Reminder of End of Service Dates for Compiler Products
Dwayne Moore
2001 for the following compiler products for OS/2 and Windows NT:
IBM VisualAge C++ for OS/2, Version 3.0
IBM VisualAge C++ for Windows, Version 3.5
IBM VisualAge C++ Professional for OS/2 and for Windows NT, Version 4.0
Refer to announcement letter 298-239 at
http://www2.ibmlink.ibm.com/cgi-bin/master?xh=D7ueQvWFWWCEsF1USenGnN9332&request=announcements&parms=G2%20298%2d239&xfr=N
for the VisualAge C++ for OS/2, Version 3.0 and VisualAge C++ for
Windows, Version 3.5 products.
Refer to announcement letter 298-473 at
http://www2.ibmlink.ibm.com/cgi-bin/master?xh=XFetbm5LwZxDLF1USenG9N32&request=announcements&parms=H%5f298%2d473&xhi=usa%2emain%7cannouncements%5e&xfr=N
for the IBM VisualAge C++ Professional for OS/2 and for Windows NT,
Version 4.0 product.
Dwayne Moore
VisualAge C++ Service & Support
Stefan Milcke
from IBM is stopped ??? Will there be no more Fixpacks for OS/2 (Very
important for me!) or Windows NT (Not so important!) ?
MfG Stefan Milcke
42 ;-)
Dwayne Moore schrieb:
Cornelis Bockemühl
uninterested in any customer, user and developer wishes in that they go
on in their killing business for OS/2 and any related development tools!
If one looks at this announcement together with the fact that there is
no new VAC++ version even for NT yet, this leaves me with the impression
that IBM is doing this killing business of their best products now also
with C++ in general!
The only conclusion from all these frustrating moves for any customer
can be: NEVER TRUST ANY IBM RECOMMENDATIONS CONCERNING NEW TECHNOLOGIES
ANY MORE! It will probably only be the buzz word of the day...
(I must admit that this is my line of advice in our company already for
a while, while I am still using some IBM technologies "at my own risk"
personally and with the above very bad feeling against IBM in general!
For example, we decided against DB2 lately...)
Greetings,
Cornelis Bockemühl
PS: Sorry if this personal statement will probably again only get to the
wrong persons...
Dwayne Moore schrieb:
>
> Please be reminded that the Program Services end date is January 31st,
> 2001 for the following compiler products for OS/2 and Windows NT:
>
> IBM VisualAge C++ for OS/2, Version 3.0
> IBM VisualAge C++ for Windows, Version 3.5
> IBM VisualAge C++ Professional for OS/2 and for Windows NT, Version 4.0
>
> Refer to announcement letter 298-239 at
> http://www2.ibmlink.ibm.com/cgi-bin/master?xh=D7ueQvWFWWCEsF1USenGnN9332&request=announcements&parms=G2%20298%2d239&xfr=N
> for the VisualAge C++ for OS/2, Version 3.0 and VisualAge C++ for
> Windows, Version 3.5 products.
>
> Refer to announcement letter 298-473 at
> http://www2.ibmlink.ibm.com/cgi-bin/master?xh=XFetbm5LwZxDLF1USenG9N32&request=announcements&parms=H%5f298%2d473&xhi=usa%2emain%7cannouncements%5e&xfr=N
> for the IBM VisualAge C++ Professional for OS/2 and for Windows NT,
> Version 4.0 product.
>
> Dwayne Moore
> VisualAge C++ Service & Support
--
Cornelis Bockemühl
IMIS AG, Zürich, Switzerland
e-mail: bockemueh...@imis.ch
-----------------------------------
Robert Eccardt
but if not, I think IBM should release at least Open Class to the open source community.
sku...@my-deja.com
When is IBM going to release v5 for NT? Planning should have been done
for 2000 so IBM should know what is coming out this year. If IBM is not
planning on releasing v5 for NT this year then it appears IBM is
dropping VA C++ for NT! This would be a sad day!!!
So what is it before propaganda keeps spreading?
Regards,
Stephen Kurlow
In article <397472D2...@ca.ibm.com>,
Dwayne Moore <dwa...@ca.ibm.com> wrote:
> Please be reminded that the Program Services end date is January 31st,
> 2001 for the following compiler products for OS/2 and Windows NT:
>
> IBM VisualAge C++ for OS/2, Version 3.0
> IBM VisualAge C++ for Windows, Version 3.5
> IBM VisualAge C++ Professional for OS/2 and for Windows NT, Version
4.0
>
> Refer to announcement letter 298-239 at
>
http://www2.ibmlink.ibm.com/cgi-bin/master?xh=D7ueQvWFWWCEsF1USenGnN9332
&request=announcements&parms=G2%20298%2d239&xfr=N
> for the VisualAge C++ for OS/2, Version 3.0 and VisualAge C++ for
> Windows, Version 3.5 products.
