Slashdot Mirror
Borland Kylix Released - Kinda
red_crayon writes: "Borland's kylix -- their port of Delphi (née Borland Pascal),
and, coming later, Borland C++ Builder -- is out.
See Borland's Kylix Web site for more details.
This has been discussed on Slashdot in the past, but it is good
to see that it is finally out.
A kylix is an ancient Greek two-handled drinking cup. Hence,
they keep the Greek theme started with Delphi. And
the two handles are meant to be (???) some sort of symbolism
WRT Win and Linux co-development." It's $999, and this round is actually "pre-order" rather than shipping -- but people have been waiting for this.
I have been previously spoiled in the Windows world using CBuilder, but am more spoiled now by using Java. Runs well everywhere; GUI's, databases, the whole thing. Plenty of IDE's around, including JBuilder. Ready to do serious prime-time work. I recommend Java to anyone who has been working in the C++ world. I'm not trying to start a war here, but this is not a black and white situation, and alternatives DO exist.
Oh, man, don't even get me started on SQL Server 7. One of our applications is basically an ASP, and the Microsoft (and Oracle, for that matter) pricing of database licences when you're serving data over the web is just outrageous. So we moved our database to Interbase (on Linux), and we don't have to worry about per-unique-stateful-user or per-cpu-per-megahertz give-me-all-your-profit fucked up pricing models. We're already using Apache (of course), and now, we get to reformat the two remaining Windows boxen and install a REAL OS. In the immortal words of Stimpy, 'I'm so happy, I can hardly contain myself!'.
I mean, compilers still have their place (in a museum of history ;-) but all serious development these days is done on interpreted platforms. The suits realise that the true cost of development is high, and they cannot afford to have their geeks sitting around waiting for their code to compile and link.
TurboVision I think, man was it a pain to program though.
OWL died because when MS released NT it took borland forever to get it working. MFC was there and people chose it even though it was hugely buggy at the time (wow I could tell you some horror stories, before numega apparently fixed a bunch of the bugs with testing versions of bounds checker), and MFC was just a huge mess written by a bunch of people who didn't understand OO methodology. The old borland ads with OWL being this pretty bridge in comparison to the messy bridge that was MFC were right on target. I tend to think though that the VCL is OWL version 2. Its more correct, even cleaner and continues to make MFC look like the mess that it is. Christ VC++ is in my opinion equal to Borland C++ 3.1. Borland didn't have the marketing to consider that just because they shipped a graphical resource editor that it was anything like visual programming though.
Regarding Borland C++ compatibility with gcc:
I wrote the devleopment tools for the CyberKNEX
toys (http://www.cyberknex.com) using gcc (under
BeOS incidently). When I 'ported' the code to Windows to add a gui with C++Builder, I had to
change one or two of abou 20000 lines of code. Not a single problem with STL, templates or RTTI.
Jon
lookie here
Seriously, people are into open source for different reasons. Some like the philosophy of everything being guaranteed free(dom) for the duration of copyright law. Some like the safety provided by being able to audit the source code. Some like the opportunity to fiddle around with cool programs. Some just like freebies. Chaos theory shows us that any system that lacks diversity is doomed to instability. The prevalance of Win/Outlook demonstrated this with Melissa et al. Viva diversity.
> "after kylix is finished, work will start on porting it to other platforms"
Which is not now - C++ is still to go. When is software ever finished anyway?
> Shame though the IDE uses Winelibs
Oh does it? Can you give a reference on that, as this is the first I've heared about it & i've been following Kylix.
My Karma: ran over your Dogma
StrawberryFrog
I've got to jump in here. Everyone's bitching about it costing 1-2 grand, or the fact it's not completely Free (speech) as defined by the FSF. I don't care.
My company develops applications for the corporate market, and the chance to move my code from the steaming heap of shit that is Windows NT, to a nice stable OS is just making me wet my pants here.
$1,999 is CHEAP, I don't care if I can't write GPL software with it, 'cos we don't sell GPL software to our customers. We do get to dictate hardware and OS, and I can see our support burden dropping hugely when we start using Debian as a server platform instead of NT.
Realise that this product is not necessarily targetted at your average OSS developer, but rather at corporate software development houses that want to support Linux platforms. This is good news, any way you play it. And given Borland's history of actually 'getting it', I'm sure you'll soon see a version available cheap (or free!) that the FSF will be 100% happy with.
Just because it's not libre and gratis doesn't mean it sucks.
If you can get someone to pay you for your labours, then good for you. You don't have a natural right to stop me from telling a joke that you made up.
"But Kylix is free", you say. The problem is, I don't have the source to Kylix, so I don't know if someone has inserted a back door into it. If I can take the source to the compiler and compile it with a different compiler, then I can be pretty sure that the backdoor will be stripped out. After all, they put a backdoor in Interbase, why should we trust Kylix?
Yeah, but why not other English-speaking countries?
It was born Nascom Pascal, then Compas Pascal, later Poly Pascal, Turbo Pascal and then Borland Pascal and Delphi. I started with Compaq Pascal, before Borland got involved in the product, and have seen Nascom Pascal being used.
Will this compiler run on every version of linux (ia64, sparc, alpha ppc)? It won't oh that's what I thought.
It has been statistically shown that helmets increase the risk of head injury.
Free software is a matter of freedom: people should be free to use software in all the ways that are socially useful. Software differs from material objects--such as chairs, sandwiches, and gasoline--in that it can be copied and changed much more easily. These possibilities make software as useful as it is; we believe software users should be able to make use of them.
Digital information technology contributes to the world by making it easier to copy and modify information. Computers promise to make this easier for all of us.
Not everyone wants it to be easier. The system of copyright gives software programs ``owners'', most of whom aim to withhold software's potential benefit from the rest of the public. They would like to be the only ones who can copy and modify the software that we use.
The copyright system grew up with printing---a technology for mass production copying. Copyright fit in well with this technology because it restricted only the mass producers of copies. It did not take freedom away from readers of books. An ordinary reader, who did not own a printing press, could copy books only with pen and ink, and few readers were sued for that.
Digital technology is more flexible than the printing press: when information has digital form, you can easily copy it to share it with others. This very flexibility makes a bad fit with a system like copyright. That's the reason for the increasingly nasty and draconian measures now used to enforce software copyright. Consider these four practices of the Software Publishers Association (SPA):
All four practices resemble those used in the former Soviet Union, where every copying machine had a guard to prevent forbidden copying, and where individuals had to copy information secretly and pass it from hand to hand as ``samizdat''. There is of course a difference: the motive for information control in the Soviet Union was political; in the US the motive is profit. But it is the actions that affect us, not the motive. Any attempt to block the sharing of information, no matter why, leads to the same methods and the same harshness.
Owners make several kinds of arguments for giving them the power to control how we use information:
Owners use smear words such as ``piracy'' and ``theft'', as well as expert terminology such as ``intellectual property'' and ``damage'', to suggest a certain line of thinking to the public---a simplistic analogy between programs and physical objects.
Our ideas and intuitions about property for material objects are about whether it is right to take an object away from someone else. They don't directly apply to making a copy of something. But the owners ask us to apply them anyway.
Owners say that they suffer ``harm'' or ``economic loss'' when users copy programs themselves. But the copying has no direct effect on the owner, and it harms no one. The owner can lose only if the person who made the copy would otherwise have paid for one from the owner.
A little thought shows that most such people would not have bought copies. Yet the owners compute their ``losses'' as if each and every one would have bought a copy. That is exaggeration---to put it kindly.
Owners often describe the current state of the law, and the harsh penalties they can threaten us with. Implicit in this approach is the suggestion that today's law reflects an unquestionable view of morality---yet at the same time, we are urged to regard these penalties as facts of nature that can't be blamed on anyone.
This line of persuasion isn't designed to stand up to critical thinking; it's intended to reinforce a habitual mental pathway.
