Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft to Buy Rational and/or Borland?
oblivious writes "I got this in e-mail this evening: According to a Reuters report that crossed the wires late today, the speculation is that Microsoft will make bids to buy both Rational and Borland. Shares of both Rational and Borland are up on the news, and so far both IBM and Microsoft have no comment on this report." We recently ran a story about IBMs planned purchase of Rational. Chris didn't make clear in here - it's not that Microsoft might buy both, but that Borland might be a likely target, if a bid to buy Rational out from under IBM fails, which it is likely too. Rational and IBM have signed the substantive portion of the agreement already, so any sort of counter bid would have some fun legal consequences for all involved.
Nothing would be worse than M$ buying borland. It would be the end of JBuilder--a fantastic java IDE. Not to mention delphi and KYLIX! This would be B*A*D.
---gralem
There is no way this ends up good, if MS makes the sale. But here's a question. At what point does MS own too much of the computing world? With MS buying Borland and Rational, does this signify the end developments for other OS's? If not this, then how much more does MS need to buy before they do own practically everything.
I have no friends. Will you be my friend?
Do not rape my Borland! I can't live without their tools. Just thinking about how microsoft would bastardize their wonderful software makes me ill!
You like my new account? Just for you!
Excellent! Where can I pre order Visual Pascal?
Microsoft will make bids to buy both Rational and Borland
;-)
If MS buys Borland they would become a Java Addict and Linux Software Producer (Kylix, JBuilder). I doubt this would happen so soon
successful? How? Borland C++ Builder, Delphi, and Kylix GONE. I don't call that successful. I call that anti-competitive.
There is no reasonable defense against an idiot with an agenda
:wq
If this is true, they've obviously decided to really flip the bird to the courts...
MS buys Borland: Bye bye kylix
MS buys Rational: Sue any open source that provides anything similar to rational products, or uses anything rational may have patented
- We are the slashdot. Resistance is futile. Prepare to be moderated -
Maybe MS wants to replace VB with something less shitty.
I was on the Borland Developer Network page yesterday and found this article on Borland's upcoming .NET IDE.
.NET development environment. Such a product could suit application developers that want to leverage .NET and the best applications from many vendors."
.NET IDE I know of today is SharpDevelop, which feels sluggish on my P3 1.2GHz. Anyone know of others?
"Borland plans to offer an alternative to Microsoft's Visual Studio
The only other
Next Headline : Microsoft buys C# and Visual Studio. In their attempt to own the world, Microsoft accidentally bought something they already own! Who watches for these kind of things?
If there were any rumor about MS thinking about bidding for both Rational and Borland as part of the same universe (and bear in mind that even the separate rumors are just rumors), it would surely have been in the first paragraph of Reuters' story, instead of what is (Rational), which is the more important rumor of the two.
This is pure speculation on my part. But considering MS's stance on Linux, and supporting non-MS operating systems, would they kill cross-platform support?
I don't know how many customers Rational has that are using the Windows version of their SW (eg: ClearCase & ClearQuest), versus the Linux & Unix versions. Is there enough income coming in to encourage MS to support other platforms?
And as far as Borland is concerned, I would expect the Kylix to get knifed quickly since it's prob not a significant source of revenue.
I could see how IBM buying Rational would be good for Linux & the community. But MS buying Rational seems like a way for MS to kill off a bunch of viable products on non-MS platforms.
Thoughts?
Obviously, im not the only one to point this out but.. If MS where to buy Borland, that would make life of the Kylix in Linux quite unstable. While kylix is allready in its second phase and we havent seen massive amounts of free and/or proprietary software build with it, its still microsoft acting against certain market..
Also, Borland products are competing with Visual Studio series, and allthou i havent used anything from Rational (nor from VisualStudio), i guess MS has data modelling tools just like Rational... Yey! Good for competition..
yush
IBM plans to buy Rational? IBM is just needs shareholder approval (from Rational) and the government to approve it.
Somebody must be playing rumors to have the stock go up or something.
The truth is, Microsoft may be interested in acquiring Borland, but Borland is most probably not interested in being sold to Microsoft. Anyway, if it was even a remote possibility, Oracle at the very least would step in.
To our valued customers:
.NET, and others.
We are delighted to tell you that IBM and Rational Software have announced a definitive agreement for IBM to purchase Rational. This is a very exciting time for both companies and builds on the extensive business relationship IBM and Rational have had for over 20 years. Most importantly, it will provide significant benefits to you.