>
> Refer to announcement letter 298-473 at
>
http://www2.ibmlink.ibm.com/cgi-bin/master?xh=XFetbm5LwZxDLF1USenG9N32&r
equest=announcements&parms=H%5f298%2d473&xhi=usa%2emain%7cannouncements%
5e&xfr=N
> for the IBM VisualAge C++ Professional for OS/2 and for Windows NT,
> Version 4.0 product.
>
> Dwayne Moore
> VisualAge C++ Service & Support
>
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Jens Fettkenheuer
>What does this really mean ?
That's simple Vince,
it means that after that date no more service from IBM will be supplied. Means
no more fixpaks, no more support (maybe if you pay an extra fee)
Now you can imply it's only valid for 3.x and 4.x and there might be coming a
version 5.0 and latter. But if you read the IBM strategy, this might be a dream
only. Java is there solution and this at the moment for Windows platforms only
(they stated Linux later).
my personal conclusion: if you have learned VAC++, you have wasted time and
money.
regards
Jens
Darren Croft
5.0 for OS/2, NT, or Linux. My understanding is there are currently NO plans
for ANY new versions on ANY of those platforms.
Regarding licenses to OCL source. IBM seems agreeable to license the OCL
source to companies to do ports to Linux and then distribute the resulting
binaries on Linux. I did not sense any hope of them making OCL available
under an Open Source license. Perhaps if someone got the license, did the
Linux port and then gave the source back to them it would be more probable
(although I think still unlikely).
I encourage anyone with an actual business need regarding VAC++ to contact
Mr. Harrison.
Darren
P.S. For a summary of further details of my conversation with Mr. Harrison,
please email me privately.
==================BEGIN FORWARDED MESSAGE==================
>Return-Path: <harr...@ca.ibm.com>
>To: "Darren Croft" <dvc...@arb.com>
>cc: mcna...@ca.ibm.com
>Message-ID: <87256907.0...@d53mta07h.boulder.ibm.com>
>Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2000 10:37:51 -0400
>Subject: Re: IBM OCL needed to transition from OS/2
Darren, I don't see a problem with sharing this information about the
availability of source with others. You can give anyone my name as a
contact.
Marvin Harrison
_______________________________________________________________
Manager, C/C++ Solutions
IBM Software Solutions Toronto Lab, 3P/842
1150 Eglinton Avenue East, North York, Ontario, Canada, M3C 1H7
Email: harr...@ca.ibm.com
Phone: 416-448-2691 -- IBM Tieline: 778-2691 -- Facsimile: 416-448-4414
===================END FORWARDED MESSAGE===================
Bruce J. Lontka
Can you please supply the name, title and contact address of the manager(s) responsible for this decision. Our company will be investigating the
possibilities of a class action suit to recover the losses that will be incurred by being forced to migrate to another development environment. IBM's
capricious and cavalier attitude in this manner should not be tolerated by anyone who has a significant investment in VAC++ and OCL.
Bruce J. Lontka
Sr Technical Fellow
Siemens Building Technologies, Cerberus Division
blo...@cerbpyro.com
Rene Matteau
I believe that the stand-alone product called C and C++ Compiler
V3.6 is already out or marketing and our of service. The only current
way to get the 3.6 series compiler is that it is shipped with
VisualAge C++ Professional, V4.0. Thus the end of service is also
January 31st, 2001.
Rene
Walter Stovall <wal...@stovall.net> writes:
> What about C and C++ Compiler v3.6.5 for Windows NT? What is the end-date for
> that product? I don't see it referenced anywhere??
>
> Thanks - Walter
Walter Stovall
yet-to-be-released Windows Millineum?
Jens Fettkenheuer
>Can you please supply the name, title and contact address of the manager(s)
>responsible for this decision.
Bruce,
the message from Darren Croft in this thread contains a contact address in this
matter:
----- cut ---------
Alexander Nikonorov
What about VisualAge for C++ for AS/400 ?
We use VisualAge for C++ for AS/400 with VisualAge for C++ for Windows 3.5.7 environment.
