Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Invests in Inprise (aka Borland)
Stephen Legge writes "
Inprise (formerly Borland, makers of Delphi, JBuilder, among other things) has established a strategic agreement with Microsoft.
Microsoft has bought $25 million (10%) worth of Inprise preferred stock.
Read the the press release here. " Only eight years ago, this would have been unthinkable-odd how much the world shifts. Of course, then again, WP5.1 was the de facto standard.
Windows 2000 itself isn't 64 bit. Never was supposed to be right off the bat.
I don't think you have a clue what you're talking about.
My dear AC, I believe you've answered your own question. No, it isn't supposed to be "right off the bat". They were pushing for 64 bit in W2K, which is why none of the windows 95/98/NT applications would be compatible with it, as I recall. That changed when they switched codebases.
--
I think that the heart of this deal is really the heavy COM+/DNA component. MS is SOOOOO thrilled with themselves about these technologies, they need to see them shored up in as many major programming environments as possible, especially as more and more people are starting to figure out CORBA. I'm just glad to see that they didn't do a WFC licensing plan that will screw up JBuilder. Still, since I've been programming in MFC for the past couple of weeks (and OWL years ago), I can say that it will NOT be a particularly great addition to any programming suite. Come on MS, how much crap really NEEDS to start with the initials Afx? And why do you have both pVariable and lpVariable names when all pointers in Win32 are 32 bit pointers?
Attempting to consolidate the market by controlling their most credible development tools competitor.
Attempting to control the market by being able to influence what platforms Borland develops for.
Hedging their bets by investing in a competing technology as they have done with SCO and Apple, for example.
Insuring that while effectively controlled, a competitor will not outright cease to exist in order to keep the feds off their case.
Insuring that their R&D (which is mostly done by their competitors) doesn't dry up.
This is just another example of business as usual for Microsoft.
As Caldera, amongst other things, is Ray Noorda's personal weapon for taking revenge on Microsoft, yes, it's a good thing they didn't buy Inprise. And it's good for Inprise customers, for now there will be future products from Inprise that aren't primarially political agenda items.
But before the agreement Netscape was the Mac's default browser. After the agreement it wasn't.
I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
I can't imagine a move which is more monopolistic than an
alliance between MS and Inprise.
Isn't inprise the main competitior MS has for Windows deveopment?
What else is there?
The result will be that all software for Windows will use MS tools,
and MS API's. However, by that time MS may be passee. I
expect a drop in the price of MS stock to 50% of its current
level by the first quarter of 2000. Enprise made a big mistake
with this alliance which will tend to sidetrack any plans it may
have had to port tools to Linux of Beos or other platforms.
I think it's good that this is happening. What it means is that
few if any entrepeneurs will want to start Windows software
development companies which produce new compilers and
toolkits. Instead, they will accelerate their move to Linux and
other platforms which are more unix-like.
Inprise tools are not that good. Why? Because they are Windows
only. I always wondered about that years ago using OWL,
which in theory was platform independent but found no takers
except OS2 (which is very similar to the MS API) in a halfhearted
way.
Linux can and will develop good IDE's and object frameworks
for developers to use. That's already happening.
Do your REALLY believe that the competitition is ALL incompetent? I find that a bit of a stretch. Occam's razor would suggest a different answer.
I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
Would you be willing to make that a binding committment?
I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
Visigenic came late to the CORBA party (Orbix was there much earlier) but in the last 3 years, Visigenic has been responsible for most of the new developments in CORBA. Visigenic basically wrote the specification for IIOP (the Internet Inter-Orb Protocol) which is the vendor-vendor interoperability specification for CORBA over TCP/IP. Visigenic also defined the Java bindings for CORBA, with everyone else playing catch up. Orbix might be a bigger company, but Visigenic has been redefining the CORBA marketplace for the last 3 years.
Last year Microsoft cut a deal with Orbix whereby Orbix would integrate DCOM into their CORBA Orb; now Microsoft is buying a good-sized chunk of the most important CORBA vendor to come along in years.
The Microsoft Way: If you can't beat them, buy them.
We call it art because we have names for the things we understand.
Amen.
a Delphi R&D Engineer '97-'99
The MIPS R4400, R5000, R7000, R8000, R10000, and R12000 are all 64-bit CPUs.
"the R12000 outperforms the fastest available UltraSparc by a wide margin."
Sun UltraSPARC II 450 (Ultra 60)
SPECint95 19.7
SPECfp95 27.0
MIPS R12000 300 MHz (Octane)
SPECint95 17.3
SPECfp95 27.4 -- 0.4 = "wide margin"
"the R14000 will be available next year."
In May 1998 SGI said the R12K was supposed to be available September of 1998. I'll believe it when I see it.
By the way, where is the Octane's next generation graphics that were supposed to be out first quarter of 1999?
IIRC they've always had good code generators, but it took them years just to read Stroustrup's book ("template"? "throw"? huh?) and they still haven't caught up with the Standard they helped write. And much of their software is amazingly bad and untested but the suckers who buy it don't seem to care, so I guess that's not really a problem....
ever heard of the NDA?
I wouldn't count on Linux or CORBA technologies coming from Imprise in the future unless there is some sign showing otherwise. This would have to come from action or from Imprise official statements.
I see this as a last gasp of breath for Imprise. COM, COM-, CaptiveX and other Microsoft pseudo technology copies will be priority ONE over more open and interesting technologies like CORBA, Java, Linux, and others. These are just my opinion based on how Micros~1 has done business for the past 10 years or more. Tit for tat and Windows is the focus. "Anybody remember Windows?" is still Bill G's battle cry.
IMHO
"Anyone who stands out in the middle of a road looks like roadkill to me." --Linus
Look, since when has Micros~1 ever published a press release that told the REAL story? Look at the current DOJ vs MS articles and deposition documents. They were even attempting to find POSITIVE data about Netscape browser numbers FOR PRESS REASONS. This wasn't a Micros~1 product but they were going to use it for PRESS REASONS. Bull shirt, this 'deal' is to keep them doing Windows tools till Micros~1 can migrate Imprise developers to Micros~1 tools and to keep Imprise tools off of Linux. Imprise developers would jump to Linux in a heartbeat if the tools were there. Now they won't.