It's elementary that laws don't decide right and wrong. Every American should know that, forty years ago, it was against the law in many states for a black person to sit in the front of a bus; but only racists would say sitting there was wrong.
Authors often claim a special connection with programs they have written, and go on to assert that, as a result, their desires and interests concerning the program simply outweigh those of anyone else---or even those of the whole rest of the world. (Typically companies, not authors, hold the copyrights on software, but we are expected to ignore this discrepancy.)
To those who propose this as an ethical axiom---the author is more important than you---I can only say that I, a notable software author myself, call it bunk.
But people in general are only likely to feel any sympathy with the natural rights claims for two reasons.
One reason is an overstretched analogy with material objects. When I cook spaghetti, I do object if someone else eats it, because then I cannot eat it. His action hurts me exactly as much as it benefits him; only one of us can eat the spaghetti, so the question is, which? The smallest distinction between us is enough to tip the ethical balance.
But whether you run or change a program I wrote affects you directly and me only indirectly. Whether you give a copy to your friend affects you and your friend much more than it affects me. I shouldn't have the power to tell you not to do these things. No one should.
The second reason is that people have been told that natural rights for authors is the accepted and unquestioned tradition of our society.
As a matter of history, the opposite is true. The idea of natural rights of authors was proposed and decisively rejected when the US Constitution was drawn up. That's why the Constitution only permits a system of copyright and does not require one; that's why it says that copyright must be temporary. It also states that the purpose of copyright is to promote progress---not to reward authors. Copyright does reward authors somewhat, and publishers more, but that is intended as a means of modifying their behavior.
The real established tradition of our society is that copyright cuts into the natural rights of the public---and that this can only be justified for the public's sake.
The final argument made for having owners of software is that this leads to production of more software.
Unlike the others, this argument at least takes a legitimate approach to the subject. It is based on a valid goal---satisfying the users of software. And it is empirically clear that people will produce more of something if they are well paid for doing so.
But the economic argument has a flaw: it is based on the assumption that the difference is only a matter of how much money we have to pay. It assumes that ``production of software'' is what we want, whether the software has owners or not.
People readily accept this assumption because it accords with our experiences with material objects. Consider a sandwich, for instance. You might well be able to get an equivalent sandwich either free or for a price. If so, the amount you pay is the only difference. Whether or not you have to buy it, the sandwich has the same taste, the same nutritional value, and in either case you can only eat it once. Whether you get the sandwich from an owner or not cannot directly affect anything but the amount of money you have afterwards.
This is true for any kind of material object---whether or not it has an owner does not directly affect what it is, or what you can do with it if you acquire it.
But if a program has an owner, this very much affects what it is, and what you can do with a copy if you buy one. The difference is not just a matter of money. The system of owners of software encourages software owners to produce something---but not what society really needs. And it causes intangible ethical pollution that affects us all.
What does society need? It needs information that is truly available to its citizens---for example, programs that people can read, fix, adapt, and improve, not just operate. But what software owners typically deliver is a black box that we can't study or change.
Society also needs freedom. When a program has an owner, the users lose freedom to control part of their own lives.
And above all society needs to encourage the spirit of voluntary cooperation in its citizens. When software owners tell us that helping our neighbors in a natural way is ``piracy'', they pollute our society's civic spirit.
This is why we say that free software is a matter of freedom, not price.
The economic argument for owners is erroneous, but the economic issue is real. Some people write useful software for the pleasure of writing it or for admiration and love; but if we want more software than those people write, we need to raise funds.
For ten years now, free software developers have tried various methods of finding funds, with some success. There's no need to make anyone rich; the median US family income, around $35k, proves to be enough incentive for many jobs that are less satisfying than programming.
For years, until a fellowship made it unnecessary, I made a living from custom enhancements of the free software I had written. Each enhancement was added to the standard released version and thus eventually became available to the general public. Clients paid me so that I would work on the enhancements they wanted, rather than on the features I would otherwise have considered highest priority.
The Free Software Foundation (FSF), a tax-exempt charity for free software development, raises funds by selling GNU CD-ROMs, T-shirts, manuals, and deluxe distributions, (all of which users are free to copy and change), as well as from donations. It now has a staff of five programmers, plus three employees who handle mail orders.
Some free software developers make money by selling support services. Cygnus Support, with around 50 employees [when this article was written], estimates that about 15 per cent of its staff activity is free software development---a respectable percentage for a software company.
Companies including Intel, Motorola, Texas Instruments and Analog Devices have combined to fund the continued development of the free GNU compiler for the language C. Meanwhile, the GNU compiler for the Ada language is being funded by the US Air Force, which believes this is the most cost-effective way to get a high quality compiler. [Air Force funding ended some time ago; the GNU Ada Compiler is now in service, and its maintenance is funded commercially.]
All these examples are small; the free software movement is still small, and still young. But the example of listener-supported radio in this country [the US] shows it's possible to support a large activity without forcing each user to pay.
As a computer user today, you may find yourself using a proprietary (18k characters) program. If your friend asks to make a copy, it would be wrong to refuse. Cooperation is more important than copyright. But underground, closet cooperation does not make for a good society. A person should aspire to live an upright life openly with pride, and this means saying ``No'' to proprietary software.
You deserve to be able to cooperate openly and freely with other people who use software. You deserve to be able to learn how the software works, and to teach your students with it. You deserve to be able to hire your favorite programmer to fix it when it breaks.
You deserve free software.
For the uninitiated, Delphi is based around Object Pascal and Kylix makes use of the same language. Dismissing Kylix as being just pascal is like dismissing a space shuttle as being just another plane. The technology that is involved in Kylix or Delphi is way more advanced than one might hope to find in your garden variety pascal text book.
The danger in looking at Kylix as just another "new" language for Linux is to miss the whole point. Kylix is an entire development environment and comes with a very advanced component model, which allows developers to create components that can be easily reused across projects. The CORBA support that is part of Kylix also allows these components to be reused across machine and language boundaries.
Also, Kylix is based around a technology that has already been around for a long time and there is already a large, loyal community around it. If one looks around the web, one will find extensive, well organized component resources and many of these will be reusable on Linux with some changes or no changes. Most of these components are available with source and many of them are licensed under the GPL.Also, in building Kylix, Borland has tried to make it as easy as possible to make use of the excellent G++ resources already available on the web. Most of the native components are found either as source code or as compiled object code.
All or most of these components will plug in directly into the IDE and make it as easy as a drag and drop to a form to use them within applications. Kylix is coming from the same chaps who made JBuilder (considered one of the best development environments for Java), C++Builder (perhaps the easiest and most feature rich C++ development environments around). The Kylix IDE is very similar to the Delphi IDE (again considered one of the best IDEs around).
The primary difference between the different editions of Kylix is in the number of components shipped with each editions. But since many of the components found in more expensive editions of Kylix have equivalents that can be downloaded from the various component sites in the Internet, one can manage surprisingly well with a low priced edition of Kylix.
Kylix comes with an excellent debugger and Borland took so long to bring out Kylix primarily because they were working on getting the debugger right considering the fact that the Linux has very different view of debugger support as compared to Windows.
Kylix includes support (via the webbroker) for interaction with enterprise class application servers such as the inprise appservers which are used by some big banks such as the Bank of America. Kylix will allow the creation of enterprise class applications much faster and with far less effort and heart-burn than was possible before.
I have previewed Kylix before and it is an excellent product and will give developers an advantage in speed of development of complex apps which will be way faster than anything else out there. And that is for both platforms - Windows and Linux. Kylix includes an advanced two-way type of visual development, which makes it a real snap to develop apps.
Borland has a had a decent record of supporting the community except for the occassional screw-ups such as with the release of the Interbase database code(some licensing problems and generally a lot of confusion). But overall, Borland has succeeded in developing a loyal community even from the time when the Internet was non-existent or in its infancy.
As for concerns about the licensing issues, the source code for the applications that are developed by anyone can be given under whatever license that the creator will opt to use. Ofcourse, Kylix will still be required to compile them.
