[Warning: thought gathering rambling follows, coherence might be sacrificed.]
Following Tod Nielsen’s letter announcing that Borland would be divesting their IDE product lines, driving an even tighter focus on the Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) market, what future lies ahead for those of us who have been using Delphi for most of the last eleven years?
I know that I am not alone in having an opinion about this divestment, and it’s one that may result in a further blog posting. Even some Microsoft employees have a very heavy interest in Borland’s divestment plans, some who were/are very close to the Delphi scene.
However, the purpose of this posting to two-fold:
- to plug Gnostice’s PDFOne – their .net 1.1/2.0 PDF creation components. It’s a great product, I reviewed their earlier Win32 VCL offering, eDocEngine and found it to be totally awesome (as this review confirms!). However, and this is not a criticism by any means, but the PDFOne demonstrations are written using C#. I believe that this is decision to use C#, and Gnostice are not alone, is a key driver that will dictate the direction of the “Delphi Language”.
- to try and understand, whether in this posting or a follow up, what might happen to Delphi as a “language”, if all vendors in the .net space move their demonstrations and support over to C#
Gnostice have produced a product for use in the .net environment. Without splitting hairs, that means products like: Borland Developer Studio 2005/6 (Delphi 2005/6), Visual Studio 2003/5, Visual C#/VB Express Editions. Given that Delphi 200x targets .net 1.1, Gnostice were wise to produce assemblies for both .net 1.1 and .net 2.0. The demonstration application that is supplied with PDFOne is written using C#…which means that it will work with Delphi 200x (via its “C#Builder” or C# personality) and it will work in the Microsoft IDEs too.
Of the other vendors who are moving their components (demonstrations and documentation too) from the VCL to .net, what if a number of them started ignoring true Delphi and provided C# examples? I guess most of us would just muck in and convert the code on an as-needed basis, after all, it’s not very difficult converting C# examples into true Delphi code (and vice versa). Certainly it would make me think about whether I should be writing any new applications using true Delphi code.
The importance of the “Delphi Language” is gradually being eaten away by the almost omnipresent C#. There are folks out there who believe C# is the best thing since sliced bread. However, us folks in the Delphi world have enjoyed virtually everything that C# has to offer today. Granted language progression slowed down somewhat when Anders Heilsberg joined Microsoft (see his TechTalk here). C#, and parts of the .NET framework (especially 1.1) are not as well abstracted as people might think, especially those of us with a Delphi background, a point that I made during my recent lament about Borland and .NET:
…is .NET 2.0 up-to-date with regard to the needs of today’s developer? I’m not so sure: Delphi was the first product to simplify Windows-based development with its glorious abstractions around WndProc and the Windows messaging sub-system. No longer did we have to write code to create treeviews, add nodes, or draw them in special ways, etc. Win32 development with Delphi was almost reduced mouse clicks. Visual Studio for .NET 1.1 brought a similar IDE metaphor to the .NET world, however it lacked a number of Win32-style events that we in the Delphi world take for granted, such as the simple ability to have owner draw controls (have you never wanted to make root nodes in a treeview bold?) In .NET 1.1, it’s back to basics, you have to implement everything yourself (as described in these hoops and by the example here.)
So Delphi 200x IDEs may be relegated to being competition for Microsoft’s IDEs. Is that such a bad thing? Can the market withstand such competition? Well, Borland obviously have a view on the competitive aspects of their IDE – they’re selling it off. By selling it off, they are telling me two things:
- They’ve got something else to focus on, in this case ALM. Presumably this is the next big cash-cow and we all should be buying shares in any company that promises big things in the ALM space.
- They’re hoping that the potential buyer will work with developers and the market space, and will progress the IDE within the competitive environment. I certainly hope this is the case.
Delphi itself, as a product, has always enjoyed a lot of kudos because of its legacy support, i.e. applications written using previous versions would re-compile with newer versions. The only problem in this legacy support scenario is third party components. [Borland, please note, this is not a criticism] For years Borland have charged circa £1000 for an upgrade to the next major version or nearly £2000 for a new purchase. Now, I am a Delphi fanatic and have been for 10 years. That’s a lot of upgrade cash. I’ve lost track of the number of Delphi developers who recite the same story to me, especially at user group meetings and developer events.
It’s one thing migrating a vanilla Delphi application from one version to the next major version, it’s another thing to migrate an application that is “third party component heavy”. It’s another thing because we have to shell out for the third party components that match the version of Delphi we’re upgrading to. If you’re doing well, the third party component vendor(s) have kept up and their products are available when you need them…not months after the release of Delphi itself.
On the other hand, and keeping things equal, I like the Microsoft IDEs too. Whilst both Borland and Microsoft IDEs require huge amounts of desktop real estate (screen resolution), each of the respective IDEs have a number of features that make them a delight to work with. Granted, in terms of developer productivity, they are behind the likes of IntelliJ, although it’s authors are making great efforts to correct that as Rob Lally confirms in his write up here (expect a Resharper review to appear here and over at Scottish Developers real soon now!)
I wonder if the recent emphasis on C# signifies the demise of what we know as the “Delphi Language”? Two things will provide the answer: time and the new DevCo who take over the Borland IDE market space. Will there be developer consultation? Will there be a customer satisfaction survey that lets us suggest what language features to important to us? I certainly hope so.
Borland rides Segue on trip out of IDE biz
Borland gambles without developers
Marco Cantu’s Support Delphi blog posting.
DavidI’s posting is here.
Hopefully this posting is merely an April Fool’s joke?
Borland wants to be a Red Hat for developers