If you've been using Rational's solution to build business applications to automate your business, you will appreciate the combination of Rational's solution with IBM's e-business strategy. IBM helps customers integrate their business processes and software infrastructures to build an on-demand e-business. This requires the integration of software development, transaction management, data management, collaboration, and systems management and security. With Rational's demonstrated strength in software development, IBM will offer leading solutions in each of these categories and provide a complete solution for creating an on-demand e-business. This includes broad support for your application development efforts for a variety of environments, including J2EE,
If you've been using Rational's solution to build software for software products and systems, you'll enjoy the benefits of an improved solution through the combination of IBM and Rational technology. Rational's outstanding solution in this space will be amplified through synergies with IBM's pervasive computing strategy. This is an important market for IBM, and Rational is key to IBM's software strategy. Whether you're building a software product, a technical system, real-time software, or embedded software, IBM will be able to provide you with industry-leading products, services and support.
Rational will become the fifth division in IBM Software Group (joining WebSphere, DB2, Lotus, and Tivoli) and retain its brand identity. The division will be led by Mike Devlin, Rational's current CEO.
As with other business acquisitions of this nature, this one will require government regulatory approval and the approval of Rational's shareholders.
IBM and Rational are impressive as separate entities. Together, with our complementary software strategies, people talents, and commitment to customer success, we can provide you with even more value.
Thank you for your continued support. We look forward to expanding our relationship with you in the future.
Best regards,
Steve Mills
Senior Vice President & Group Executive
IBM Software Group
Michael Devlin
CEO
Rational Software
Wasn't there just a slashdot article saying that Microsoft lost money in every department except for Windows and Office? http://www.self-aggrandizement.com/archives/monopo ly_much.html
this mentions it too
so I dont think that MS buying them will make them profitable.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Why is Rational considering a sale to another corporation, anyway? Do they just need a boost, or are they a sinking ship?
J#Builder
Turbo Pascal.NET
Wouldn't either of these deals be blocked by the authorities? Like when MS tried to boy Quicken.
Lesbian Nazi Hookers Abducted by UFOs and Forced Into Weight Loss Programs - -all next week on Town Talk.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Sheesh! This is getting way out of hand, and the government really needs to step in and do something.
Micro$oft has been on a buying spree recently. Rareware was one of its more recent aquisitions, much to my horror. They had good games; now, I'll avoid them on general principle.
M$ is trying to expand by assimilation. Don't have the tools/knowledge/brains/experience to corner a market? Just buy someone who does! If they don't sell, drive them out of business!
This chain will only end with complete Microsoft control of the world- literally- or M$ gets broken up. The government has to step in and cause the second.
Microsoft's "Buy Or Kill" strategy is, unfortunately, an effective one. Destroy all competition, by taking what they have, if possible; expand to new markets by buying the leader of the industry.
End result? A Microsoft monopoly on almost every technological market.
*whimper*
Warning: Poster of this comment is a nerd. Just like everybody else here.
Well Borland is profitable:
roughly 5m/quarter for the past 4...
That's 8% net profit margin - now this isn't
Microsoft level profits but it's probably
ethically obtained!
When you hear hoofbeats, think horses, not zebras
Now nobody will say that MS does not innovate.
All of Borland's and Rationale's innovations are belong to MS!
I'll do it for cheesy poofs.
Unfortunately, I think MS wants to replace something less shitty than VB with... VB.
I am a Java programmer myself (laugh it up), but Swing just plain annoys me.
Are you on drug(s)?!! Why not?
This news brought to you via your XBox home media center, by MSNBC.
No, we're not a monopoly yet. Nothing to worry about. Go back to playing your game made by Rare.
Having been a Borland tool user since Borland was invented, I'm sure that Delphi could become the JBuilder of .net. This makes a lot of companies interested in buying Borland - for each their reasons: IBM, Sun, Microsoft. One thing is sure: Fuller's own future looks bright, no matter who he sells to.
Well, M$ already has Anders Hejlsberg - the
chief architect/inventor of both Delphi and
C#. I guess it was only a matter of time...
When you hear hoofbeats, think horses, not zebras
Actually, this story is more accurate.
First this is jusr rumors and speculations.
Second, Borland will likely become an acquisition target for MS ONLY in the event that IBM complete the acquisition of Rational.
If MS do acquire Borland, that will be funny (and painful at the same time). They would acquire a bunch of very popular Java products! And the UML tool (which is the thing they are the most interested in) is written in Java! What will they do with it... convert it to C#?
successful? How?
Um, because they'll get shares of MSFT which are backed by $40 billion in cash reserves?
But you're right, that's the end.
Borland's products will be examined for what they can contribute to MS Visual Whatever and then be slowly phased out after they've been assimilated.
