On Sun, 13 Jan 2002, brian moseley wrote: > altho kylix was discussed in the first post of the thread, > my actual reply to you stood on its own as a condemnation of > a general cliquish attitude.
Oh, consider me properly chastened then. BTW - kylix is actually the subject of this thread, supposedly. I didn't think addressing it directly was too out of bounds! And Kylix *is* aimed at non-programmers, or at least it was when it was Delphi. > but microsoft visual studio blah blah .net blah blah is > quite popular, isn't it? Have you used MS "visual" studio? There isn't much "visual" about it. In my experience it's pretty much on par with the various C/C++ IDE's around for Linux already. All of which are pretty close to useless, IMO. People use MS Visual Studio because they have to. Same reason they'll use .NET. If there's anything Borland has proved it's that providing a better development environment than Microsoft doesn't get you more developers. Kylix is, as I understand it, something much closer to original Delphi aim of programming without coding. I'm not saying it wouldn't be neat if you could do Kylix for Perl. I'm just saying I don't think it would be a fantastic success. So, yeah, I'm agreeing with Perrin, but I don't think that makes me some kind of horrible elitist. -sam