What service or support we can get from IBM ? Or only Java is on our way ?
P.S.
Some time ago, I was surprised to learn about IBM solution to kill OS\2.
Now I was more surprised to learn about VisualAge for C++ (the powerfulest IDE for C++ developing for many platforms) death.
Alan Harrison
Dwayne Moore wrote:
> Please be reminded that the Program Services end date is January 31st,
> 2001 for the following compiler products for OS/2 and Windows NT:
I think most people seeing a three year lifespan for a product assume they
will be expected to migrate to a newer version before that limit. IBM has
clearly advised us to abandon C,C++, VB,Cobol,RPG etc. in favour of Java.
I have done this for 90% of my apps but the remaining programs
and JNI DLLs still require a native C compiler.
Sounds like a scorched earth policy to drive us away from IBM products.
Alan
Cornelis Bockemühl
You are right!
The IBM policy to "migrate" customers away from their own very good
technology (OS/2, VAC++, what next???: DB2???) to competing and mostly
technically inferior products (NT, MS-VC++...) is not very reassuring
and does not make anybody feel good about IBM products! And furthermore,
"eBussiness" and "Java" are *not* the overall answer to all IT
questions!
But while we actually do mainly "eBusiness" in our company, we do it as
far as possible avoiding IBM technology: This is not the result of my
personal frustration with them, but was the way to go already before my
arrival. There is some "MS lemming" behaviour, but also some IBM
frustration involved. On the contrary: I am the only one who uses VAC++
in an otherwise 100% MS-VC++ world here because I see it as the far
better product...
(I could also imagine that IBMs DB2 technology would be a good solution
for many of our database problems, but people here in the company as
well as in the banks we are working for prefer others; DB2 isn't even
being evaluated if it comes to choosing a database: They really *have* a
bad reputation, and they are working hard to keep it!)
Greetings,
Cornelis
PS: Again, I am afraid that these hard words only go to the wrong ears
within IBM! But maybe those who see it can also see that I am very much
fond of many IBM technologies, and if only they weren't marketed in such
a crazy way I could even really use them...
Jack Wise
Alan Harrison wrote:
>
> Dwayne Moore wrote:
>
> > Please be reminded that the Program Services end date is January 31st,
> > 2001 for the following compiler products for OS/2 and Windows NT:
>
> I think most people seeing a three year lifespan for a product assume they
> will be expected to migrate to a newer version before that limit. IBM has
> clearly advised us to abandon C,C++, VB,Cobol,RPG etc. in favour of Java.
> I have done this for 90% of my apps but the remaining programs
> and JNI DLLs still require a native C compiler.
>
> Sounds like a scorched earth policy to drive us away from IBM products.
> Alan
--
And where do we go in 3 years when some other technology is in
vogue and IBM announces the end of service for Java and related
products?
Jack Wise
Houston, TX
Massimiliano Campagnoli
IBM stopped OS/2, VisualAge (C++ and Java) and left all their customers with no
migration path.
What shall we do in IBM's mind ?
Jack Wise wrote:
--
Massimiliano Campagnoli
ASTORI SRL
Via Geola, 34
28013 Maggiate Superiore
Italy
Tel: +39 0322 838847
Fax: +39 0322 880198
Axel Schmidt
Massimiliano Campagnoli wrote:
>
> This simply shows that IBM is not a reliable vendor.
> IBM stopped OS/2, VisualAge (C++ and Java) and left all their customers with no
> migration path.
> What shall we do in IBM's mind ?
>
Maybe they think: Migate to whatever you want but dont use our products.
Jauvane C. de Oliveira
VAJava has not being stopped. In fact it is being enhanced with Linux version
available as well...
JVc.
Mario Semo
and IBM killed internal some product parts which they LATER shipped in a 1.0
Version with OS/2 1.2 toolkit 1.2 (but the parts are already killed! The
people developing the parts have either left the lab or were working for
other products).
IBM developed SOM as THE Corba Object broker. they used it in OS/2 (WPS).
They managed a lot of other organizations to develop technologies based on
SOM (VACPP had a SOM direct to SOM feature. and some other OS2 C++ compilers
too.) IBM shipped SOM2.0 and finally SOM 2.1.4. and then they killed SOM.
But they made SOM 3.0 available for free on the WEB and even announced SOM
4.0. But at the time SOM 3.0 was made available, SOM was already dead.
At the Colorad OS2 developer Conference in 1993 and finally 1994 and talked
to the IBM OpenDoc managers. and they told me to use OpenDoc. It will be the
future UserInterface for IBM and and and...
