it certainly isn't as great as W2K. Pity
M$ had to go nuts and create WinXP. Don't get me wrong. I have Win2k
*and* Windows XP pro at home. So I am not speaking out of heresay, but
actual experience.
But, AFAICR, Win16 version of Windows *wasn't* an O/S. Was just
some GUI shell on top of DOS.
Of course... standard disclaimer: YMMV.
 

Re: Future of Delphi 7.x - need official word from Borland

Quote
Seems like 7 is the magic number....
Actually, I don't think you're that far off the mark. There seems to be
a marketing thing against going to big version numbers - the current
trend seems to be to change to years after a while
Cheers,
Jim Cooper
_______________________________________________
Jim Cooper XXXX@XXXXX.COM
Falafel Software www.falafelsoft.com
_______________________________________________
 

Re: Future of Delphi 7.x - need official word from Borland

Quote
I expect Borland to be committed to D7
Then I think you will be very disappointed :-)
Cheers,
Jim Cooper
_______________________________________________
Jim Cooper XXXX@XXXXX.COM
Falafel Software www.falafelsoft.com
_______________________________________________
 

Re: Future of Delphi 7.x - need official word from Borland

Eric Schreiber sighed and writes::
Quote
Eyal writes:


>>The 7 in Delphi 7 is the version number,



>That's an insult.


You're perhaps a bit too easily insulted.
Wouldn't this be a bit insensitive?
Quote

While your distaste for D2005 isn't unreasonable, I believe you will find
that it is, in fact, the direct succesor to D7.
That would sound correct, since Delphi 8 was entirely .NET.
Quote
>I expect Borland to be committed to D7, because as it looks now Delphi 7 is
>the last Win32-centric version of Delphi, and because I do not have
>an alternative.


Get used to disappointment.
I agree. This is one way to get over Borland's antics. Get used
to being disappointed, then if Borland throws a GPF app at you,
you won't feel a thing. :) Hey, I don't think that is right, but
what can one do aside for pack one's bags and head elsewhere?
 

Re: Future of Delphi 7.x - need official word from Borland

Quote
Yeah, he also asked people to report, rate and vote for Delphi 7 bugs, an
advice that I and many others took seriously, only to get disappointed.
This time the votes will make a difference ;-)
Cheers,
Jim Cooper
_______________________________________________
Jim Cooper XXXX@XXXXX.COM
Falafel Software www.falafelsoft.com
_______________________________________________
 

Re: Future of Delphi 7.x - need official word from Borland

Quote
Are you sure that NT/2K and XP code is based on the 9x kernel? I am
not.
No, they aren't. NT was a complete rewrite. That was how they "dropped
the DOS code", among other things.
Cheers,
Jim Cooper
_______________________________________________
Jim Cooper XXXX@XXXXX.COM
Falafel Software www.falafelsoft.com
_______________________________________________
 

Re: Future of Delphi 7.x - need official word from Borland

"Alan Garny" <XXXX@XXXXX.COM>a écrit dans le message de news:
XXXX@XXXXX.COM...
Quote
Well, I'd think that 2K5 ought to be understood as 2005, no matter
whether it is confusing or not. 2.5K, however, should be understood as 2500
indeed.
In the world of electronics as well as other places, this is industry
standard notation where the decimal point is replaced by the symbol for the
denominator.
Joanna
Consultant Software Engineer
TeamBUG support for UK-BUG
TeamMM support for ModelMaker
 

Re: Future of Delphi 7.x - need official word from Borland

Quote
This refers to the penchant some folks have for using 2K5 as an
'abbreviation' for 2005 when it actually infers 2500.
Those who think D2K5 stands for 2500 are out of touch IMO :-))
Everyone using modern chat language should be able to deducde the meaning.
You say/speak/pronounce "Delphi 2000 AND 5" [= Delphi 2005]
... so D2K5 = "Delphi 2000 (2K) [and] 5". [= Delphi 2005]
It's like 4U, U2, UR, U, BRB, BBL, FFS, RTFM, and alike :-)
best regards
Thomas
 

Re: Future of Delphi 7.x - need official word from Borland

"Joanna Carter (TeamB)" <XXXX@XXXXX.COM>writes
Quote
"Alan Garny" <XXXX@XXXXX.COM>a écrit dans le message de news:
XXXX@XXXXX.COM...

>Well, I'd think that 2K5 ought to be understood as 2005, no matter
>whether it is confusing or not. 2.5K, however, should be understood as
>2500
>indeed.

In the world of electronics as well as other places, this is industry
standard notation where the decimal point is replaced by the symbol for
the
denominator.
Doesn't sound logical to me, but then again... So, so be it then...
Alan.
 

Re: Future of Delphi 7.x - need official word from Borland

Alan Garny writes:
Quote
>In the world of electronics as well as other places, this is
>industry standard notation where the decimal point is replaced by
>the symbol for the
>denominator.

Doesn't sound logical to me, but then again... So, so be it then...
Nor me, but some countries rather than 2,005.00 would have 2.005,00 and
that to me is just freaky.
 

Re: Future of Delphi 7.x - need official word from Borland

Eyal schrieb:
Quote
JED writes:

>Eyal writes:
>
>Do you have a particular bug in Delphi 7 that you can not workaround?
>

QualityCentral is full of them. For me, BiDi issues are at the top of
the list. Long time ago I also considered dbExpress issues to be
high-priority, but I simply gave up on the dbx fiasco and switched to IBO.
Why was dbExpress a fiasco for you? I use it with MySQL and Firebird
(ok, MySQL without transactions) and it is much faster than IBO and as
stable as IBO.
Concerning Delphi 7 and D2005: At the moment D2005 has bugs and seems unstable
under some conditions. All versions of Delphi had problems in some parts
in the past. Other software is buggy too, that is life. If you develop
software, do you release bug fixes for versions that are nearly 3 years
old with 2 newer versions since the original release?
Regards,
Carmen
 

Re: Future of Delphi 7.x - need official word from Borland

"Tom Reiertsen" <XXXX@XXXXX.COM>writes
Quote
"Eyal" <XXXX@XXXXX.COM>skrev i melding
news:41f70cf1$XXXX@XXXXX.COM...
>
>While I am sure your program is great, I can not test it because
>I don't want to contaminate my system with .NET and D2005.
>

There is your problem. You think that installing .Net will contaminate
your
system. This is not the case. .Net is not a virus, it is a runtime. Just
get
over your obsession with .Net and you will be just fine like the rest of
us.
<snip>
As distrustful as I am of M$ and their {*word*108}, I accept .net as the next
big thing, but personally I prefer a faster IDE. I dislike waiting on the
machine to become ready to listen to me. It disrupts my rhythm and forces
my primary focus away from the task at hand.
Wasn't the whole point of RAD to take less time and effort with a better
IDE? Didn't Borland pioneer many great innovations, beginning with clicking
on error messages jumping into the code? With hardware prices continuing to
fall, the cost of programmers' salaries is a major cost, and slow software
aggravates this.
To return to the original question, why is Borland not willing to sell Delphi 7 to
those of us who prefer it?
Kirk Halgren
"Inventing is a combination of brains and materials. The more brains you
use, the less material you need."
--Charles Franklin Kettering, inventor of the battery ignition and the
electrical starter.