Board index » delphi » Re: Delphi Q&A

Re: Delphi Q&A


2005-09-14 03:10:27 AM
delphi180
"Anders Ohlsson (Borland)" <XXXX@XXXXX.COM>writes
Quote
bdn.borland.com/article/0,1410,33303,00.html

Q: Are developers still important to Borland?

A: This is a question that completely baffles us!
Developers are at the very core of Borland?s Software Delivery Optimization
vision.
They account for the core of the overall application lifecycle,
and thus play a central role in our strategy both now and in the future.
Well, let's rephrase the question:
Q: Is the individual developer still important to Borland? You know, the
developer that formed the core of Borland sales from TurboPascal on up
through the Delphi of a few years ago, before Borland turned it is focus to
ALM tools?
A: No, the individual developer seems increasingly unimportant to Borland.
Certainly not as important as individual developers were up until a few
years ago. Borland's focus is now changing to expensive and complicated ALM
tools that have limited use for a solo developer, or even for teams of a few
developers. Even assuming Borland's ALM tools were useful to a small team,
they are much more expensive and won't yield much more benefit to small
developers than open source or inexpensive ALM tools like Subversion version
control, Active Focus requirements management, FogBugz or Trac bug tracking
software.
-- Herbert Sitz
 
 

Re: Delphi Q&A

Peter Morris [Droopy eyes software] writes:
Quote
The question only baffles Borland because the answer is so obvious.
It is not more obvious than Borland officials have seen the need for
putting emphasizes on it in several occasions.
--
Ingvar Nilsen
www.ingvarius.com
 

Re: Delphi Q&A

Peter Morris [Droopy eyes software] writes:
Quote
The question only baffles Borland because the answer is so obvious.
It is not more obvious than Borland officials have seen the need for
putting emphasizes on it on several occasions.
--
Ingvar Nilsen
www.ingvarius.com
 

Re: Delphi Q&A

Larry Drews writes:
Quote
Many posters on this newsgroup have been
squawking for weeks for a statement from a Borland executive regarding
Borland's position on Delphi. You now have in front of you a clear
assertion that Delphi is and continues to be a significant part of
Borland's product mix, and that Borland intends to continue to invest
resources into evolving the product. What the hell else do you need
from an executive?
Can you clarify your post a little bit?
David I is the head of Developer Relations, possibly "Chief Evangelist",
but does he hold an Executive position? More specifically, one that would
appear on:
www.borland.com/us/company/leadership/index.html
What I need is for the folks on that list to use the same kind of language
in that letter to us, Delphi Developers, when they speak to the press or
make press releases.
I have much respect for David I, and have had many great interactions with
him. I rather enjoy his presentations, even if he does omit semicolons in
strange places, and insist on placing parenthesis at the end of procedures
that don't need them (evidence of a heathen C background, I suspect). But
I don't count him as an executive. He's one of those guys trying to do
their best to keep the company running despite the idiots at the helm.
-Brion
 

Re: Delphi Q&A

Eryk writes:
Quote
It is baffling that a company drones on at interminable length, playing
"buzzword bingo" with what amounts to project management software and then
seems to be 'surprised' when asked if developers are still important. We
hear vast amounts about glorified gantt charts and workflow modelling
tools and precious little about real developer concerns like compilers,
class libraries and de{*word*81}s. Developers are not Project Managers any
more than they are Accountants, HRD Droids or Janitors. All of those posts
have a part to play in software delivery of course, but it doesn't follow
that developers will have any interest in the Accounts software or "Turbo
Janitor Toilet Roll Inventory 2000".
That's part of what I tried to say to Patrick Kerpan - the audience is as
important as the message. Putting management fluff in management oriented
press releases is fine. Putting it on BDN in your blog to developers is
not.
Give us some news we want to hear, in a way we can understand it, to
balance out what the Analysts think they need to hear.
-Brion
 

Re: Delphi Q&A

"Brian Moelk" <XXXX@XXXXX.COM>writes
Quote
It helps, but still leaves the ultimate question of Delphi's importance
within the overall context of Borland's ALM strategy unanswered.

We all know that Delphi is an important product in Borland's portfolio.
It
is a cashflow positive product that can be used to fuel the ALM growth
engine.

