Is VO.NET killing VO 2.7b (and users) ?
Johel de Souza Filho
I see you're making a good progress toward VO.NET. Congratulations.
But that's not fair for us, who are waiting for VO 2.7b.
Could it be that the Win32 developers will be left in the cold while you put
all resources to develop VO.NET and please all those early adopters of dNET?
Anyway, they are all C# developers by now!
So, please, give us a bug free VO 2.7x and then you can go your VO.NET way
with no looking back.
Sorry for my hard words, but we need some explanation from you.
Thanks,
Johel
Willie Moore
Here is what I heard from Brian at DevconUSA a couple of weeks ago. There
are 2 seperate teams working on VO. Team 1 in continuing the work on VO
2.7x. They were running things from a newer version of the runtime than what
I have. They are not slowing up on the 2.7x product.
Team 2 is building a new dotNet compiler from the ground up. From what I saw
and heard at DevCon, Brian has not thrown all of his resources (ie
developers) into the dotNet version.
Brian said repeatedly that he is 100% behind continues development of the
2.7x line!!!
Regards,
Willie
"Johel de Souza Filho" <johelso...@uol.com.br> wrote in message
news:cemmm3$ocr$1...@ngspool-d02.news.aol.com...
Phil McGuinness
the 2.7x line!!! ]
Good.. he will need a user base and without a VO2.7b it will dissolve.
Phil McGuinness - Sherlock Software
--
TSDing
I also feel they should focus on VO 2.x rather than .NET.
Win32 is a mature market, while .NET is still evolving. I think its better
to let the .NET dust settle first before working on it.
While waiting for that, there are a lot of improvement can be made to VO 2.x
to make it more competative and at the same time build bigger VO 2.x user
base. Without a big VO 2.x user base... there is no point building a VO.NET
version. If you can't convince people to use VO in win32 world, I think it
would be even tougher in .NET world.
VO 2.x has gone so far, only lacks little bit more to make it perfect.
I hope to see in 2.x
1. More graphical capabilities ( graphics reporting, graphics charts,
special effects windows, buttons... etc ). This is what attracts new comers
and students. To be able to build attractive windows and effects.
2. Beautify the IDE.
Things must look beautiful. Like it or not, beauty sells. Thats why
cosmetics business are booming everywhere.
Regards
Ding
Jamal Assaf
Yes, these are hard words and you base on assumptions.
Everyone wants to know about VO.NET and immediately when something so good
is announced, some begin to speculate about killing VO. It does not make
sense!
As Willie said, Brian and his team are committed to VO users and version
2.7b and (possibly 2.8 if needed.).
Jamal
"Johel de Souza Filho" <johelso...@uol.com.br> wrote in message
news:cemmm3$ocr$1...@ngspool-d02.news.aol.com...
Karl Faller
>1. More graphical capabilities ( graphics reporting, graphics charts,
>special effects windows, buttons... etc ).
Karl
TSDing
Alot of newbies would not go hunting for 3rd party products. Perhaps part of
Graphics4Vo can be built into VO as a base product not as ad-ons. It will be
more convinient for the users and if it can help to make VO to grow faster,
everyone including 3rd party tools maker will benefit.
Regards
Ding
Karl Faller
>I have once, it looks great, unfortunately it is not part of VO itself.
>
>Alot of newbies would not go hunting for 3rd party products.
Now, what's to hunt? It comes with the .7 CD. It's install proc
shouldn't be to hard, even for a newbie <g>.
And, things being as they are, i'm happy that this part of VO gets
supported by the man who wrote it ;-)
Karl
Ginny Caughey
> Win32 is a mature market, while .NET is still evolving. I think its better
> to let the .NET dust settle first before working on it.
.Net is not new - it's 4 years old now and widely adopted outside the VO
community. It's still evolving primarily *because* it is successful, but the
changes are very much evolutionary - fairly minor extensions to the
Framework and languages for version 2 compared with version 1. The "dust
settled" for .Net before it was ever released since 100s of 1000s of beta
testers worked it over thoroughly during the huge public beta.
> While waiting for that, there are a lot of improvement can be made to VO
2.x
> to make it more competative and at the same time build bigger VO 2.x user
> base. Without a big VO 2.x user base... there is no point building a
VO.NET
> version. If you can't convince people to use VO in win32 world, I think it
> would be even tougher in .NET world.
And that's where you would be wrong. Since .Net is the modern standard and
is taught in schools now, that's what new people would want. Win32 is
yesterday's news.
> I hope to see in 2.x
>
> 1. More graphical capabilities ( graphics reporting, graphics charts,
> special effects windows, buttons... etc ).
This is where the 3rd party comes in. Even Microsoft with all their
resources relies heavily on 3rd parties for this sort of thing, so I don't
think it's reasonable to expect Grafx to provide it for VO.
>
> 2. Beautify the IDE.
With VO.Net you'll get the most beautiful IDE in the industry, and Grafx
doesn't have to write it. It would take enormous resources to improve VO's
IDE to that point, although there are just a couple of little things that I
hope Grafx will do for the VO IDE - primarily in the area of fully
supporting secondary monitors.
Ginny
brian
> I see you're making a good progress toward VO.NET. Congratulations.
Thanks
> But that's not fair for us, who are waiting for VO 2.7b
We realize VO Win 32's importance to the Development team, (Since we use the
product that we make for our own clients) as well as the importance to the
all of the people who are using VO 2.7a for their development platform.
That is why we are 100% committed to VO32(2.7b) for Windows.
We have already built several new version since 2.7a for the beta team
and will release a new version(to beta) with in the week. As I've explained,
development will continue on the VO Win 32 bit product. We have absolutely
no plan/intention of abandoning it, or even letting up on it's development
It's taken a long time to get comfortable with the VO source, now is not
the time to let up on development . It's full steam ahead on VO Win 32.
At the same time we must not turn a blind eye toward the future.
> Could it be that the Win32 developers will be left in the cold while you
>put all resources to develop VO.NET and please all those early
adopters of dNET?
NO. Visual Objects Win 32 will be continued to be developed. Period.
> Anyway, they are all C# developers by now!