If you have any doubts regarding Kylix, download the freeware edition of Kylix and see for yourselves.
According to Borland the IDE uses winelib, though it will eventually be 100% native.
I think that this is a treasure to the Linux community because it could only benefit further development of applications. Many apps arent ported over to Linux from the Win32 platform because of time and costs involved. Now that borland has introduced this tool to us, porting a Linux app to Win32 and vice versa should be a snap. The linux community can have great coding done by great win32 developers who were weary about developing for linux platform. This is great! Now that we will be seeing more linux apps and support from other companies that make great win32 software only, this could only increase linux's desktop/server share. I can't wait to get coding with this app.
It does *not*.
A long time ago it did, but those days have past.
OK now tag on rent, plus utilities, plus hardware, server space, etc. Then say every developer's station is going to go up $2G.
I can see the wheels spinning: "Or I can buy Visual C++ for less than $500 a head, and sell my product to a much larger market, ensuring my survival."
--- Jump!! Fire!! Bullet time!! - Lego version of the Matrix
According to this page. Borland will be releasing an "open edition" of Kylix by mid-year. This version will be able to be downloaded (or purchased) for $99--a bit more reasonable than $999.
Looks like they just wanna rip off some Linux-hype/bandwagon corporate folks while they can.
You weren't expecting Kylix for free, now, were you?
Free version will be available mid-year. You can only write GPL apps with this version though. Doesn't care if you choose KDE or GNOME (or no desktop at all).
$1k/license isn't that much if you can save developer time... the unanswered question is how much (if any) time is saved, whether or not it is buggy and if it is easy to interoperate with other elements of the system, like a database. And if you could do it in another way, like switching to python.
Having something like this around might be very useful for penetration on certain kinds of corporate desktops - those were you have people punching in or extracting data from custom applications.
It's not "plain Pascal" by any means -- it's Delphi (often called Object Pascal).
Even Turbo Pascal had many Borland extensions to the original language. Today, Delphi's Pascal supports nearly everything you'd need (obviously it doesn't support every last C++ feature, but most C++ coders don't use nearly the entire language).
It's very suitable for a RAD environment as well -- the unit approach (as opposed to includes) yields much faster compiles.
In my college linux is currently used for education about OpenGL and serverside programming (php/perl) for apache. We've got one linux lab, and three windows labs in my department.
When borland ports it's ide,.. and makes it GPL (and if I understand correctly this would also be C++),.. my college would very likely expand with one more lab.. because half of the classes thought. (GUI, and various programming related topics) could just as easily be trained using borland's software,.. and there'd be no reason not to use the GPL'd versions in school..
my only fear now is that they won't add another linux lab.. and the current lab will be cramped.
Borland did the Really Smart (TM) thing, and released the CLX, DataCLX, and MySQL libraries GPL'd, making it possible to write GPL software entirely within Kylix. This was a concern voiced here on /. a while ago, and I'm glad to see Borland on the right track with this.
Think outside the... Hey, where'd the friggin' box go?
The FREE version is scheduled for mid 2001. See this story on LinuxToday.
Platform abstracting layers/thunks/libraries do add chunk of code to your application but the amount is rather fixed. So, it is death for that 1000 line ditty application. But for a real application it is a manageable (and static) size increase. As you app grows from 1 to 3 megs the toolkit libraries remain fixed in size.
The poster's off the cuff remark, "I choose to write in a portable subset of C and C++" is right and wrong. The way we did our cross-platform app (500+ files, about a half million lines of code) was to stick to a "portable subset of C" but that doesn't do anything for database and GUI issues, nor does it solve the platform specific issues like file path separaters and clipboards.
Our cross-platform app (which we started in 1993) used the XVT GUI toolkit but the issues are the same now as then, you need a portable GUI layer to write to. Everyone assumes they can roll their own toolkit. Bullshit - these are complex animals. Spend the money and buy someone else's mature, debugged, documented toolkit. Back when we started our development ODBC was embryonic as was IDAPI (Borland's database layer). Lacking an industry standard (at that time) we chose to build our own database layer which gave us access to Btrieve on the PCs only and Oracle on both PCs and HP workstations. Let me tell anyone interested in doing a cross-technology layer: don't do it if you really don't have to. Use ODBC, JDBC, etc. for your databse and settle on a tool for the GUI as well. The only caveat is be leery of a toolkit specific API unless you feel good about using the toolkit/IDE for a long time. Industry standards are best but at some point you pick a tool and make a go of it for few years.
Port early, port often (the battle cry of cross-platform coders). It's not portable unless you have tested it on all target platforms. Assumed, but untested "portable" apps aren't.
History note - Borland, like Microsoft, often has 3 levels for the compilers, Personal/Student/Standard ($99), Professional ($499-$999) and Enterprise ($999-$2499) so don't get undone that they announced the high-end Enterprise tool first.
A hundred bucks is not too much for a good tool for personal use. $500 is not too much for a tool you will use to write commercial apps and any price is ok if your employer thinks it is cost effective and picks up the tab.
-- The voice of experience
I'm scared of world leaders who think locally and act globally.
Here's the truth clarified --
Kylix's IDE is a native Kylix application that used Winelib.
Kylix produces native executables that don't use Wine or Winelibs at all.
Kylix executables do require the qt libraries.
Other kylix apps don't need wine so why should this one?
Porting speed. Oh, sure, Kylix *could* be written using CLX. but that would take more time.
Are you calling them liars
Liars would be harsh. Misinformed, perhaps.
>Oh does it? Can you give a reference on that, as this is the first I've heared about it & i've been following Kylix.
;-)
Then you haven't been following Kylix close enough!
borland mention it on the kylix non-technical newsgroup. Anyones (who doesn't work in borland etc) guess.
> "after kylix is finished, work will start on >porting it to other platforms
Again, see the kylix non-technical newsgroup for the exact quote. They may convert the delphi kylix first... or they may just wait until all of kylix 1.00 has been released.
" .dfm format would be the only major obstacle (and who knows, maybe Kylix uses text files instead of binary files, making it even easier). "
:-)
. Either way, if someone wanted to make absolutely sure that the CLX could be included with distributions that have a strict meaning on the term "free", I'm sure decoding the
Man, get over it !
If you have the delphi source handy look up the function ObjectBinaryToText (sommut named like that I don't have Delphi handy right now), its in classes.pas I think. It allows you to convert dfm to text and vice versa with TextToObjectBinary.
Now will you stop whinging about the DFM format!
No kidding.. You guys complain about software and trump Linux pretty heavily but.. I want for a minute to delve into the realm of the hypothetical.
:)
I am not assuming any of this is true just saying what if sto help illustrate what the previous poster said.
Okay I am your average software developer.. If I told my boss this 1000 dollar program would save me 5 hours a week it would be bought for me in an instant.
Why? Because 5 hours a week at over 30 dollars an hour... 5*30=150*4=600 Dollars in one month. In two months of application development the application has paid for itself. Now my employer begins to just simply save money and deliver apps quicker and on a smaller budget. Okay so you still think 1000 dollars is much?? Paying a developer over 70,000 dollars and not giving him tools he/she says will speed up their development even if they are expenisve is throwing money away.
So 1,000 dollars is a drop in the hat when you really think about it. We pay 5-6K a year easily for our MSDN and it saves us money every time.
Okay so.. I know you guys are all sold on free software.. but you have to understand that if you develop a product and it is really good, and it will save people money and or enable them to do something more effeciently you will find that people are willing to pay if the price is right, and usually that price is high enough that you can make a very nice living as a software developer
Rant time.. And.. If everything was free well.. all of the open source developers would find real jobs and the quality of open source would drop, becuase everyone would have to ifnd real jobs and not have time for OS stuff.
Next major rant point, we often hear a whole lot about these cool open source people getting jobs with companies like VA etc, like ERic Raymond and Mandrake etc..
I bet these people literally make up such a small percentage of the developers in the world that its not even funny (That is developers working on free software full time and that is their primary job)
I have no statistics to back this up justwhat ive observed.