The assimulation line is now forming at 100 Micros~1 Way room #42.
IMHO
"Anyone who stands out in the middle of a road looks like roadkill to me." --Linus
Except for that one little thing called Microsoft!
Sell. Soon.
----
Open mind, insert foot.
Yep - Delphi is my dream-dev tool, I fear this mean we will see Delphi leaving and Visual Basic coming :-( .
"All resistance is futile, you'll be bought"
With M$ expertise in this field, I would not wonder, if legacy 32-bit applications would not run anymore on their 64-bit O/S. But if I am not mistaken, Sun's UltraSparcs can still run old 32-bit apps even if switched into 64-bit mode. The Linux port to that platform contains also code to enable this kind of backwards compatibility.
>Anyway their record for multiplatform client
>tools is rather spotty - anyone remember
>Borland C++ for OS/2 - an orphaned product.
That was really the beginning of the end. After AppBuilder (Novell?) failed in its crossplatform development promises, Borland had to backtrack. It was going to bring OWL to OS/2 and then UNIX via AppBuilder. IIRC. By supporting OS/2 it was now the target of Micros~1. MFC marketing increased, its price was kept low, then the brain drain, etc. Tough road with some damn good technology again a viscous competitor.
Funny how a development tool vendor becomes a competitor when its products become crossplatform....Do you think Micros~1 feels Windows is THE most important product it has?
"Anyone who stands out in the middle of a road looks like roadkill to me." --Linus
With VJ++ on the sidelines, does this mean Bill G is going to loan Anders Hejlsberg out to Borland to help with the JBuilder port to Linux/Solaris?
The mind boggles...
Beware Ahaeans bearing gifts....
In fact they've scuttled their own cross-platform work, which was their only chance to grow beyond the handful of evangelists still willing to risk doing business with them.
Will this make Inprise less inclined to port it's development tools to Linux? (Interbase is already ported). C++ Builder or Delphi for Linux would have been nice.
Stephen Molitor steve_molitor@yahoo.com
Well, I can't bind the company; i'm
not in management.
But I will bind myself to do anything in my
power to prevent it.
Eight years ago, DOS was the dominant platform, I was writing in Borland Turbo Pascal, and Linux was just a gleam in Linus' eye.
:)
Now Windows is the dominant platform, I'm writing in SVGALIB/C, and Linux is huge! Borland may die, but their legacy will live on.
P.S. My favorite Linux programmer's editor is RHIDE. The Turbo Vision interface is so comfortable after years of programming in Turbo Pascal.
pb Reply or e-mail; don't vaguely moderate.
http://www.omnis-software.com/whatsnew/press/linux .html
Omnis Software announced their next generation 4GL cross platform RAD tool a month ago.
I'm psyched to use Omnis Studio on Linux. In the meantime a trial version on Win32/Mac PPC is available for download.
Paul
-just an Omnis developer
.
rm -r /borlandcompilers ; echo Now I feel better :)
Do your REALLY believe that the competitition is ALL incompetent?
Well, yes. Borland botched big time by not supporting Windows 3.0 in their products just after the fabolous Turbo Pascal 5.5/6.0.
When they did, Turbo Pascal for Windows was pathetic and in the meanwhile Visual Basic 1.0 was out. Borland begun their fall at that precise moment and never managed to get back.
It is really sad when MS have to put money into Apple and Borland just to keep competition alive... Keep in mind that being succesful in the software business is MUCH more than being a k001 coder.
I think the smartest guy is still Jobs. He sold Next to Apple for some serious money, got $150Ml from Bill and even had the vision (and luck) to own Pixar. Smart guy indeed, and not only a good programmer...
Yeah, I agree, so much for seeing Inprise tools ported to Linux... oh well.
----------
In a real emergency, we would have all fled in terror, and you would not have been notified.
B: There are only three reasons for MS to invest in another company :
the other company has bigger margins than MS (very unlikely) or expects bigger (monopoly-like) margins in the future
the company has something that MS wants. (patents, technology, shipping product)
the company poses a threat to MS's software monopoly.
Inprise qualifies on no 2 and maybe on no 3.
Anyway, as a customer of a company the only thing that is worse than a MS buy-in is a Computer Associates take-over (your product will be put on the back-burner , milked for all its worth and tossed aside)
I guess you can kiss OWL goodbye. Seems like MS wants to heavily push COM+. Not a bad move, wonder what the future of VisiBroker will be...
"JBuilder - competes with Visual J++"? Nope. VJ++ does not support Java 1.2.
"C++ Builder - competes with Visual C++"? Sort of.
"Delphi - competes with Visual Basic (Bill's first and favorite)"? Hardly. Pascal and Basic are not the same language.
"Visibroker - competes with DCOM"? Nope. The technologies are not compatible.
"Turbo Assembler - competes with MASM"? Possibly. Do Borland still make it? I thought it only shipped as part of C++ Builder.
"DBase - competes with Access/ SQL Server"? Irrelevant. DBase is no longer a Borland product, and Paradox existed long before there was an Access.
"Inprise just got bought out!"? No, they just got some more money. Why are you reading so much more into the press release than is actually there? Are you going to boycott schools which Microsoft have donated money to as well?
Poor Borland.
They made great products in their day, and they deserved better than slow assimilation at the hands of Microsoft.
Try running on NT with 128M or more of memory. I've never found any development environment stable on Win95/98 -- it's a deployment platform, not a development platform. (Personally I just use it for videogames and refer to it as my Wintendo box.)
I've found JBuilder, VAJava, and the Symantec products to be equally stable under NT. The issues for choosing between them have more to do with your work style:
1. I'm not a Mac user, and don't care for the Symantec interface. Maybe there's no correlation between their Mac work and their interface, but I found their interface inconvenient. Other users with different habits will have the opposite opinion.
