×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

243 comments

woo (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 years ago | (#12324640)

woo hoo!

First post! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 years ago | (#12324642)

FP! That is all!

the answer... (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 years ago | (#12324649)

is no. Borland tools sux.

"Is the future of enterprise IDE open?"

Delphi too, please (5, Insightful)

Aggrajag (716041) | about 9 years ago | (#12324650)

Just opensource Delphi as well. I just love Pascal as a programming language.

Mod parent Upwards (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 years ago | (#12324707)

Ok , who gave the moron mod points.
flamebait no, Bad moderation yes .This is on the uprise . looks like the trolls are on the warpath

Re:Delphi too, please (2, Interesting)

F1re (249002) | about 9 years ago | (#12324716)

What about Lazarus [freepascal.org] ?

Re:Delphi too, please (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 years ago | (#12324749)

lazarus makes horribly large binaries, the simplest gui hello world is 1 meg or so

Re:Delphi too, please (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 years ago | (#12324943)

Lazarus isn't ready yet for the masses, and I believe it won't be for another year or so; I regularly download and test it since two years, then I delete it because it simply still isn't there.
It looks promising but it's still buggy as hell. Last time I tried it, less than 3 months ago, it crashed X every time I opened twice in a row a configuration dialog. This made Lazarus unusable for me.

Re:Delphi too, please (1, Troll)

fm6 (162816) | about 9 years ago | (#12325004)

Lazarus is just an OS alternative to the Delphi libraries. If you add Open Pascal, you do have an alternative for hacking out Delphi code. But without an OS equivalent of the Delphi IDE [about.com] , your missing the one component everybody buys Delphi to use.

I can't see the usual set of motley OS volunteers creating and maintaining an alternative to Delphi. I used to help write the Delphi API documentation, and I can't begin the convey what a massive effort it is just to maintain that product. Not something you can do without the backing of somebody with deep pockets. If Borland chooses to get behind an OS version of Delphi (as they now have with JBuilder) it might be a different matter. Though it's worth noting that their previous attempt to open source a produce (Interbase) did not go well. Frankly, I don't think Borland's notoriously factious corporate culture makes them a good partner in an OS project.

Re:Delphi too, please (1)

F1re (249002) | about 9 years ago | (#12325079)

LCL is the alternative to the Delphi VCL libaries. Lazarus IS the alternative IDE to the delphi IDE. Free Pascal is the compiler.


It's coming along nicely. You should grab a nightly build and have a look.


Documentation is a big problem though, as with most os projects.

Re:Delphi too, please (1)

tomhudson (43916) | about 9 years ago | (#12325134)

I used to help write the Delphi API documentation,
2 thick volumes, just for the class libraries. Nice stuff. Fairly complete, too. I always liked (old) Borlands' documentation. The "documentation-only-on-a-cd" trend devalues a product.

Re:Delphi too, please (1, Insightful)

killjoe (766577) | about 9 years ago | (#12325148)

Delphi/Object pascal does need some updating though. They really need something to make sure an application you wrote with delphi can be easily compiled by somebody else. Maybe something like ant or a way to specify dependencies via relative paths or something.

Right now if you built a non trivial delphi app and sent me the code I would have to install every single component you used (the same versions in most cases) and place them in the exact same directory structure as you in order to compile your code.

Re:Delphi too, please (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 years ago | (#12324951)

I just love Pascal

Grow up please ! :)

Re:Delphi too, please (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 years ago | (#12325043)

We don't need the full Delphi. Even opening the VCL alone would give us a very well designed Object Model. Writing stubs to remap calls to xlib, glib, whatever would be a nightmare but the end result could pay. The less we are forced to use GTK, the better Linux will become.

BTW, the VCL library is the same used also on Borland's C++ Builder which is -surprise- a C++ IDE, so a Pascal compiler could be used, albeit not required.

Open? I sure hope so.... (4, Insightful)

ZephyrXero (750822) | about 9 years ago | (#12324652)

I think the future of all software is going to be more and more open ;) Companies are starting to learn that most components of their programs can be released in a free/open-source format (especially the file format) and then you can sell a more complex version with the real things that give your product value added on top of that.

Re:Open? I sure hope so.... (4, Interesting)

nametaken (610866) | about 9 years ago | (#12324789)

most components of their programs can be released in a free/open-source format (especially the file format) and then you can sell a more complex version with the real things

I think you're right. But something frightens me about companies using open source as a loss leader. It makes me think they're missing the point.

But, who's to complain. If its something or nothing, I'll take something. :)

Re:Open? I sure hope so.... (1)

ZephyrXero (750822) | about 9 years ago | (#12324923)

Agreed. A good example of what I'm getting at is video games. For years companies have made a big deal about who has the best graphics and what engine they use, but these days they're all heading towards the same major plateau. It would make more sense for everyone to work together one the graphics engines and everything and just focus on what really makes your game "your game". The levels, the characters, the art, the gameplay, the story, the music...that's what makes your game worth anything. It's a perfect time for developers to move towards this model and it would drop rising production costs back to something smaller companies could handle again. And the same concept could go for just about any software. Services aren't the only way to make money off open source ;)

Re:Open? I sure hope so.... (1)

Taladar (717494) | about 9 years ago | (#12325151)

Game Engines in the same way as e.g. Movie Players or Ebook Readers would be a good thing. The Companies would create the content but not the engine and sell that. I imagine we would see more and better (read: more depth) games that way.

