Slashdot Mirror


Is Linux Ready For Delphi? -- Delphi R&D Answers

Chrismo writes: "Danny Thorpe, Sr. R&D Engineer at Borland, has written a great article addressing "some of the commonly expressed fears, misconceptions, and even misplaced euphoria" heard from the Delphi community since the announcement of their move to support Linux with their development tools."

9 of 242 comments (clear)

  1. Second article in a row! by scumdamn · · Score: 4
    Again I'm impressed, and I'm not easily impressed. (Simpson's reference: Homer: Wow! A blue car!) This is a thoughtful and well articulated article by a non-marketriod, non-Linux zealot that I feel has increased my understanding of things, has kept me occupied for more than ten minutes, and made me think.

    For those of you complaining of lack of "News for Nerds" and "Stuff that matters." you have no farther to look than here.

  2. One thing that occurs to me by IntlHarvester · · Score: 5

    Is that Delphi being available for Linux might actually spur the sales of their Windows product quite a bit.

    At this point, more savvy IT departments are aware of Linux, but the common perception is that "it's not ready yet" (or is it "we're not ready yet"?). But, even out on the horizon, the existence of alternative environments has to cast some doubt on the typical Windows Standard Environment policy in place at most shops.

    So, when a large internal RAD project comes down the pipe, even if 100% of the clients are currently Windows systems, Delphi may look like a better choice than Visual Basic simply because Borland is willing to consider popular non-Windows platforms. It at least gives you long term options -- in 2002, you'd hate to be the person to tell the CIO that Linux on the desktop is impossible because your department has just completed two million dollars of VB development -- a much worse problem than some poorly converted DOC files.

    I'd expect there will be quite a few "We get along fine with gcc and vi, thank you." posts, but keep in mind this move isn't really about you. It's about the people on the S curve the author talked about (who probably care as much about you as you care about them), and my guess that in the short term, it's really about providing a more attractive product to their Windows customers.
    --

    --
    Business. Numbers. Money. People. Computer World.
  3. I know this sounds lame, but... by god_of_the_machine · · Score: 5

    I am VB programmer... despite the bad publicity the language gets, I was born and raised on GW-Basic, and then moved to VB way back in the old Win16 days. Now, I'm doing more and more (non-programming) work in Linux, but I can't start developing for it because I am too lazy to learn C++ when I can do a bloody good job in VB.

    I think that it's great that Delphi(Object Pascal) is being ported to Linux -- how about an open-source version of a basic language so folks like me can start developing? With an open source Object Basic tool I would start porting my programs like crazy -- as would a million other VB programmers.

    Before dismissing me completely, just consider that not everyone has to be a "programmer" to generate a lot of decent results in an Object Basic type langauge.

    --

    -rt-
    ** Evil Canadians are taking over the world. Learn about the conspiracy
    1. Re:I know this sounds lame, but... by JabberWokky · · Score: 5
      > With an open source Object Basic tool I would start porting my programs like crazy -- as would a million other VB programmers.

      >Do you think anyone is interested in your crap?

      A super HLL like VB has it's place -- I submit to you that Visual Basic is to Windows as Perl is to CLI Unix (including Linux). With one key difference.

      Although I don't like VB myself, I have seen or used plenty of goofy small apps that were written in VB. Everything from Sky Charts to conversion programs to those damn sheep that walk on your desktop. Nothing of any importance, but useful when you needed some bizzare little tool.

      I have a feeling that none of these programs were written by anybody that you would want near your kernel code -- they weren't programmers as much as hobbyists. They had a vision of what they wanted, or just started banging on the keyboard, seeing what they could do. I know the sky chart program was written by an amatuer astronomer for himself. Maybe the sheep author just liked sheep.

      They key points are: VB allowed the unwashed masses to create what they wanted without much effort, some of those people probably went on to become "real programmers", and I couldn't fix the problems because I didn't have source.

      Hey! That last one is the difference between VB and Perl (calm down, it's not the *only* difference... just the one important to this missive). I know plenty of people whose most recent accomplishment has been discovering the "WordArt" button go on to fiddle with some shell script written in perl. But I can come back and fix it or at least look it over to make sure it dosen't call "rm" anywhere in it.

      The problem with Perl? It's easy for non-programmers... but not for GUI work. They want some sort of hand-holding IDE that pops up help, auto-completes their line, and suggests where the bug might be. Linux could use that. Not for us -- for them.

      Now, I'm not saying that if we arm the masses with a HLL for a Linux GUI that we are going to get an office suite or anything terribly useful.

      No, we're going to wind up with hundreds of screen savers, star charts done up the way some guy in Topeka wants it to work, and those damn sheep.

      But, I had to outlaw those damn sheep in my prior job. They filled up our mail system, and caused about a 10% increase in BSODs... because *everybody* *ran* *them*. 400 WinNT boxes, and at least two-thirds had those sheep on them.

      ...

      Lot's of people talk about how Linux needs a stable web browser, or a better word processor. In at least one financial office, the killer app was some little .exe that made sheep walk on the desktop. Written in Visual Basic, probably by a non-programmer. And it captured a two-thirds market share.

      Linux could use a GUI super high-level-language like VB.

      Not for us coders... for the rest of the world.

      and their damn sheep.

      --
      Evan

      --
      "$30 for the One True Ring. $10 each additional ring!" -- JRR "Bob" Tolkien
  4. Polemic comment in the article by divec · · Score: 4
    Linux is about choice. Any Linux advocate who says Delphi is not welcome in the Linux space is a hypocrite.

