[DUG] What is the future for Delphi programmer?

[Bevan Edwards]

Nice post!  :D

I really get sick of these Mac fanatics who go on about how wonderful 
they are and that they boot up in next to no time, so I like your point 
about that extra few minutes not being any more productive.

In fact, not trying to sound bigheaded or anything, I work faster than 
most of the people I work with.  So even if they were all using Macs 
they still wouldn't reach the same productivity level as me during a 
"normal" day ;-)

I too have been around the industry for many years, and agree with what 
you are saying.  I've seen the fads come and go and there's always 
someone to harp on about the latest and greatest technology.  In 
reality, none of this really affects how "good" a person is at doing 
their job.  As you say, if someone really wants to be developing for the 
iPhone and/or Android, they won't be waiting for Delphi/Embarcadero to 
come to the party.

Jolyon Smith wrote:
>> I reckon you are still focusing way too narrowly.
>>     
>
> Simply explained by the fact that I was responding to one very specific
> observation, not offering a forward looking view covering all aspects of the
> anticipated directions that Delphi may or may not ever go in.
>
>
>
>   
>> I am expecting office workers will still have desktops for years
>> to come.  But more and more will be moving to phone and netbook
>> devices, and already have started.
>>     
>
> I might agree if I hadn't been hearing the exact same prediction for the
> last 10 years.
>
>
>   
>> Windows desktops start to be replaced by terminal services
>> and RDP devices to grunty servers.
>>     
>
> Ditto.  This was "the way of the future" back in 1992.  I hasn't transpired
> in the last 15 years.  What reason is there to think it will in the next 15?
>
> I think the problem here is that there is a temptation to think that there
> will be One True Way in the future, and we try to identify what that One
> True Way will be.
>
> Whereas the Truth is that there will always be "Horses For Courses".  There
> may be a dominant approach, but even then what dominates in one area of
> business/industry won't necessarily be appropriate for another, in which a
> different approach will dominate.
>
>
>   
>> browsing, VNC, RDP connections to the servers.   (I have 
>> been watching a colleague do all of these things already 
>> from an Android phone... )
>>     
>
> Then he's years behind.  I was doing this on a Windows Pocket PC back in
> 2000.
>
> If the result of 9 years of technological progress in this area is simply
> that now you can do exactly the same thing on some other handheld device,
> then I struggle to see how this will lead to some new wave of computing
> following this model.
>
> If there was a need or a benefit, people would be doing it already.  This is
> certain, because it has been possible.  If people aren't doing something
> that they could be doing, there is usually a reason.
>
> Of course, some people ARE doing it already and HAVE BEEN doing it for
> years.  But that doesn't mean that EVERYONE will be doing it in the future.
>
>
>   
>> Phone was free on a 2 year Vodaphone plan.)
>>     
>
> If you really think that that means the phone was "Free" then I have to say
> that doesn't actually say much about your perception of reality.
>
> ;)
>
>
>   
>> Hardware keeps getting cheaper, instead of $500-$1500 for
>> computers, it soon becomes $50-$500 for desktop RDP devices,
>> netbooks and super-phones.
>>     
>
> Again, this is the same mantra that has been churned out for the last 10-15
> years.
>
> Have we *really* already forgotten the NetPC ?
>
> Again I ask the question... if the NetPC hasn't dominated the computing
> world in the last 10 years, what reason do we have for thinking it will be
> different in the next 10 years?
>
> The technology isn't the issue.  Everything you describe has been possible
> for years.  And I don't think price is the issue either.
>
> On that score, your predictions of "cheap as chips" devices is naive
> hardware companies will always find ways to justify maintaining higher price
> tags.  Cheaper (older) technology then starts to get more expensive as
> maintenance of that technology becomes more expensive due to its "legacy"
> nature and the manufacturers seek to price it out of the market to compel
> their customers to buy more new technology.
>
> It was always thus and always will be.
>
> The hardware companies simply aren't going to play your game I'm afraid.
>
>
> And going back further of course, is simply an evolution of the mainframe
> and dumb terminals architecture that the industry started out with, and with
> "software as a service", goes full circle back to the days of purchasing
> computer time.  I'm far too young to remember those days myself (I'm a
> client/server baby), but I'm old enough to remember that such models
> existed.
>
> The users of the technology moved away from such models en mass, and
> embraced a far less mature and in some ways less reliable and more expensive
> model.
>
> I suspect that the "vision of the future" we get these days is more a
> reflection of the lack of awareness of what is in the rear-view mirror among
> the "visionaries" in industry today, than it is based on any genuine
> understanding of what business wants/needs from technology.
>
>
>   
>> I have seen examples of a linux device able to boot in 1-2
>> seconds.
>>     
>
> Whoop-de-doo.
>
> My laptop takes 2 minutes or more to (cold) boot to a usable environment.
>
> Reduce that to 7 seconds and you won't actually get any more productivity
> out of me, because while it's booting I'm making myself my morning coffee.
>
> :)
>
>
>   
>> I don't know the answer to that, but as long as phones 
>> and netbooks keep outselling desktops the market dollars 
>> will decide it.
>>     
>
> Sales numbers aren't the end of the story.  At work I use a laptop and don't
> have a desktop in the office at all.  But my laptop is used AS a desktop.
> It get's docked first thing in the morning and stays locked in its dock all
> day.
>
> The purchase of that device contributed to the "sales of laptops
> outstripping desktops" but the way the device is used means it should really
> count in the desktop column.
>
> Sales of laptops and mobile devices also reflect other aspects of those
> devices...
>
> When my laptop develops a fault in a USB port, GFX card or whatever, I have
> to buy a new laptop.  Servicing a laptop rarely makes economic sense.
>
> Kerching... "sales of laptops" gain another increment.
>
>
> When the same thing happens on my desktop (at home), I simply replace the
> defunct *part*.
>
> When a faster CPU comes out/becomes cheap enough, I upgrade the CPU on my
> desktop.
>
> To get a faster laptop CPU I have to buy a new laptop.  Kerching.
>
>
> It's fair to say I think that laptop sales should be adjusted to reflect
> this obsolescence factor before being compared to desktop sales.
>
> I don't know what that adjustment should be, but there should be one.
>
>
>
>   
>> More certainly, iPhone and Android devices will have a growing
>> market, and I would love to be able to program for these without
>> having to learn a new IDE and language....
>>     
>
> I suggest that that attitude provides an insight into the genuine need you
> perceive in these devices.
>
> If you really have things that you can/want to do with those devices, then
> you would not be waiting for Delphi to deliver to those platforms.
>
> You would be learning what you needed to learn now, and employing those
> devices in your solutions today?
>
> No?
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>
> __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature database 4776 (20100115) __________
>
> The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
>
> http://www.eset.com
>
>
>
>
>   


__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature database 4776 (20100115) __________

The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.

http://www.eset.com