Re:Open? I sure hope so.... (1)

saider (177166) | about 9 years ago | (#12325186)

But something frightens me about companies using open source as a loss leader. It makes me think they're missing the point.

Why is this frightening? This is common sense. If people are willing to develop a comparable product for free, why pay someone? Put that person onto a more profitable venture (add-ons, extra tools, support, etc).

Open? I sure hope so....MAYA! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 years ago | (#12324805)

"Companies are starting to learn that most components of their programs can be released in a free/open-source format (especially the file format) and then you can sell a more complex version with the real things that give your product value added on top of that."

Open Source MAYA!

Java (4, Insightful)

Mark_MF-WN (678030) | about 9 years ago | (#12325103)

I think you see this more with some languages than others. Interpreted and VM languages, like Java, Perl, and Python, have a tendency to be extremely open. I believe this stems at least partly from the difficulty of concealing the sources of such languages -- even when compiled to a byte code of some kind, applications written in them still tend to be quite easy to disassemble. Compare that to C++, which is difficult to disassemble; it's much easier to conceal source.

As a result, languages like Perl, Python, and Java have a strong tradition of OSS licensing, and C/C++ less so.

That's just my impression of the industry though from my own interaction with the Python, C++, and Java communities; don't take this as some attempt to be the moses of language-politics. :)

Which one is better? (3, Interesting)

liquidpele (663430) | about 9 years ago | (#12324662)

Can anyone provide a good explaination as to which they prefere, Eclipse or Borland?
Are they more or less clones of one another, or do real differences exist?

Re:Which one is better? (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 years ago | (#12324785)

I've used JBuilder since version 1.0 and i've recently started using Eclipse. The main difference between the two is the learning curve. It's really easy to create a web/j2ee/swing application in JBuilder, while it is a lot less easy to get going with Eclipse. Plain Eclipse is not really suited for real development: you need several other plugins (such as myeclipseide.com) for it to be useful.

The main reason for Borland to shift the focus to Eclipse is that it takes a *lot* of work to develop/maintain the basic functionality of an IDE. Look at CVS integration for example. It comes "free" with Eclipse, and is way better than what JBuilder offers. Eclipse offers a free base platform on which Borland can create & market proprietary plugins for enterprise development (this is what IBM does and what Oracle is moving to). It'll be interesting to see how commercial plugins will compete with OSS ones.

Which one is better?-Free or free? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 years ago | (#12324894)

"It'll be interesting to see how commercial plugins will compete with OSS ones."

Once we've copied them...not well.

eclipse is still the best windows cvs software (4, Interesting)

krunk4ever (856261) | about 9 years ago | (#12325067)

Look at CVS integration for example. It comes "free" with Eclipse, and is way better than what JBuilder offers.

i've personally tried a round of window cvs software include WinCvs [wincvs.org] and TurtoiseCVS [tortoisecvs.org] and I've gotta say both were incomparable to Eclipse. I don't know why there hasn't been a easier CVS software, or maybe it's because I'm not looking hard enough. That said, even if I'm building software on Visual Studio or another IDE, I would still use Eclipse to refresh the directory and synchronize with the repository.

If anyone knows of any better free CVS software out there, I'm all ears!

Re:eclipse is still the best windows cvs software (3, Informative)

Dan-DAFC (545776) | about 9 years ago | (#12325091)

Try SmartCVS [smartcvs.com] , it's the best CVS client I've used by some distance.

Re:eclipse is still the best windows cvs software (1)

krunk4ever (856261) | about 9 years ago | (#12325194)

interesting! thanks! stupid google. returning wincvs and turtoisecvs as the most popular. cant rely on them anymore. hehe.

looking at the screenshots, it is exactly what i want a cvs software to do.

Re:Which one is better? (2, Informative)

gaygeek (843167) | about 9 years ago | (#12324942)

IntelliJ IDEA is better than either. I have used JBuilder extensively at work and although Borland tries to add features that other IDEs have (refactoring tools, web module, code folding), they just don't get it right. For example, there is no way to fold all methods in class with a keystroke, or to specify rule for what should be folded by default. The refactoring tools don't work in JBuilder unless the classes compile--no such annoying restrictions exist in IntelliJ. Web module support in JBuilder is awkward and cannot be used easily with a tool they don't specifically support like JRun, where IntelliJ has generic server support. I haven't used Eclipse enough to compare.

Re:Which one is better? (4, Informative)

varag (714360) | about 9 years ago | (#12324962)

In my job, we used JBuilder up to (and including) JBuilder X. However, the enterprise version of JBuilder is prohibitively expensive. We evaluated Eclipse and found that adding the plugins for JBOSS IDE and XDoclet gave us enough functionality to enable us to switch for the majority of our development work. However, we still keep a copy of JBuilder X for Swing development, which (obviously) is not very good in Eclipse.