Its a lot easier to give something away when you are making good money and dont have anything else like buying food to worry about.
Jeremy
Personally, I welcome Borland. They've always made quality products that worked well. My only problem with this entire thing is the free/$99 version for writing 'Open Source' programs will likely never be free enough to incorporated in some distributions such as Debian, because of the binary-only compiler (unless freepascal is/gets advanced enough to compile CLX/Kylix code). I hope that Borland does well with this endeavor. And maybe, just maybe, this'll enourage some improvements in other 'competitive' projects that are attempting to solve the same problem. I would certainly love to be able to compile CLX with GCC and FreePascal and then turn around and compile the same code in BCC and Delphi.
I used up all my sick days, so I'm calling in dead.
What domain name will they use to promote it? microsoft.mil?
-Martin
SoftMaker Office for Windows|Linux|Android
> Then you haven't been following Kylix close enough!
1) The Delphi IDE is written in Delphi. The Kylix IDE will be in written Kylix. Other kylix apps don't need wine so why should this one?
2) this is in fact a point of pride for Borland - if Kylix was not capable of building the Kylix IDE it wouldn't be ready to release. Again, why should it need wine?
3) Other posters here have said that Kylix does not use WINE in any way shape or form. period. Are you calling them liars?
My Karma: ran over your Dogma
StrawberryFrog
The only programs I have ever seen written in delphi are mail bombing/dos programs.
Now all the l33t hax0rs will go to linux beacuse they can use their mail bombing programs and DoS programs. I await for the "3y3 w4nt 2 b3 a l33t gnu hax0r. h0w?????" posts on mailing list.
Why ? Maybe because you have obviously never used Delphi before and don't have a clue why Kylix is well worth 999$.
It's not just about IDE (although Bordland IDE is one of the best in the world), it's also about the language (Object Pascal), the cross-platform visual components, the rich documentation, etc...
"whaa whaa I want Delphi for Linux for free!"
"whaa whaa I shouldn't have to pay for anything!"
The same people who demand usenet answer their homework questions.
Do you have a filter to produce this crap, or are you wasting your valuable time producing it by hand? (and where is the filter? :-) )
"don't fall into the fallacy of believing that Perl can solve social problems. Maybe Perl 6 can, but that's a ways off"
I've used Delphi for years, and I've been told that Kylix looks very similar with some improvments. So drawing on my past experience of Delphi this is what to expect from Kylix. First the language is object pascal which, if you know C++ will be very easy to pick up. Instead of != it uses greater and less then signs, instead of {} it uses begin and end. It has classes which are build up as single inheritance, (but there are ways around that). It has a really nice feature called properties. For example when you assign a number to a class variable, the class can be made to automagically call a functions to handle it. Talk about data hiding. There are also many treasures to be found in the Libraries, and if you get the professional version you get the source for those. Other treasures are found on the web. http://community.borland.com/homepages/dsp is one of my favourites. There you will find components which you can plug into the IDE and use in your own code. It's very powerful and much of it is open source. The IDE is also good. anytime the editor can help you out it does. For example if you are accessing an instance of a class and want to know what functions or data is available, type the instance, and then a period. (the period deliniates class and function the same as in C++). Up will pop a list of the possible things that can be used from the class at that point, the list is shorted to include only those things which are syntatically valid. Another nice feature is function templating. You design a class and fill in 20 or thirty function prototypes (for example). Then hit that magic key sequence ctrl-shift-C and those functions created for you, including parameters and return values. All you must do is the guts. I've been waiting for Kylix for a long long time. I'm looking it as a good way to do gui apps in Linux. I think if Kylix is 1/2 as good as Delphi it will be worth the free download and the $999.
No thanks, rather than pay $999 for a tool that will let me write Windows and Linux programs, I choose to write in a portable subset of C and C++, and abstract out the platform specific things. Then porting is as easy as writing a new implementation of my abstracted platform layer. With GCC this is free, and with Java this is not even necessary.
The "open edition" will cost $99 for a packaged version or be available as a free download. This version allows people to create only open-source software under the GPL.
No, Thursday's out. How about never - is never good for you?
Problem is, the world and his wife are migrating to .Net as fast as their wallets will carry them.
Unless this delphy compiles to MIL (Microsoft Intermediate Language) they haven't got a hope in hell of success.
MIL is Microsofts answer to Java, and (much as I hate to say it) is an extremely cool bit of software.
This was certainly true for old versions of gcc/g++ (in the 2.7.2 days), but one of the goals of gcc-3.0 will be to support 100% of the C++ standard. Current versions (2.95) are already quite close to it, possibly closer than most commercially available compilers.
Sure P4 optimization isn't perfect yet. Try to find a compiler with perfect P4 optimization in the shop.
I think this an introductory price (have any of you ever payed extra to have the latest hardware -- I pre ordered the MonsterII for $200 when it came out). Most people in the Kylix newsgroups agree that Kylix will cost less later on. $999 for the enterprise edition, but other editions for less (like 100-200).
Bad User. No biscuit!
Yes, it's great that Borland are supporting linux, and I know there are at least a FEW windows apps out there written in delphi, but why does everyone think this is so great. Languages like Python and Ruby are free, can run cross-platform and have multiple widget sets. So does Java. The only reason would be performance (and a nice IDE?), and for most GUI apps the performance of the client computer is usually quite adequate (hasn't VB proved this?). It's usually stuff like network or database connection that is the limiting factor.
Some random Kylix related info not mentioned in the summary or directly in the article:
- There will be a version called Open Kylix (or Kylix Open Edition) that will be a free download, or $99 for CD+manuals. This will be intended for use for developing Free/Open Source Software. This won't be available until mid-year though.
- On Borland's Kylix newsgroup, there are rumors that Kylix's IDE uses winelib. This was qualified by saying that the generated applications themselves won't rely on winelib (only the IDE itself will). This kinda scares me a little, but not too much without giving it a chance.
- As mentioned several months ago, CLX will be licensed under the GPL (and probably dual-licensed with another for commercial development). Borland also said that CLX widgets are not real/default Qt widgets, and that they basically are all custom (so a Kylix TButton is NOT a Qt+ button). This is actually good news, since it will make a Gtk+ layer more feasible.
From the Borland online shop:
Windows programs:
Delphi 5 Enterprise - New User - $2,499.00
Delphi 5 Professional - New User - $799.00
Delphi 5 Standard - $99.95
and the Linux stuff:
Kylix Server Developer - $1,999.00
Kylix Desktop Developer - $999.00
If you compare the Windows Delphi 5 Pro and the Kylix Desktop Developer, the difference isn't that big. So this might not be that expensive for companies.
> How many java apps have you downloaded and run lately. [sic, use a frickin' ? dude]
argoUML just yesterday. works pretty good (argouml.org) I _think_ JBuilder 4 is all java.
It works great.
10megs is _nothing_ for a commercial distribution, considering that today a multi-cd application is normal. further, in an intranet environment, I can have total control over what is installed.
> I will NEVER buy a shrink wrapped java app.
OK, well, since you're the ultimate expert on the entire IT industry, you're opinion becomes fact and invalidates everything Java. Riiiiiiiight.
Java has a bad rap for being slow and bloated, held over from the 1.0 days when, being honest, it was pretty shitty. If you actually take the time to learn the language and the dev environment, esp. jdk 1.2+, it's not so bad.
Keep in mind that the greatest software engineering travesties to date have been done in compiled languages (*cough*any MS op.sys.*cough*), so being compiled is no insurance against bloat or sluggardliness.
This is not to say that Kylix isn't cool. Just don't go a-slamin' java if you don't know it.
--
Fuck Censorship.
News for Geeks in Austin, TX
"You shoulda writ"
"Writ" is not a word. Check it out:
writ (rt)
n.
1.Law. A written order issued by a court, commanding the party to whom it is addressed to perform or cease performing a specified act.
2.Writings: holy writ.
