The Joel on Software Discussion Group (CLOSED)

Just an idle question about Borland development.  What are the compelling reasons to select Borland over MS VS when developing new applications exclusively for Win32?

Does the compiler generate substantially more efficient code or is the IDE more usable?

Thanks for the info.

- James.

Does anyone actually still use Borland for serious development?

I do.  Borland C++ 5 and the new BDS 2006.

I dig it. 

Advantages?  I'm sure there are some. 

Do I know exactly what they are?  Probably not.  I like dbExpress, Indy and FastReport components.  Their API is better in my opinion. I like the fact that I'm not using a Microsoft product.  However, you shouldn't listen to me. I'm biased because I work in it.

We switched out of Borland JBuilder years ago. So you can count me in the "we don't use Borland anymore" group.

We are still using Delphi 6, besides VC6/2003/2005/JDeveloper/JEdit/Forms/Access/PL/SQL Developer/UltraEdit.

Seriously, I think the advantage is ease of use. The drawbacks are, on the C++ side, less standard conformance and less stability. I think it really depends what kind of app you are going to develop.

We use Delphi 7 Enterprise.  We are developing a wholesale distribution program that will end up being sold nationally. 

We used Delphi 7 to develop a program for Stanford University Hospital Department of Pathology that is used to help teach students, residents and doctors how to better diagnose disease. 

We use Delphi to develop medical software programs that are used in pathology labs all over the US.

No, no one uses Borland for serious development.

I don't know any shrinkwrap software company that uses Borland or has even considered using Borland.  Visual C++ is so entrenched.

"What are the compelling reasons to select Borland over MS VS when developing new applications exclusively for Win32?"

When you're talking solely about Win32 (i.e., _not_ .NET) Delphi's VCL framework is richer and easier to use than any gui framework you'd use with VS.  Plus there's a huge market of 3rd party components that are as good as you can get, and easy to use to boot.

When the alternative to Win32 Delphi is .NET programming in VS.NET, the reasons to prefer Win32 VCL over .NET's FCL framework are less compelling.  A decision there is probably driven more just by whether you want to move to .NET or not.

If you're comparing Delphi to VS for Win32 programming, you may as well download and try out the free TurboExplorer version of Delphi or C++:
http://www.turboexplorer.com/

>I don't know any shrinkwrap software company that uses >Borland or has even considered using Borland.  Visual C++ is >so entrenched.

To name a few:

 Spy Sweeper
 Spyware Doctor

Yes, the fact that most Win32 shinkwrap is written using VC++ has nothing to do with it being a better or faster environment than Delphi for writing win32 apps.

A couple more shinkwrap Delphi apps:

Skype
TopStyle

There are thousands of shrinkwrapped application written in Borland Delphi (mine too).

And the world's most popular, and most expensive (eBay bought it for several /billion/ USD) application (Skype) is written in Borland Delphi.

In spite of the gross incompetence at Borland that has slowed Delphi's development to a crawl for the past 5 years and in spite of the unusability of versions past D7, D7 still is by far the best Win32 dev tool out there.

On the Win32 side of things, Delphi is the only RAD tool out there that is being developed and being moved forward.  The VCL is a powerful, venerable, extensible and thoroughly supported visual development, component based framework.  If you are a Win32 developer, it's really the only choice at this point.

As for apps built with Delphi, the Skype client is. So are FeedDemon and BeyondCompare.  See:

http://delphi.wikia.com/wiki/Good_Quality_Applications_Built_With_Delphi

Nick Hodges
Delphi Product Manager

>> Does anyone actually still use Borland for serious development?

LOL

VC++ is a better C++ compiler. It's more standards compliant, and it generates better code than Delphi. On the other hand, if you're writing an app with a GUI you're much, much better off with Delphi. Delphi exception handling is also better than C++, IMHO.
The big problem people have had with Delphi (other than that it isn't from MS)has been Borland's secrecy and reluctance to release updates. Fortunately, things are looking a lot better under DevCo. They've done a lot better about fixing bugs and keeping the user base informed after the split was announced.
(I've used D3-D6, VC++ 1.5, 2.0, and the C++ compilers in VS 2002,3 and 4.)

I use Delphi for my shrinkwrap software "Art Affair" and will continue to use it for all other win32 development that I have planned.

I've also used it at a previous job with state government to produce 2 large database apps for their mental health and developmental disabilities divisions.