Any good developer knows to use the "right tool for the
right job". VO 2.7 is the right tool for many jobs. for example 32 bit
Windows App's. C# may be the right tool in other cases. I personally
know many developers that use both VO and C# and think they are
being smart for doing so. It shouldn't be a religious war of words, its a
It's a development tool, if it works for you, use it. Use everything that
helps you make a living.
> So, please, give us a bug free VO 2.7x and then you can go your VO.NET way
> with no looking back.
I'm confident that we can pursue both issues at the same time.
> Sorry for my hard words, but we need some explanation from you.
No problem, I hope this clears up this issue for you.
Brian
"Johel de Souza Filho" <johelso...@uol.com.br> wrote in message
news:cemmm3$ocr$1...@ngspool-d02.news.aol.com...
TSDing
> .Net is not new - it's 4 years old now and widely adopted outside the VO
> community. It's still evolving primarily *because* it is successful, but
the
> changes are very much evolutionary - fairly minor extensions to the
> Framework and languages for version 2 compared with version 1. The "dust
> settled" for .Net before it was ever released since 100s of 1000s of beta
> testers worked it over thoroughly during the huge public beta.
from what I heard .NET is now at version 1.1 and version 2 is in beta now.
Since I have not work on either version or .NET. I cannot comment on how
much difference from version 1 to 2.
Software written in Win32 will still run for a long time to come, why is the
rush ?
> > 1. More graphical capabilities ( graphics reporting, graphics charts,
> > special effects windows, buttons... etc ).
>
> This is where the 3rd party comes in. Even Microsoft with all their
> resources relies heavily on 3rd parties for this sort of thing, so I don't
> think it's reasonable to expect Grafx to provide it for VO.
This is where Grafx can have a chance to outshine the other tools... If VO
do not have anything special, why would people use VO ? VO has very elegant
language but people just cant see it on the surface.
I do not see anything wrong if Grafx is to improve VO to have additional
features.
> > 2. Beautify the IDE.
> With VO.Net you'll get the most beautiful IDE in the industry, and Grafx
> doesn't have to write it. It would take enormous resources to improve VO's
> IDE to that point, although there are just a couple of little things that
I
> hope Grafx will do for the VO IDE - primarily in the area of fully
> supporting secondary monitors.
Actually, I am refering to the VO 2.x IDE. Not everyone would want to move
into .NET yet.
Alwin Nederpelt
report pro 3.5(b or so)
alwin
On Tue, 3 Aug 2004 09:07:49 -0400, "brian" <brian_...@yahoo.com>
wrote:
Chris Pyrgas
Brian,
Thank you very much for the update
Chris
Ginny Caughey
> Software written in Win32 will still run for a long time to come, why is
the
> rush ?
The "rush", if there seems to be one, is that it takes a long time to
redesign and rewrite a big app for .Net. Phil estimated a couple of years I
think, and that's probably not too far off for something complex. Added to
the time to develop the apps is the time to develop the tools the apps use
in the case of VO.Net and of course the time it takes to learn the new
tools.
> This is where Grafx can have a chance to outshine the other tools... If VO
> do not have anything special, why would people use VO ? VO has very
elegant
> language but people just cant see it on the surface.
If people aren't interested in VO now, they won't like it better with more
stuff in it. More stuff just means more stuff to learn, so it's actually a
barrier to entry for a newbie. They can always add stuff later from the 3rd
parties if they want to. That's why you often see just basic functionality
in a language tool with the 3rd parties filling in with specialized classes.
Ginny
Marshall Rhinehart
The approach your taking makes sense. As individual users we each have
specific things we'd like to have addressed. But none of those single
issues is as important as VO making advances on the two fronts you mention.
Congratulations on the progress so far.
Marshall
"brian" <brian_...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:2n9guvF...@uni-berlin.de...
TSDing
Ginny,
People who are new to programming needs to see nice things and able to do
nice things easily.
For example, someone wants to show a .jpg picture on pushbutton
For most development tools, the programmer only needs to choose the .jpg
files from pop-up properties window, but in VO... have to do much more,
although not difficult but what will be the newbie first impresssion of VO
if compared with another tools where he can easily perform that task?
I am not saying advanced feature but some very basic stuff that VO should
have. I am aware that there are 3rd party developers but that is something
else.
The VO team has done a great job to bring stability to VO but the team must
also be aware that cosmetics in a development tool is very important. Delphi
for example.. beautiful IDE when it first launched... it managed to attract
so many users.
VO IDE is already very nice but can be improved further especially the
windows editor.
> If people aren't interested in VO now, they won't like it better with more
> stuff in it. More stuff just means more stuff to learn, so it's actually a
> barrier to entry for a newbie. They can always add stuff later from the
3rd
> parties if they want to. That's why you often see just basic functionality
> in a language tool with the 3rd parties filling in with specialized
classes.
Regards
Ding
Ginny Caughey
I agree about your comments about the Window editor. For me, the most
annoying things about it are that I still need a CMKludge module to make it
generate correct code for Classmate and that the mouse position isn't
recognized if the form is on a secondary monitor. It would be nice if these
things can be fixed.
Images on buttons are nice too, but if Grafx doesn't want to allocate
resources for that sort of thing, this could be a good opportunity for a
community shared source offering. In fact, one of the first things we put
into the OpenNetCF.org framework to extend the simple GUI of the .Net
Compact Framework was a ButtonEx class that supports using image files like
icons easily, and it's probably the feature I use the most myself today. You
can see how much stuff is in there today at www.opennetcf.org and it's the
sort of thing that the VO community could do too.
--
Ginny
"TSDing" <dingts_re...@pc.jaring.my> wrote in message
news:410fc...@news.tm.net.my...
TSDing
Ginny,
I like the idea of us sharing source to help improve VO, that should give
Grafx enough resource to move VO forward.
Regards
Ding.
"Ginny Caughey" <ginny.caug...@wasteworks.com> wrote in message
news:2na4a6F...@uni-berlin.de...
Phil McGuinness
snip[ for .Net. Phil estimated a couple of years ]
Yep...... this is the big issue for a small company.. Just to test the
waters is $75k and to commit is $250k and roll out the final product is more
like $700k to $1M.