One of the intriguing aspects of Eclipse is the rich client platform, which has the potential of becoming a cornerstone of client development for enterprise systems.

Re:Which one is better? (2, Informative)

omicronish (750174) | about 9 years ago | (#12324968)

Can anyone provide a good explaination as to which they prefere, Eclipse or Borland? Are they more or less clones of one another, or do real differences exist?

I've used both for a research project. Bottom-line: JBuilder is absolutely terrible, Eclipse is great. I'm actually a C#/Visual Studio guy, so I can make comparisons with that as well :)

What makes JBuilder so terrible is its non-native GUI. The thing just looks bad with its GUI that's almost Win32, but not quite. Ctrl+Tab doesn't switch between code panes as you would expect in any Windows app; instead it uselessly switches between panes such as Project and Structure. If you Alt+Tab back into the app, it goes into menu mode so as soon as you start typing it executes menu commands. But by far the absolute worse was its ignorance of Windows' ClearType setting for font smoothing. I have a laptop running at high resolution, and code in JBuilder looked absolutely harsh to my eyes. It was bad enough that I started typing Java code in J# for a while just to get ClearType. There are other GUI differences but I'm a horribly nit-picky person when it comes to UI, so they probably won't bother normal people (menus are too wide, menu selections are rendered in an odd manner, etc.)

Eclipse, in comparison, doesn't have these problems. The UI works fine, none of the weirdass UI quirks of JBuilder, and it even respects my font smoothing settings. It also looks very nice, and there are a ton of configuration options. In fact, there are a bit too many, or they're organized in a slightly messy fashion (I recall seeing font color configuration in 3 different places). But it's not bad if you get used to it, so it's probably just that I'm unfamiliar with Eclipse. One thing I really like is its Software Update option. Turns out Eclipse doesn't come with a visual designer for Java, but you can install one pretty easily from inside Eclipse. Eclipse also has refactoring capabilities.

Both JBuilder and Eclipse feel slightly sluggish and can take quite a while to start in comparison to Visual Studio. (I know someone's going to say Eclipse is fast for them. I don't care what you say; it feels slower than VS to me). VS 2002/2003 lack refactoring capabilities for any of the languages it supports, but 2005 will have refactoring for the .NET ones. I think Eclipse might be more configurable than VS in terms of code formatting, but I'm not entirely sure. The rest of the differences that matter to me deal with the languages (Java/C#), which shows how nice both GUI's are: for the most part they don't get in my way, which lets me concentrate on coding.

To summarize, go with Eclipse if you're doing Java development. Avoid JBuilder at all costs, although I'm curious if anyone else has had the same experiences as me?

Re:Which one is better? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 years ago | (#12325155)

Agreed. JBuilder is the "official" IDE for my Java programming class and it absolutely sucks balls. Almost everything about it is counter-intuitive.

I use VS.Net in my day job and it really is that rare case of a Microsoft product that is really good. OK, its not perfect but at least I can get work done on it unlike JBuilder where I spend more time arguing with the IDE than I do coding.

Re:Which one is better? (1)

killjoe (766577) | about 9 years ago | (#12325193)

What's interesting is that Eclipse refactoring, debugging etc are language independent. There are plug ins for ruby, php, python etc that are all pretty nice.

It's a nice platform that you can use to code virtually any language.

Free poop! (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 years ago | (#12324663)

One free turd deserves another.

Take one crappy IDE and join it with another and it will somehow be better!

Too earlt to tell (5, Insightful)

jvv62 (236967) | about 9 years ago | (#12324671)

Seems to me the article doesn't really say anything. Thus it is too early to have a decent discussion of what Borland is doing. On the other hand it is nice to see an OSS product making headway against a proprietary product. I liked JBuilder, and I think there are some features to Jbuilder that would be nice additions to Eclipse. Also the GUI seemed a little more solid in JBuilder than in Eclipse.

Re:Too earlt to tell (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 years ago | (#12324714)

I used JBuilder couple of years ago.. before the Eclipse's reign.... During that time... JBuilder is based on Swing... (may be they are still swing based..) as compared to Eclipse's SWT.. I feel Eclipse is better than JBuilder in this sense.. if you compare, just the IDE (not the J2EE and other wizbang stuff).

I feel they would be releasing just the base IDE for J2SE dev and they will keep J2EE pieces to their hearts.. like IBM WebSphere App Developer.

Is the future of enterprise IDE open? (5, Insightful)

woah (781250) | about 9 years ago | (#12324681)

Not really, given that Microsoft would never do this with Visual Studio.

Re:Is the future of enterprise IDE open? (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 years ago | (#12324694)

Thank god. Can you imagine a world with even more VS programmers? *shudder*

Re:Is the future of enterprise IDE open? (1)

superpulpsicle (533373) | about 9 years ago | (#12324708)

Here, take this FREE visual studio 2005 Extreme Edition with FREE donuts... write all the programs you want. You just need to pay $300 for windows 2003 to compile it.