2. VAJava has it's good points, but when you're trying to modify a base class it's really irritating and time consuming to have it flag errors all over your class hierarchy when you modify a method or member, knowing ahead of time that those issues will crop up. It's nice to have them tracked, but it would be far more efficient if you could control when those evaluations are done. Once you've got a few hundred derived classes, you can end up waiting several minutes for VAJava to "save" changes to a method while it updates it's dependancy/error trees. If you're working with stable base classes (purchased?), this same "problem" becomes the biggest benefit of VAJava.
3. JBuilder walks a nice line between the information analysis of VAJava and traditional IDEs that just integrate "make" style tools with an editor, error highlighter, and source debugger.
Personally I prefer JBuilder, but that's not to say the other environments are "bad". They've all worked comfortably with project in the 80-100K line range, provided that they have enough memory.
I'm just hoping M$ doesn't leverage their investment to cancel the Linux port of JBuilder -- it's one of the few key products that force me to keep a WinNT box around (other than customer demands for WinXX development.)
I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.
They're (MS) obviously running scared -- they know Inprise makes really excellent + userfriendly development tools. They know that if they decided to take, say Delphi, to Linux they'd have a problem.
Uh huh. So Inprise isn't switching to M$-prescribed, proprietary technologies and abandoning their own/open ones?
The short-term cash dump is meaningless. Microsoft for all intents and purposes now 'owns' Borland/Inprise - whatever you want to call them.
They have been assimilated. Good-Bye Borland/Inprise.
I hope they don't try to mess up C++ Builder. It is pretty much the most painless why that anyone can write applications for Windows. The ease of form creation / widget layout that Visual Basic pioneered combined with a useful programming language that doesn't get it your way (ala BASIC) combine to make C++ Builder actually fairly enjoyable to use.
It's your new "dark fantasy world" order. Don't let it keep you awake at night. You'll need your sleep, for those days when you'll don your Paladin's garb and go out fighting the good fight.
Yep, the commercial software world is like a comic book, all black and white.
Little spots of color on Sunday, too.
The bulk of this deal was about patent issues. Inprise only made a commitment to continue to support Windows tech. If anything, this shows that MS is worried about lack of Win00 adoption by developers. I don't see any way this could limit Borland from porting its tools. In fact, the $100mil could be used to fund any number of development efforts - which for all we know, may include a Linux development tool.
just my $0.02
Microsoft is having a hell of a time getting their 64-bit version of Windows to work. Uh, nope. Microsoft has 64-bit NT running internally. A 64-bit version of Windows 2000 for Alpha will follow the main Windows 2000 release by only a couple months. This Borland deal isn't about that.
I'll believe it when I see it. How much of a rucus have you seen from
Apple since that pay-off?
FUD
Do all of you people seriously believe M$ is really that powerful, in that all they have to do is just start talking to execs and invest in stock and BOOM, that company is now gone and we are playing taps???? If you do, congradulations, you have no logical and rational thought.
Borland, or Inprise, ain't going anywhere. There products, which kick M$ devel tool's asses, are not going anywhere. Please people, stop playing the funeral song, M$ doesn't have that kind of power in swallowing companies up. That are not THAT powerful. Delphi, and others, is here to stay. If anything, the M$ deal actually helps Borland by raising their stock value, which hasn't been doing to well. Remember, did Apple disappear when M$ invested in them? Did Apple suddenly get assimilated? No. In fact, they have a Open Source, or at least a variant, OS in the works, and more and more people by Apple hardware to use PPC/Mk Linux on it (I know a few people who do). So stop your illogical whinning that "Oh, look where M$ threw their money, in Company X. Bye bye Company X, we shall miss you. Would have been great if you did a Linux port sooner." CRAP!!
Oh, and that leads to another point, will every one stop complainig about how Inprise could have done a Delphi port. That ain't going to happen for a few technical reasons (this also applies to C Builder):
1) Delphi is extremely designed for Windows, and its architecture model and features. That means most of the things available don't even exist in Linux. A port would require another layer of simulation to mimic a lot of the functionality of Windows. Kind of like Wine. In the end, I think performance would be an issue if that kind of layer was added. The best way would be to re-write it for Linux, but they don't have the time and resources for that kind of feat.
2) They would have to choose between KDE and GNOME because they are the only two things that provide a CORBA type architecture. Side note: Is CDE avaiable for Linux? They would also be a contender I guess. Anyways, KDE already has KDevelop, which is your Delphi/C Builder equivelent. So logically, you might want to go GNOME, since they don't have anything solid that I have seen yet. But then without a doubt, no matter which way Inprise decides, there is going to be a flame war on why they chose one over the other (and I can count on all of you whinning desktop martyrs to bitch about it).
On a final note, CALM DOWN, Borland is not going anywhere and M$ is not consolidating, or putting Borland out of business. If M$ really had that kind of power, the government would already have them found guilty on being a monopoly, and a powerfull one at that, and would have already dealt with them (however they decide).
This is the next logical step for M$. Regardless of how we all feel about them, this is good strategy on their part. If they can't infiltrate the technology, they'll buy a significant/controlling stake in the other players.
This way, if the industry doesn't buy into the Microsoft method, Microsoft buys into the industry method.
I'm sure there are more 'strategic partnerships' like this on the horizon. Look for M$ to enter into such a partnership with a major PC vendor in the near future.
-- What you do today will cost you a day of your life.
That might have been secondary. I think that getting Netscape Navigator OFF of the Mac and keeping Suns Java OFF of the Mac were the prime directive. The DOJ and QuickTime were secondary points on the shopping list. Look at what they were doing at that time.
"Anyone who stands out in the middle of a road looks like roadkill to me." --Linus
This sucks.
Not that Delphi for Linux was ever more than a pipe dream anyway. VCL was always too Windows-specific.
I wonder what this means to Interbase for Linux? Will Microsoft kill that too?
First, Mr. Maritz claimed that he expected that cable owners would in the future have a big say on what software is distributed. Well, this opportunity for "competition" has been disappearing through the many billions of dollars that Microsoft has sunk into cable ownerships during the last two years.