Which language, which developer, which design, which backend, what tools....
what will the market accept. Rewrite tools and maybe new machines... What
happens if we get it wrong or we are late to market?
Shit it bet to be worth it !!!!
This is why we research this stuff... one mistake and your out of business..
I have an interesting other aspect to this change and eventuallity on the
clients.
I have only 2 DOS Clipper users left and one is special and big and running
on Linux and we will replace with and Intranet version in 18 months. The
last DOS user has started legal action against to continue to support the
DOS product and not close it down. He has been offered the Windows version
for FREE but refuse to change. 10 minute change over.
He has taken out a legal injunction pending a court appearance for us to
support it under some law for up to 10 years.
If we close down the program or not offer support he is attempting to claim
the cost of buying another system and staf training and and loss of
business.
Jeez....... Some people !!!
Phil McGuinness - Sherlock Software
---
Carlos Vazquez
PMFJI
> This is why we research this stuff... one mistake and your out of
> business..
The same for us. Out of business or at least in very big trouble. Our
main reason for desiring long life to VO.
> I have only 2 DOS Clipper users left and one is special and big and
We have A LOT of users still using our Clipper apps (under W98, W2K and
XP) most of them looking at VO version and not very convinced to change to
it.
> running
> on Linux and we will replace with and Intranet version in 18 months. The
> last DOS user has started legal action against to continue to support the
> DOS product and not close it down. He has been offered the Windows
> version
> for FREE but refuse to change. 10 minute change over.
>
> He has taken out a legal injunction pending a court appearance for us to
> support it under some law for up to 10 years.
> If we close down the program or not offer support he is attempting to
> claim
> the cost of buying another system and staf training and and loss of
> business.
>
> Jeez....... Some people !!!
I can hardly believe that! How is M$ (and others) doing it so well to get
rid of those things? <g>
--
Carlos Vazquez
c...@NOSPAMtelefonica.net
Phil McGuinness
This guy tried to pull a fast one for sure...
We told all our user we would phase the DOS version out over 2 years...
which we did.
We told them in Newsletters the actually date it would cease and we repeated
this date many times.
In the last 3 months we had about 30 stragglers eventually capitulate...
"dragging and screaming"
We wrote letters to the last 20 users about 8 weeks before the completion of
the license it would not be renewed.
We invoiced for ONLY the Windows version whether they had it or not... and
most booked in for training or gave us a date of change over.
This person PAID the Windows invoice and waited and hoped we would cash it I
suspect... which we did not do.
I think their case is disadvantaged by this fact as we have not accepted
payment. They thought we had banked the money.
The legal claim is WE THE DEVELOPER cannot dictate the date of non-support
and legally this has to be upheld but apparently there are laws to stop a
company stopping an application or not providing service to an application
provided under consumer legalisation.
One thing I am impressed about that our old app which has had a 24 year
legacy would inspire a client to sue me to keep using it... I was going to
give in on this alone.. but I have to make a commercial decision that I just
cannot keep it going for ever. Jeez.. I wonder if the WIN32 users will sue
me to stop them switching to the .NET version. <rofl>
snip[ How is M$ (and others) doing it so well to get rid of those things?
<g> ]
The difference is MS does not provide [real] support <BG>
Carlos Vazquez
> This person PAID the Windows invoice and waited and hoped we would cash
> it I
> suspect... which we did not do.
<bg>
> snip[ How is M$ (and others) doing it so well to get rid of those things?
> <g> ]
>
> The difference is MS does not provide [real] support <BG>
... and has a lot of good lawyers
--
Carlos Vazquez
c...@NOSPAMtelefonica.net
D.J.W. van Kooten
<dingts_re...@pc.jaring.my> wrote:
>
>For example, someone wants to show a .jpg picture on pushbutton
Hello Ding,
Use HoverButtons. It works great.
Dick van Kooten
D.J.W. van Kooten
<ginny.caug...@wasteworks.com> wrote:
>If people aren't interested in VO now, they won't like it better with more
>stuff in it.
Hello Ginny,
I think we are not talking about (many) new users for VO. But the
current user base must be kept satisfied, otherwise they go to other
tools. In my opinion, this task is much more important than a .net
version which won't be here for years. I sent up a "Top 10" from which
no single issue was realized in 2.7a. And probably the same goes for
many other users. I am not complaning about it, I realize other
choices had to be made for 2.7(a), but I would much more like to see
at least my top 5 realized, and I am prepared to pay for it, than any
real new developments, at least for the next few months.
Given the split up of the team however, this looks hopefull.
Dick van Kooten
WFR
may be I did something wrong, but I have only an demo-version G4VO????
Wolfgang
"Karl Faller" <100725Mask...@ASSEScompuserve.com> schrieb im
Newsbeitrag news:cjrug0d7ksmnuubpr...@4ax.com...
TSDing
Its not for my own usage, I do not need such controls at the moment. What I
am trying to say is how to make VO attractive to new comers. New comers
would be bothered what 3rd parties can do, they are only interested in what
VO can do and what VO can offer them.
Regards
Ding
"D.J.W. van Kooten" <koo...@ic2remove.this.com> wrote in message
news:4110e22c...@news.zonnet.nl...
Johel de Souza Filho
> may be I did something wrong, but I have only an demo-version G4VO????
Me too. The free basic version is no more. Maybe they could do the same
thing like the guys from bBrowser, ComSDK, VOCOM, VO2ADO, TagIT, VOScript,
etc. Thanks for all of them. Whithout those basic versions VO would become a
very expensive product.
Johel
Phil McGuinness
VO is a very inexpensive product....... compare it to other full systems
and it is a bargain.
Phil McGuinness - Sherlock Software
------------------
Johel de Souza Filho
> .Net is not new - it's 4 years old now and widely adopted outside the VO
> community. It's still evolving primarily *because* it is successful, but
the
Not true. It *may* be successful inside USA, but you do not show any numbers
(please, no MS marketing, ok?). MS-dNET will not run on Linux, the same
Linux that is spreading over EU, Latin America and Asia. China and Japan are
even creating a common Linux version specific for their languages and
reality. Contrary to MS-dNET framework, Win32 apps are already running on
top of Linux. Carly Fiorina was in Brazil this week. She wants to double HP
Brazil, already one of the biggest HP branchs outside USA. Guess what, Linux
will be the OS of choice. So, at *my* side of the World MS-dNET is
non-existent. And I'm sure the same happens with Ding's side of the World.
