Account Options

  1. Sign in
The old Google Groups will be going away soon.
Switch to the new Google Groups.
Google Groups Home
« Groups Home
borland.public.delphi.non-technical
+ new post
About this group
Subscribe to this group
This is a Usenet group - learn more
Message from discussion String Tests was: Delphi vs C++ Performance Comparison
The group you are posting to is a Usenet group. Messages posted to this group will make your email address visible to anyone on the Internet.
Your reply message has not been sent.
Your post was successful
 
From:
To:
Cc:
Followup To:
Add Cc | Add Followup-to | Edit Subject
Subject:
Validation:
For verification purposes please type the characters you see in the picture below or the numbers you hear by clicking the accessibility icon. Listen and type the numbers you hear
 
NeilB  
View profile  
 More options Feb 10 2000, 3:00 am
Newsgroups: borland.public.delphi.non-technical, borland.public.cppbuilder.non-technical
From: "NeilB" <neil_butterwo...@lineone.net>
Date: 2000/02/10
Subject: Re: String Tests was: Delphi vs C++ Performance Comparison
Print | View thread | Show original | Report this message | Find messages by this author

Robert Lee <rh...@nwu.edu> wrote in message

news:38A32CF6.EB062AB9@nwu.edu...

> Complementary? Do you mean comparable?  I definitely think we can make a
> statement about how they compare to VC++.  Borland has been loathe to do
> this, probably because they wouldn't "win"  However, what if they loose
> by only 5%?  Would you pick VC over BCB and all its RAD tools because of
> such a small difference?

No, you misunderstand me. I don't think performance is an issue, and I've
never had a (human) client who did. What it all comes down to is that:

- The Borland products (Delphi BCB) are demonstrably superior for building
GUIs.

- The Borland products are not so demonstrably superior for N-tier. The
reliance on CORBA prevents adoption in many (ectually most) business
environments where COM, DCOM and other MS technologies have been adopted.

- VC++ is clearly superior to BCB (by virtue of it's excellent debugger
[Borland, please copy]) for developing  server and COM apps.

So Borland have (from my point of view, and I suspect from  the point of
view that anyone who has had the misfortune of using VB or programming with
MFC) the GUI, and MS have the server. My question is why don't Borland
leverage the GUI advantage?

NeilB


 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
Create a group - Google Groups - Google Home - Terms of Service - Privacy Policy
©2012 Google