I love Delphi. I use Developer Express components among others and DBIsam database.

We use BDS2006 for our large scale medical software.  It is our competitive advantage over other dev companies in the same market.  It keeps us from being limited - we can do .NET and Win32 in the same IDE and same language.  We also are not going to have our codebase abandon anytime soon as other developer tools companies have (ala VB6).  Things I have from Delphi 1 still compile in Delphi 10 (BDS2006).

Why ? Delphi is simply far better on the win32 road that ANY other competitors.


Just have a look to the free Turbo explorer version (has Databse support ;) and license allow you to write commercial applications). The IDE is snapy and has tons of nice feature.

A must have !

For Win32 development Delphi is THE tool to use.
Arguably the strongest feature of Delphi is its VCL library. Since D1 it always shiped with sources, and that's probably the answer for Delphi enormous popularity, and massive amounts of 3rd party components.
VCL is implemented on both - Win32 and .NET - platforms, which makes Delphi apps VERY portable (D1 demos still compiles on D2006 for .NET). Portability of legacy code in VS is problematic (VB6 to C#?).

And there is nothing comparable to ECO in VS.

Paweł Głowacki
Delphi Consultant

>>Does anyone actually still use Borland for serious development?

How about the software I help develop for the U.S. Air Force to support stores (missiles/bombs) certification on military aircraft? Pretty serious?!?! We use BDS 2006 with Oracle using dbExpress. The Air Force loves the speed with which we can deliver a quality product. Delphi rock(et)s!

Just to add to the list - we are using D2005 for our operations management software - lots of great free and paid for components.

You have to stop comparing VC++ to Delphi.  They aren't the same.  Delphi is pascal, object pascal to be exact.  The comparison to Borland is C++ Builder.

I see this mistake so many times that if I had a penny for every time I heard/read this, I'd be wealthier than Warren Buffet by now.

We have an enterprise accounting/erp/edi application written in 100% Borland C++ Builder using all the VCL glory.  VLC rocks!  It dwarfs anything Microsoft has including MFC.  I'm talking pure Win32/C++ here; not .net or C#.

So I wonder about the OP.  BDS vs. MS Visual Studio.  BDS is just the IDE and within it supports C#, C++, and Delphi-Object-Pascal.

I looked at VC years ago and just didn't like it.  I hated having to assign strange numbers to window handles; even though I knew what they mean. (going back I use to create my windows API calls to CreateWindow).  When VCL came along, I grabbed on.  It rocked.  Event driven program became, well, event driven instead of this laborous re-visit of the message cracker's loop.  God did that suck. 

Now I know VC has gotten much better -- at least this is what I read and have been told, bla, bla, bla.

But when you have millions of lines of code written in Borland, making heavy use of VCL, heavy use of a couple 3rd party plug-ins, and your software nets you $5-$8 million a year, you just don't switch or even think about switching to another environment.

Borland's latest news has us a bit concerned but not too much.  All our code completely compiles no problem under the new BDS-2006 and VCL hasn't changed much since C++ Builder 3.  We don't touch CLX.

I am a bit of a Borland cheerleader yet, I can easily fill a page of all the issues with the IDE.  It's not without it's problems but they are manageable.  And I assume VC has similar issues.

I've seen benchmarks where VC compiles to smaller code than BDS/C++ but I generally don't care about such metrics since my code is accounting, doesn't require much above a Win98 box with 256MB RAM and 766MHz machine.  So for me, it's like why buy a Ferrari when the speed limit is 55 MPH?

If the OP is looking for advise, definitly give VC a hard look but don't ignore BDS.  Especially since Borland seems confused about the direction of BDS with DevCo or whatever they call themself these days. (Borland, Inprise, back to Borland, now DevCo).

Of the places I've worked at that use Borland dev tools, they all have stopped using Borland. They have moved to either VisualStudio or Eclipse for Java stuff.

Diego

Here is why we see a disproportionate flood of Delphi / Borland comments whenever someone asks a question:

http://blogs.borland.com/nickhodges/archive/2006/10/07/28270.aspx

We're getting all the fanboys piling in.

FYI, here's one from last month:
http://blogs.borland.com/nickhodges/archive/2006/09/11/27456.aspx

This isn't just evangelizing. Is this ethical?