Second, Microsoft claimed to be under competitive pressure from platform independent java. So the use their dominant position in Windows programming tools to reduce the standard to a set of proprietary technologies. Guess what will happen to Inprise's JBuilder?
Third, Microsoft claimed to be under competitive pressure from "middleware". Has anyone heard from ColdFusion's announced port of its server to Linux since they announced their "strategic alliance" with Microsoft? Does anyone expect to hear anything from Inprise's CORBA standard Visibroker, after Inprises "strategic alliance" with Microsoft that includes adoption of COM+?
Microsoft is presently buying markets from customers (cable) and platform dependency from middleware vendors that could be or become platform agnostic (Allaire, Inprise). Thus they are consistently supporting and extending their Windows monopoly.
-cjr
My point was, the only 64-bit processor that is already supported (and only one that will be supported, AFAIK, until Merced) is the Alpha. You can't run Windows 2000 on anything but Alphas and X86...
Unfortunately Free Pascal has still a long way to go. The latest version has more than three (;-)) bugs.
As much as I would like to see a Delphi for Linux I doubt that it will ever become a reality.
It should OTOH be possible to write a wrapper around the Delphi commandline compiler to make it run under Linux (I think it uses less than 50 Win32 API functions, most of them should be basic stuff.) and to port most of the RTL to Linux. Unfortunately this is nearly impossible without support from Inprise since it is bound to stop working as soon as they release a new version.
Actually this idea is stolen from my collegue
Vitaly, the maker of Virtual Pascal...
Steve Jobs is a good programmer?
What, specifically, has he coded in the last decade?
He's a good marketing guy, that's for certain, and an interesting motivator, from the stories I have heard.
A disaster of a businessman, in many ways.
I've not seen the output of his coding, at least not code he's written in this or the last decade...
All the competition isn't incompetent. If it were, ALL you would see on the shelves at retailers would be Microsoft. All businesses would be buying would be Microsoft. Since that isn't the case, not ALL the competition is incompetent.
There are some 'major brand names of yesteryear' that are incompetent at the moment, though. Mostly you'll notice them begging the government to interfere in the market so they won't be run out of business by their competitors.
Don't be dragging in scientific metaphors like Occams Razor when there's an easier explanation. (heh)
I suspect that stopping Linux tool development may have been at least part (fairly substantial???) of the reason for the aquisition...
my $0.02 worth anyway...
David Buddrige
mailto:buddrige@q-net.net.au
(Haven't time to create an account)
>Delphi for Linux - too tied to Win32 - not too >likely to happen. I'll eat a hat, tho, if they >prove me wrong, 'cos I'd LOVE to use it!!
_Most_ of the basic widgets that Delphi use seem to be handled ok-ish in winelib (a free win32 clone for x86 *nix, part of the www.winehq.com project).
Even if Delphi just officially supported WineLib, that would be cool. This would be more of a bug-stomping exercise than real porting, but it would give pseudo-support for all *nix including *BSD, so it wouldn't be all bad.
We use GNU/SunOS.
In the early 90's Borland discovered MS was using their tech to develop Windows and Win apps. Needless to say they were pissed. This forced Borland to change their lic agreement to limit distribution of any products written with their compilers to 10,000 copies without getting further permission.
MS has been raiding Borland for programming talend for years. example...The new bubbling and event management features in IE4 and later are direct ripoffs of Paradox for Windows.
MS probably figured out that it is cheaper to invest in Borland than keep offering million dollar signing bonuses to their key employees, and get sued for it.(Borland brought legal action against MS for actively soliciting their employees)
Borland is simply getting some of their own back (hence the additional $100 million.)
As long as they don't turn Delphi into another Virtually Braindead, this is very good for Borland. It will make all the conservative IS managers in the Fortune 1000 much more comfortable using Borland superior tools.
BTW, JBuilder code should already be able to run on Linux if you have a Java compatible VM. I think IBMs' works, but I'm not sure.
There is nothing about COM+ that ties it to windows. It was designed to be cross platform and languagte nuetral.
Your right. This whole arrangement will make IS managers a lot more comfortable using Borland tools. There was/is a fear that Borland is going out of business (this fear has been around since the late 80's). Maybe this will kill it once and for all.
Things could be worse, imagine if CA invested in them.
>imagine if CA invested in them
Anyone remember Clipper? xBase?
That which M$ cannot technologically defeat (or even come close to), they buy out and absorb, no matter what name they put on it.
Maybe Delphi should have gone open source...?
The plan never was to make Windows 2000 64-bit native. Never. If you can find info otherwise, I would be utterly fascinated by it.
It wouldn't have made any sense...
Since Windows 2000 (nee NT5) was supposed to ship in (pick any year before 1999), why would Microsoft have ever planned to run native 64-bit, when Intel wasn't even going to have roughed-in chips until late 1999 for TESTING???
And, from what I've heard, Windows 2000 64-bit WILL be able to run Win32 applications.
They never changed codebases... Windows 2000 = NT5, which is based off NT4.
I can promise you that that wn't happen.
This is MS's attempt trying to replace CORBA with COM/COM+/DCOM/YourCOM/MyCOM/EveryoneHasaCOMCOM.
They could also possibly attempt to corrupt Java from this front.
I wrote Borland off the day they changed their name, anyway, for pretty much the same reasons I don't expect to hear anything more about "Tru64 Unix"...
Umm... didn't Microsoft "invest" in RealNetworks to the tune of $10 million, grab all the knowledge they could, and then screw them over?
I have this sinking feeling. This seems like Bill Gates pissing on Philippe Kahns corpse.
Let's face it, M$ will lose to linux in the server market and possibly in the workstation, but forget it in the home market. That is where BeOS will come in. BeOS is very easy to use and install especially for the clueless newbies. What we need now is for a full port of gcc to Win32 and to get the BeOS port of egcs up to date. Anyone who has used BeOS on a supported system knows just how fast it would rip windows's head off if the hardware support and # of software are equal. Can you see a true clueless newbie (the other 95% of the population) trying to
1. recompile something, even a text editor
2. configuring lilo
3. messing around with config files and shell scripts
I can't.