Taking the argument further, and in reverse, I think it's been a damn shame that good compiler technology has been kept on a leash in Redmond to further awkward corporate interests rather than simply providing quality, standards-based development tools. Yes, MS does provide development tools that are good to some extent already, but they could be so even more if they were untied from the corporation.
"Provided by the management for your protection."
An interesting thought is that the question of Microsoft making cross-platform compilers now is a serious one.
Microsoft in buying Borland aquires not only a UML modelling tool (Borland recently aquired TogetherSoft). But, they also purchase one of the better Java vendors out there. This move is both offensive and defensive. M$ gains a UML modelling environment while simultaneously killing off a significant segment of the Java tools industry.
If Microsoft pursues Rational as well they end up with the 2 best UML tools in the industry and kill off IBM's strategic partner. The net effect is that Microsoft wins big.
However, I can't believe that M$' shareholders would agree that both purchases are necessary. I expect that if Microsoft is unable to sway Rational over then we will see them make a serious bid for Borland. After all its the UML modelling software that MS wants, and if the IBM purchase of Rational goes through then MS has no modeller for their developers.
Seeing as IBM is a large player in open source software (Apache/Eclipse/Linux) and Java I personally hope to see the Rational purchase succeed, however, M$ has a crap load of cash sitting on hand - if M$ wants to start a bidding war they certainly have the ability to.
And so the consolidation in the industry continues.
Plus, Borland just bought StarBase, which produces the StarTeam SCM system, as seen in this press release. (Wow, just look at the way the Borland logo is plastered all over the StarBase website!)
So with Rational and Borland, they knock out 2 competitors in the SCM market!
Now we see the basis for Bobby Schmidt's "Hell Freezes Over" column in the latest CUJ. The next Visual C++ is standards-compliant by vacuuming up a quality comptetitor...
No, that's a troll.
But Borland has a lot of Java product, and owning that would help to maneuver it out of the C# path...
No, that's a troll, too...
Borland's CLX library has the potential to do what QT could not, popularize GUI-applications that run under 'Doze and X, so you could blunt that attempt to compete if you owned the product... (seriously, I can't name a single application on the local CompUSA shelf using QT, please educate me)
No, that's YAT (Yet Another Troll)
The fact that the DOJ is a singleton-class, MS server application running inside the Beltway box means that MS can do whatever the fsck it likes and laugh about it...
Ah, now that is a sufficiently gratuitous troll...
Get thee glass eyes, and, like a scurvy politician, seem to see things thou dost not.--King Lear
Pick your prophecy people: If you claim in one post that Microsoft is doomed, then you must forever disagree with any claims that they are a monopoly.
Slashdot is not monolithic!
Sigh.
Retarded, irritating and whiney -- sure. You've proved that by combining a false dichotomy with a big flaming strawman. Cheers.
Wouldn't MS have to scrap/shelve JBuilder under its agreements/court-ordered restrictions in the Sun case?
.Net development offerings?
I'm sure if Borland was entertaining an MS offer, other companies would consider buying it knowing that it was up for sale. Oracle, Sun, and IBM are obvious choices, but there are others. I don't think Larry Ellison would mind a true merge of their Java tools, and what better way to stick it to MS than to outdo their
Roughly 2 months ago Borland bought StarBase, makers of StarTeam (a SCM system) which is a direct competitor to Rational's ClearCase as well as Microsoft's horrible SourceSafe.
I've often wondered when MS was going to step it up and take over the SCM world, maybe this is the first volley?
Well, now that Unix/Linux users have an easy an effective RAD with C++/Pascal support and with tons of features (Im talking about Kylix of course) M$ is trying to buy it.
Is this not ilegal?
I still remember the news "Netscape X Explorer" and the end of the history too.
And now the fight is Delphi X VB, well it seams the M$ found a different way to solve its problmes.
Microsoft is going about this "taking over the world" thing all wrong. Why don't they just offer Linus 10 billion dollars for the rights to Linux?
Now I am simply waiting to here a break-in announcement from Bill Gates that
he has declared himself the world's emperor.
Steve Ballmer at Internal M$ meeting:
"The US Senate will no longer be of any concern to us. I have
just received word that the Emperor has dissolved the government
permanently. The last remnants of the Old Republic have been swept
away."
Employee: "But that's impossible. How will the Emperor maintain
control without the bureaucracy?"
Ballmer: "The regional sales managers now have direct control over their
territories. Fear will keep the local systems in line. Fear of our software."