I can't compare with Visual Studio, but at work I'm currently using Delphi 5 to produce a shrink wrap (ish) application for the aerospace avionics industry.

We are perhaps a litle bit too happy with D5 - Borland would love us to upgrade.

Hi,

> We're getting all the fanboys piling in.

So where are all the MS Visual Studio fanboys then? They can't be very attached to their development tool, otherwise would see them here, wouldn't we? So it must be crap.

Yes, I know that logic is flawed. But calling all those people who say they use BDS "fanboys" is just as stupid.

OK, just to out myself as a fanboy too:

I am using BDS at work for a shrinkwrapped software package as well as at home for some private stuff. I like it very much.

I can't really compare it to Visual Studio since the only VS version I used was the one of Visual Basic 6. That one sucked big time even compared to Delphi 5 (which was 6 years and 5 Delphi versions ago).

twm

Nick Hodges and Borland might want to consider a radical strategy -- abandoning .NET IDE development for good

Actually C++ Builder / B.D.S. 2006 are the only true R.A.D. tools you can find for the C++ language in the Win32 API world. That’s enough of a reason for me to prefer Borland instead of the ugly MS-VC++ and the awful managed “code” of .NET framework.

I mean is there any other serious development set of tools out there?

Eclipse? oh ok, that one, i thought that JBuilder is light years ahead of that, and it is only because it is for free that Eclipse is making its way.

Visual Studio? lol, give me a break.  They are only the, "i do it because my roomate does" option, nothing technical behind it. 

RAD development only in one place, and it starts with "D" and ends with "elphi".

I don't really think the "fanboys" comment is fair.  The OP wanted to know a comparison between BDS and VS.  The Delphi community is a very proactive and passionate community that feels like they have the best kept secret in software development and have for years.  I genuinely want people to know about it because it makes my company's life so much easier.  I don't call that a fanboy, I call it a satisfied user.

Mr. Hodges used his public forum to just shed light that someone wanted information - nothing more.  It isn't his fault that there aren't many vocal VS supporters that have used both Borland and Microsoft products.

Visual C++ doesn't just compile to more efficient code than C++Builder, it is insanely more standard-conformant, it's even faster now.

C++Builder has had limitations at the compiler/linker level for years and they haven't been fixxed.

BDS is still buggy, and only somewhat comparable to VS2005 in terms of stability and speed even after 2 Service Packs and a bunch of hotfixes.

VS2005 has only just got SP1 in beta.

- Nate.

> Visual C++ [...] is even faster now.

Are you sure? If I compile Qt 4.1 with msvc it takes almost 10 minutes longer than when I compile it with C++Builder 2006. And that even without using a C++Builder compiler accelerator.

The compelling reason I see is that VS doesn't support object pascal or the VCL unless you buy the "VS-lite" BDS. I've done a little development in VS, and I'm using VS2005 and D7 at the moment. I prefer D7, especially on multiple monitors, although the supporting tools are better in VS2005 (you'd hope so, it's 5 years newer). But then, I've spent ~10 years with Delphi and only ~2 with VS, so there are probably productivity tricks for VS that I have missed.

As another comparison point, our major competitor recently abandoned their attempt to reproduce our 10 geek-year product after spending about 100 geek-years and almost $US100M. We have no idea what could account for that, but their affection for VS is probably part of it.

> "I genuinely want people to know about it because it makes my company's life so much easier.  I don't call that a fanboy, I call it a satisfied user."

For the record, I am a fan of Delphi. Comments from satisfied users would be great. What I object to is non-JOS people being funnelled here by Borland (or whatever) executives to skew the direction of the discussion.

I didn't post the first link by the way. I had the guts to add my name.

"So where are all the MS Visual Studio fanboys then? They can't be very attached to their development tool, otherwise would see them here, wouldn't we? So it must be crap."

A lot of the "fanboy" name calling tends to come mostly from Windows users. In one regard it happens when looking at it from a Linux or OS X versus Windows point of view. And in this case it's the Microsoft user crowd (specifically Visual Studio users). I don't think that Windows/Microsoft users have much to be fans of, so calling others fanboys is all they have.

There's really not much to hold on to and be passionate about when it comes to Microsoft products. Microsoft products, by nature of their corporate culture, which comes all the way from Steve Ballmer/Bill Gates down to the developers, are very uninspiring, boring and lacking style. So when a Microsoft user is faced with people who are passionate about other products they don't understand.