---Got Coffee?---
BG said that the only man he hated (as of sometime before 1993) was Philipp Kann (spell is wrong), founder of Borland. While Philipp departed long time ago to head still unknown Starfish, Bill must have had few nice feeling buying out his old rival. Although he didn't buy 51% (yet), it still significant. What is 100mln for him anyway? I bet MS paid with it's stock (not cash).
It is funny to see a bit of history back, Borland died anyway long time ago. It's Inprise *yucks* now.
AtW,
http://www.investigatio.com
alexc
Join Majestic-12 Distributed Search Engine
We`ll everybody that have had dealings like this with Microsoft have signed their death warrant.
You name the company.
Basically I like Borland, I didn't like Inprise and now there is no more Inprise.
Microsoft for all intents and purposes now 'owns' Borland/Inprise - whatever you want to call them.
:)
Nonsense. They own 10% in shares. Did you see any announcement of MS being on the board of directors ? I didn't. There is another investor that has more than 6% of the company. 10% is not owning the company and perhaps in future they will sell the shares. Let's stick to the facts. And the "short" term cash is significant, Inprise basically doubled the amount of cash. This is very good news, it takes money to pay salaries to develop Linux products
> Like Apple, I think that Inprise can bounce back
Yeah, like Apple, in whom Microsoft is a 10% shareholder.
Funny ain't it, M$ can only run their monopoly successfully if they maintain a veneer of a free market by financially supporting the competition.
Regards, Ralph.
Definitely not related. :-) I'm a Mac user and I like JBuilder the best of the Windows Java IDEs (except for the editor...). Symantec's interface is just not very productively arranged.
Cafe crashes a lot more than the other two you mention, for me. It also doesn't deal well with large projects, even on a 256MB 450MHz PII with plenty of disk space.
VisualAge requires I import a lot of the external classes I use, which bloats the repository; the GUI designer creates literally hundreds of classes for a reasonably complex layout, making it virtually unusable; and it also has zero integration with external version control.
JBuilder's code browser is nice, visual designer the best of a bad bunch, and it's pretty fast if you ignore the memory usage.
CodeWarrior's editor is pretty decent and the class browser, diff tool, and build support rock, but its debugger isn't anywhere as nice as JBuilder's, and it has no visual interface designer. I'll be interested to see the Java RAD stuff and improved debugger in Pro5. So for now I write mostly in CodeWarrior, except if I'm doing a lot of AWT/Swing stuff in which case I use JBuilder, and debug in JBuilder. Not the best... sigh.
--
I really wish it were cheaper, but Apple's Interface Builder for OS X or WebObjects/NT is probably the most powerful Java Swing visual designer out there... I used this back in the Rhapsody DR1 days, and I couldn't believe how much flexibility you could have without even writing code - all you need to write is the business logic or complex model interactions.
VisualAge's editor is probably closest in the "wiring" concept to IB, but as you say, Visualage's code generation leaves something to be desired. (IMHO, though, it is better than Symantec's code gen). On the other hand, VisualAge is definitely a server-side developer's dream (again imho)...
-Stu
They most likely would have split the company in two pieces, one dev tools/technology and the other services. This was planned and is now on hold. This would have allowed someone to buy the dev tools division as it was rumored Sun was looking at it along with Oracle. A far better solution then Micros~1 control and the perpetuation of Micros~1 proprietary operating systems and services. IMO
"Anyone who stands out in the middle of a road looks like roadkill to me." --Linus
You're thinking about 32-bit vs 16-bit addressing and the Windows APIs associated with them. Windows NT/2000 uses 32-bit addressing and has the "Windows on Windows" system for compatibility with 16-bit Windows programs. Windows 95/98 uses a mixture and supports both 32-bit and 16-bit Windows programs with the same code, using "thunks" to bridge between code using different addressing modes.
What "Signal 11" is talking about is the 64-bit extensions for Windows (aka the Win64 API) on Alpha and Merced, which are likely to be included in a sort of Windows 2000.5.
I'd like to think that Borland, the company who defined the IDE on the PC would be worth a little more than 25 mil.
Conscience is the inner voice which warns us that someone may be looking.
-- H. L. Mencken
There is development under way to provide Delphi-like IDE's to be used with Free Pascal, a great Pascal compiler for Linux x86, Win32, DOS, Amiga and OS/2 that supports Delphi 2.0 features, is TP 7.0 compatible and has very responsive developers. Everything under GPL...
See the IDE homepages of Megido and Lazarus.
Come on people - it 10% holding. MS owns some (usually 15%) of pretty much EVERY company out there - they buy, outright, about 1 company per day. This is a fairly good thing for Inprise, and Inprise developers, as it shows that SOMEONE (who idiot managers respect) has faith in the company.
As for the crys, here's a little info:
Delphi for Linux - too tied to Win32 - not too likely to happen. I'll eat a hat, tho, if they prove me wrong, 'cos I'd LOVE to use it!!
JBuilder for Linux - they have announced it, people - it was on here a few months ago!!
Like the cop in south park - "Move along, nothing to see here..."
:)
N
Try the Magic of Linux - A GREAT Development Tool
6 07-1.shtml
http://www.ecommercetimes.com/news/articles/990
www.magic-sw.com
--
2. JBuilder, etc. already outsourced to Oracle (renamed to JDeveloper)
Not really. JBuilder has not been outsourced at all. JBuilder is developed 100% at Inprise/Borland, Oracle had a licence for it and they renamed it in part of their tools but there's no JBuilder developement in Oracle except the extensions that they have made for integrating their database.
I don't think that Inprise/Borland has the resources to port Delphi/C++Builder to Linux. They might try to make something run with Wine.
a Delphi R&D Engineer, '97-'99
Since a few people out there think that Windows 2000 will be 64 bit, I've searched, and found these links. NT4 is 64-bit.. mostly. win98 is not. Hopefully this will clear up the confusion....