Compaq buying DEC was bad enough. Microsoft buying Borland is horrible. I remember in the early 90's it was like "Wow, Microsoft makes a compiler too? No thanks, I will stick to Borland", and now it's like "Wow, Borland is still in buisiness". What is left for all of the tech giants of the past like Cray, DEC (err Compaq, no HP), Borland. IBM's only saving grace is that they were quite diversified, and MSFT will never be able to topple them.
I want my rights back. I was actually using them when our government stole them after 9/11.
All versions of Delphi have included a (renamed) copy of Borlands' C/C++ compiler.
Delphi's pascal source code files are converted to something the C compiler can understand, and then compiled. It's been this way since Delphi 1.0.
You can even invoke it (DCC) from the command line. Check your documentation, it's all there.
The next Visual C++ is standards-compliant by vacuuming up a quality comptetitor...
For Microsoft, this is standards-compliant.
I pledge allegiance to the flag...
of the Corporate States of America...
Microsoft can't buy Forte or Eclipse. If they eliminate Borland's products, that will simply reduce the fragmentation of non-Microsoft development tools--not necessarily a bad thing.
This is the pattern that Microsoft and Intel both have repeatedly run through:
- find a company
whose software helps you develop software, or web pages, or what have you
- buy that company
- make future relaeases that only work on
Windows
as the software rot makes the old versions fail, users of that software are herded towards Windows.- "History shows again and again how nature points out the folly of men" -- Blue Oyster Cult, 'Godzilla'
Compare lazarus to delphi or kylix.
bad: Some points are still missing.
good: They are evolving fast enough
bad: not fast enough, at least if you wanna move now
good: It's native in all OS
good: It works much better than wined-kylix (debuging in kylix is a real pain in the ass, it remembers me on windows days, crash, (optional restart), crash, must restart or logoff (or kill all processes in top - delphi and windows are not included, restart is a must there))
bad: less features than kylix
good: lighter, faster
all in all together. I have licensed delphi 7 and kylix 3, but I don't use them, only for some small db projects. All my other work is more console than gui, so lazarus ROCKS, at least for me.
Signature Pro version 1.13.2-3 release 83.5 beta3try7 after-breakfast edition
They got a bunch of the big names back then when it looked like Borland was out of the development business. Some of the top C# creators came from Borland.
It also gives MS a chance to hurt Linux, which Borland has been supporting in recent years with JDeveloper and Kylix.
it's = "it is"; its = possessive. E.g., it's flapping its wings.
Microsoft's old strategy of killing competitors by buying them doesn't work with open source. Sorry, Bill.
Microsoft is a monopoly, and an abusive one. That fact has been proven in a court of law, and upheld upon appeal.
So was IBM at one point. IBM was unbeatable, unstoppable. But they were stopped, and gasp, even took the opportunity to mend their ways somewhat.
Now Microsoft is the unbeatable, unstoppable, juggernaut. With Longhorn/Palladium/Millennium and the Hollings bill, they have the potential of going even farther than IBM, becoming a US government mandated monopoly, ruling the computer industry for a thousand years, or even forever.
Of course a monopoly is built on top of customers. While a company maintains a monopoly they can use it (against the law) to shoehorn themselves into other markets and be a real bully. But becoming that bully bears a hefty price tag. Microsoft is very much a hated bully.
Microsoft has managed, with Licensing 6 and other ploys, to alienate two thirds of their customers. If those customers go elsewhere, it is the end of Microsoft's monopoly, and their mad dreams of world domination. That is the danger Linux, Apple, various office suites and browsers pose: an alternative, that has arisen because angry customers want and need a way out of this nightmare. That is how Linux and Apple can stop the unstoppable, and pull the evil monopoly down. Today's monopoly does not guarantee tomorrow's monopoly, or even that tomorrow will come for Microsoft.
That is the irony, badly mangled in the Americanization of "Godzilla 2000": to achieve world domination and begin a thousand year kingdom, only to have Godzilla destroy you the very same day.
Microsoft is a monopoly, an illegal and much abused one, at the height of its arrogance, cruelty, and power. It could lock the world in its iron fist for a thousand years. Or it could be destroyed tomorrow. Nothing is certain but this: its fate is in our hands.
Shinoda: "The age of Millennium."
Io: "What does that mean?"
Shinoda: "A thousand year kingdom. It wants to create a home for itself. There is one flaw in its plan: Godzilla."
"Godzilla 2000 Millennium" (Japanese version)
All versions of Delphi have included a (renamed) copy of Borlands' C/C++ compiler.
Delphi's pascal source code files are converted to something the C compiler can understand, and then compiled. It's been this way since Delphi 1.0.
