[DUG] Delphi Specials

[David Brennan]

My comments in a lovely purple. ;-)

 

From: delphi-bounces at delphi.org.nz [mailto:delphi-bounces at delphi.org.nz] On Behalf Of Jolyon Smith
Sent: Friday, 22 October 2010 8:53 a.m.
To: 'NZ Borland Developers Group - Delphi List'
Subject: Re: [DUG] Delphi Specials

 

Ø  Aw nuts you are just being a stirrer.

 

Why is pointing out facts considered stirring?

 

You obviously have pretty strong feelings about it Jolyon but you jumped on John pretty hard and if I was him I would certainly feel you were being deliberately antagonistic. You didn’t just point out facts, you had an axe to grind.

 

 

Ø  What I am saying is do not punish Borland and Embarcadero for making a product that was reliable and well usable for 10+ years.   Reward them by spending a small amount of money to keep them in business. And into the bargain enjoy a much better version of Delphi.

 

How about Embarcadero punishing their customers for not having provided compelling reasons to upgrade?

 

Aren’t they two sides of the same issue? Either Embarcadero/Codegear/Borland haven’t added anything to Delphi since version 5 OR version 5 was so good that you didn’t need any of the things they added. You believe the former and refuse to accept that perhaps part of the reason is that v5 was so good. I (and apparently John) think you are wrong, sure some versions didn’t add anything much I thought was useful but plenty of versions have added features that are quite useful. But Delphi 5 was good enough that you could happily ignore the useful new features and just stick with it (as we did until very recently). Perhaps you could argue Embarcadero didn’t manage to add any ‘everyone must have’ features but again that just comes back to Delphi 5 having such a full feature set and being so functional.

 

Delphi 4 (which Wallace has) was released in 1998! How many other software products from 1998 can you still use reliably? 

 

I think Embarcadero limiting the upgrades could have been managed a little better from a PR point of view but I can perfectly see why they felt they had to do it.

 

Ø  I am grumpy about buying 8 versions of Windows mainly because I couldn’t move the licences from PC to PC

 

What?  I bought a Windows XP upgrade to the “Me” that came with a PC I bought some years ago.  I have bought a number of PC’s – some pre-built and some self assembled - since then but never had to buy another copy of Windows, I just re-installed my existing XP license.

 

I’m guessing you have never received an OEM version of Windows then? I believe most copies of Windows sold are OEM which are locked (in theory) to the computer they are sold with.

 

And why do you feel so less inclined to reward Microsoft for making a reliable, well usable product when doing so costs far, FAR less than rewarding Borland (who produced a couple of REAL stinkers, products that were neither reliable nor even barely usable, over the years)

 

Sounds like John has purchased 8 copies of Windows, you don’t think that is rewarding them? 

 

Borland blew it in a major way around Delphi 8/2005, no question about that and I can understand punishing them for it. But at some point it becomes cutting off your nose to spite your face... anyone who develops seriously in Delphi needs Delphi to be a viable commercial product and that means being willing to pony up for some money occasionally in my opinion.

 

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://listserver.123.net.nz/pipermail/delphi/attachments/20101022/c65b142d/attachment.html