> And that's where you would be wrong. Since .Net is the modern standard and
> is taught in schools now, that's what new people would want. Win32 is
> yesterday's news.
Schools? Which ones? Did you make a research around the World?
> With VO.Net you'll get the most beautiful IDE in the industry, and Grafx
> doesn't have to write it. It would take enormous resources to improve VO's
> IDE to that point, although there are just a couple of little things that
I
> hope Grafx will do for the VO IDE - primarily in the area of fully
> supporting secondary monitors.
Here you go again making MS-VS marketing for MS. I think #D is good enough
and costs nothing. And then there is Eclipse...
Johel
Johel de Souza Filho
> Yes, these are hard words and you base on assumptions.
Assumptions? No! Any one of us here knows that VO can be divided in enough
pieces to have all Brian's people working on it without people stepping over
each other. Brian did a political decision about VO.NET, not a technical
one. I will not buy another VO 2.8 if it is only a VO 2.7-with-less-bugs
released to fund the VO.NET development. I do *not* need VO.NET. I *need* a
bug free VO 2.7x.
BTW, where is the VO profiler? Should we wait for Paul Piko or Fabrice to do
it?
> Everyone wants to know about VO.NET and immediately when something so good
> is announced, some begin to speculate about killing VO. It does not make
> sense!
Good? I do not *care* about dNET. I do not need it now. My clients will not
need it for the next 5 years. Win32 is good enough for them and it still has
a lot of fat to burn.
> As Willie said, Brian and his team are committed to VO users and version
> 2.7b and (possibly 2.8 if needed.).
I will not buy 2.8 if it is only a VO 2.7-with-less-bugs version. I want
*new* features.
BTW, did I tell you about the VO profiler yet?
Johel
Johel de Souza Filho
> > Sorry for my hard words, but we need some explanation from you.
>
> No problem, I hope this clears up this issue for you.
OK. I will take your word for that. Sorry again for my hard messages inside
this thread.
Best whishes,
Johel
Phil McGuinness
Today this is true for sure........ but 18-24 months from now you will have
to be considering seriously the .NET development... and your opposition will
be doing the same now or at least then.
The work has to be done now for the future.
TSDing
I agree with Johel on this. Over this part of the world, hardly hear anyone
using or developing any .net applications. I have also not
heard of any schools here teaching .net. All the schools that I know are all
on the Win32 platform.
Regards
Ding
> Not true. It *may* be successful inside USA, but you do not show any
numbers
> (please, no MS marketing, ok?). MS-dNET will not run on Linux, the same
> Linux that is spreading over EU, Latin America and Asia. China and Japan
are
> even creating a common Linux version specific for their languages and
> reality. Contrary to MS-dNET framework, Win32 apps are already running on
> top of Linux. Carly Fiorina was in Brazil this week. She wants to double
HP
> Brazil, already one of the biggest HP branchs outside USA. Guess what,
Linux
> will be the OS of choice. So, at *my* side of the World MS-dNET is
> non-existent. And I'm sure the same happens with Ding's side of the World.
>
Johel de Souza Filho
> VO is a very inexpensive product....... compare it to other full systems
> and it is a bargain.
VO *is* a bargain. I never said it's not. But if you start to buy all those
3rd parties for basic functionality it will go above US$ 1000,00 a lot
faster.
From Grafix (US$):
----------------------------
CA-Visual Objects 2.7 Full Product - 499,00
MD Reporter Professional Source Code Version - 320,00
VO-COM - 269,00
VO-Productivity Pack 3.0 - 199,00
VO2Ado Professional - 449,00
not on Grafix:
bBrowser Pro - EU 199,00 (??-not online)
Graph4VO-AEF Graphics for CA-VO (AEF source code) - EU 350,00
----------------------------
VO as it shoud be: around US$ 2315,00
From Borland (US$):
Delphi 8 for the Microsoft .NET Framework, Professional - New User (includes
Delphi 7 Professional Edition) - 999,00
Borland® DelphiT 8 for the Microsoft® .NET Framework, Professional Edition
is your evolution for the .NET revolution. Simplify your move to .NET today
with Delphi language RAD development for the Microsoft .NET Framework
including VCL Forms, Windows® Forms, ASP.NET, Web Forms, local ADO.NET, and
more. Developers can immediately use their Delphi language and framework
skills and much of their existing investments in Delphi application source
code to start developing Windows applications for .NET today. With code
visualization, you can understand and communicate the architecture of your
Delphi application. The .NET framework is designed for interoperability,
security, and reliability, transforming Windows application development.
Delphi 8 is pure .NET and pure Delphi.
Minimum system requirements:
. Intel® Pentium® II/450 MHz (Intel® Pentium® III/850 MHz or higher
recommended)
. Microsoft® Windows ServerT 2003, Microsoft Windows XP Professional,
Microsoft Windows® 2000 Professional, or Microsoft Windows® 2000 Server
. 128MB RAM minimum (256MB RAM recommended)
. 600 MB hard disk space recommended minimum (includes space required during
install)
Johel de Souza Filho
> snip[ I do *not* need VO.NET. I *need* a bug free VO 2.7x. ]
>
> Today this is true for sure........ but 18-24 months from now you will
have
> to be considering seriously the .NET development... and your opposition
will
> be doing the same now or at least then.
>
> The work has to be done now for the future.
That's true... but...
I respect you as one of the best software development company strategist of
this group. You always had very pragmatic positions. Then I would like to
hear from you what is the dNET' advantages that you think that will bring
real value for your customers, in 2 years from now. For example, I'll not
need to mix different languages (I only use VO), so this part of dNET has no
value to me. DLL hell? What about a dNET framework hell (1.0, 1.1, 2.0, etc)
?