That's nonsense. The current compiler has a common back end with the C/C++ compiler, but that doesn't mean it translates into something the compiler can understand (which is presumably C or C++), it just means that the front-ends of both compilers produce a parse tree which the back end converts to object code.
I'm not sure that this was true of Delphi 1.0, though. That was a 16 bit compiler, which used the same code generation as its Turbo Pascal predecessor. The TP compiler was written in assembler.
I think what's new is that recent versions distribute both front-ends in the same package.
You can even invoke it (DCC) from the command line. Check your documentation, it's all there.
What does that show? Turbo Pascal had command line compilers for years.
From the article in respect to M$ rumored bid - "That pushed the stock up, indicating that investors are betting there could be some sort of bidding war for the company, the traders said."
M$ doesn't care to own either of the companies. I belive they're driving up the cost of the Rational acquisition for IBM by floating rumors that they're goign to jump into the mix. The Boreland rumor adds some credibility to the rumor of a M$ bid for Rational because it looks like M$ has a backup plan. In reality they'll drive the price of Rational up, let IBM pay big bucks for it, and then announce or leak that Boreland just wasn't worth acquiring thereby devaluing the Boreland stock.
And yes... I do believe that the Unmarked Black Helicopters run Palladium.
What is left after that??!! True, Delphi kicks VB's ass in every possible catigory...but after you take out C++Builder and Kylix you are left with
1. Delphi -- Competes with VB
2. JBuilder -- ya, MS just loves Java!
3. Interbase -- already got SQL Server, Access and Fox Pro
4. People -- oh wait, they already hired all of them away.
Consider this, Borland is MS biggest competitor in the compiler market. MS would buy Borland and gut it. Once again, the superior technology (Borland) looses.
Bad User. No biscuit!
If only I had moderation points today... this WAS truly funny if you are a Quake player. Someone please mod this up as funny.
-"...bad old ideas look confusingly fresh when they are packaged as technology" - Jaron Lanier (Digital Maoism on Edge.o
They can do two things.
Expand or kill.
First is not possible. Well, maybe for you in your dream. I can't imagine my self using a M$ product on any other than M$ platform (or half of the current people, well newcommers maybe). The thing is that I some day stopped believe M$ and I would not trust them that M$ products I use on other than M$ platforms are stable and secure as they should be (and that would be probably intentional if you look at M$ past).
Second is more likely. Delphi was used for many commercial applications so killing kylix in their eyes means keeping developers for them self. The thing is that they maybe don't realise that kylix was not used much. Sorry, but for a simple app (no network serving) coding there is just too much lacking features.
1. No reporting components
2. No real db access as in delphi which covers that department much better, ok you can use zeos but that's not it
3. QT only, no gtk (but that's the least of the problem)
4. kylix just isn't it
Signature Pro version 1.13.2-3 release 83.5 beta3try7 after-breakfast edition
I thought Microsoft bit off more than it could chew when it bought the Catholic church.
Is this thing on? Hello?
Hi honey! Did I strike a nerve?
...
Perhaps you missed the whole "prevalent argument" conditional put on that?
Nope, but you used so many words to make your point that my clipboard got tired and I couldn't paste it.
the majority of Slashdotters will in one story
Actually, you got me there. The majority could be saying any old thing, but my threshold is +3, so what's going on in the bowels of Slashdot passes me right by. Which means I'm huddled in Slashdot's appendix by the way.
Firstly let me get the de rigueur insult in here: You suck eggs and your mother wears army boots! Save the insults for the next girl guides meeting moron because they just case you for the savage that you are.
Mine was better.
xxx
How would MS make development tools if it wasn't part of the corporation?
It wouldn't.
Like just about every other software development company, it would go out and buy those tools from independent competing vendors, such as Borland.
"Provided by the management for your protection."
All Borlands' compilers were written in assembler. So what? They still compiled from C. Just because the compiler was doing in-memory assembly doesn't mean that it was compiling pascal code directly.
Since Anders Hejlsberg, the Danish creator of Turbo Pascal was pinched by Borland by Microsoft to be the chief architect of C# and the Common Language Infrastructure used by .NET, perhaps Microsoft will decide to go the whole hog and get the rest of the company too? Borland had (has?) some of the best developers in the field and may be worth buying just for them.
IBM's "planned" available of Rational isn't just "planned." It's actually done. I'd suggest that maybe you guys missed it, but, well, you know.
Microsoft today acquired the Free Software Foundation, acquiring the GPL and the last vestiges of competition.