Re:Is the future of enterprise IDE open? (3, Interesting)

omicronish (750174) | about 9 years ago | (#12324856)

Here, take this FREE visual studio 2005 Extreme Edition with FREE donuts... write all the programs you want. You just need to pay $300 for windows 2003 to compile it.

You're closer than you think :) The Visual Studio 2005 Express edition betas (each geared toward a language such as C++, C#, VB.NET) are freely available [microsoft.com] at the moment, and final pricing has been set to $50 for each express edition [microsoft.com] , which is virtually free compared to the prices of past editions of VS.

Of course you can always go completely free (in terms of IDE price) with SharpDevelop or notepad, but VS is quite nice, especially at that price.

Re:Is the future of enterprise IDE open? (1)

kabz (770151) | about 9 years ago | (#12324956)

You're closer than you think :) The Visual Studio 2005 Express edition betas (each geared toward a language such as C++, C#, VB.NET) are freely available at the moment, and final pricing has been set to $50 for each express edition, which is virtually free compared to the prices of past editions of VS.

Yes, but will they run on Linux ?

I thought not.

Seriously, can anyone reccomend a decent IDE that runs at a decent speed on Linux. Maybe Eclipse has improved, but the last time I tried it, the one second delay bring characters up to the screen kinda put me off.

I have been in the situation of pretty much only having vi to edit largish cpp files on Linux, which is like only having a chisel to clean your contact lenses. I HATE VI !!!!!!

One of the hardest parts of running Linux for me is having to give up Excel and MSDEV. Boo hoo :-((

Re:Is the future of enterprise IDE open? (2, Informative)

eviltypeguy (521224) | about 9 years ago | (#12325076)

If you don't mind using KDE stuff there's kdevelop, which is pretty nice.

If you're of the GTK persusasion, Anjuta's pretty decent too.

I must agree though, Visual Studio is the best that I've seen when it comes to editing source in an IDE still...

Re:Is the future of enterprise IDE open? (1)

Taladar (717494) | about 9 years ago | (#12325191)

If you hate vi you might want to try emacs. It can do almost everything any modern GUI can and works with all languages known to mankind. Lots of information about it is available here [emacswiki.org] . Be warned however that it might require some editing of config files to put together the perfect feature-set for your needs.

Re:Is the future of enterprise IDE open? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 years ago | (#12325006)

The question still stands... Is the future of the enterprise IDE something other than Visual Studio.

I think so.

Already today, our company's bigger C# apps are developed in Emacs. Visual Studio is a nice way of clicking and dragging UIs together, but doesn't lend itself to enterprise needs (like checking in to Perforce, etc).

Response (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 years ago | (#12324690)

Eclipse community: Thanks for the crappy code but we actually already have an IDE, thanks.

What do you want to open source today? (1)

khujifig (875862) | about 9 years ago | (#12324698)

Anything from MS people would like to see open sourced?

(wishful thinking, I know)

Re:What do you want to open source today? (1)

jarich (733129) | about 9 years ago | (#12324732)

Anything from MS people would like to see open sourced?

The odds are slim to none, but since you asked...

If MS open sourced a "basic" version of Windows, they could easily achieve complete world OS dominance. The free version of linux rational would appear to evaporate and MS would continue to make a killing for years to come on their OS add-ons, office suite and development tools.

Just a thought... I personally prefer linux, but I can see it playing out that way.

Re:What do you want to open source today? (4, Insightful)

rebug (520669) | about 9 years ago | (#12324782)

To most people, Windows already is free. It's a non-optional compoent of their new Dell, not an add on. Non-geeks never upgrade their OS, so Windows' cost is never an issue.

Re:What do you want to open source today? (1)

jarich (733129) | about 9 years ago | (#12324809)

To most people, Windows already is free

True... I was thinking more of emerging markets, were cost matters a great deal.

Re:What do you want to open source today? (1)

tomhudson (43916) | about 9 years ago | (#12325168)

To most people, Windows already is free

True... I was thinking more of emerging markets, were cost matters a great deal.

I think they already have that covered - you can buy a copy for the local equivalent of a buck or two in any "emerging market".

Re:What do you want to open source today? (2, Insightful)

linguae (763922) | about 9 years ago | (#12324841)

There is a huge difference between free as in "comes with my Dell" and free as in speech (open source), though. The grandparent post was referring to open-source Windows, not "free" Windows.

Re:What do you want to open source today? (1)

FidelCatsro (861135) | about 9 years ago | (#12324794)

Either that hapens or more likely ,
linux has an open source version of windows code to look at and linux becomes 100% binary compatible with windows.
The free windows gets add'd too by the FOSS community and becomes on par with the pay version quickly .
Regular windows is now uneeded and MS has to change its bussiness methods as it cant sell windows anymore.

Re:What do you want to open source today? (2, Interesting)

cafard (666342) | about 9 years ago | (#12324801)

Easy one. I'll pick DirectX. Games easily ported through platforms... *dreams*

Now, such a move would be a commercial suicide for them, as it would definitely cut the last major interest of the Windows platform as a home desktop. I won't hold my breath :).