Thanks,
Johel
Phil McGuinness
But this is what the software industry is all about.... the great money pit.
You need a Computer $2000 and a Desk $1000 and Chair $600 and a language
$500 and an Installer $500 and a Virus Checker and Firewall and ADSL
connection and it never damn ends..
Look at .NET everybody you stuff of before now wants to flog you a .NET
version.
For us to change is Hundreds of Thousands..
Time to become a pastry chef.. <BG>
snip[ MD Reporter Professional Source Code Version - 320,00 / VO-COM -
269,00 / VO-Productivity Pack 3.0 - 199,00
> VO2Ado Professional - 449,00 ]
All good products but if need them then you must have customers and they pay
your money and this pays for the 3rd party products.... so to you they are
FREE. <G>
Johel de Souza Filho
> All good products but if need them then you must have customers and they
pay
> your money and this pays for the 3rd party products.... so to you they are
> FREE. <G>
Sorry, but that's not the point.
You said:
"VO is a very inexpensive product....... compare it to other full systems
and it is a bargain."
OK, I did:
VO as it shoud be(VO+3rd): around US$ 2315,00
Delphi 8 for the Microsoft .NET Framework, Professional - New User (includes
Delphi 7 Professional Edition) - US$999,00
VO + 3rd (US$ 2315,00) = Delphi 7 Professional Edition (US$999,00) and let's
suppose the Delphi 8 for the Microsoft .NET Framework is just a gift from
Borland <g>
So, no bargain....
Johel
Phil McGuinness
I see the WIN32API has been patched up and built on added to for last 13
years..
At some stage it needed a redesign and .NET is it..
You can easily ignore .NET for 2 or 3 years but after that it was like
trying to stay with DOS when Windows moved on....
It does offer some benefits and yes the different Frameworks will be an
issue.
..But is any different to the current W2k Sp1/2/34 and XP Sp1 /2 all the
patches to fix and old system. Right now with windows you are just waiting
for the next buffer overrun or patch.
Personally we have a solution now for years to come in VO + PHP and the .NET
interest will be just to see what it can do and whether I start futher down
this path now or be forced this way in a few years from now.
To me .NET has not really achieved that super growth MS wanted and the JAVA
market is still bigger than ever.
The problem that will happen for products like VO is why would a 3rd party
spend to much time on an older mature market when there is a new and
emerging market.. and this is what Brian and the team will aim for and it
makes sound commercial sense.
Stephen Quinn
Your comparing apples to oranges
VO = $499
D8 = $999
VO + 3rd party = $2315
D8 + 3rd party = $?????
D7 + 3rd party = $?????
> Delphi 7 Professional Edition (US$999,00) and let's
> suppose the Delphi 8 for the Microsoft .NET Framework is just a gift from
Borland
It's the other way around (and they have different price points)
- Buy D8 with D7 in the box
OR
- Buy D8 without D7 in the box
D8 is for .NET only
D7 is in the box so you can still do WIN32
D9 will have a single IDE to do both according to some ng posts I've read.
--
HTH
Steve
TSDing
Comparing DOS to Win32 and Win32 to .NET, thats alot of difference.
From user point of view, Win32 to .NET is almost transparent... but from DOS
to Win32 is quite significant.
I believe Win32 application will continue to run on Microsoft O/S for a long
time along side with .NET application. I am not sure an average user will be
able to tell the difference between a .net application and a win32
application. I dont think they will care much if it is a .net or win32.
Regards
Ding
"Phil McGuinness" <hey...@sherlock.com.au> wrote in message
news:2ndl27F...@uni-berlin.de...
Phil McGuinness
I have to agree with most of your comments...... and this why NET is having
a slow adoption and you need all the .NET SPIN doctors trying to sell you
the "Emporers' New clothes".
However over time the base will build ... however my belief is the Open
Source movement will be 3 fold of any .NET momentum.
We are definitely going to have a WIN32API, JAVA, NET , Open SOurce all
taking a slice of the market.
Phil McGuinness - Sherlock Software
---
Marcos Nogueira
> VO as it shoud be: around US$ 2315,00
>
>
> From Borland (US$):
> Delphi 8 for the Microsoft .NET Framework, Professional - New User
(includes
> Delphi 7 Professional Edition) - 999,00
I've just received an invitation for the 3rd "Borland Conference Brasil",
wich includes a "special promotion" for the "Delphi Productivity Pack": from
US$ 11,000 for "only" US$ 3,600 (JBuilder: 14.5k/6.4k). It's only rock 'n
roll, but I like it...
Regards,
Marcos Nogueira
S. Paulo - Brazil
PS: nevertheless I agree that VO is - in terms of "richness" - behind its
competitors. MN.
richard townsend-rose, tdoc
I have just started in php, being comfortable with vo now for a few
years.
With php for server side stuff (thin client) and with vo for rich
client, where do we need .net .... ? apart from keeping wee willy
gates off the corn dole.
rgtr
Marc Verkade [Marti BV]
May I say something in this discussion...
I think you can better compare VO-.Net with Clipper-VO.
It is not about the looks, but about how about the way you create your
applications..
Remember in a dark clipper ages that you had to write your own window
layout, navigating system, ways to show graphics, ways to communicate with
com-ports etc.. Using batch files and other exotic tricks with clipper? This
all is now much more easier done with VO. At a certain point we all saw that
developing in VO (WIndows) would benefit us and our company's more.
The same will happen (i think) with .Net. In VO you can for instance use
graphics, but try this without Graphics4VO or the FabPaint lib.. In .Net
everything is there, and implemented in an uniform, consistent and easy way.
No need for __Methods etc and all nicely documented. You are right in
believing that Win32 apps will run for a long time, but company's like my
own, will go for .Net because it saves us time (=money).
And when more people turn to .Net, fewer people can help you when you have
problems here in this non-.Net NG... More people will move to the VO.Net
newsgroup (or Cule, or C#) and your questions will not be answered that
often anymore...
IMHO this is the time to look at .Net and be prepared for the way software
is written by the majority of professional company's.. Do not miss the
boat... Cule looks very very promising, but we had to decide to use C# due
to the pressure to release our software and Cule does not have an IDE
(yet!).
p.s. For instance........