Then again, once someone invests so much time and money on learning and using the software that they do, it's almost impossible for them to realize that they have made a mistake and have chosen an inferior product. No one likes to find out they were wrong all along.

The rate at which a JOS thread reaches entropy is directly proportional to the frequency of the word 'fanboy' in each of it's posts.

It depends on what exactly you are going to do in Win32.

Pros:

Delphi is Object Pascal and many developers find themselves much more productive with it than with C++.

Delphi has a VCL library that wraps Win32 API so that it is easier to use.

Delphi VCL has a set of GUI components that allows you to create a nice GUI really fast.

There are components for lots of tasks, including database and web development, including free and proprietory 3-d party ones.

Sometimes Borland IDE has more polish then VS. It also has exclusive features like Refactorings.

Cons:

Being Pascal, Delphi needs SDK header files translations to Pascal. There are 3-d party sets of translations, including free, but you have to search for them and there is no guarantee that the header you need is translated. C++ Builder helps there, but forces you to master both C++ and Object Pascal.

Since Win32 is a moving target, Delphi wrappers are often outdated. Some areas like Rich Edit support are plain abandoned.

In order to make Delphi GUI components to behave exactly like you want, you have know well both the Win32 API and the VCL source.

Quality of component frameworks varies. 3-d part components may not be supported with newer versions of Delphi.

So far, Borland IDE is much less stable and more resource hungry than VS, and some features, including Refactorings, are not 100% reliable.

"Since Win32 is a moving target, Delphi wrappers are often outdated. Some areas like Rich Edit support are plain abandoned."

So what?  This doesn't prevent you from speaking pure Win32 through the Win32 APIs and, if so desired, create your own component pallet tool for reuse.

This is true for both Delphi and C++ Builder.

I'm a Borland fanboy because:

1.  It helps me maintain software netting me around $8M/year.
2.  It works without too many issues.  Upgrading between versions is always a pain point.

3.  Compilation metrics I've seen favored VC but not by much.  Including EXE size and actual execution speed.

4.  C++ Builder, in contrast to post above mine, has great RAD tools but there is nothing from stopping me from:

#include <windows.h>

Some folks need to get a clue!

I think the OP should definitly look at VS due to Borland's seemingly confused viewed of BDS's future. If you are developing for enterprise and expect to support your app. over many years, then go with VC.  If you're an ISV with a small app. that you don't expect to grow very large or to warrant tons of support, etc... then Borland will work for you -- it would be, at least, a good opportunity to check out BDS to see if you like it or not. (you will).

You need to tell us if your choice between Borland & Microsoft is more of a buisness decision or of a  technical decision.  If it's buisness (support, larger install base = tons of support, product updates, etc...) choose VS.

Borland management just needs to get their act together. They have a great product but is lousy at managing it. Great talent flee as a result.

We can talk a lot about similarities and differences.

But from my point of view VS simply sux! Sure it has everything... But, it also ask to bend over your back instead of doing something simple and easy.

Yes, BDS is not that stable now, but i think it not only Borland's fault. It was discussed a lot - BDS is based on MS stuff, hence is far behind VS. It's by definition. MS never allow Borland to be really ahead using financial preasure or something else. What MS fixed currently, Borland will get after 2 of years. But anyway they proved to do it better!

As a sad fact - on every single project i used to work, Delphi was substituted with something else. I also need to say this somthing was from java camp... It was not about tool used, but about Borland itself. Only in one case i've moved app from java to Delphi.

Good news is that recently something clicked, and i started to get project offers to upgrade to newer versions of delphi, means something changes to better. :-)

Anytime somebody here mentions Delphi Nick Hodges is going to post a link.  He's a regular reader, and since his job is evangelizing for Delphi, it can hardly be a surprise that he directs people to Delphi threads here.

If you need a good looking GUI, definitely use C++ Builder.  It's much easier than Visual Studio.

"Yes, BDS is not that stable now, but i think it not only Borland's fault. It was discussed a lot - BDS is based on MS stuff, hence is far behind VS. It's by definition. MS never allow Borland to be really ahead using financial preasure or something else. What MS fixed currently, Borland will get after 2 of years. But anyway they proved to do it better!"

That's not entirely true, and a very backdoor way of bashing the "other side," I may say.