Re:What do you want to open source today? (2, Interesting)

linguae (763922) | about 9 years ago | (#12324810)

Well, it would probably never happen, but I'd like to see the specifications for MS Office's file formats opened. If the file formats were open to everybody, people from various platforms and even applications can finally read and write Word/Excel/PowerPoint/Access files seamlessly. Besides, Microsoft's formats could finally be a standard.

If this ever happens, I don't think that everybody will switch from whatever MS Office version that they're using to OpenOffice or some other alternative immediately; however, MS Office would be to the Office File Formats as Adobe Acrobat is to PDF; Acrobat may be the "official" way to make PDFs and it has many nice features, but one can make tools that makes PDFs.

What do you want to open source today?-Hell! (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 years ago | (#12324821)

"Anything from MS people would like to see open sourced?"

Clippy!

Micrsoft Fish ! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 years ago | (#12325197)

This was a nice piece of software that ran on Windows - it made your computer look like a fish tank.

1) It just worked (tm)

2) It was easy to use

3) It never crashed.

I think Microsoft should go back to their roots and look at quality products like Fish - if there were more fish in their products today the IT world would be a nicer place

What it really means ... (2, Insightful)

tomhudson (43916) | about 9 years ago | (#12324702)

... is that Java and/or Borland, is dying.

Seriously, Borland used to be a cool company, before they became Inprise and forgot what made them great in the first place. And java still suffers from bloat and speed issues.

Re:What it really means ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 years ago | (#12324728)

java suffers most from it's **horrible** look and feel in graphical apps.
The speed issues are usually not a problem unless you are doing something with java that you should have used C for.

Re:What it really means ... (1, Insightful)

tomhudson (43916) | about 9 years ago | (#12324826)

java suffers most from it's **horrible** look and feel in graphical apps.
oh yeah. "horrible" is being too kind by half.
The speed issues are usually not a problem unless you are doing something with java that you should have used C for
In my book, that's pretty much everything. There's got to be a better way.

Re:What it really means ... (2, Interesting)

johnjaydk (584895) | about 9 years ago | (#12324895)

What bloat really means is a gigantic lib of great parts so you don't have to code everything from scratch. The core language is still fairly compact. Of course not as compact as C but nothing else is that small. It's the swiss army knife of programming languages.

Now try to compary Java with C++. I mean REALLY C++. All of it. Now that is a big language even without STL.

Java GUI's can be slow. Swing in particular takes a lot of flak and I've seen some nasty personal (and public) attacks on Swing core people. The truth of the matter is that it all depends on how you program stuff. JBuilder's gui is build on swing and the last time I checked it was rather snappy.

Anyway the fun stuff is on the server-side, there Java has really found a home. There is also a lot of development happening in that area and the best of it open-source. Don't burry Java yet.

Re:What it really means ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 years ago | (#12325062)

Gigantic standard libraries are good. Core language bloat is bad, and that's the direction Java is moving in. Just because C++ has some weaknesses doesn't mean Java is good.

Spend a month using Smalltalk, and then try to go back to Java; it's eye-opening. Java has a few good ideas, like interfaces, as well as wider recognition and support, but to a large extent, it feels like a really, really bad clone of Smalltalk (which, coincidentally, was what sun wanted to sell, but the major smalltalk vendor decided to be a pain about it).

Re:What it really means ... (1)

tomhudson (43916) | about 9 years ago | (#12325110)

I think the big problem was two-fold (and I just KNOW that people are going to go nuts over this, but I'll say it anyway):
  1. Requiring everything to be an object was a VERY dumb idea.
  2. Requiring garbage collection, as opposed to making it a programmer-selected or user-selected toggle, was a mistake
A bit of personal history that maybe others can relate to ... when I first made the switch from c to c++, I went through the same "let's make everything a reusable object" phase. And, like everyone else, I discovered three things:
  1. even "re-usable" objects have to be extended when new problems come up, and it may be more efficient (both in programmer time and code execution time) to make a custom object from scratch
  2. the more classes, the more you have to be careful of the interplay between them, and the more time spent coding so that they all "play nice"
  3. simple is always better
Don't get me wrong - I love coding objects. But, while they're usually part of the solution, they're never the whole solution.

I expect my garbage-collection statement to be regarded as flamebait by some people, but reference-counting garbage collectors are slow by nature. Sure, incrementing or decrementing a reference count is quick - but then, doing the mark-and-sweep over all the existing objects, checking for circular references, etc., is always going to be non-trivial when done in software. The original java was supposed to do this in hardware.

There are other ways. Create an object that keeps track of all memory it allocates, and frees it in its' destructor. Yes, I know this doesn't safely let an object share memory with another object, but in such a case, maybe the other object should just get a copy of the data? Or even stuff it into a struct outside the object, with a tag noting whether the creating object or the receiving object has the right to free the memory?

If it was possible to turn the garbage collector off, and you trusted the code, you'd see java performance go way up.

WRT the STL, I hear you. The STL is not on my preferred list (and I'm being polite here).

Borland finally figures it out... (1)

bogaboga (793279) | about 9 years ago | (#12324731)

Borland finally figures it out, and realizes that old saying "if you cannot beat them, join them". I wonder where we'll be on the software front 10 years down the raod, and hope it's not too late for them. One thing is for sure: The software front will be very interesting. Now, let them release Delphi and Kylix.