Next Consumer Windows to be 98 Derivative Feb, 1999
NT5 officially 'Windows 2000' Oct, 1998
--
Yes, I read the release differently.
What the release doesn't say is more important than what it does say.
Inprise has just gotten a HUGE cash infustion from M$. It would be very foolish of Inprise to do something against the best interests of a 10% stakeholder who has also just paid 100mil to settle patent and legal issues.
Inprise will shift focus to pursuits that more immediately benefit it's benefactor.
Even though this was not STATED in the press release, it's implicit in the nature of the arrangement. I give you money therefore you have to be nice to me - it's as old as time.
What the press release DID say what that any speculation about Inprise performing well in the future were just that - speculatory. This might mean that M$ just might hamstring Inprise to make it less of a competitor.
The deal is a payoff. "Here's 5 bucks kid, don't bother me."
-- What you do today will cost you a day of your life.
Instead you get to worry about the unweidly and horribly unstable BDE, code bloat that makes Microsoft envious, and a language that is about as well thought out as Wordperfect for Linux.
Delphi is a great product, but don't start fooling yourself in a bid to pat yourself on the back.
It's practically a daily occurrence that someone who owns a *potentially* lucrative business "sells out" - ie, sells the entire business to (perhaps) the competition - the owner then retires a (possibly multi) millionaire at 30, set for life ... he/she doesn't care if it means no competition in that arena. The buyer is happy because there is less competition and they've acquired assets.
Perhaps this is Inprise gearing up for a potential sale, rather than go under. But then again I'm a programmer, not an economist, so perhaps I'm full of BS. But I don't see that Inprise would've done this if their numbers hadn't shown that they were heading for trouble with their current strategy. Perhaps they've just decided to back out of the IDE market, much like IBM backed out of the OS market. Delphi will still exist, officially, but no roadmap.
I see this "partnership" as a bad thing. I see it as the end of real competition in development platforms on Windows. I know MFC well enough to know that it's a fscking hideously godawful "standard", that I wouldn't want my worst enemy to have to program with. MS Visual C++, however, happens to be a great product - but without decent competition it WILL stagnate, and prices WILL go up.
On the bright side, stagnation in development environments on Windows can only make developers more keen to check out Linux.
Another one bites the dust. The idea is to have one and only one company developing software for Windows. Can you guess who?
Inprise/Borland has been a sinking ship for a while. They have had very bad management for the last couple of years. Furthermore, there is no research going on. The best compiler person left for Microsoft last year. The rest of the crew (3 people) is maintaining the current product. I seriously doubt that the two people who work on something Linux will ever succeed. I also have my doubts about "Primetime" the all Java environment.
a Delphi R&D Engineer '97-'99
"Anyone who stands out in the middle of a road looks like roadkill to me." --Linus
You might not have noticed, but the Justice Department is pretty focused on the issues in the case at hand. They're not Ken Starr, so they can't go on fishing expeditions at the spur of the moment.
It doesn't really matter much what they think, actually, because they're just a bunch of lawyers, like the rest of Washington.
Now the crybabies out for blood against Microsoft are surely gonna squeal over this one, but did we ever expect different from poor losers?
If Microsoft needs to pump cash into their competitors to keep them alive, that says more about the feebleness of their competitors than anything else. I mean, really.
You'll squeal in fury if they do. You'll squeal in fury if they don't.
They [MS] were found guilty back in 1994
No, they weren't. They voluntarily agreed to the consent decree to make the case go away (that's why it's called a "consent" decree). Justice agreed to the decree because they knew they didn't have a case (or thought they couldn't get a better deal). MS didn't admit to doing anything wrong in that consent decree, it's very specific about this.
I notice that the agreements listed in the press release don't include dumping Visibroker. Last time M$ took an interest in a CORBA vendor (ICL) they divested of their ORB pretty damn quick!
DAIS is now owned by Peerlogic , and I wonder how long until Visigenic gets to float free of Inprise (minus is its [OJ]DBC products of course).
Keith Duddy : dud at dstc.edu.au : http://www.dstc.edu.au/AU/staff/dud
Obviously, most of you slashdotters have done any real Windows programming.
Inprise's tools are CRAP internally and externally as compared to Microsoft's.
Check the benchmarks. Microsoft makes damn fine development tools.
I too am a Delphi developer. Rumor has it that an alpha version of Delphi is being run in Linux. Don't hold your breath though. They dropped their promise to have Delphi generate Java byte code.
This is MS's attempt trying to replace CORBA with COM/COM+/DCOM/YourCOM/MyCOM/EveryoneHasaCOMCOM
No, it's not. This is MS paying, better late than never, for using Inprise patented technology. The 10% buy of shares is common practice in this kind of settlements. Look at the Apple case, MS bought $150 Million in shares. In this case they pay $100 million in cash and $25 million in shares. I know that there is a lot of emotiional stress in this kind of things but this is actually excellent news for Inprise given that they have now a vast amount of cash for the Windows and Linux projects.
Isn't it strange that MS is paying Imprise $100 million for some unheard of patent and licensing concerns? Wouldn't it be natural for a company like Imprise to PAY Micros~1 for using its 'technologies'? This sounds like Micros~1 is buying its way in here, just like they are buying Windows CE into the cable/settop market. There is no market/consumer/developer making the choice here. How can this be legal?
When they lose the current DOJ vs MS case will they be forced to divest in all these things they used the illegal profits on?
"Anyone who stands out in the middle of a road looks like roadkill to me." --Linus
R10000 and R12000 are 64-bit, too. the R12000 outperforms the fastest available UltraSparc by a wide margin. the R14000 will be available next year.
I just got a letter from them that said they were borland again...
This poster got it right. It's Microsoft that got screwed by Real Networks. From what I hear from my MS insider friends, this former MS exec that runs RN got fired from MS for being behind most of the things that got MS a bad name. And now he's continuing his evil tactics with Real.
Why ? Please read the announcement. MS agreed to give Inprise $100 million as a settlement for patent issues and buy $25 million in shares. /.
The article also underlines that Inprise will have access to the Windows technology, there is no mention of MS controlling or obtaining anything from Inprise.