BDS is built on Microsoft .NET 1.1, as is Visual Studio .NET 2003, and Visual Studio .NET 2003 with alot of add-ons on my computer starts up in about 6 seconds.  BDS starts up in about 1 minute.  The help system is useless, many people keep Delphi 7/C++Builder 6 installed so they can use those help files.  Modelling and refactoring features is iffy.  Error Insight is useful (hogs system resources and is often incorrect).

Visual Studio 2005 starts in half the time, I may add, and I have alot more third-party components/experts installed in it (Refactor!, DevExpress, RadChart, etc.) than BDS.  As far as C++ goes, I mourned the day Borland dropped their traditional IDE in support of mimicing that monstrocity which Ebony (or Ivory, whichever it was).  I don't think that IDE setup is conducive to C++ developers, especially when you are the coder and not sitting in front of your monitor drawing screens.

In fact, if you would read the Borland NG, you will see that the suggested fix for many of BDS's instabilities is turning off or disabling many of its awesome features.

If you require .NET 2.0 support in the IDE than BDS cannot help you.  If you think Delphi has language features found in other languages (like Generics, etc.) then you're wrong.  Borland even removed support for third-party SCCI-compatible source control providers in BDS2006 (it was there in BDS2005), forcing you to use their entire ALM toolchain should you want them integrated into the IDE.  They change their reporting components every version, forcing developers to either migrate to another (commercial) solution, or fix it themselves.

And don't get me started on .NET...

Their product can "suck" (using that term loosely) because they have strangled their resources, or frankly because they enjoy lobbying 2 years behind Microsoft's heels.

The bottom line is that their products are suffering in terms of quality, and quite frankly I don't see how they could have the audacity to use their customer base like monkeys for some experiment (BCB6, D8, BDS2005).

Their Professional Edition costs more than Visual Studio 2005 Professional Edition.  If you look at the feature matrix most serious developers will need the Enterprise Edition to get as serious as they could with Visual Studio 2005 Professional Edition with BDS.  They're overpriced.

They have the new Turbo 1 language products (can only install 1 on a single machine, unless you use VMs) for sale (the Pro Editions) and they are somewhat overpriced also.  The Explorer versions are near useless since you cannot install any 3rd party components/experts/etc. in them.  Nice donation to Shareware developers.

Please try again.

- Nate.

Correction:

"Error Insight is /useless/"

I find the online-help in VS pretty useless too.
Usually I'm much faster just typing the keywords in Google...

I have to agree with the "fanboy" criticism.  If the folks at Borland/DevCo have so much time to sit around and post to sites like this about how great their product is it makes me wonder how much time they are actually spending DEVELOPING! 

As a matter of fact when Nick Hodges threw out the question on his own blog about why even the Delphi "fanboys" weren't upgrading to the newer versions the response was so negative he had to take it down in a quick effort at damage control.  Check it out here: http://blogs.borland.com/nickhodges/archive/2006/10/04/27823.aspx

Why not just make a good product and let honest word of mouth lead people to use it instead of launching fud attacks against sites like this.  Get back to work DevCo, otherwise pack up your tent and let Delphi die.

"I find the online-help in VS pretty useless too.
Usually I'm much faster just typing the keywords in Google... "

That's nice, but can you tell me what you think of the BDS help system?

This is a comparison, IIRC.

Hop on over to the borland.public.delphi.non-technical newsgroup and check out the thread titled "Why aren't you upgrading?" to get a better picture of the situation.  You may go blind looking at it.

- Nate.

"That's not entirely true, and a very backdoor way of bashing the "other side," I may say."

That is what i heard from people who work for MS. Like it was discussed internally long time if they allow Delphi to stay alive. It also from what i can see - 2 years time lag.

Now if we take in account the difficulties Borland faces (including dealing with design flaws introduced by MS) we will understand why they are so far behind.

I cry out loud when somedody says me that Borland technologically is behind MS. In what area? IDE bootup time?

You better compare something real. Languages: VB vs. Object Pascal. DB connectivity: BDE vs. ODBC, MIDAS vs. ADO.NET, Internet Express vs. ASP.NET, IDE design surfaces finaly! There you will see the difference in development time. There is no match to simplisity of RAD in Delphi. Nobody even come close.

It so sad that Borland constantly kills it's own technologies in favor to borrowed from MS. But it's not thechnological problems. It's about management.