Kylix? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 years ago | (#12325145)

Thought it was dead - hadn't been updates in years iirc.

Irritatingness (2, Interesting)

aking137 (266199) | about 9 years ago | (#12324737)

I was unfortunate enough to subjected to Borland JBuilder whilst making the mistake of taking the Introduction to Programming [dur.ac.uk] module at the Computer Science department at Durham University [dur.ac.uk] in late 2000, and it was the worst piece of commercial software I have ever witnessed. It had a minimum recommended spec of 128MB of ram (this was nearly five years ago), or 256MB if you had it, and even then, doing simple stuff like selecting something from the menus could lock your machine up for minutes.

When I joined the course we were just using javac and a text editor of our choice, but a couple of weeks later they had to go and force us to switch to that, and to hand in our work in a JBuilder format. The slowness did make sense; apparently they had just rewritten the whole thing so that it was in Java itself, and this was 4-5 years ago, so of course it was going to be slow.

The software was so completely irritating and impossible to use that I decided it was more than my university career was worth and dropped out of university with nothing at the end of first year - which has now turned out to be one of the best career moves I've ever made. Thanks, Borland! My thoughts go out to any poor sod forced to use it.

Re:Irritatingness (4, Informative)

Monkelectric (546685) | about 9 years ago | (#12324800)

At one time, Borland compilers were among the best in the world. Microsoft wanted to cripple them -- so they offered *all* of their top engineers double their salary at Borland to work for Microsoft. I think something like 40 engineers defected. Borland products have *sucked* since.

I used to be a big fan of C++ Builder but it was completely unusable. In a short (few hundred line) project I ended up finding *SEVERAL* bugs in their stdio and cin/cout implementation.

Anyone want a hardly used copy of C++ Builder? :)

Re:Irritatingness (2, Informative)

justins (80659) | about 9 years ago | (#12324970)

At one time, Borland compilers were among the best in the world. Microsoft wanted to cripple them -- so they offered *all* of their top engineers double their salary at Borland to work for Microsoft. I think something like 40 engineers defected. Borland products have *sucked* since.

I know we are all supposed to hate Microsoft and believe them to be the cause of all that is wrong in the world, but Borland hosed themselves. Does the word "Inprise" mean anything to you?

Borland made some very, very bad decisions which made abandoning ship appealing to the top people. It's not as if Microsoft imposed an utterly retarded management on Borland during the mid-nineties.

Re:Irritatingness (2, Informative)

killjoe (766577) | about 9 years ago | (#12325178)

And yet Borland sued MS for poaching their top talent and MS settled for a a couple of hundred million.

You must admit that it's pretty damned hard to run a company when Bill Gates wants to put you out of business. It's amazing to me Bill failed with borland I guess we can thank the court system for that.

Re:Irritatingness (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 years ago | (#12324909)

If you hated it so much, why didn't you just write your projects in a text editor, test them, and then import it into JBuilder? You can't really blame Borland for becoming a drop out, your lack of thought probably affected other classes too.

Re:Irritatingness (5, Insightful)

Textbook Error (590676) | about 9 years ago | (#12325136)

The software was so completely irritating and impossible to use that I decided it was more than my university career was worth and dropped out of university with nothing at the end of first year

Here's an alternative explanation. You're a bit of a dumbass, and decided to bail from a privilege that most of humanity never gets a chance to experience (higher education).

Anyone who decides to give up that opportunity because of a flaky IDE is a dipshit. Sorry to have to be the one to break it to you.

Re:similar experiences with C++ Builder (1)

g2ek (852570) | about 9 years ago | (#12325137)

my experience with Borlands C++ Builder is similar. i'm forced to use it at work, and it's the crapiest comercial software i've used ever. the editor ends up deleting parts of your code for whatever reason, the gui editor is everything less intuitive, access violations every now and then. most of my co-workers share my opinion that using C++ Builder was the worst decision managment took in the project. if at least it were FOSS we'd have the possibility to fix the most crappy stuff, but as it isn't we can only desesperate or hope to change to an other environment (maybe qt?) in the future

Re:similar experiences with C++ Builder (1)

windex (92715) | about 9 years ago | (#12325189)

If you are using C++ builder enterprise, you have the source to the interface. It's entirely implimented in VCL, and the VCL source is included. If it crashes, it's because an underlying VCL component is broke. :)

Not that I like BCB, but when forced to develop on win32 where cygwin won't do, it's at the top of my list compared to MSVS.

Slightly Off Topic (-1, Flamebait)

ravenspear (756059) | about 9 years ago | (#12324768)

Something I've noticed. Why is it that most Java IDE's are fairly good but most of the Java apps built with them suck?

I mean if someone can write a good Java app to do development, why can't they write a good app to do anything else? Most all of them tend to be bloated, slow, and have an ugly UI.

Re:Slightly Off Topic (1)

johnjaydk (584895) | about 9 years ago | (#12324954)

I mean if someone can write a good Java app to do development, why can't they write a good app to do anything else? Most all of them tend to be bloated, slow, and have an ugly UI.