Next time, shut up.
This is a cross-platform RAD development tool. Not just a cross-platform compiler. The fact that it can compile the same code developed in half the time on the two most popular platforms around is what they are trying to get at. And this is what I would assume they do quite well considering the success of the whole Delphi line.
Just think about how quickly that $999 disolves away when you double your productivity. That is their goal. To make a highly productive x-platform development environment, something that Linux really needs.
Occam's razor is the blind faith in the natural selection of least resistance and in universal oversimplification. -- EF
So, what does your reply have to do with Kylix?
1. Borland announces that there will be a free (as in beer) Open Edition of Kylix, which can only be used to produce GPL apps. This will produce more software that must be freely distributed as you advocate at FSF.
2. Poster says "Hey, the tool itself isn't free as in speech, but free as in beer! It's not truly free!"
3. Your response says "Yep. All software should be free. It's morally wrong for anyone to require compensation for the use of their intellectual creations."
Was that it? In 2035 words, I might have missed something!
It was $125 million, bonehead.
I really hate to admit it, but the only compiler that seems to implement full support of C++ (including namespaces, templates, et. al.) is MSVC 6 Well, that just shows how much you know about the standard. CVS G++ is much closer to the standard than MS, and it still has a way to go. MS doesn't even implement macro expansion properly, forget the rest.
> Are you sure it generates programs that use Qt? QT is used for the visual stuff which is wrapped in CLX. > My guess is that Kylix is probably based on > Motif or their own homebrew widget se see above. >. Although I must say the Kylix screenshot looks >a LOT like it was developed with Qt. The IDE requires winelibs to run. It uses windows widgets... see kylix newsgroup.
Darn, you must be really good to have found the free downloadable version when it's supposed to be released only later this year ! ;)
"Naughty, naughty, naughty, you filthy old soomka !"
Only if they are using a platform supported by Borland. I can take any GPL'd program written with gcc and stand a good chance of making it work on my Alpha (or for that matter my ARM based RiscPC). Will that be the same for GPL'd code written with Kylix?
It might sound like a lot of work, but freepascal already supports many Delphi/Turbo Pascal extensions. Perhaps the Borland C++ Builder equivalent will be even better and include some kind of method of getting (some version) of GCC to generate valid code.
It's easy to badmouth a product you can't yet see or use. Just wait, maybe things won't be as bad as you think. As it stands, the only binary poorly/undocumented file that Borland's VCL products use are the .dfm file that contains the form definition. Who knows, maybe Borland will be generous enough to donate code to developers so that third party compilers (RMS license friendly) can process it just as well as Borland's official product.
I used up all my sick days, so I'm calling in dead.
I've been waiting for this for a long time, and I'm confident that it will help Borland. So much so, that I bought a bunch of their stock. My only regret is that I wish I had bought it a month ago at $5 1/4 instead of 8 months ago at $6 3/4. But at least I did, and now it's paying off! I expect it to hit $15 to $20 before this summer.
I am a bit disappointed that they're charging $999 for the "regular" version. I was hoping to pick it up for $500 or less. I don't know if I can even justify that price for what I'm doing now, but I guess I can sell my BORL stock and use the profits to buy it... that would be a bit ironic...
Perhaps they have some kind of upgrade program? Except that the last Borland product I bought was Borland Pascal w/Objects 7. Since using OS/2 and Linux for 8 years I haven't had the need for any of their products until now.
As a VB developer, I've been dying to have an opportunity to write Linux applications. And I know most of you look down on me with scorn for writing in VB at all, but for RAD 3-tier database access applications VB has outdone them all. It's main limitation (for this purpose) is its dependance on the Windows platform.
I've been following Kylix for quite some now, and it does everything that I need it to start working on the Linux platform without having to learn a "difficult" programming language. Of course... I have to say "almost finally" because it's technically not available yet.
I know that there are licensing issues that people are concerned about, but IMHO the disadvantages are nothing compared with the advantage of having RAD developers (there are a lot of us, you know) able to develop business applications in a hurry on the Linux platform. Hurrah!
-rt-
-rt-
** Evil Canadians are taking over the world. Learn about the conspiracy
ive been a fan from the turbo days,
recently tho' development of cross platform apps has been a necessity. We do use java but deploying the stuff is a hassle with the various JRE foibles. It always ends up ok but the end product just doesn't seem to be as good as the native implementation (or that could just be some of my own bias sneaking in)
So coming back to using borland delphi (kylix) AND having cross platform ability AND borland are allowing for a low cost GPL version is pretty much a dream combination as far as I'm concerned.
If you wish to close source your software - then buy kylix if you want to have open source and support borland the buy kylix if you want open source and free beer then download kylix for free latter in the year.
doesn't get much better than this for linux development as far as i'm concerned. (assumeing stability)
Do your homework. It's going for FREE in mid 2001. http://linuxtoday.com/news_story.php3?ltsn=2001-01 -31-001-27-OP-CY-SW
Borland is not M$. They want to make money but they care and listen to their customers.
I'm sorry that something that could have positive effects like this, at the time of release, needs to have the negative effects pointed out. However, this is one of those times.
Kylix is not free enough to be fully accepted by all of the Free Software advocates. Not by a long shot. The restrictions it imposes, and the corporate control of the language are just non-negotiable to the same people who stayed away from KDE because of the old licensing conditions.
It's been shown that the part of the community who calls themselves the Open Source Community are well disposed to using software which does not meet all of the requirements that some people in our community require their software to have before they put a considerable time investment in learning it and using it.
In order for developers not to fragment this community's software choice, I would have to advise against writing general purpose software for Kylix. It must NOT become a core part of Linux distros.
If you're a member of the Borland Community (free, sign up at http://www.community.borland.com), you'll get that discount. Dunno if that's only pre-existing Community members, or if you can still get it if you sign up now... Maybe before the official start of sales, which I dunno either if you've already had in the US. (Here in .fi, I've got until the 13th of February to order at a beta-testers discount [probably the same rate?] -- and you bet I will!)
:-]) Server edition, without having to refrain from using the "upper half" of it? The GPL probably wouldn't work -- that would be the same as giving it away for free to everyone who bought the Desktop edition -- but perhaps LGPL? This bears thinking about some more... Which Borland probably already has done. And, you know what? Given how they've bent over backwards to be "Open" in the rest of this, I actually *trust* them to have come up with a fair and as-Free-as-possible solution!)
What's "missing" from the "Open" version, compared to the "Desktop Developer" one, seems to be only the ability to deploy your apps under licenses other than the GPL. And come on, now... The morons posting at -1 are screaming about how even that "suxx", they want that too for free -- but if you aren't going to play by Free Software rules yourself, shouldn't you *expect* to pay *something* for your tools too?!?
That's all they have left to sell, seeing as they are giving away practically everything (well OK, not the extra components in the high-end "Server Developer" edition) else -- and, hey, they're a commercial company, so they *have* to earn *some* revenue, somehow!
All in all, it seems like a damn fair deal to me.
(With one possible caveat: Will they dual-license the high-end server components too? So I could release an app under the GPL even if I use my bought-and-paid-for [soon!
Christian R. Conrad
My ISP is the Saunalahti company, of Finland.
Christian R. Conrad
mail me at iki.fi ; same user ID as here
I'll try formatting it this time! :-)
> Are you sure it generates programs that use Qt?
QT is used for the visual stuff which is wrapped in CLX.
> My guess is that Kylix is probably based on > Motif or their own homebrew widget se see above. Although I must say the Kylix screenshot looks
>a LOT like it was developed with Qt.
The IDE requires winelibs to run
There is a free download version. You can only write GPL'ed programs with it because it links in code released under the GPL (whose viral nature means it can only be used with free (speech) software; the commercial version comes with a library licensed for both free (beer?) and non-free commercial software) ... I have no problem with that, I applaud Borland for coming up with an interesting way to support free software development while still maintaining some intellectual property.
... which could be used to distribute other non-free commercial software.