We build Bake-it from scratch with 5 years VO experience in 1 year....
(www.bake-it.nl)
We build Cash-it from scratch with no C# experience in 6 months
(www.cash-it.nl)
What I like about C# is that I do not have to study my code for hours, to
see why something goes wrong and than having to use some exotic __method to
get things working.... It is all there, documented and working without a
flaw.... Our cash-it app is released a few weeks ago and we did not have 1
single crash or error! I could not say that for my Bake-it app....
Have fun studiing...
Grtz, Marc
"TSDing" <dingts_re...@pc.jaring.my> schreef in bericht
news:4111ccba$1...@news.tm.net.my...
Johel de Souza Filho
> Your comparing apples to oranges
> VO = $499
> D8 = $999
>
> VO + 3rd party = $2315
> D8 + 3rd party = $?????
> D7 + 3rd party = $?????
You did not understand. D8 does not need basic 3rd party like VO does
(VOCOM, VO2ADO, etc). They are all included in the main product D8 (COM,
ADO, etc).
------------------------------------------------
Borland® DelphiT 8 for the Microsoft® .NET Framework, Professional Edition
is your evolution for the .NET revolution. Simplify your move to .NET today
with Delphi language RAD development for the Microsoft .NET Framework
including VCL Forms, Windows® Forms, ASP.NET, Web Forms, local ADO.NET, and
more. Developers can immediately use their Delphi language and framework
skills and much of their existing investments in Delphi application source
code to start developing Windows applications for .NET today. With code
visualization, you can understand and communicate the architecture of your
Delphi application. The .NET framework is designed for interoperability,
security, and reliability, transforming Windows application development.
Delphi 8 is pure .NET and pure Delphi.
D7 (included with D8)
Borland® DelphiT 7 Studio Professional delivers new, integrated technologies
for increased productivity. Get your applications ready for Microsoft® .NET
with the Delphi 7 Studio Migration Kit for .NET. Expand your market
opportunities: use one code base to leverage the power of cross-platform
development for Linux® with the included Borland KylixT 3 for Delphi
environment.
------------------------------------------------------------
So, as I understand it VO is not a bargain anymore because you do need the
3rd party products to make a good work. What 3rd party do you need to make a
good work with D8 or D7?
Johel
TSDing
Congratulations on your Cash It. Hope you get plenty of cash from it :)
> IMHO this is the time to look at .Net and be prepared for the way software
> is written by the majority of professional company's.. Do not miss the
> boat... Cule looks very very promising, but we had to decide to use C# due
> to the pressure to release our software and Cule does not have an IDE
> (yet!).
Yes CULE looks good, the thing I like the most about CULE is its language,
very nicely designed. I believe CULE is now using an IDE called #D. I am no
hurry to move to .NET... I will not use .NET until either CULE or VO.NET is
ready. I am not convinced on C#. In the meantime I can still work in Win32
and VO 2.x.
> p.s. For instance........
> We build Bake-it from scratch with 5 years VO experience in 1 year....
> (www.bake-it.nl)
> We build Cash-it from scratch with no C# experience in 6 months
> (www.cash-it.nl)
I am sure your 5 years of VO experience has contributed to to your C#
success. The other day I manage to convert a simple C# class into VO class
in just few minutes and that was my first time looking at a C# code... C# is
very similar to VO. With the experience with Bake-It I am sure you can
develope Cash-It in less time, C# or VO. I ussually share codes from my
first application down to the next application... as time passed, my
development work becomes easier.
> What I like about C# is that I do not have to study my code for hours, to
> see why something goes wrong and than having to use some exotic __method
to
> get things working.... It is all there, documented and working without a
> flaw.... Our cash-it app is released a few weeks ago and we did not have 1
> single crash or error! I could not say that for my Bake-it app....
Why do you resort to use those exotic __methods ? If I dont feel comfortable
with a code I avoid using it and try find alternative
way to do it. A good place to get help is this newsgroup :) I would like to
thank everyone for help all their help all these years.
System crash is is very rare with apps written VO 2.x, when it happens, it
is my own coding errors.
Regards
Ding
Lars-Eric Gisslén
.Net 2.0 will also bring a few new products based on the 2.0 framework. For
instance MS SQL Server 2005 will require the 2.0 framework. There will also
be a SQLServer 2005 Express that will replace MSDE and will be free (the
beta can be downloaded now). It will not have any other limitations than a
Database can not be bigger than 4Gb, otherwise it should be the same as the
full SQLServer. In SQLServer 2005 you can also write stored procedures in
.Net instead of TSQL.
Regards,
Lars-Eric
"TSDing" <dingts_re...@pc.jaring.my> skrev i meddelandet
news:410facbc$1...@news.tm.net.my...
>
> > .Net is not new - it's 4 years old now and widely adopted outside the VO
> > community. It's still evolving primarily *because* it is successful, but
> the
> > changes are very much evolutionary - fairly minor extensions to the
> > Framework and languages for version 2 compared with version 1. The "dust
> > settled" for .Net before it was ever released since 100s of 1000s of
beta
> > testers worked it over thoroughly during the huge public beta.
>
> from what I heard .NET is now at version 1.1 and version 2 is in beta now.
> Since I have not work on either version or .NET. I cannot comment on how
> much difference from version 1 to 2.
>
> Software written in Win32 will still run for a long time to come, why is
the
> rush ?
>
> > > 1. More graphical capabilities ( graphics reporting, graphics charts,
> > > special effects windows, buttons... etc ).
> >
> > This is where the 3rd party comes in. Even Microsoft with all their
> > resources relies heavily on 3rd parties for this sort of thing, so I
don't
> > think it's reasonable to expect Grafx to provide it for VO.
>
> This is where Grafx can have a chance to outshine the other tools... If VO
> do not have anything special, why would people use VO ? VO has very
elegant
> language but people just cant see it on the surface.
>
> I do not see anything wrong if Grafx is to improve VO to have additional
> features.
>
> > > 2. Beautify the IDE.