(oh : OpenDoc was SOM based).
And IBM shipped OpenDoc 1.0 as part of OS2 4.0 . but at this time OpenDoc 4
OS2 was a dead product.
They really told their customers to use a internal already known dead
product.
And IBM shipped VACPP 4.0. And we (the old customers of CSET/2, of CSET++,
of VACPP 3.0, of VACPP 3.5) told (in 1996!) what they should NOT do to avoid
problems. They ignored us and so we ignored IBM. I told all my customers in
Europe to NOT use IBM products anymore.
And we will continue to use 3.5 for the next 10 years. (we still use
MicroSoft C (!) 6.0 for our 16bit OS2 and 16bit DOS development. (in the
area of mission critical process control a life cycle of 20 years is what
customers expect. not 3 years. and noone in my area talks about DataBases
(maybe some people uses Realtime DBs running under VxWorks) or about Java,
or ECommerce.
PS: i wrote it 10 years ago at CompuServe: WE are IBM. We are not interested
in customers.
--
regards, Mario Semo. http://www.kirchnersoft.com
Massimiliano Campagnoli <astor...@pn.itnet.it> wrote in message
news:397C7BBF...@pn.itnet.it...
> This simply shows that IBM is not a reliable vendor.
> IBM stopped OS/2, VisualAge (C++ and Java) and left all their customers
with no
> migration path.
> What shall we do in IBM's mind ?
>
>
Cornelis Bockemühl
>
> > IBM stopped OS/2, VisualAge (C++ and Java) and left all their customers with no
>
> available as well...
VAJava for OS/2 is being killed already ("OS/2 is *the* Java platform!!"
- not long ago...), and the Java2 runtime will be sold for a price such
that smaller users and businesses are driven out of that model, while
the bigger ones might buy it and be reminded that they are on a sinking
ship... (Don't get me wrong: Paying money for good products is *not* my
problem, but I see it as part of a strategy of "let customers pay money
so we get finally rid of them" like other products are given away for
free if a company wants customers to get them.)
Of course the explicit meaning of this move is: "go away from OS/2", but
I am sure it does also harm to Java: Once it is been killed on *one*
platform, it is starting to die as a "platform independent" environment
- and I am sure most customers will understand it that way: When
developing Java apps, you will have to ask yourself "Java for which
platform(s)?", thus making the main reason for using Java already
obsolete!
I also like Java, like I like OS/2 and VAC++, but concerning IBM's
attitude towards it - well, I am burnt!
Greetings,
Cornelis
Andreas Killaitis
now - very likely - from VisualAge C++. Ok, that's the way we know IBM. But don't think it's only IBM's Software Division who have such manners. I just
ordered a wonderful IBM ThinkPad (with - of cause - no OS/2 drivers!). But - fancy! - they told me that at this moment no ThinkPads are produces and
delivered. They will continue to produce some day next month. You will not believe, but they (IBM) recommended me to buy a Toshiba notebook!!! That's IBM.
Vince Ieraci
Paid $2,000.00+ and only farted.
Yes folks, I thought that IBM was a safe bet !! After paying out for VACPP v4 and DB2 I really thought that by now, I would have a working application....how
wrong could one be!
What I have is a far more complex tool that has so many whistles and bells that I am confused to the point that I don't know where to start. It seems obvious
now that what IBM have done is wrapped all those projects that have been sitting in the cupboard and disguised them as "the ultimate programming environment"
with visual building tools that takes the programming out of programming. So simple that anyone can develop a working project in hours !!!
Well, they sure have made me look like a fool, because 12 months down the road and I'm still trying to do basic tricks that have turned out to be major
programming feats beyond comprehension!
And as for support, the only support I see is a bunch of likewise programmers sharing the same problems and no solid answers from IBM, they must be sitting
back in their high-chairs looking at all these messages wetting themselves silly with laughter and counting their $$$$'s (and also saying "I wonder how many
$$'s Bill Gates has got to-day ?")
We are obviously suckers because we are pawns in someone else's OS and they can call whatever shots they like because when we opened that envelope that said
"...by opening this envelope you agree by these terms set out...." and that's all that matters in a legal battle !!
Pity one could not write everything from the ground up in ASM then we wouldn't have to rely on big guns like these.
Andreas Killaitis
Vince Ieraci wrote:
Great! You hit it!