This is an interesting combination of Perl's dual license (GPL and Artistic) and the approach Cygnus took. They ported gcc to Windows NT/2000 (it mostly also works on 95/98/ME), and included a GPL'ed C runtime library. (This, plus a bunch of ported GNU software, is Cygwin.) This "infects" your application, so it can only be used to develop free (speech) software. Cygnus also implemented an alternative C runtime library, which they licensed as non-free, commercial software
(Or they used to. A quick search of the Red Hat's site seems to show they now only do this for embedded software.)
Stupid job ads, weird spam, occasional insight at
That's a bargain. A QT development license is $1550. I wonder how much of a cut Borland is getting of that $999.
http://www.trolltech.com/products/purchase/pricing .html
Well, JBuilder 4 (free version on linux w/ sun jdk 1.3, or is it using it's own internal ibm 1.3?) is pretty dang nice. :-) So if you like java, it's a good option. (Forte by Sun is pretty cool too, but it feels kinda sluggish compared to JBuilder. On the third hand I haven't tried it since 1.0, and it's at 2.0 now I think.)
Of course if you don't like java... Well, there is CodeWarrior for (c|c++|java) I think. I've never tried it but it is out there.
--
Fuck Censorship.
News for Geeks in Austin, TX
g++ is a frontend as much as the GCC c compiler, fortran compiler, objective c compiler, chill compiler, etc.
They are frontends to the GNU compiler, which consists of a nifty set of parse trees, a register transfer language (RTL) [a sort-of arch-independant algebraic-pseudo-LLL], optimizers (mostly at RTL level), and an assembler (gas or as, depending on your installation).
--
Do daemons dream of electric sleep()?
I'm glad to see most (but not all!) of you are either too blind or too stupid to see the benefits from Kylix. Means less competition for those of us that understand how the real world works.
The Game Guy
I'm sorry but MSVC++ 6 is not any closer to the
standard thatn ony other compiler. For example
it still does not do for loop scoping correctly.
The closest compilers to the standard are Kai C++
and Comeau C++.
At this point there are no compilers that support
C++ as well as they should ( especially agressively optimising templates ).
Everyone seems to a little upset with the $999 pro and $1999 enterprise price. If you look at the price of Delphi 5 which Kylix is supposed to replace you'll notice that they raised the price of the 'PRO' edition $200, and dropped the price of the 'enterprise' edition $500. Plus they are releasing a free GPL'd version that cost's nothing compared to the $99 for standard.
Personally I think this is very competive for the tools. I currently use Delphi 5 Pro and will be upgrading to the Kylix Pro version when it comes out.
My complaint, give me an upgrade price from Delphi 5 to Kylix Pro that is in line with the Delphi 5 upgrade price!
To be fair Borland did invest a fair amount of money in the product, and put themselves out on a limb announcing it as coming soon at the Borcon 2000. About time they final got it out the door, guess they where true to there word that they would not release it before it is ready. I have warm fuzzies about this one.
TastesLikeHerringFlavoredChicken
TastesLikeHerringFlavoredChicken
rr
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum videtur.
$999 and $1999 aren't intended to woo the linux geek who trying to put together Gnome Invaders 3D. It's priced for midsize and large corporations who wouldn't think twice about dropping a grand or two for VisualAge or some comparable enterprise RAD software. I think this is a smart move by Borland. They need to find out if indeed there is a market for expensive Linux development software. They need to know if they are going to actually be able to turn a profit selling support, upgrades, etc. And if not, they will find themselves having to rethink this entire project. As you said, the dot-com revolution is over. It's time for the grey suits to get paid. Moving expensive product with rock-steady support to corporate clients is going to be how they do it, not by selling kitchen-sink gee-whiz try at your own risk patchware to college kids and spare-time coders.
There are two kinds of people: 1) those who start arrays with one and 1) those who start them with zero.
I really hate to admit it, but the only compiler that seems to implement full support of C++ (including namespaces, templates, et. al.) is MSVC 6. Unfortunately that comes at the cost of being platform specific, and several of the POSIX APIs only implement the minimal spec (e.g. minimal support for NLS, though clearly the platform could handle it -- you have to use platform-specific APIs that have few changes other than the function/method name.)
As to P4 optimization, who cares right now? Until they ramp up the clock speed and drop the price significantly, you get far better bang for the buck with an Athlon/Thunderbird or with dual PIIIs. By the time P4 is worth buying, I'm sure GCC will be doing a pretty good job with the optimization.
As to Borland's compilers, they're good, but I haven't actually used them much. I know how to make things work with MSVC and have current copies of both compilers; I'd rather spend my learning time playing with new kits (qt, kde, gnome, bonobo, etc.) than learning how to make another compiler turn the same code into executables.
I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.
Well, I'm not sure who you're preaching too since several people have already pointed out that it will be a free download (or $99 for cd+manual).
Furthermore, no one has complained yet about wine here. I only mentioned that there are rumors that the Kylix IDE will (in this version at least) use winelib. You said "Kylix does not use Wine in any shape or form. Period". Have you any proof to back up this claim? Yes, we all know the generated applications won't use wine or winelib.
"Can anybody give me reasons why they won't use it? Do people have a prejudice against IDEs or RADs?
Borland is doing a good thing, and paying attention to what people in the linux community are asking for."
I love Delphi personally, so I'll surely use this for something. However, I probably won't use it for primary development for awhile due to the lack of Gnome support. This will come in time I'm sure, and I have no doubt dozens of people will begin work (without waiting on Borland) as soon as it's released.
Its not that its *easier* to learn than C, its that bad code that will compile as C generates compiler errors. Pascal was designed to teach (read enforce) design standards. If you knew C then you could code. If pascal was *hard* then you learned to code C poorly. It was the bad habits that kicked you, not the language.
ian@ultima:~$ man bcc | grep Bruce
bcc - Bruce's C compiler
does that look like it is made by borland? oh yes, and it is also 16 bit code.
Pascal/Delphi is way cleaner and faster than any C derivated language. There is no ambiguity like in C ( '==' instead of '=' in conditions, and a helluva lot more) and the compile tiem is nearly instantaneous. Sure, when you learn C first, you are 'used' to these ambiguity, but when you do the opposite, you see all the C syntax shortcomings. Pascal/Delphi makes sense and is way clearer to read than any C-related language. Sure, for C purists, you don't have all the power of C/C++, but you don't have all the disadvantages and problems associated with it too. The language is clean and elegant. This is the first real language I learned and it's stil my favorite, even if I rarely use it. It's the answer to VB (IDE/RAD wise), but Delphi is actually a 'true' language, and not a little half-ass excuse for a language like VB! With Delphi and C++ Builder, Borland/Inprise have a very big advantages in the RAD world, and it will be even better when this gem is released. -Karhgath
Those BSD guys are gonna be pissed.
I didn't pay for my operating system either
Because Trade Wars 2002 and TWGS will now be ported to Linux! See the old Slashdot discussion about this.
:)
Now I don't have to fiddle around with crazy dosemu hacks or depending on Win9x machines to have a real Trade Wars server.
zsazsafrazs
it's extremely frustrating that the open-source community can be so open-minded and so close-minded at the same time. people trash kylix for the price tag because they are used to trusty ole vi/emacs/gcc which are free. they don't seem to understand what kylix is and what it offers. the current state of ide's under linux is ridiculous, in that there currently are *none* that i have found. and don't point me towards glade, kdevelop, etc. i am talking a *true* ide, where i can peace together the gui of my application, and in the same environment assign properties and methods to my components, full integrated debugging, etc. why should i have to hand write hundreds of lines of code just to create a gui for my application? i am in charge of programming several projects in my line of work using delphi, and have ached to be able to develop at home on my linux box, but i am spoiled by the things that delphi gives me. i know c and a little perl and c++, but any time i sit down to write a full blown app under linux, i get frustrated at the mundane things i am required to do just to give the application a face. i challenge any of you who say that kylix has nothing to offer the open-source community to code a full gui app in half the time it can be done under kylix/delphi. and as far as the pricing goes, look around at the prices on other full blown integrated development environments like visual studio, etc. comparing kylix to vi+gcc is just ignorant. kylix/delphi is a full solution for application development built around an unparalleled component environment. take a look at www.torry.net sometime, and show me another language with as many components freely available for download. try to be a little more open minded when a company gives the linux community something as powerfull as kylix. there's no reason to take offense to it's presence and price tag. kylix will usher in a new era of development for linux.