> > With VO.Net you'll get the most beautiful IDE in the industry, and Grafx
> > doesn't have to write it. It would take enormous resources to improve
VO's
> > IDE to that point, although there are just a couple of little things
that
> I
> > hope Grafx will do for the VO IDE - primarily in the area of fully
> > supporting secondary monitors.
>
> Actually, I am refering to the VO 2.x IDE. Not everyone would want to move
> into .NET yet.
>
>
>
>
Ginny Caughey
Another nice thing about SQL Server Express is that it will have a GUI
management tool too (although I haven't seen it yet as it's not in the
current beta.) But the biggie is no more throttling with heavy use like MSDE
does.
--
Ginny
"Lars-Eric Gisslén" <now...@inter.net> wrote in message
news:HivQc.4447$vH5.579@amstwist00...
Lars-Eric Gisslén
That's right but there will also be a VB.Net Express using the 2.0 framework
which will also be free.
Regards,
Lars-Eric
"Ginny Caughey" <ginny.caug...@wasteworks.com> skrev i meddelandet
news:2nfe0c...@uni-berlin.de...
Ginny Caughey
I didn't realize that VB.Net Express will be free - I thought it will cost
under $100 though like C# .Net Express, which is a pretty good deal for
somebody who doesn't need the tools is the full Visual Studio product. But
SQL 2005 Express will be free for sure.
--
Ginny
"Lars-Eric Gisslén" <now...@inter.net> wrote in message
news:FyvQc.4456$vH5.1089@amstwist00...
Lars-Eric Gisslén
That's the information I got in the MS Gold Partner News Letter. But things
may change after the Beta stage of course :)
Anyway, it also seems like the installation is different compared to MSDN as
SQL 2005 Express used named pipes and you can install 50 instances of 2005
express on the same computer, but MS recommends all application uses the
same installation with the default named pipe. I also think it would be a
natural step to include it in Longhorn as it's free anyway.
Regards,
Lars-Eric
"Ginny Caughey" <ginny.caug...@wasteworks.com> skrev i meddelandet
news:2nfikn...@uni-berlin.de...
Marc Verkade [Marti BV]
> I am sure your 5 years of VO experience has contributed to to your C#
> success. The other day I manage to convert a simple C# class into VO class
Sure.. Nevertheless I was amazed how easy it is to write cide and I love the
VS-IDE!
> Why do you resort to use those exotic __methods ? If I dont feel
comfortable
> with a code I avoid using it and try find alternative
Sometimes you can not avoid them when you want some stuff done with for
instance accelerators, menu's, graphics etc.
Hey, they work, but mostly creating the a routine is not a problem, but then
finding out why some things happen differently then what you expect. If you
are not having this difficulties, I am happy for you and think you are lucky
(Or are a better developer than me!!). All my apps (VO2.0 /2.5 / 2.7) had
some issues where I had to look at a long time before finally getting rid of
the issues and suppliing a steady app.
> System crash is is very rare with apps written VO 2.x, when it happens, it
> is my own coding errors.
Not having 5333's and using OCX and external DLL's???? Once in a whule they
do occur... God knows why.. It will be my pcoding problem, but what I am
saying.. I do not get these unpredictablke errors in C#. And that is what I
like!
Grtz, Marc
"TSDing" <dingts_re...@pc.jaring.my> schreef in bericht
news:41126...@news.tm.net.my...
Graham McKechnie
Watch it, you are starting to sound like a VO basher. - The VO police Jamal
and Johel will be after you....
Graham
"Marc Verkade [Marti BV]" <ma...@martiXYZNOSPAMZYX.nl> wrote in message
news:4112ba25$0$196$58c7...@news.kabelfoon.nl...
Graham McKechnie
>> C# is very similar to VO.
Thats not what you were saying the other day, when you did the conversion.
Graham
"TSDing" <dingts_re...@pc.jaring.my> wrote in message
news:41126...@news.tm.net.my...
Johel de Souza Filho
> I see the WIN32API has been patched up and built on added to for last 13
> years..
> At some stage it needed a redesign and .NET is it..
Ok, I know that.
> You can easily ignore .NET for 2 or 3 years but after that it was like
> trying to stay with DOS when Windows moved on....
> It does offer some benefits and yes the different Frameworks will be an
> issue.
That's it: what are the real benefits?
> Personally we have a solution now for years to come in VO + PHP and the
.NET
> interest will be just to see what it can do and whether I start futher
down
> this path now or be forced this way in a few years from now.
So you're not so sure about those unknown benefits....
I'm also thinking about VO and PHP (for Linux servers). #D + Mono also would
be a good option but I guess that all that software patent crazyness will
hurt Mono.
> To me .NET has not really achieved that super growth MS wanted and the
JAVA
> market is still bigger than ever.
Yes, another solution is Eclipse/Java. Runs everywhere, from servers to
handhelds and it's free.
> The problem that will happen for products like VO is why would a 3rd party
> spend to much time on an older mature market when there is a new and
> emerging market.. and this is what Brian and the team will aim for and it
> makes sound commercial sense.
I agree. As I said to Brian, I just want a bugs free VO 2.7x. That's all...
Johel
Johel de Souza Filho
Exactly! Why do we need dNET now? I do not know. I can't see any real needs.
Johel
Stephen Quinn
> You did not understand.
I did understand.
That's why your paying more for what's in the basic box
> D8 does not need basic 3rd party like VO does> (VOCOM, VO2ADO, etc).
That's debatable, you'll need to ask D8 users about what extras are 'needed'
> They are all included in the main product D8 (COM, ADO, etc).
I believe they're more a part of .NET than D8 but I don't own D8<g>
> So, as I understand it VO is not a bargain anymore because you do need the
> 3rd party products to make a good work.
IMO the only essentials are VOPP and bBrowser
- one for the dev environment and the other for applications
any of the other 3p tools you mentioned would be application specific
- ie optional
> What 3rd party do you need to make a good work with D8 or D7?
Depends on what the application required I suppose - just less 'need'
--
HTH
Steve
Marshall Rhinehart
Please excuse me jumping in.....but a couple questions.
Other than auto export...what other features in VOPP do you use on a daily
basis...or are there too many to mention? I never went that route, but your
mentioning it with bbrowser, well.... got my attention.