I was about to say that it wouldn't do Microsoft any good because they still wouldn't really be able to use any GPL code, then I realized something...
quite a bit of GPL code has an "or any future version of the GPL" clause. If Microsoft DID aquire FSF it could simply release a new version of the GPL and effectively remove all protection on all of that software.
-
- - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
The real loss will not be C++Builder. The true loss will be Kylix.
While C++Builder is a reasonable approach to C++ development, you need to consider the quality of what it generates. In my experience, the executables that C++Builder generates are very large and very slow to execute. Being a fan of Delphi, I expected fairly small and fast executables when I purchased C++Builder, but there is a definite difference between the runtimes and the resulting executable code.
If you compare the floating point code generated between Delphi and C++Builder, there is an immense difference. The Pascal code generates much faster executables -- and that ought not to be! However, this is the case for Borland's C++ product line and it has been this way for over 10 years.
Practically every other C++ compiler out there generates tighter code than Borland's, especially in the area of floating point math. I am no fan of M$, and never have been, but I must say that their binary code is tighter, by quite a margin, than Borland's. If they acquire Borland and kill off C++Builder, they will be killing off a great GUI front end with a miserable code generator. Yes, I know Borland's is more ANSI compliant...so what? If the binary is slow, and you care about run times, ANSI compatibility is not your primary concern.
Where we will lose as developers will be in the loss of Kylix. It might not be perfect, and it might not be the most efficient code creation engine, but if it creates projects that can be ported to Linux, M$ will want to kill that off quick! And I can't say that I blame them (even if I disagree with the idea).
Be excellent to each other. And... PARTY ON, DUDES!
I still would use CVS in a heartbeat over ClearCase, if not under a corperate mandate to use ClearCase. It is a lot better than Sourcesafe though, at least from my distamt memories of SourceSafe!
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Remember, the original language spec for pascal was that it (the source) was to be converted to pcode to be run through a pcode interpreter, a la java.
One of Borlands' innovations was converting pascal source into C in memory, then compiling it.
This goes along the lines of how C++ was originally done (AT&T CFRONT compiler) - source cpp files were converted to standard c, then compiled. Compilers that could use c++ source directly didn't come along until later.
Although I wish Borland would stay a scrappy independent forever, I always thought that Sun or Oracle would be a good parent for Borland.
Actually, if you could get past the CEO egos, a combined Sun/Oracle/Borland could be an instant IBM and Microsoft "killer". They would have the hardware from desktop on up that could be supplemented with x86 hardware, the enterprise backend software (J2EE, Oracle, etc), some of the best development tools around (Delpi/Kylix for Linux/Solaris, JBuilder, CBuilder, etc), and an Office suite to boot.
Their corporate cultures seem to be compatible, from what I know of them (not much, directly, but based on years of reading). I don't see anything compatible between Microsoft and Borland, however.
"your mother wears army boots!"
On that note, can anybody explain why this is actually an insult? I never understood. Surely there are many mothers in the military. And army boots are rather sturdy. If my mother wore army boots I think that would imply she could kick your mother's ass. Actually, I think arming more mothers would be a good idea all-around.
It's 10 PM. Do you know if you're un-American?
Dude, check your dead-tree manuals.
I'd be happy to. Just give me a page reference.
All Borlands' compilers were written in assembler. So what? They still compiled from C.
Strange then that their Turbo Pascal compiler came out several years before their Turbo C compiler.
A) Different people can have different oppinions.
B) Either one could be wrong. How the hell does that mean people can't still assert the other one?
C) They could BOTH be right. It's completely possible for Microsoft to be an EvilMonopoly and on the verge of collapse in one or more markets. Assuming they ARE and EvilMonopoly, anything short of total bankruptcy could still require government intervention to set things right.
-
- - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
Be sure to pass that lesson on to your children.
War is necrophilia.
It's easier to implement a subset of the C language, than to implement the whole thing.
That's why, for example, the original C Builder's delivery date slipped, and slipped, and slipped. You can implement a pascal-to-c converter, and the subset of c necessary to compile, than to implement a full ansi-compliant c compiler. The "problem set" of of pascal is much simpler.
On a historical note, Philippe Kahn wrote the original pascal compiler in 6 weeks in a hotel room. :-)
As for the page references, all my dead trees are at home (14 x 6 shelves, 2 decades+ of manuals, etc...).
Only to the extent that a bank competes with random strangers as a reasonable place to keep my money. SourceSafe may be viewed by many as a reasonable alternative for Clearcase, but that's a horrible mistake. SourceSafe is deeply flawed and inappropriate for any but the most trivial situations. I've written a paper on Visual SourceSafe's many flaws. Spread the word! Friends don't let friends use SourceSafe!