I would like to hear an explanation of Borland's strategic thoughts
regarding Delphi within their ALM transformation; not just how Delphi will
provide integrations into their ALM suite.
Q: What is the connection between Delphi and Application Lifecycle
Management (ALM)?
A: Delphi 2005, as well as future versions of Delphi, includes integrations
with Borland's ALM offerings including the CaliberRM requirements management
and StarTeam software change and configuration tools, and we will continue
to add even more ALM support going forward. So as your needs for lifecycle
tools increase, Delphi plugs right into Borland's ALM solution.
What more are you looking for? "Delphi plugs right into Borland's ALM
solution". it is right there in black and white. Clearly ALM is driving the
ship, but it is apparently bringing Delphi along for the ride as opposed to
leaving Delphi in its wake.
 

Re: Delphi Q&A

"Peter Morris [Droopy eyes software]" <XXXX@XXXXX.COM>wrote in
message news:XXXX@XXXXX.COM...
Quote
>"Q: Are developers still important to Borland?
>A: This is a question that completely baffles us!"
>
>It's unfortunate that it baffles Borland.

I think you are reading it wrong. Remember, the question baffles Borland,
not the answer. The question only baffles Borland because the answer is
so
obvious.
If the answer were so obvious it wouldn't be on a "Frequently Asked
Questions" page I don't think.
It's obvious that love my wife, but if I never tell her that and at the
same time go on and on about how pretty the next door neighbor is, what do
you think will be the outcome?
 

Re: Delphi Q&A

"Herbert Sitz" <XXXX@XXXXX.COM>writes
Quote
"Anders Ohlsson (Borland)" <XXXX@XXXXX.COM>writes
news:43270187$XXXX@XXXXX.COM...
>bdn.borland.com/article/0,1410,33303,00.html
>
>Q: Are developers still important to Borland?
>
>A: This is a question that completely baffles us!
>Developers are at the very core of Borland?s Software Delivery
>Optimization
vision.
>They account for the core of the overall application lifecycle,
>and thus play a central role in our strategy both now and in the future.

Well, let's rephrase the question:

Q: Is the individual developer still important to Borland? You know, the
developer that formed the core of Borland sales from TurboPascal on up
through the Delphi of a few years ago, before Borland turned it is focus to
ALM tools?
We are still building products and features into those products for the
individual developer, the small shop, larger companies, and even (in certain
parts of the world) larger teams.
 

Re: Delphi Q&A

"Herbert Sitz" <XXXX@XXXXX.COM>writes
Quote
Well, let's rephrase the question:

Q: Is the individual developer still important to Borland? You know, the
developer that formed the core of Borland sales from TurboPascal on up
through the Delphi of a few years ago, before Borland turned it is focus to
ALM tools?
The developer is not the one that provided the revenue that built the
building housing Borland. Nor were development tools the main thrust of the
patents that resulted in Borland's current cash hoarde either. The fact of
the matter is that "the developer" never did pull his weight in making
Borland a household name, or in financing the infrastructure upon which
current-day Borland coasts.
Personally, if there ever really was such a thing as the day of the
developer, it certainly has passed by now. Corporations are the ones making
the dev tool purchases these days, not hobbyists and do-it-yourself-ers.
Software development *is* a business process, and so placing it squarely in
the purview of business tools ultimately makes a lot of sense. The problem
is that a lot of programmers view themselves as maverick cowboys, as they
ride herd over the servers in the back room.
 

Re: Delphi Q&A

"Eryk" <XXXX@XXXXX.COM>writes
Quote
Developers are not Project Managers any more than they are Accountants,
HRD Droids or Janitors.
Maybe that is why so much software is so poor, and users complain almost
universally about software that "doesn't work" even though the programmer
thinks he has done a great job.
 

Re: Delphi Q&A

"Abdullah Kauchali" <XXXX@XXXXX.COM>writes
Quote

"When is borland going to share more public information about longer-term
Delphi plans?"
^^^
I made a few minor edits in the original HTML of the Q&A including the lower
case borland in the 6th question.
Stay tuned to BDN for additional Delphi information in the coming weeks and
months.
David I
 

Re: Delphi Q&A

"David Intersimone "David I" <XXXX@XXXXX.COM>writes
Quote

We are still building products and features into those products for the
individual developer, the small shop, larger companies, and even (in
certain
parts of the world) larger teams.