We're busy with the IDE's at the moment can you call back later ... much later ?

Borland is realizing what IBM did (4, Insightful)

thammoud (193905) | about 9 years ago | (#12324769)

years ago. There is no money to be made in stock IDE's. Building value added plugins for a popular IDE (Eclipse) and people might pay more money. The Java platform is in a wonderful position with all the free (and superb) IDE's available. Eclipse and Netbeans are both excellent IDE's that other platforms can only dream off.

My prediction is that IDEA's IntelliJ will also go open source. The gap between it and the above mentioned IDE's is very narrow to warrant spending the dough.

Borland is realizing what IBM did-Hiring MS. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 years ago | (#12324868)

"Eclipse and Netbeans are both excellent IDE's that other platforms can only dream off."

Lisp and Smalltalk can do better.

Re:Borland is realizing what IBM did (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 years ago | (#12324982)

My prediction is that IDEA's IntelliJ will also go open source.

well, it allready is free for open source developers.

read more at http://www.jetbrains.com/idea/opensource/

Re:Borland is realizing what IBM did (2, Insightful)

(H)elix1 (231155) | about 9 years ago | (#12325109)

Building value added plugins for a popular IDE (Eclipse) and people might pay more money

Isn't that the truth. IBM jumped into Eclipse with WSAD, then moved to the Eclipse 3 core with Rational Application Developer. I found myself in the unfortunate position of needing the current cut of RAD for the portal toolkit plugin for WPS 5.1 - only to find they want over 4k for the 'value add'. Lots of extras in there like the modeling tools, none of which I needed...

The EJB stuff is slowly working its way into Eclipse, which seems to me where most of these guys were trying to make their money. Even Netbeans had an 'enterprise' version for a couple grand if you wanted to do anything more than JavaBeans and JSP. It amazes me how long it took before things like My Eclipse [myeclipseide.com] plug-ins that give EJB tools for $30 a year - looking forward to more and more of these tools becoming commodity IDE items. Got to wonder how long IBM and others can keep charging stupid money for the plugins, however.

I think this is good news. (2, Insightful)

ocularDeathRay (760450) | about 9 years ago | (#12324775)

I always liked borland's C/C++ IDE, although I never got much chance to use jbuilder. When I was going to the local community college the first time around, they gave us a choice to use either borland or MS IDEs. I always used borland... Then a couple years and a couple jobs later I was back at the same school to find that only MS IDEs were supported. By then it didn't matter cause I was using linux at home and did all my homework in vim with gcc.

big deal (1)

b17bmbr (608864) | about 9 years ago | (#12324792)

jbuilder is a bloated piece of crap. it was pretty good somewhere around version 5 or 6, but since that time, you need damn near a cray to run it. what pisses me off the most is that you can't get older versions. viva la open source!! it also shows how much better the OSS dev model is than the closed version. jbuilder just doesn't hold candle to netbeans or eclipse. to get the same functionality, you had to spend hundreds for the pro or ent. version. i personally use jedit for most of my development, but i am not working on huge projects.

Brief keybindings... (1)

Garion911 (10618) | about 9 years ago | (#12324802)

If it gets me Brief keybindings in Eclipse, I'm all for it!

Re:Brief keybindings... (1)

cratermoon (765155) | about 9 years ago | (#12324978)

That's just about the only thing that comes to mind the JBuilder base edition would bring to Eclipse that it doesn't already have, and do better. In any case, having used JBuilder for a long while before switching to Eclipse (and having a brief fling with IntelliJ IDEA), I really don't see myself switching back to the Borland/Inprise "experience". If the Register got the story right, which some are questioning. It wouldn't surprise me if there already were a plugin for Brief keybindings.

What the hell is eclipse? (1, Interesting)

autopr0n (534291) | about 9 years ago | (#12324830)

I'm sorry. I'm so confused right now. Jbuilder is an IDE, and Eclipse is an ide, right? Or is it a "platform SDK"? How does one release something "Onto" eclipse? Does that mean Eclipse is like sourceforge somehow? blah, why can't people be more obvious about what they're doing.

Re:What the hell is eclipse? (5, Informative)

pringlis (867347) | about 9 years ago | (#12324886)

Eclipse is, at the very base, a platform. All but the most basic functionality (including the Java Development Environment which most people associate with Eclipse) is supplied by plug-ins. Users can create plug-ins to associate with the Eclipse work bench or any other Eclipse plug-in.

Basically to realease something "onto" Eclipse means that it is released as a plug-in for Eclipse. JBuilder provides functionality into the Eclipse platform which users can utilise.

license? (1)

ghee22 (781277) | about 9 years ago | (#12324846)

what license is this under? it's not in TFA... nor is this piece of news even on their website

argh.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 years ago | (#12324861)

I just bought the Enterprise Edition...

JBuilder + Eclipse = ? (1)

skwirlmaster (555307) | about 9 years ago | (#12324869)

Well in my experience both are rather slow IDEs. So maybe we can get one that is twice is slow, wouldn't that be a great step forward?

Honestly though eclipse is a good tool, maybe borland moving Jbuilder to it will actually speed up the environment.