Cornelis Bockemühl
...
> What I have is a far more complex tool that has so many whistles and bells that I am confused to the point that I don't know where to start. It seems obvious
> now that what IBM have done is wrapped all those projects that have been sitting in the cupboard and disguised them as "the ultimate programming environment"
> with visual building tools that takes the programming out of programming. So simple that anyone can develop a working project in hours !!!
VAC++ *is* a complex tool - yes! And I would also prefer being told that
in the beginning: "powerful, but complex - you will have to learn
something new, and it will take some time!" BUT: Do you think anybody
(except me, if the concept is convincing ;-) ) would buy a product that
is advertised like that?
My impression is: If you just think "visual programming - wow, an easy
thing!" and *not* understand the underlying and created code (based on
the OCL library), you will get troubles everywhere when trying to do
just anything a little bit different than in the first starting
examples. Having done one first project with the "Visual Builder" and
much frustration because I had to learn the above the hard way as well,
then another project with OCL, but without VB and using many of the "VB
techniques" now "by hand", like notifications and observers etc., I
would now go into another project using the VB again and try to use the
right mix of direct OCL programming and VB programming, getting most out
of both.
In any case I don't even think about throwing VAC++ away now because IBM
doesn't care any more! Why? Once I got so far with these tools, I cannot
find any alternative any more that is even from far comparable with the
IDE/codestore concept, the OCL and the "visual" tools! (Please don't
even mention MS VisualC++ - this is just a joke in my eyes: a simple
dialog editor, a couple of "wizards" and a badly designed class or
rather macro library that in the first place makes cross platform
development as difficult as possible!)
And finally, if I would have eventually to switch to other tools and
away from IBM products entirely for some reasons, I would never regret
having done the effort to learn something new with VAC++ that isn't
applicable anywhere else - because I never regret having learned
anything!
So far about me. For the rest I still think: Crazy, incompetent IBM
managers who do not even know the qualities of their own products do not
deserve to be trusted about *anything* they are trying to sell us!
Massimiliano Campagnoli
which is still under development is DB2.
Of course it has less options that DB2 for NT.
Let's bet they'll drop it in 1 year time ?
Cornelis Bockemühl wrote:
> Greetings,
> Cornelis
>
> --
> Cornelis Bockemühl
> IMIS AG, Zürich, Switzerland
> e-mail: bockemueh...@imis.ch
> -----------------------------------
--
Massimiliano Campagnoli
We'll stay with VisualAge C++ 3.0 + fixpack even if IBM won't support it anymore.
Unforntunately there are still some minor bugs in OCL that are not going to be fixed and we'll
learn how to survive with them.
What IBM does NOT understand is that you can't say to developers "Hey guy, go there, it's the future"
and when you have reached that point you are told:
"Ok, now that you are there throw everything away (OS/2, VACPP and yes, Java itself) because you're in the
wrong direction and it's your business to convince your customers about it".
But where we should go ?
When IBM dropped S/36 they built AS/400. You could run S/36 software on AS/400 with no problem at all.
When IBM dropped OS/2 and ALL the development tools after saying that Java was the future you're simply left with no options at all.
Cornelis Bockemühl wrote:
Vince Ieraci
for answers, and sometimes, no answers at all! Maybe if I started this 5 years earlier, things might have been different today and I wouldn't be bitching so much!
But I am a bit scared of facing a dark future of learning if there is no support when one really needs it !
Anyway you look at it, even if IBM do drop all support, I won't be spending any more money on anything else, I beleive that I've got everything necessary to go on
with. It's just gonna take a lot more dumb questions and trial-and-error (sledgehammer) technique. And I will resist all temptations of going back to windoze,
especially for networking, because it just keeps falling over.
As they say, you can't polish a turd...
Mario Semo
I hope you will not close this News Server and the newsgroups after service
end so at least developers can help other developers ITF.
and maybe IBM assembles some last fixpacks for the 4 versions (3.0.x, 3.5.x,
3.6.5, 4.x) before the service ends.
--
regards, Mario Semo. http://www.kirchnersoft.com
Dwayne Moore <dwa...@ca.ibm.com> wrote in message
news:397472D2...@ca.ibm.com...
> Please be reminded that the Program Services end date is January 31st,
> 2001 for the following compiler products for OS/2 and Windows NT:
>
Daniel Dudley
news:8lp60f$rpk$1...@news.software.ibm.com...