Search 2010 Gen Con events
I can't understand why MS would want to buy Borland, they've already hired away all their talent.
These are my friends, See how they glisten. See this one shine, how he smiles in the light.
Um... CLX is based on QT. Partially at least.
http://www.drbob42.com/kylix/kylix.htm
$_='while(read+STDIN,$_,2048){$a=29;$b=73;$c=142;
Maybe but it would take 10 years and a incorruptible Department of Justice to prove it.
Where have you been?
Do you even know anything about perl? -- AC Replying to Tom Christiansen post.
I have to program on Java from time to time as well, but usually I use high-order languages, like Python and Lisp. Well, whole Java annoys me. Swing and EJB are both the best illustration of how to sell bad technologies through non-technical managers.
I think with death of Borland (that's the goal of Microsoft deal, isn't it?) the chances of Java to survive will be less, while chances for better languages of new generation (read: functional and logical programming languages) to come to the market will be bigger. I wonder (but won't be surprised) if Microsoft will start sell some of them.
Less is more !
Soldiers fighting overseas would pay local prostitutes by giving them their boots.
Rational Software Up 3% On Rumors Of Second Bidder
By DONNA FUSCALDO
Of DOW JONES NEWSWIRESNEW YORK -- Shares of Rational Software Corp. (RATL) saw heavy volume Wednesday after rumors spread on the Internet that a second company could make a bid for the software maker.
The stock recently was up 30 cents, or 3%, to $10.59 on volume of 21.5 million shares. Average daily volume is 5.6 million.
International Business Machines Corp. (IBM) said Friday it would buy the software tools maker for $2.1 billion, or $10.50 a share.
Following news of the pending acquisition, some Wall Street pundits said IBM was getting Rational on the cheap, which sparked speculation that another bidder would step in. On Wednesday rumors abounded that Microsoft Corp. (MSFT) could be that second bidder.
Officials at Microsoft, Rational Software and IBM declined to comment.
While investors traded up shares of Rational on the rumor, some analysts discounted the veracity of the speculation.
Gary Abott, an analyst at RTX Securities, said the chances of a second bidder emerging are highly unlikely.
There is a constituency out there that believes IBM has stolen this on the cheap, said the analyst. I do not count myself among that group.
According to the analyst, who does not own shares of Rational, Microsoft is an unlikely suitor.
Microsoft is an intelligent and formidable company and paying a premium to this price doesn't appear to a make a lot of sense to me or anybody, he said. RTX Securities does not have an investment banking relationship with Rational.
The rumor was also reported on CNBC.
Kevin Buttigieg, an analyst at Kaufman Brothers, agreed a counter offer from Microsoft is unlikely.
He noted that IBM included a clause in the agreement, which basically said that if a competitor purchases Rational, the software tool maker's source code would still be disclosed to IBM.
Buttigieg does not own shares of Rational and Kaufman Brothers doesn't have any investment-banking ties with Rational.
Still that didn't stop investors from betting that another suitor may step up to the plate.
After reaching a high of $10.72, Rational's shares swapped hands recently at $10.59, up 30 cents. That's a slight premium to IBM's all-cash offer of $10.50 a share, signaling that some investors expect a higher bid.
Rational's trade volume, at nearly 26 million shares, was nearly five times its average daily trade volume of 5.5 million shares.
The stock is certainly acting like people expect a higher offer, said one arbitrage analyst.
The analyst said the acquisition would make sense for both Microsoft and IBM. It's a small deal, he said. IBM can write the check and so could Microsoft.
IBM is hoping to close the deal in the first quarter. If there is a bidding war it will have to happen soon.
-By Donna Fuscaldo, Dow Jones Newswires; 201-938-5253; donna.fuscaldo@dowjones.com
(Janet Whitman in New York contributed to this report.)
Updated December 11, 2002 3:20 p.m. EST
Woopty Doo Basil, what does it all mean?!
They may not be able to buy Forte or Eclipse but they can remove a significant development tool for the linux platform that allows the exact same project to run on solaris, linux, windows and mac os (to a lesser extent). This gives credibliity to the platform as a stable one that is supported by large vendors.
Personally I develop through my company for Windows and Linux the same (JFC) but for OS X I use the development tools (interface builder) from Apple and tie into my same java classes (we recompile a cocoa app). We build an Aqua interface and tie into the same backend. On Linux and Windows all development is in textpad (via wine in linux). Any other apps that are specifically remote in nature are implemented in JSP for web access. So I can sort of agree with you but not entirely. If I didn't use Windows so much I'd be using vim exclusively (but that's another fight altogether!).