Yes, but my point is that all of the ALM stuff is of limited value to the
small developer. Most of it is overkill; I can get what I want from simpler
tools for far less money. For example, within a few minutes I can go to one
of many Subversion hosting companies on the web and put an entire project
under version control, which is then accessible via WebDav from anywhere I
can get an internet connection. Any simple way I can do that for $10/month
with StarTeam?
And, yes, I understand Delphi will continue to be developed. But if past
couple years are any indication it is the ALM features that are main focus,
and focus on adding "mere" language features takes somewhat of a back seat.
Whether this is because of focus on ALM or need to maintain backward
compatibility I don't know. But product like Chrome has made me wonder why
small team can create an entire compiler with useful new features while
entire Borland company has an ObjectPascal implementation that lags by
comparison. Maybe some of it is because of need to maintain backward
compatibility. But not all. And I expect more could be done with language
itslef if focus weren't so much on ALM.
-- Herbert Sitz
 

Re: Delphi Q&A

Quote
Personally I suspect that you wont ever be 100% happy with anything
Borland
could post on this matter.
You're entitled to your own opinion about that, but I have said very
explicitly what I want from Borland.
Quote
You seem to be seeing negative everywhere, and
no positive at all.
Not at all, this is a positive step, but not sufficient in light of the last
two Delphi releases, previous statements made by the executive team and
increased level of direct competition.
Quote
Borland are working {*word*156} the next release of Delphi,
and have even spoken of features in the version after the next one, sounds
to me like they think developers are important.
There is a difference between what they do at a tactical level vs. what they
do at a strategic level.
 

Re: Delphi Q&A

"Captain Jake" <jake[nospam]@jsnewsreader.com>writes
Quote
"Herbert Sitz" <XXXX@XXXXX.COM>writes
news:432723da$XXXX@XXXXX.COM...
>Well, let's rephrase the question:
>
>Q: Is the individual developer still important to Borland? You know,
the
>developer that formed the core of Borland sales from TurboPascal on up
>through the Delphi of a few years ago, before Borland turned it is focus
to
>ALM tools?

Personally, if there ever really was such a thing as the day of the
developer, it certainly has passed by now. Corporations are the ones
making
the dev tool purchases these days, not hobbyists and do-it-yourself-ers.

Software development *is* a business process, and so placing it squarely
in
the purview of business tools ultimately makes a lot of sense. The problem
is that a lot of programmers view themselves as maverick cowboys, as they
ride herd over the servers in the back room.

Yes, all that is true. But basically you're telling me that what I said is
true also, just that revenue from small developers has always been less of a
factor for Borland than I thought. (Although I'd still say that the
word-of-mouth advertising and "spreading of the word" by small developers
has been a big factor in Delphi's success.)
All that is fine. But at least back five or more years ago the main focus
was on improving the language and the IDE, not on this ALM stuff that is of
limited value to the small developer. Maybe now that Borland focus is
explictly on ALM it would make sense to move to a tool like Chrome, which
definitely has language features as a first priority.
I'm still with Delphi for now. And unlike many others I am quite happy with
it. I hope not, but I have a feeling that might change in the future.
-- Herbert Sitz
 

Re: Delphi Q&A

Quote
What more are you looking for?
A clear statement that Delphi is critical to capturing ALM in the .NET
space. That they are going to leverage BDS and Delphi in building their SDO
vision to go after the Fortune 500.
In plain terms, what competitive advantage does Delphi and BDS give them
over using VS.NET? In other words "why bother" in the context of the ALM
strategy?
Until their ALM strategy is presented in clear terms of how it benefits the
typical Delphi developer, there's a problem.
Quote
"Delphi plugs right into Borland's ALM
solution". it is right there in black and white. Clearly ALM is driving the
ship, but it is apparently bringing Delphi along for the ride as opposed to
leaving Delphi in its wake.
That's right. it is one thing to integrate into ALM; quite another to be the
driving force. In the interview just posted in another thread, Mr. Arnold
says:
"That's one thing that differentiates us from the other companies that work
from a top-down perspective. As a partner with the developer, we start at
the code and work our way up, and we do that in a way that is cognitive of
the types of decisions that need to be made by people managing projects and
working with budgets, but we do it with the full knowledge of the
developers' DNA. "
IMO, if that were really true, then Delphi and JBuilder would be driving
ALM, but I see it like you see it. ALM is the driving force here.
The really cynical side of me says that Delphi R&D is pushing to integrate
into ALM to justify their existence to the bean counters. If they play this
game long enough, they might be included in the overall ALM strategy, or if
it goes bust, can continue being a profitable business on its own.