    That's not true. Some people who advocate Linux do so because it is free software, and would only advocate free software, and consider non-free software to be coercive and immoral. Danny Thorpe clearly disagrees with this view (as do most Linux users, probably) but that doesn't mean that its proponents are hypocrites.
    --

    perl -e 'fork||print for split//,"hahahaha"'

  5. Personally, *I AM* ready for Delphi on Linux. by torpor · · Score: 5

    As a long-time Linux user, and a recent religious convert to the ways of Delphi (having, wrongly, abandoned my old faithful Turbo Pascal skills when Windows 3.0 came along in favor of C/C++, which was a *HUGE* mistake because I'd written about 3 million lines of Turbo Pascal code during the late 80's/early 90's), I am totally ready for Linux Delphi.

    Delphi rocks, as a RAD tool. There really isn't much out there for Windows that can compare - Delphi *ACTUALLY* made Windows programming fun again - specifically the extremely well-designed VCL.

    Prior to Delphi, Windows suffered the same fundamental problem that Linux currently does, at least for me anyway, which is that there are a large number of API's, and multiple different ways of doing things, from a developer standpoint.

    The Delphi VCL changed all of that for me as a developer who cares about getting things done fast, as rock solid as possible - it encapsulates a lot of the dreck that is the Windows GUI API, and makes it productive.

    Now, I'm not saying that Linux is the same - certainly, the GNOME/KDE efforts are very well designed projects, but there is still a last-step of organization that is required to make RAD a reality for those GUI environments, and I sincerely hope that Delphi can bring that into the Linux mix. Either way, Linux will still be a great platform to deploy apps on, and I use it every day regardless - its just that the Delphi way of doing RAD is going to make for a *huge* shift in developer focus away from such mundane things as library dependence, text-based GUI design, towards rapid application development.

    And, since Linux needs apps, rapid app development can only be a good thing.

    When I can use Delphi to build apps on Linux, I will ditch whatever last vestiges of control Microsofts operating systems have over my current development environment/requirements, and happily be a full-time Linux developer. Right now, I'm *forced* to use Windows as a client software deployment platform, because Delphi makes Windows programming so damned fast...

    --
    ; -- the corruption of government starts with its secrets. a truly free people keep no secrets. --
  6. Re:Is Delphi Ready for Linux? by Speed+Racer · · Score: 4
    You mean products like Delphi, which is made by Borland (now owned by Correl, a merge resulting in renaming them Inprise).

    The only thing worse than an incorrect post is a post correcting it that is also incorrect.

    In the beginning, there was the land called Bor, and Borland was good. Borland begat InterBase and Paradox and Quattro Pro and Turbo Pascal and Delphi and C++ Builder and J Builder. And the Win32 developers did rejoice.

    Behold, a curse came upon the Borlanders and that curse was Del Yocam. This evil leader, full of guile, changed the name to Inprise to capitalize on the buzzword "Enterprise". There was much weeping and wailing and gnashing of teeth in all the land.

    The fairy stockholders were displeased with these actions and did cause that the stock price should plummet. After many fortnights, Borland rose again from the ashes of Inprise as a beacon of hope for all to follow. The evil Del was banished and all rejoiced.

    From the vast hinterlands to the north came courting a certain Micheal Cowpland of Corel. This Cowpland did offer bounteous riches that he might own Borland and the Borlanders were beguiled by his cunning. Thus, Borland became united with Corel and Inprise was banished entirely.

    --
    Free Mac Mini. Yes, I'm
  7. ATTN: All Linux Zealots by cwhicks · · Score: 5

    This is a must read for all Linux zealots. I tried to say something along these lines in a post to yesterdays Delphi article, but I did not put the same thought and effort into it as this guy did.
    This article is important for Linux freaks to read because this is how the rest of the world outside of the community looks at Linux. They community has trouble understanding that the world doesn't care about open/closed, MS/RH, or any other opposed forces. If you want Linux to be big, this article shows the path to it being a huge success with the other 99.9997% of the world.

    --
    - I like pudding.
  8. Why are some Linux users so damn greedy? by EvlG · · Score: 4

    This is a bit of a rant addressed to the small (but vocal) sect of Linux users that whine and scream and cry whenever a company announces a product that is not free (in all senses of the word.)

    In two words: GROW UP.

    Companies exist for a number of purposes; chief among them are to offer products and services to customers willing to purchase them. To do this requires that talented people be employed to develop and maintain those products and services. How can the company stick around, to continue to provide those products, as well as offer new ones? Sticking around requires a keen sense of the market, to continue to innovate and lead the pack in ways your competition isn't doing. And sticking around also requires that you continue to make money so you can pay those talented developers.

    This is exactly what Borland is doing; they are among the few (but growing number) of companies that have the foresight to know that Linux is going to be a huge market, and soon. They are simply providing a product that many developers (myself included) are clamoring for: RAD tools.

    Borland's RAD tools are among the easiest to use and most productive I have had experience with. Delphi and BCB give you all the benefits of a powerful language, without all the hassle and trouble of a "traditional" solution laden with mindless, cumbersome details.

    It's really quite simple, folks. If you like the idea of developing a fully-functional, complete product in a couple weeks, without having to care about all the silly details that make your life miserable, then you'll love Borland's RAD tools. Afterall, isn't that why we all love Perl? It makes easy things easy, and hard things possible. However, if you'd rather spend all your time under the hood and get to know the application intimately, you're probably already quite comfortable with your current options.

    What gets me is that amount of bickering and ugly fighting that rears its head every time a company offers a new product for the Linux market that isn't free. Why try and discourage companies from offering products that many of us would like, just because it doesn't satisfy your personal (albeit warped) agenda? Why not vote with your dollars, and simply not purchase the product that you don't want, rather that making a big scene every time it happens?

    It's time many of the kiddies in this community grew up and got a clue. Linux IS all about choice, and you too have the freedom of choice to develop without whatever you'd like. There are many of us who want and/or need the benefits a RAD tool can provide. Why rain on everyone's parade?