This is not going to change Inprise except that is giving them more money and resources to keep working on their projects. Last week they showed Linux versions of JBuilder and C++ compiler at the shareholder meeting. Should I say more ? I'm actually suprised that that news was all over the Net except on
O.k., I'll name Apple. They've been doing great since MS invested in them. Next piece of anti-MS FUD you need refuting?
JBuilder2, and it's new 3.0 version, are the slickest Java development environments I've seen for the PC.
The Solaris JBuilder is supposed to be pure Java itself, and therefore easily portable to other machines and OSes (read Linux)..
Well, it was a nice idea. I guess so thought Microsoft. So long Borland - it's been a pleasure.
-- What you do today will cost you a day of your life.
Don't worry, that's just the sound of my jaw bouncing off the floor... I would have bet and lost good money that this kind of a thing would NEVER happen.
I used Borland tools for years, and always found them superior to the M$ tools (with the possible exception of Dbase V versus Access 97). I was lucky enough to NOT be stuck in MFC land, although OWL (the Borland C++ Object Window's Library) wasn't much more readable. Apparently (with the demise of Rogue Wave's zApp library, Symantec, and even Sybase Power++ defaulting to the MFC, and now Borland) Microsoft has really gained a near monopoly for Windows- oriented, commercially available C++ development platforms. Not good news, in my book.
Glad to see that M$ is also having to ante up for all of their patent infringements to Borland over the years -- $100 million more than the $25 million stock price.
But I do hate to see M$ win. Makes you kinda glad that MetroWerks is porting to Linux, and that Cygnus is gaining a foothold in WinXX land, doesn't it?
...Open Source isn't the only answer -- but it's almost always a better value than the alternatives...
I am a Delphi developer and keep an eye on the discussions in the Inprise (Borland) newsgroups. Inprise technical employees are saying that this will not impead their development of Linux development tools. They have Interbase for Linux and are working on a JBuilder for Linux along with a few more Linux projects. I don't think that M$ will be forcing anyone at Inprise as long as the DOJ has them under the microscope.
READ THE NEWS RELEASE - you people just don't get it. there is nothing in this deal that would prevent Inprise (err..Borland) from developing for Linux
Here's my read on it. Only a feeling, zero fact here, folks.
Microsoft is having a hell of a time getting their 64-bit version of Windows to work. Originally, this was called W2K, and would be based on the NT codebase. That didn't work, but I still think they're trying. Simply put, their current offerings suck, and they know it. W2K was supposed to address "system instability" problems. I think they've arrived at the conclusion that their code/compilers can't cut it, and now they're going for outside help. It's a huge undertaking. I don't think Microsoft, even being the world's biggest software outfit, can handle it.
They need Borland's expertise to get 64-bit Windows off the ground.
--
Well...as a stockholder of Inprise(Borland) I hate to say it...but I AM F**KING THRILLED... Inprise was going down in a major way. They still make good tools, but they are a mere shell of what they used to be.
The stock is up 26% already today...wow...I can't believe that I'm alinged with the enemy...I knew sombody would step in but I always kinda thought it would be IBM...or maybe Oracle...not the evil empire MS...The timing was right...sounds like a good deal for both sides.
Now if you'll excuse me, I'm going to go take a shower...I feel sorta dirty all of a sudden...:)
Borland has made some excellent development tools in that past. This is definitely a smart move on Microsoft's part.
On the other hand, I don't think this will benefit Inprise (Borland) much more than the fact that they are getting $125 big ones out of it.
By the way, I thought that C++ Builder 3 already had MFC included with it. I realy hope that they don't scrap VCL for MFC. That would be a huge step backwards.
I guess I'll have to wait until hell freezes over before I see the C++ builder GUI for Linux now.
Inprise already announced that JBuilder 3 will be ported to Solaris and Linux (the Linux part being released sometime late 99). This announcement has no effect on their plans to support JBuilder3 on Solaris and Linux.
If you read the release differently - please explain how you feel this deal will cause Inprise to stop supporting other platforms.
Yes, this time it's Microsoft who pay, but I think software patents are even worse than Microsoft.
You better grab a copy of IBM's VisualAge for Java before you get screwed with Delphi. Delphi is a dead end road!
a Delphi R&D engineer '97-'99
Except that Apple still includes Netscape on the Mac OS CDs and MRJ (Mac Java) supports Sun's standards, but not MS' (apparently, the MS team didn't communicate with the MRJ team during the releases of MRJ 2.0 and 2.1. 2.2 might have some support for extensions to the security model which are MS-only, but that's the only sop to MS-Java.).
MS invested in Apple because Apple caught MS stealing its patents. Apple threatened to sue, MS threatened to announce that they were cancelling all Mac development, and the two companies negotiated. Quicktime should figure in somewhere in this story, but I'm just giving a high-level summation.
-jon
Remember Amalek.
Ehm, if MS didn't throw some money to Inprise, they would be DEAD in a year. So, if now you'll get Jbuilder or other development tools from Inprise on Linux, you'll have to thank mr Bill.
Amazing, eh?
Notice how the things that Borland must do are outlined specifically? Notice how the things that Microsoft must do are left intentionally ambiguous?
Also, I got tired of Microsoft development environments and went to Delphi. I loved it. Now, it looks like even that wont work anymore.
Thank God for Linux.
Codifex Maximus ~ In search of... a shorter sig.
The next major rev of Delphi was supposed to be a Windows development tool that could generate executables for AS/400's and *nix. It would be worth the $125 megabucks to MS just to get that threat removed.
The release says preferred stock. That stuff generally has to get its dividends, ie Inprise must generate cash to pay MS dividends on the stock or they will be roadkill. From the statements available on-line, it looks like they are generating very little cash, so they have to hope that this deal will lead to an increase in revenues to improve their cash flow.
When was the last time a company raised its revenues by entering a joint licensing agreement with M$? This is the corporate equivalent of the white flag and the welcome mat.
Translation: Microsoft just bought control over Inprise without actually owning it.
