To be fair to Borland, Delphi 2005's stability and speed has been improved a lot by the two updates. Although Delphi 2005 is still a lot slower than D5 and D7, it's now at least twice as fast as it first came out. It is a nicer IDE than D5 and D7. I wouldn't run D2005 on a Pentium III PC while I won't hesitate with D5 or D7.
I used VS.NET before and felt it very slow, too. Not really any better than Delphi 2005 after the updates. Delphi 2005's help is really no good. Lots of basic things are missing. Hope they improve that. -- Best regards, Jack Sunday, May 22, 2005, 12:16:38 PM, you wrote: ML> with its bugs. I have not bothered upgrading to Delphi 2005 to do .Net for ML> two reasons; firstly reading all the problems that have been put forward in ML> this list; secondly I have been using Visual Studio for the past 3 years. I ML> consider myself as a C# developer now and do not need to be frustrated using ML> a development tool, such as Delphi 2005 that according to this list is slow ML> and buggy, whereas Visual Studio works and is fast and gives me no problems. ML> I once spoke to Danny Thorpe about the VCLxx.bpl errors, he said it was due ML> to some 3rd party component, I told him that the environment was free of 3rd ML> party components. This was dismissed as unlikely. How could it be unlikely ML> as it was occurring and shown to him. I also spoke to the managing director ML> of a Borland subsidiary about the rising costs of new version updates. His ML> response was that is "how we make money, we just add some new features". ML> These responses made me uncomfortable with the company that was supposedly ML> helping me make an income using their development tool. Maybe the disastrous ML> Kylix was their focus. ML> I have moved to the Microsoft thinking as they dictate our development ML> world, currently we have .Net, sometime in the future they will have dot ML> something else and will have the development tool long before Borland do ML> something about it. Borland, in my opinion are in a continual catch up mode ML> and are delivering a solution that is now not acceptable to developers. We ML> cannot be their testers and at the same time pay big dollars to upgrade to a ML> product that is buggy and causes us to waste our time to achieve nothing. ML> They apparently don't realize that some of us make a living developing ML> applications and can not afford the time stuffing around advising them of ML> the numerous bugs in their new release. We cannot deliver solutions to our ML> customers with the rubbish we have to pay Borland for. ML> Microsoft have made their tools affordable to the developer and at the same ML> time provide exceptional resources to support their tools, provide great ML> database integration etc. Not like Borland who hit us with big upgrade price ML> for something that doesn't deliver, a crappy Help and very useless ML> resources. ML> I read stuff on this list how Delphi is so great and Microsoft is crap, ML> unfortunately you have to doubt the validity of these arguments, and in all ML> cases laughable, when the respondent has had no exposure to a MS development ML> tool. ML> It is also of interest that I note, a lot a companies that previously used ML> Delphi are moving away from Delphi. You just have to look at job ads, ML> "Delphi and C# experience to convert Delphi to C#". Can any one tell me ML> where Delphi is heading when ads such as this are appearing? ML> Pascal is a great language, the Delphi IDE was good, but some of us have to ML> move on, learn a new language and use a new IDE, and in the case of Visual ML> Studio, is pretty good. I can live with that and am very comfortable with it ML> as it doesn't cause me frustration of coping with bugs as almost every ML> release of Delphi has. I have never had the problems in Visual Studio that ML> Delphi has given me where I have had to use the Task Manager to kill Delphi. ML> Look at some of the components available for C# and it makes life easier to ML> work with a tool that delivers solutions quickly without the added heartburn ML> and frustration. DevExpress is one of those companies. ML> Microsoft invented Windows and are now providing exceptional affordable ML> development tools at the fraction of the cost of a Borland bugged program. ML> Borland's testing must be appalling with what they deliver. Can any one ML> remember a new release of Delphi that worked to expectations without at ML> least 2 updates to fix bugs. The first version of Visual Studio worked bug ML> free. Maybe we are Borland's unpaid testers, but pay for the product to ML> test. ML> I don't know when Borland will get the message that some of us will not ML> tolerate the crap they dish out. I never thought that when I moved from ML> Microsoft's Visual Basic to Delphi and spending about 11 years with Delphi ML> that I would return to Microsoft. Unfortunately it has happened, but ML> fortunately development time with Microsoft has reduced and I don't have to ML> spend hours figuring if it is my bug or a development tool bug. ML> Mike __________________________________________________ Delphi-Talk mailing list -> [email protected] http://www.elists.org/mailman/listinfo/delphi-talk