Hmmm... So, perhaps a little more research next time? Props for straightening me out...
</blush>
Get thee glass eyes, and, like a scurvy politician, seem to see things thou dost not.--King Lear
That is strange. Not sure how yours was setup, but if you checked files out for developing, it was irrelevant to the ability to backup the VSS database - same with being logged in.
Correct, but I forgot that we always ran ANALYZE.EXE before backups, causing the backups to "fail", which is what I should have said...
www.christopherlewis.com
"Borland, like Microsoft, also sells programming tools that allow software developers to build programs for Microsoft's .NET Internet software. But unlike Microsoft, Borland's tools allow developers to run their applications in non-Microsoft environments..."
And this I fear is the motivation. Borland sells an excellent tool called Kylix that runs on Linux. The product has two IDEs. The first is equivalent to Borland's Delphi and the second is the equivalent to Borland's C++Builder.
In fact by using these tools, companies can develop Microsoft products and easily port them to Linux. Microsoft doesn't want that on the desktop.
Remember what happened when Microsoft bought Corel shares? Corel almost immediately announced that there would be no further development on Corel Linux. Of course Corel management said that the decision had nothing to do with Microsoft's purchase. Yeah, right...
So all I've got to say is if you want to use these excellent tools you may want to buy them soon!
The race isn't always to the swift... but that's the way to bet!
Microsoft are attempting to push the price of Rational up to either bust the deal or create fear and confusion in the Java market. The Borland thing is just to add credibility by appearing to have a contingency plan. Basically, they are terrified of an IBM armed with Rational dev tools and Java - a certain .NET killer.
I especially liked this part of the story:
'"We never comment on rumors and speculation," a Microsoft spokeswoman said.'
No, they only start them.
While browsing for info in regards to the legality of a proposed buyout of Borland, I ran across this site from Microsoft Monopoly, at Stanford, Its has a fairly well laid out description of all of Microsoft's past woe's and tangles with the law.
Argo doesn't do collab/sequence diagrams, nor does the whiteboard ed. of TJ. Boo, hiss. I haven't found *any* free tool that does collab/sequence diagrams (Dia doesn't count, I need this for work, not home.)
0 111-ootools.html.
I'm tired of static class diagrams that don't tell me how the system *works*.
So is Allen Holub. See http://www.javaworld.com/javaworld/jw-01-2002/jw-
First, consider that Rational's source control products. As bloated as they can be, they run on Win32 and many flavors of *NIX.
Next, Borland does a lot of Java work. Under Microsoft's rule, this would surely slow to a trickle or be converted to the .NET platform.
Obviously, industry support for non-Microsoft platforms would be greatly reduced if these buyouts go through. Not only that, but many of the good people at Rational and Borland would be soon out of work, as Microsoft would suddenly find them irrelevant to their strategy.
Yes, I think this would be very bad for cross platform development, and the software industry in general.
At least we don't have to call it "Inprise's C++ and Pascal compiler". Inprise. Sounds like a medical condition or social disease.
Reading all the fearfilled comments here about what might happen with Borland C, Kylix etc including their communities and all that time and effort people have spent on learning those development environments, just makes me feel warm and fuzzy inside that I've settled for free software. :)
:)
Nobody can take over free software like that, at least not with the communitys acceptance, feels great to be immune against threats like that.
Of course, still hopes that things turns out well for Borland, the Kylix community etc...
I agree, Borland tech was always my favourite. Unfortunately, they lost me when I moved to linux, and their Kylix product just doesn't do it for me. It's not a native app (requires WINE to run, at least the first two versions I tried out) and produced .exe files. Ugh! Borland's first pascal compiler used a core licensed from someone (forget his name - you can find it on the net) to which they added an IDE. It's the IDE that (at the time) was the cutting-edge stuff we all drooled over! Ah, memories.... :-)
Have a nice day!
Yes, Kahn was one of Wirth's students, and he may have written the original Pascal compiler, but it was Anders Hejlsberg who wrote Turbo Pascal. It was a Pascal compiler, not p2c plus a C subset compiler.
Not to argue. The original turbo pascal was licensed from Hejlsberg, with an IDE from Kahn. :-) However, the Delphi series is a whole different kettle of fish (or in this case, pretty s/fowl/foul/); It works, but single-class hierarchies really suck and require too many compromises. At least that's my opinion, and I noticed that single-class forced me to make ugly compromises when I was designing my own components. In the end, it wasn't worth the bother.