It's finally time for Linux to get down to business. There are days when I'm the open-source bigot that everybody else is, but I'm tired as hell of writing applications on Windows to pay the bills.
With Kylix and Firebird (Interbase) I'll be able to write customized business applications for the "Small Business Next Door" to quadruple their efficiency and make my mortgage payment. And I'll do it all without Windows.
Hell yes, I'm here to make some money. I'm really getting fed up with "you should do everything for free". It's wonderful that there are open source projects out there (I have some that are all mine, and plan to write more), but I want to be able to buy the toys, man.
That's what it's all about anyway, right? Toys!
Why has Borland never dominated over Microsoft in the PC compiler market?
Also MS raided Borland's compiler group, "stealing" away many of their employees. Borland sued MS, I don't remember how it turned out, but that combined with the Borland custom Windows libs that never completely caught on (OWL or something?) almost killed Borland.
I still have a copy of Turbo C++ 2.0 that I break out from time to time.
Scuttlemonkey is a troll
There have been a lot more Borland product stories floating around for Linux besides this one, so be sure to harass the BORL guys at LinuxWorld and get some more info to post here ;). A few I've heard are:
- There will be some version of MIDAS (Borland's XML middleware) for Linux, and that could play an important role in next generation versions of Kylix.
- There will be an Enterprise version of Kylix that includes both the Delphi and C++ builder sides in a single, integrated package. This would likely bring MIDAS and Corba support to the table.
- Delphi 6 (the next generation) development on Linux is almost in sync with its Windows counterpart, so the release lag between the two should be very short.
Things I want to know:
- Will this ever be ported to other Unices? Solaris would be great for server side development, and since this is all based on Qt, it'd just be the compiler that needed changes. Obviously, its nontrivial to write a good Sparc compiler for a serious language, but it's a lot easier than rewriting an entire, massive development library AND a compiler.
- Will they start giving away an open edition of Delphi or C++ builder on Windows? They already do it for JBuilder foundation. JBuilder, BTW, is so good that I actually bought the Pro version.
- Will C++ builder have a free, "open edition" for Linux? This could have a huge impact, as you could develop ANY C/C++ GPL app with it. Surely they don't make you include the CLX libraries if you're writing for the console.
- We know that Borland's C++ compiler is incredibly fast at build time (I mean, like an order of magnitude faster than g++ for some programs, though that includes linking + assembling time), and we know it has good standards compliance. But how fast is the output code relative to g++ on Linux?
--JRZ
I wasn't trying to suggest that Delphi == VB, only saying that historically the popularity of VB has shown that high performance for simple desktop applications is not a must. Python has a RAD tool which looks quite good (it's not free, but it doesn't cost a grand either). What makes Kylix so great? Is a good ide that lets you do RAD really worth $1K.
But I thought f77 generated assembly via f2c?
It's okay, folks, it's okay. Hemos must've read the article upside down; Kylix is a lot cheaper than you thought!
:-)
It's really only 666$. There, don't you feel much more comfortable? Hmmn, actually, now that I think about it...
"Homo sum: humani nil a me alienum puto"
(I am a man: nothing human is alien to me)
My only political goal is to see to it that no political party achieves its goals.
I changed from VB to Delphi after being a die hard VB-user for ages. After two years of Delphi under my belt I can say that it was the best decision ever.
It's amazing how easy Delphi is to start with. There's a small treshold as the syntax is a bit different from VB. But when you do some serious development, you'll see how Delphi really makes sense. It's both easy and very extensive at the same time. With Delphi you can write apps that you couldn't even dream to write with VB. And no need for kludges.
What's the situation now? My new apps are small, blazingly fast and reliable. They are also written in a language whose vendor actually cares about quality and backwards compatibility. Porting from Delphi4 to Delphi5 was just a simple recompile. And now I have a chance to port them to Linux too. Oh boy, I just can't wait :-)
Needless to say it's real torture for me to write code with VB now.
I had to write the DLL in Delphi :-)
I only stopped the madness with VB5. Passing a string to a DLL caused it to be converted from unicode to ansi thanks to VB storing them internally as unicode. Passing a table made VB convert every fscking string.
Then I wisened up and changed alltogether to Delphi.
More than that, the excellent debugger, which absolutely rocks.
My plan is to pimp before they realize I'm a jackass. Hit 'em hard and fast.
g++ translates the input C++ code into FORTRAN and uses f77 to generate the actual assembly.
Close, though.
We're going down, in a spiral to the ground
For a grand it better not only write code for you, but there better be a voice synthesizer that says "Yesssir Masster Ssir," as it compiles with no bugs.
Take the cheese to sickbay, the doctor should see it as soon as possible - B'Elanna Torres, "Learning Curve"
You spelled damn incorrectly.
BEGIN
I don't care if it is improved. Pascal is very
sad. I learned it in high school. It pissed me
off that the teacher thought it was easier to
learn than C. I already know C. It isn't. The
only good reprecusions may be that comercial
apps that just don't get written in Perl and
need better RAD and GUI support than most GCC
compiled apps will be written, strengtening the
Linux software offering.
END
What happened to /. ? There used to be smart "nerds" who had interesting/decent discussions. More and more everything turns into an off-topic war of mine vs. yours.
This Kylix thing for example; People are all over themselves with how I couda done this in this language, or Perl would solve World hunger (which it very well may -- but's that's besides the point).
Here are my points:
1) Read the article; there will be a free version for download.
2) Eyery language bigot I have ever met starts of with "What can your language do that mine can't?" If you have to ask, you are not worth talking to. Because, the answer is -- very little to nothing.
3)Perl, Python, C/C++ -- all of these do exist on the Windows platform. Yet, Delphi find a comfortable place among them. No, it's not the *most* popular language for Win dev, but so isn't Python. ( Sorry, but I had to say it).
4) It's not about having a language -- there are plenty. It's about having a industrial strength RAD environment on Linux.
5) It's about having a good enough platform that lets you switch from a productive RAD session to a performance tuned server app without managing 20 different code windows. And it's about being able to debug them both at the same time.
6) This is not about language wars.
7) This is not about language wars; stay home.
8) As a professional Windows software developer, who has been playing with Linux since the version 1.0 kernel, price isn't the issue to me. My company pays me 6 figure salaries not because how many languages I know. They pay me because I deliver. And if Lylix lets me deliver -- on Linux -- several times faster than I could before, I would pay the $2000 price without taking a "slashdor moment."
Now back to our regular programming...
rr
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum videtur.
First off, sorry for the harshness of the language of my first post, it frustrates the hell out of me when people jump to conclusions regarding anything, especially when the people being criticized are doing something (in my opinion) positive.
As far as winelib goes... I've been tracking the kylix discussions in newsgroups and whatnot havily for quite a while, and the impression that I have received is that the IDE is a native linux application using QT. The screen shots seem to back this up.
cheers
They fuck you up, your mum and dad.
--Anticipation of a New Lover's Arrival, The
As if there's something Perl can't do! Psh!
Send your friends messages of love at fuck-you.org
I find it hard to believe there is any demand for this. Indeed, it may make the less savvy people out there think of Linux as an expensive choice, especially when you realise that the vast majority of Linux users are shall we say "careful" with their cash!!!
One more example of big corporations setting out to destroy the open source revolution. I am saddened. What do others think ?
what is IT? Paragraphs! use them!
then maybe we can READ your RANT!
nmarshall
The law is that which it boldly asserted and plausibly maintained..
nmarshall
The law is that which it boldly asserted and plausibly maintained..
