> There is no such thing as a truly independant study commissioned by the
> owner of one of the test subjects. At least I've never seen one yet :>
yeah, but atleast we're (Borland) not quite as guilty of doing it as M$ -our
fud engine is only a 1.6, theirs is a 15.0 turbo intercooled diesel!
> After a quick browse I have to conclude that they chose D4 as their test
> version of Delphi because there were some things that VB6 could win at.
> Would be interesting to see how D5 would have performed.
yeah - ZDNet said, on release of Delphi 5 (vrs VB 5 I think) that it was " a
better COM platform than MS's own product" - or something like that.
> One thing that I do kind of agree with though is the debugging. But when
> you have the OS developers to help you build the debugger, insert
> VB-specific crap into the hidden APIs, etc. then of course you'll get some
> advantages. This has always been one of my beefs against M$ since way
back
> in the DOS days. They always keep something in reserve to give their
> programmers a slight edge.
yup, which personally I think should be an anti-trust case all on its own!
Maybe thats what the $100million we got from them a while back was for......
? :)
> Corey Murtagh
> The Electric Monk
> "Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum viditur!"
Does that translate into "Anything said in Latin sounds important" ??
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
New Zealand Delphi Users group - Delphi List - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Website: http://www.delphi.org.nz
To UnSub, send email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with body of "unsubscribe delphi"