If anyone has any tricks to speed up the JVM so it doesn't drag ass I'd appreciate it being posted.

As a side note, anyone else come across the old WOW32.dll access problem @ hex address problem recently? It has something to do with how the Borland C++ accessed windows. I was surprised when working on a computer to come across this. All you need is to upgrade Win2k to SP3 or better. Sad really, the admin of the system must have been sleeping for a couple years. Easy money, so no complaints.

Re:JBuilder + Eclipse = ? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 years ago | (#12325047)

If you run an old 16-bit version of Borland C++ (say 4.52) ontop of Windows 2000 then you'll get a WOW violation when your mouse hovers over a system menu icon (min, max, restore) due to Win 2K providing tooltips. The solution is to disable a registry entry, or possibily upgrade to a later SP. (Or run XP...)

Re:JBuilder + Eclipse = ? (1)

kannibal_klown (531544) | about 9 years ago | (#12325116)

The last 2 versions of JBuilder I ran were 9 and X, and yes they were slow. My friend says 2005 is a little quicker, but I find it hard to believe.

Eclipse, however, has never appeared slow to me. The SWT API makes it a lot faster than Swing and it doesn't look too shabby either.

mental note: send email to borland (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 years ago | (#12324960)

"dear borland, you can check ebay for a gps with digital compass, you indeed have lost the track and can get lost forever".

Open Source is not going to save Borland (1)

aCapitalist (552761) | about 9 years ago | (#12324969)

Eclipse has made the Java IDE market a commodity market. The best they can hope for is to become much smaller and sell value-added plugins. I bought the vi-plugin for Eclipse, but that model won't work for a company the current size of Borland.

But hey, if Borland dies then maybe MS will do what they've always really wanted to do, which is to give away VS for free. VS2005 beta2 rocks.

Re:Open Source is not going to save Borland (1)

aCapitalist (552761) | about 9 years ago | (#12324985)

I should've added that I'm sure Intellij is worried about Eclipse too, but made a smart move by instead of trying to compete directly with VS.NET they leveraged their expertise and produced a kickass addin for VS2003.

Re:Open Source is not going to save Borland (1)

Jason Earl (1894) | about 9 years ago | (#12325158)

Which basically means that Borland is doing market research for Microsoft for the next version of Visual Studio. The easiest way to find out what your customers want is to simply borrow the ideas that some of them were paying good money for in the previous version.

When VS 2005 (or whatever) comes out, what do you bet that it has most of the more popular Borland features.

What business model is that? (1)

Renegade Lisp (315687) | about 9 years ago | (#12325052)

From the article:

"We will give customers something that's differentiated in the market and do it with a lot less investment on our part," Fuller said.

So, in effect, he's saying: We let others do the basic work for us, and then make money by adding stuff on top of what they create.

Granted, this may be the same thing IBM is doing with Eclipse, it's just that you seldom hear it voiced so clearly and unmistakably.

As an open source/free software developer, I would think twice before contributing to such a code base -- I guess I'll end up doing it anyway, because like the sorcerer's apprentice, the power of unleashed free software development is already overturning the business model of these companies in a far greater extent than they seem to be prepared for, but still... it doesn't feel quite right to help a company in the short run maintaining a business model which I explicitly declined, when I became a free software developer.

The future is not in selling proprietary software; the future is in selling services for free software. IBM, for one thing, seems to have grasped that simple truth better than Borland, but I guess they are still learning.

Re:What business model is that? (1)

aCapitalist (552761) | about 9 years ago | (#12325074)

The future is not in selling proprietary software; the future is in selling services for free software. IBM, for one thing, seems to have grasped that simple truth better than Borland, but I guess they are still learning.

That's what FSF extremists wish the model will be, but if the software is doing its job then there should be little need for "services".

The future is really proprietary software leveraging the bottom of the software stack which is free. Proprietary software can give back by making contributions to these lower layers of the software stack, by maintaining a sane business model by offering value added proprietary software at the higher ends of the stack.

Re:What business model is that? (1)

Renegade Lisp (315687) | about 9 years ago | (#12325139)

That's what FSF extremists wish the model will be, but if the software is doing its job then there should be little need for "services".

Funny how using the word "free" in connection with "software" gets you labelled as an "FSF extremist" immediately, but I can live with that :-) (ok you didn't label me an extremist :-)

I make most of my money by deploying and customizing free software in large companies, and boy, I know for sure this kind of job is gonna be needed for a long time. It's not a function of how good the software is, how well it is doing it's job, but mostly of the complexity of the companies where it's being used. No, I don't see "services" going away anytime soon, unless we have software with artificial intelligence that deploys itself where it's needed and adapts itself to what it's needed for.

The future is really proprietary software leveraging the bottom of the software stack which is free. Proprietary software can give back by making contributions to these lower layers of the software stack, by maintaining a sane business model by offering value added proprietary software at the higher ends of the stack.

Here you are simply saying the opposite of what I said. Any reasons that would turn it into a valid argument? Why should it be so? If free software development is capable of taking over the lower levels, why should it stop there? Is it not an uphill battle for proprietary software vendors?

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...