--Colonel Burr 1783
Let's see, we use the BSD license, and then we integrate that code into a commercial product. Whoops, looks like we just defeated the purpose of having the licenses this way in the first place. This is one case where having a viral license is quite important.
Its a quick plug, but until someone writes a PostgreSQL dbExpress driver (not hard), http://www.easysoft.com/products/kylix will work to the Postgres ODBC driver.
As I understand it, there are contractual subsidiaries in foreign countries who would get upset if it didn't go through them.
Borland has been suffering under MS dominance for way too long. Delphi for Windows is good software. If Kylix is as good, and the db libraries to free rdbms's are truly free, we all stand to benefit from their work. Contgrats to Borland (Inprise? I forget which now.) I hope they make the billions they deserve.
Here are some important points for everybody that is complaining:
1) They are releasing a free version for download or to buy ($99 for cd and manual by mail). This will be equivalent to what the JBuilder 4 free download is to the JBuilder 4 professional edition.
2) Kylix does not use Wine in any way shape or form. Period.
3) CLX is GPL'ed. A damn smart move.
4) C++ builder will follow in around 6 months. So to all those people who (for some reason are another) are anti-object pascal, this is still a damn good thing.
The only thing I am worried about is compatibility with gcc. Otherwise this is the best thing to happen to linux in a long long time.
Can anybody give me reasons why they won't use it? Do people have a prejudice against IDEs or RADs?
Borland is doing a good thing, and paying attention to what people in the linux community are asking for.
The g++ compiler does not use C as an intermediate language. It never has. I defy you to show me the switch that will produce C from your C++ code. Run /usr/lib/gcc-lib/i386-linux/2.95.3/cc1plus (with appropriate values substituted for i386-linux and 2.95.3, of course) by hand one day - you can feed it preprocessed source and watch it spit out assembly. Alternately, compile a pure C++ program one day and watch top. You'll see cc1plus, and gas/as in there, but you won't see cc1 (the C compiler, gcc only being a driver) in there, because it's not used.
it includes c++ too you know, (or rather you don't).
BTW I actually was forced to learn pascal in 1997/8 for a Masters degree.
The VB programming model for Linux
This is a good thing? Blergh.Ryan T. Sammartino
Ryan T. Sammartino
"Ancora imparo"
Many people forget what Kylix is about. It's about building large enterprise solutions. In that case, when a company needs RAD it's not enough to have gcc/vi/etc. Kylix is *NOT* a replacement to gcc.
- ----
If your company needs some solution *FAST*, you'll use Kylix because it will hardly be useful for anything else (such applications are commonly customized).
If you want to build a generic software, THEN you use gcc!
-------------------------------------------
You think Bill Gates is evil?
There will always be a place in my heart for Borland. The first real programming language I ever learned was Turbo Pascal. The Turbo Pascal 7.0 IDE was the best text mode IDE ever. (It could highlight my code with ease even on my 8088). At the height of MASM's (the Microsoft Macro Assembler) popularity, Turbo Assembler could not only assemble its own syntax (called Ideal Mode), but it could also assemble MASM syntax faster than MASM could itself. TASM even went so far as to emulate all the bugs in all the different versions of MASM! Just thinking about it brings a tear to my eye. Borland, to me, was the Mount Olympus of the Programming Gods. Why has Borland never dominated over Microsoft in the PC compiler market? Two things: Microsoft (of course) leveraged their OS monopoly; and Borland had some shitty management.
We deploy web applications that answer to a PostgreSQL back end. Assuming that it is possible to write PostgreSQL applications (not just MySQL), then this will be a terrific boost. While the core applications are web based, all the administrative stuff is a pain to do web based. Writing all the error checking in Javascript is irratating, and sometimes gets skimped on.
I'm a former VB Programmer (as well as general NT guy who used Linux as a hobby for a few years), and VB was always irritating to do anything useful. C++ Builder was irratating (I'm not a huge C++ fan), by Delphi was interesting to say the least.
Developing quick database applications is gold. Doing them all web based is irratating, and the UI isn't so hot. The ability to let your administrative tools be written as a desktop applications is awesome. While the Windows only version would be adequate, Linux support makes our life easier. Our development environment in Linux, so while we all have Windows computers as well, it's more convenient to have everything in one place.
This, in a work, rocks.
Are you sure it generates programs that use Qt? This would mean that people would have to buy a Qt license as well.
My guess is that Kylix is probably based on Motif or their own homebrew widget set, just like every other "professional" X program. Although I must say the Kylix screenshot looks a LOT like it was developed with Qt.
-Justin
I was counting down the days for this; had my bosses mostly sold on the idea. Now they'll see it's realeased and ask me to get a copy. Then I'll have to tell them its a grand, or more, for the "full" edition.
Its not that I don't mind paying. But a grand? It better write my code for me.
ZOMG I WOULD LOVE TO KNOW ABOUT YOUR FEELINGS ON MACINTOSH VERSUS WINDOWS, VI VERSUS EMACS, AND HOW YOU'RE NOT A DORK
More info: Borland's new app will help developers port their Windows apps to Linux. Hooray! The story can be found on C|Net's News.com website.
The problem with capped Karma is it only goes down...
SIG: HUP
I will wait for two things. The price to come down, and C++ support. I couldn't find anywhere on the website is GNOME was supported tho.
I would definately prefer this over g++ IFF (if and only if) the price were lower. I could see paying $500 for a desktop version, but not $999. I think they will find that this out and eventually lower the cost.
At the next eco-hypocrisy-meeting, count the private jets used to get to the meeting. Should be interesting to see that
I guess this is a bit redundant but people keep on complaining about the price tag...
While Kylix is very interesting for Delphi users wishing to migrate from legacy OSes i think Black Adder is a better choice for the unix crowd. (It's not OSS tho - but i can understand that theKompany needs to make a living too. They've released tons of Free software, so i don't mind "sponsoring" their Free work with buying other non-Free software)
Not to mention that Black Adder is a much cooler name than Kylix :)
-henrik
On the shop.borland.com site, it says:
Availability: Scheduled to begin shipping on Feb 22 2001
We may only sell this product to the following countries:
United States
What's up with that? Anyone know what the big deal is shipping to other countries? It's not like there's those crappy export restrictions any more...
But, unfortunately, this isn't a perfect world.
On Borland Kylix non-technical newsgroup, someone from Borland said "after kylix is finished, work will start on porting it to other platforms" - words to those effect anyway.
What platforms that would be wasn't mentioned.
Kylix could be a killer app for all *nix platforms if it is ported to more processors / OS AND if Borland market it correctly.
Shame though the IDE uses Winelibs.. probably the P2 (2?) 400 requirements... The sooner the IDE becomes fully linux native the better.
The free edition kylix model is a novel way of ensuring apps don't get written for commercial purposes..
Congrats borland.
Translating everything takes time.
According to eweek (printed version, hence no link), the promise of releasing Kylix has boosted their stock by 35% (Symbol will change to BORL).
Also, they are promising three different versions. A 'server' version, a 'desktop' version, and a free version, that will include GPL'ed versions of the libraries, therby forcing you to write GPL'ed software with it. Sounds pretty decent to me.
(For more information, check out this editorial on the subject at Linux Today.)
----------------- "I have a bone to pick, and a few to break." - Refused -------------------
OK, sure, it's free if you want to give your stuff away. But what about a mid-sized shop that wants to do closed source stuff for Linux? Some struggling startup that can't afford $2G per developer?
--- Jump!! Fire!! Bullet time!! - Lego version of the Matrix
I don't know about you, but isn't SlashDot AlmostNews neat? I love hearing all about the newest in VaporWare videogame technology, not to mention all the cool news about the MIR! I can't wait to see that TV show about the MIR with the survivor-esqe contest winner and the billionaire and the wacky hijinks that ensue as it is crashes into the Pacific!
------
Let me give you the lowdown