Key components of the arrangement include Inprise's commitment to do the following:
Translation: This how Microsoft plans to remove the competitive edge from Borland C++:
Microsoft also paid Inprise $100 million for the rights to use Inprise-patented technology in Microsoft products and to settle a number of long-standing patent and technology licensing issues.
Translation: Yeah so we ripped you off and stole your top employees. Water under the bridge. Here's some money. Now tell your lawyers to take a hike.
"Microsoft is pleased to enter into this alliance with Inprise", said Paul Maritz,
Kind of creepy how a huge corporation is described as feeling "pleased" by this arrangement. "Microsoft is pleased by your obedience. There will no swarms of locusts devouring your crops this year. All hail Mircosoft!"
About Microsoft Founded in 1975, Microsoft is the worldwide leader in software...
I'm sure the justice department is gonna love this :P
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK----- Version: 3.12 GIT d? s: a-- C++++ UL++++ P++ L+++ E- W++ N o-- K- w--- O- M+ V PS+ P
I would love to get Delphi for Linux, but I have been playing with this pascal compiler for a while. It's pretty good, and they are working on Delphi compatibility. It's already very TP compatible.
free pascal
Quicker
You might take what I say with a grain of salt--I work for a different division of the company, and I don't see very much of what's happening over in the Borland.com division (which appears to be the part of the company most affected by this deal). I guess we'll all have to stay tuned.
Any talk of porting Delphi or C++ Builder? This would be a much be bigger challenge than JBuilder or Interbase. Interbase is mostly non-gui (and perhaps it had already been ported to other Unix platforms before Linux???). JBuilder would require no porting if it were written in pure Java to begin with, and if Java were truly platform independent.
Stephen Molitor steve_molitor@yahoo.com
Windows 2000 itself isn't 64 bit. Never was supposed to be right off the bat.
Why push development for a 64-bit architecture right now, when Alpha is the only one, and Merced is over a year away???
I don't think you have a clue what you're talking about.
They bought STOCK!! Ok... They satisfy the dudes that have the STOCK!! If MS says --- hey make don't develop so much Linux stuff -- focus on our stuff because we've got stock -- what do you think they'll do??
All,
C++ Builder, JBuilder and Delphi are **NOT** going to go away - reasons:
1. Core products for Inprise - whats really left?
2. JBuilder, etc. already outsourced to Oracle (renamed to JDeveloper)
3. MS *NEEDS* some competition - the DOJ is whupping its ass.
4. The agreement makes no mention of any product "consolidations"
5. MS doesn't have a credible Java strategy - MSJ++ is virtually sidelined at the moment.
As for the Inprise products on Linux, well time will tell. If MS is seen to be restricting consumer choice, they'll catch major flak. No, I suspect that the reason why Inprise is not releasing their products on Linux is that they have their hands full. Anyway their record for multiplatform client tools is rather spotty - anyone remember Borland C++ for OS/2 - an orphaned product.
As for Visigenics, a very good product that is included in a number of other products (Oracle 8i Enterprise for one) and is key to Inprise's distributed application aspirations out from the MS stranglehold. Actually it may be that MS wants Visigenics playing nicely on Win2k, bridging to COM+ and all that good stuff.
No, to me, its certainly not clear that Inprise is done for. Like Apple, I think that Inprise can bounce back and eventually challenge MS in the tools arena (remember 1991/2 before MSVC++ and VB, they were king)
Bruce.
This seems to me like the "investment" M$ made in Apple: keeping a "competitor" alive so they can defend themselves more easily against antitrust complaints. If Inprise sinks beneath the waves, then M$ suddenly has no real competition in several categories, and DoJ gets more interested...
--
Disinfect the GNU General Public Virus!
Try these on for size:
IBM
Central Point
He doesn't know what he's talking about? I'm afraid you're being quite rude, and wrong yourself. Intel (or shall we call them Wintel) has a 64 bit mainstream plan that was announced at least a year ago. I'm sure Windoze'64bit is a needed ingredient in this.
Might want to try quotes ;-)
In the case of Borland, they probably want support for their Java "extensions" in JBuilder, plus more commitment by Borland to COM and MFC.
But despite some forays onto other platforms, Borland seemed largely a Windows company anyway. It's a shame because some of their products would have been ideal for a cross-platform strategy.
I wonder whether these "strategic investments" shouldn't be curtailed. While an investment does not mean the same thing as full ownership, it does guarantee a "seat at the table" and significant influence. It may also be easier to get past antitrust regulators for now.
Microsoft has sufficiently deep pockets to make those kinds of investments in just about any company that matters, and that bodes ill for any kind of real competition.
Don't forget the UltraSparc, that's a good solid 64 bit chip. Also, if I'm not mistaken, most of the MIPS chips, including the R4400 and R8000 are 64 bit. There's lots of good quality, high performance 64 bit architectures out there that aren't vapour like Merced.
As for the original poster, I can think of a lot of better places for Microsoft to get people with experience on 64 bit architectures. They're nibbling at Inprise because they want to level the alternative compilers market for Windows. It's an attempt to destroy competition even further, plain and simple.
----
Open mind, insert foot.
Perhaps we are witnessing the exile of opposition groups to Microsoft owned "reservations". Bill Gates gets 95% of the land outright and everbody else gets 5% and pays rent to Bill. Is this the new world order?
I suspect we may still see Linux ports of Inprise software in the future. Microsoft telling Inprise not to touch Linux would be insane and against shareholder's interests. I mean, it's one thing to tell users they should use this or that OS, but it's another to prove it's not worth the money invested in a particular platform. And so far, it is becoming as short-sighted to ignore Linux development than it is to ignore Win32 platforms.
Didn't Inprise revert their name to Borland?
"There is no surer way to ruin a good discussion than to contaminate it with the facts."
We are a purely Delphi shop. No worrying about distributing different DLL's with every version like Visual Basic. No problems connecting to our data on the AS/400 systems. No problems, it just worked.
I bet we can kiss Delphi goodbye to be 'replaced' with some bastardization of visual basic.
Bleh...