> I hope you will not close this News Server and the newsgroups after
> service end so at least developers can help other developers ITF.
Even if these newsgroups were closed, it wouldn't (and shouldn't)
take very long to get comparable newsgroups up and running on
devnews. The demand is clearly there, judging be the traffic in these
newsgroups, which is also a good indication for why IBM should NOT
discontinue the product!
Daniel
Jauvane C. de Oliveira
available. The idea is that while developing code you may choose either Windows or
Linux and the code generated may work under Windows-Linux-OS/2-Solaris-Mac-AIX-Other
Unix flavours and any other Java enabled platform. Java is still supported under OS/2,
only the development tool (VAJava) has been dropped.
JVc.
Cornelis Bockem”l
>Only the development tool has been withdrawn from OS/2. Deployment tools are still
>available. The idea is that while developing code you may choose either Windows or
>Linux and the code generated may work under Windows-Linux-OS/2-Solaris-Mac-AIX-Other
>Unix flavours and any other Java enabled platform. Java is still supported under OS/2,
>only the development tool (VAJava) has been dropped.
Could be that this is what they mean, but I would rather like to
develop on OS/2 and deploy to Windows and Linux - if I have a choice!
With OS/2 I have still the best of both worlds: The comfortable GUI
and the solid kernel, and these are the "features" I estimate most
when developing! - But that's just me, and I am not a "strategic
market", but just a developer... :-(
Greetings,
Cornelis
--------------------------------------------
Cornelis Bockemühl, Dornach, Switzerland
e-mail: cbockem AT datacomm DOT ch
(use this instead of antispam reply address)
PGP public key available
David Rocks
linux. Or VAgen 4.5. Maybe next year. For all practical purposes you can develop with a
downlevel product on OS/2 or switch to windows for the next year or more. How many times
do you expect to sitch development platforms?
"Jauvane C. de Oliveira" wrote:
> Only the development tool has been withdrawn from OS/2. Deployment tools are still
> available. The idea is that while developing code you may choose either Windows or
> Linux and the code generated may work under Windows-Linux-OS/2-Solaris-Mac-AIX-Other
> Unix flavours and any other Java enabled platform. Java is still supported under OS/2,
> only the development tool (VAJava) has been dropped.
>
Jauvane C. de Oliveira
As long as ths IDE is still the same I really don't care much about which OS is being used
underneath. Of course that if that is the same used for other applications it is cool but
either a multi-OS boot or things such as VMWare enable the use of that one tool which is not
yet supported in that other OS... VAJava 3.5 Enterprise will be available for Linux. It may
take a little longer than the Windows version but it is just natural to have release of a
version with a greater user base first.
My 0.02...
JVc.
Jauvane C. de Oliveira
One will be just as unsucessful looking for VAJava 3.5 for Windows as it hasn't been released
yet...
JVc.
Ed Ross
Dwayne Moore
While I have seen the writting on the walls for some time now, and have
shifted to java, I still have a lot of software written in visualage C++
version 4 (for windows).
Before IBM stops support for this product, will they support windows ME, or
give any real support for win2k?
(I rarely go for more than an hour before I get the segmentation error, have
to delete the ics file and rebuild)
thx
Dario Fassi
from IBM is stopped ??? Will there be no more Fixpacks for OS/2 (Very
important for me!) or Windows NT (Not so important!) ?
This may be other effort of IBM in favor of MS marketing strategy.
Dario Fassi.
Dwayne Moore escribió:
> Please be reminded that the Program Services end date is January 31st,
> 2001 for the following compiler products for OS/2 and Windows NT:
>
> IBM VisualAge C++ for OS/2, Version 3.0
> IBM VisualAge C++ for Windows, Version 3.5
> IBM VisualAge C++ Professional for OS/2 and for Windows NT, Version 4.0
>
> Refer to announcement letter 298-239 at
> http://www2.ibmlink.ibm.com/cgi-bin/master?xh=D7ueQvWFWWCEsF1USenGnN9332&request=announcements&parms=G2%20298%2d239&xfr=N
> for the VisualAge C++ for OS/2, Version 3.0 and VisualAge C++ for
> Windows, Version 3.5 products.
>
> Refer to announcement letter 298-473 at
> http://www2.ibmlink.ibm.com/cgi-bin/master?xh=XFetbm5LwZxDLF1USenG9N32&request=announcements&parms=H%5f298%2d473&xhi=usa%2emain%7cannouncements%5e&xfr=N
> for the IBM VisualAge C++ Professional for OS/2 and for Windows NT,
> Version 4.0 product.
