[DUG] Has Malcolm Groves Been Misrepresented?

[Jolyon Smith]

No - the original remark was "on page 53" too.

It was a *comment* responding to a *comment*.  Not a blog post.

Paul misrepresented me as having blogged this.  I didn't.


-----Original Message-----
From: delphi-bounces at delphi.org.nz [mailto:delphi-bounces at delphi.org.nz] On
Behalf Of Jeremy North
Sent: Friday, 16 October 2009 3:47 p.m.
To: NZ Borland Developers Group - Delphi List
Subject: Re: [DUG] Has Malcolm Groves Been Misrepresented?

So you made the remark on the front page and hid the "apology" on the
53rd page amongst the classifieds.

Hardly a credible thing to do.


On Fri, Oct 16, 2009 at 1:17 PM, Jolyon Smith <jsmith at deltics.co.nz> wrote:
> I also went on – in a subsequent comment – to say that things that Malcom
> didn’t seem to consider were that big, *were* in fact very noteworthy and
> worthwhile additions, imho.
>
>
>
> I think the actual position is somewhere between the two views.
>
>
>
> i.e. Delphi 2010 *is* more than just a “bug fix”, but it’s not as *major*
a
> release in terms of headline features that 2009 was, for example.
>
>
>
> Perhaps Malcolm simply didn’t express that particularly well in Auckland.
> (there’s a danger that since people often complain that bugs don’t get
> fixed, attention is then drawn to “how many bugs we fixed” which then
> distracts away from “how much of, and how big, the new stuff is” – I was
> commenting on the perception that I felt Malcolm conveyed, not agreeing
that
> that perception was necessarily correct).
>
>
>
> I myself was perhaps not clear enough on that point (the observations were
> in comments, not a blog post – I spend more time on posts than on
comments)
>
>
>
>
>
> From: delphi-bounces at delphi.org.nz [mailto:delphi-bounces at delphi.org.nz]
On
> Behalf Of Paul A Norman
> Sent: Friday, 16 October 2009 2:59 p.m.
> To: NZ Borland Developers Group - Delphi List
> Subject: [DUG] Has Malcolm Groves Been Misrepresented?
>
>
>
> I was not at the Auckland presentation, and have had to rely on others'
> reporting of it. Jolyon who normally appears to be very careful in what he
> says and writes has said on his blog:
>
>
>
> "Malcolm Groves stood up in Auckland and openly told us that in his view,
> apart from 1 or 2 things, and really in *his* opinion only 1, Delphi 2010
> was basically a bug fix release with lots of little tweaks here and there.
> They charged full price for it of course and won’t be retrofitting those
bug
> fixes to Delphi 2009 or 2007 (where they would be of most use).
>
>
>
> "I stress – that’s not my characterisation of the release as not
delivering
> much in the way of “new stuff”, it was his.
>
>
>
> "David" wrote on Jolyon's blog:
>
>
>
> "While I usually agree with you Jolyon I don’t feel Malcolm Groves told us
> Delphi 10 was mainly just bug fixes. What he did say was that there were
> only one or two big killer features but there were hundreds of small
> improvements. Some of these small improvements were no doubt bug fixes,
but
> many are enhancements and new features which from the sound of it really
> improve the IDE."
>
>
>
> Please, Jolyon, David and any one who was there, what is what? -- Because
> like a lot of people, my decisions on ongoing use and purchase of Delphi
> very much depends on whether you have to factor in the next version as a
> paid for bug fix or not, on what you buy.
>
>
>
> Paul
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> NZ Borland Developers Group - Delphi mailing list
> Post: delphi at delphi.org.nz
> Admin: http://delphi.org.nz/mailman/listinfo/delphi
> Unsubscribe: send an email to delphi-request at delphi.org.nz with Subject:
> unsubscribe
>

_______________________________________________
NZ Borland Developers Group - Delphi mailing list
Post: delphi at delphi.org.nz
Admin: http://delphi.org.nz/mailman/listinfo/delphi
Unsubscribe: send an email to delphi-request at delphi.org.nz with Subject:
unsubscribe