Secondly, in another thread, you posted a link to a Spy program. Looking a
little further, the site talks about ...
(Clipped from Winspector site...)
Winspector includes the ability to watch for the creation of windows of
specific window classes. When Winspector sees a window that matches one of
your classes it will create either a properties or messages window.
(End of clipped section..)
If I have a VO dialog window called...simple_win, would I actually enter
'simple_win' as the window I want to see the messages for?
Thanks...any answers appreciated.
Marshall
Ginny Caughey
Yes, I assumed that Longhorn would include it anyway (or something very like
it.)
--
Ginny
"Lars-Eric Gisslén" <now...@inter.net> wrote in message
news:QNxQc.4477$vH5.821@amstwist00...
Paul Piko
Since WinInspector is not a VO-specific tool I assume the reference to class
means a Windows class.
A Window class is not the same things as a VO class. A Window class is a set
of attributes that Windows uses as a template to create a window (e.g. via a
call to CreateWindowEx). Each Windows class has a function associated with
it that controls the way the window appears and behaves - a window
procedure.
In VO we rarely need to make use of the Windows class because the GUI
classes provide us with an object-oriented representation of the windows,
which is a step above the API level concept of a Windows class. There is no
direct correlation between VO classes and Window classes - all VO subclasses
of DataWindow (for example) will have the same Window class.
--
Paul
----
Paul Piko
Piko Computing Consultants
http://www.piko.com.au
"Marshall Rhinehart @adelphia.net>" <mrhp<remove> wrote in message
news:O6WdnX0VVti...@adelphia.com...
Marshall Rhinehart
> Since WinInspector is not a VO-specific tool I assume the reference to
class
> means a Windows class.
>
> A Window class is not the same things as a VO class. A Window class is a
set
> of attributes that Windows uses as a template to create a window (e.g. via
a
> call to CreateWindowEx). Each Windows class has a function associated with
> it that controls the way the window appears and behaves - a window
> procedure.
>
> In VO we rarely need to make use of the Windows class because the GUI
> classes provide us with an object-oriented representation of the windows,
> which is a step above the API level concept of a Windows class. There is
no
> direct correlation between VO classes and Window classes - all VO
subclasses
> of DataWindow (for example) will have the same Window class.
>
While typing the question... I began to think...how would it know anything
about a VO class.
You cleared it up for me. As for my other question...I'll have a look at
your website, and past threads.
Thanks,
Marshall
TSDing
Regards
Ding
"Graham McKechnie" <g...@bignospampond.net.au> wrote in message
news:r4zQc.34977$K53....@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
TSDing
> Sure.. Nevertheless I was amazed how easy it is to write cide and I love
the
> VS-IDE!
This one I agree with you, VO IDE is very weak, especially the Windows
Editor.
> Not having 5333's and using OCX and external DLL's???? Once in a whule
they
> do occur... God knows why.. It will be my pcoding problem, but what I am
> saying.. I do not get these unpredictablke errors in C#. And that is what
I
> like!
This is one area where I always complained about VO not having enough basic
things and alot of us have to resort to 3rd party OCX or DLL. Thats where
alot of unknown things happens.
Although sometimes I complained about VO, I still prefer using it than the
other tools.
>
> Grtz, Marc
>
Stephen Quinn
> Please excuse me jumping in.....but a couple questions.
That's OK<g>
> Other than auto export...what other features in VOPP do you use on a daily
> basis...or are there too many to mention?
In the IDE
Import & Compile
AutoExport
AutoType
Ctrl+Alt+I - (Re-)Format Code
Calculator
External
VOEE - View/compare MEF/AEF withhout having to load up VO or even when VO is
in use.
Calculator - not so much daily but 2-3 times a month
--
HTH
Steve
Karl Faller
not to mention the System Builder - that alone makes PP a "must"
my .2
Karl
Stephen Quinn
Phil builds the system for distribution and I don't think he uses that part off
VOPP<g>
--
HTH
Steve
Jamal Assaf
the real the VO bashers. Why don't you just stop your BS!!
"Graham McKechnie" <g...@bignospampond.net.au> wrote in message
news:X3zQc.34976$K53....@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
Gerhard Bunzel
which Compiler have you used for your project Cash-it? Microsoft Visual
Studio .NET?
Regards
Gerhard
"Marc Verkade [Marti BV]" <ma...@martiXYZNOSPAMZYX.nl> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:41125aec$0$745$58c7...@news.kabelfoon.nl...
Graham McKechnie
It might be better to suggest to you to get a sense of humour. You are the
one going on with all the BS mate, not me.
Graham
"Jamal Assaf" <REMOVETHI...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:2njdfsF...@uni-berlin.de...
Jamal Assaf
FYI, I have VS 2003 ( C# and VB.NET ) and several books about them, and I am
learning those as time permits. I am just tired of your constant bashing of
VO. I have nothing against C# or any new technology, but your approach to
telling how good C# is wrong and defeats any good intentions you have and
spoils any good will in your side. Maybe you consider your style as humor,
but it's a very strange and odd humor :)
Jamal
"Graham McKechnie" <g...@bignospampond.net.au> wrote in message
news:MTeRc.39618$K53....@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
richard townsend-rose, tdoc
I just cannot see what ".net" is going to do for my product -
advantages are what ?? and nobody seems to be able to answer this
question....
i am just an engineer - i like to do things simply quickly and
efficiently. This means NOT to change unless there is a proper
motivation to make things even simpler, quicker, and more efficient.
change for ms' sake cannot therefore be a good change
r
richard townsend-rose, tdoc
Phil McGuinness
Your analysis is objective and logical........ but when was software
direction truly logical.
It is mostly based on Commercial vendors manipulation of what the user will
get rather than what is more robust and cheaper for the user. If they see
the Indians coming.... they more the Fort to another hill.... with lots of
Quciksand surrounding it..
.NET is another money making market controlling system... just like the
current one.. but NEWER !!
[Cynical] Phil McGuinness - Sherlock Software
--
Johel de Souza Filho
> not to mention the System Builder - that alone makes PP a "must"
Correct!!
Johel