>
> Dwayne Moore
> VisualAge C++ Service & Support
Dario Fassi
Andreas Killaitis escribió:
I have many others samples like that. Try to buy a Netfinity Server with OS2 for e-Business and see what IBM answer to you ...
All this bad things don't change my opinion that VACpp 3 and 4 are good tools to work with. Once you pass the hard first year you become productive with a
multiplatform tool that give the opportunity to work quick in a visual environment for every day programming tasks and/or mix hand code for complex parts.
Other good point is re usability of developed part , more time you have invested in develop with VACpp more productive you became by reusing parts, this is
absolutely true.
I can't understand where IBM want to go !
We have many industrial data acquisition and process control applications. How they think we can move software like this to their "only chance to be save"
namely Java ??
If this announce is the preface to a no more VACpp announce , miles of working hours , applications and solutions are automatically depreciated and put in a
"subject to be migrated" state.
Dario V. Fassi
Rene Matteau
In the absence of a response, I think we will have another FP that
will include support for Windows 2000 (i.e. the product will install
and the IDE, the debugger, the compiler, etc will work). I believe
that this is called toleration mode. I don't have the schedule for
this. I would not expect support for ME as it is not even shipped
yet. Note that I no longer work in the C/C++ area.
"Ed Ross" <edr...@consultant.com> writes:
> Before IBM stops support for this product, will they support windows ME, or
> give any real support for win2k?
--
Rene
John Holsbeeks
decision.
I 'll kill them with my bare hands.
Jens Fettkenheuer
That's not necessary John, they kill them self. In a financial magacine here in
Germany they are listing IBM as number 3 of the top 500 IT companies in 1998 and on
position 17 in 1999. I suppose they will not be at the top 500 in 2 or 3 years. If
they continue, they will disappear from the market soon. The presence of the company
as it is for now has historical reasons only. There is no rational reason to use IBM
products today.
regards
Jens
Vince Ieraci
Everybody left.
Now everyone will leave IBM for a different set of reasons...they don't want to play
ball any more.
So, the question to ask is...what OS is the answer ?
What is going to prove a stable and reliable OS to invest in ?
Cornelis Bockemühl
>
> First, Microsoft windows lost it's favor due to it's poor stability and buggy programs.
> Everybody left.
...hmm - looks a bit like wishful thinking to me!?!
Ok: I *WOULD* like to leave in any case!
Right now, I am struggling with the idiosyncrasies of the MFC classes
and the "VisualStudio" again - after having convinced my project leaders
about one year ago to use VisualAge C++ instead for another project! But
how should I go on arguing in favor of VAC++ if even IBM is dumping it??
> Now everyone will leave IBM for a different set of reasons...they don't want to play
> ball any more.
> So, the question to ask is...what OS is the answer ?
> What is going to prove a stable and reliable OS to invest in ?
>
> Jens Fettkenheuer wrote:
>
> > There is no rational reason to use IBM products today.
We actually have the choice between:
- A well designed class library (OCL), however badly documented, with a
great IDE (VAC++), but not being supported any more soon by the producer
(IBM)
- An extremely bad designed class library (MFC) - a real offense or
mockery for all serious C++ programmers! - with a mediocre IDE, but
being seriously pushed by the producer (M$)
I for myself would still prefer the first one, because once you overcame
the starting problems with the bad docs programming becomes more and
more fun, but it looks like I have to go with the latter, fighting with
all this stupid macro stuff like "IMPLEMENT_DYNAMIC" and MANY other
crazy stuff...
So yes: There *ARE* non-IBM products around - but what! :-((
Greetings,
Cornelis Bockemühl
Stefan Milcke
> Vince Ieraci schrieb:
> Right now, I am struggling with the idiosyncrasies of the MFC classes
> and the "VisualStudio" again - after having convinced my project leaders
> about one year ago to use VisualAge C++ instead for another project! But
> how should I go on arguing in favor of VAC++ if even IBM is dumping it??
MfG Stefan Milcke
42 ;-)
Mario Semo
--
regards, Mario Semo. http://www.kirchnersoft.com
Jens Fettkenheuer <_NO_fettken...@t-online.de> wrote in message
news:srggxraurhregbayva...@news.software.ibm.com...
Daniel Dudley
news:39D0A216...@imis.ch...
> Vince Ieraci schrieb:
> >
> > First, Microsoft windows lost it's favor due to it's poor
> > stability and buggy programs. Everybody left.
>
> ...hmm - looks a bit like wishful thinking to me!?!
>
> Ok: I *WOULD* like to leave in any case!
>
> classes and the "VisualStudio" again - after having convinced
> my project leaders about one year ago to use VisualAge C++
> instead for another project! But how should I go on arguing in
> favor of VAC++ if even IBM is dumping it??
>
> > they don't want to play ball any more.
> > So, the question to ask is...what OS is the answer ?
> > What is going to prove a stable and reliable OS to invest in ?
> >
> >
> > > There is no rational reason to use IBM products today.
>
>
> - A well designed class library (OCL), however badly documented,
> with a great IDE (VAC++), but not being supported any more soon
> by the producer(IBM)
>
> - An extremely bad designed class library (MFC) - a real offense
> or mockery for all serious C++ programmers! - with a mediocre
> IDE, but being seriously pushed by the producer (M$)
>
> I for myself would still prefer the first one, because once you
> overcame the starting problems with the bad docs programming
> becomes more and more fun, but it looks like I have to go with
> the latter, fighting with all this stupid macro stuff like
> "IMPLEMENT_DYNAMIC" and MANY other crazy stuff...
>
> So yes: There *ARE* non-IBM products around - but what! :-((
Take a serious look at Dev-C++ http://forum.bloodshed.net/.
It's open source software (currently in Delphi) and IMHO may
well have a future (due to the absence of commercial
orientation). Used in conjuction with the many available
libraries on the web it could be a viable contender.
Daniel
Cornelis Bockemühl
[...]
> It's open source software (currently in Delphi) and IMHO may
> well have a future (due to the absence of commercial
> orientation). Used in conjuction with the many available
> libraries on the web it could be a viable contender.
Yes, you are right: Companies like IBM and Microsoft are more and more
convincing me of the "open source" concept, whether that is the
initiative you are pointing me to or something else (e.g. for OS/2,
which exists as well...)!
The advantage of "open source" is definitely the fact that no
unreachable managers somewhere "high up" can arbitrarily decide to dump
high quality products: It would then *really* be the market who decides
what is going on and what not! Right now, some kind of "market" only
works between the biggies, playing their "Monopoly" game somewher far
away from the world of real people. We as the "normal users" do not
participate at all: We have to take what we get in this world! Ok, the
"manager gods" would probably claim that they *are* the market, a bit
like Louis XIV who said something like "The state, that's me!".
OTOH, I see also a disadvantage of the "100% open source" concept: Some
projects just seem to be too big to be done simply by a number of
enthusiasts! Ok, there is Linux as an example that even big projects
*can* finally get done, but it takes years and many things are still not
finished. But something like a good IDE has a much smaller market, so
it's more difficult to achieve: Most free IDEs I have seen are still far
from anything like VAC++! (Ok, some projects would of course even profit
if they were *not* as big as they currently are: Just imagine a fast and
simple browser being present on every desktop, not all that stupid bloat
and the gimmicks around so web designers would not use them any more...)
In my eyes, a combination of the best of both worlds, i.e. commercial
and "open source", would be the best thing to have from a customer
standpoint. So I would certainly pay for a continued (commercial) VAC++
product for OS/2 and NT(2000): I use it, I like it and they would get
real money for real good work. But once IBM decides to dump it, i.e. not
put any more money into it and not sell it any further, I cannot see the
point of *not* releasing it as "open source"! In any case I *hate* this
"being migrated" by some "manager gods" to whatever *they* think I want
to go :-(
Why can't they at least release the OCL as "open source"??
I am probably not the only one who is now with the dumping of VAC++
already disappointed a second time by IBM - after having dumped OS/2 a
couple of years ago. I am going on with using OS/2 and VAC++ now for a
couple of freeware and shortly also "open source" projects, but of
course I cannot go on with these products on a commercial basis.
Professionally, I am right now changing to a little company where even
the leaders have an idea of informatics and programming, so the danger
of being forced to work with things like MFC or even "VisualBasic" is
minimal. The leader is also a former OS/2 user and so also "burnt" by
IBM, so using VAC++ is "out" already for a while: They are using
MS-VisualC simply as an IDE and compiler, without MFC or all the
"wizards" and with either own or free class libraries like STL etc., so
leaving all doors open to porting the software to wherever they want:
Sounds interesting in any case!
Greetings,
Cornelis