"That is what i heard from people who work for MS. Like it was discussed internally long time if they allow Delphi to stay alive. It also from what i can see - 2 years time lag."

They lag because they have failed to deliver a productive IDE for the .NET framework, at least not productive in comparison to the competition out there.  For people who want an OP-like language coupled with a hyper productive .NET IDE, there is Chrome.  If you just want to toy around with the language, it is available in CLI compiler form and supports all versions of the .NET framework currently in production use.

Other than that, I cannot understand what you are really saying with that.  The second statement is a fragment (no offense).

"Now if we take in account the difficulties Borland faces (including dealing with design flaws introduced by MS) we will understand why they are so far behind."

That should read "Now that we've take into account the sacrifices Borland has made in a failed attempt to compete with Microsoft as a .NET tool vendor, we can see why they are so far behind."  They are so far behind, they are almost a null factor.  By the time they are releasing Hylander, people will be ready to start migrating their existing apps to Vista (I think).  Furthermore, their compilers suck.  Especially their C++ compiler.  Looking at a disassembly of some of their code makes me throw up in my mouth a little.  It's no wonder they're incorporating third-party enhancements into their RTL now.  Their Memory Manager sucked also, they now use FastMM.  Their C++ toolchain still has problems with very large binaries (linker issues).

"I cry out loud when somedody says me that Borland technologically is behind MS. In what area? IDE bootup time?"

I don't see Borland making any radical innovations on the development scene.  Coming from a company that brought us awesome features like Precompiled Headers, C++ template support, RTTI, exception handling, Delphi 1-7 (minus D4); they are doing pitiful in that area.  And it's not just about IDE bootup time.  I don't remember MS "fanatics" telling me to disable certain features of my IDE to improve its speed or stability.

I can care less how their product works, I just have a problem with them calling it a high-quality development environment when in actuality it is garbage when you consider the price you must pay for a version that can be used seriously by a professional software development, given its numerous shortcomings and issues.

"You better compare something real. Languages: VB vs. Object Pascal. DB connectivity: BDE vs. ODBC, MIDAS vs. ADO.NET, Internet Express vs. ASP.NET, IDE design surfaces finaly! There you will see the difference in development time. There is no match to simplisity of RAD in Delphi. Nobody even come close."

BDS supports VB.NET, without designer support.  IIRC, VB.NET, like C# was submitted for standardization (correct me if I'm wrong).  Even still, there are things that are in VB.NET that Delphi developers are very much waiting for.  As always, it sometimes isn't wise to put the weight of your investments in a "niche" (as some have said) language from a tools vendor that seems to be hanging on by the thread of their teeth.

BDE had many issues regarding performance and deployment.  It was subpar in comparison to its competitors, especially when you were accessing data stored in an SQL Server (it was OKAY for dBase and Paradox databases, I guess.  MIDAS started off with Royalty fees, and like all things Borland, they weren't cheap.  If MIDAS is so good, then why isn't Borland/DTG putting its eggs in that basket?

Why do you even attempt to compare InternetExpress to ASP.NET?  This confuses me...  Oh, whatever...  The thing in BDS to compare to ASP.NET would be IntraWeb; that isn't a product of Borland/DTG, but rather AtoZed.

"It so sad that Borland constantly kills it's own technologies in favor to borrowed from MS. But it's not thechnological problems. It's about management."

It has nothing to do with Borland constantly killing its technologies.  Like Kylix, if something just isn't viable, you cannot justify wasting the money/resources on keeping it alive.  Many of their "technologies" just weren't viable in the long term.  Also, their push into RAD development killed some of their API-centric technologies also (by introducing more overhead, etc.).

This thread was about Borland Developer Studio 2006 versus Microsoft Visual Studio 2005.

There is no competition until Borland can attempt to compete with Visual Studio .NET 2003, which it has yet to come close to (in my experience).

I like my Turkey stuffed, but I like it stuffed with something edible.  Clearly, something is just not right about their Turkey Stuffing.  Maybe I'm wrong, and you know where I went wrong.  In that case, I look forward to you setting me straight.  After all, I thoroughly enjoy getting PWND on a message board.  Something to laugh about, since I so seldom laugh at all.

- Nate.

Nate,

The original question was specifically about developing for a Win32 environment, not as you claim about BDS vs VS.  For my money, Delphi 7 using the VCL is still a hands down more productive development environment for Win32 apps than either the BDS or any version of Visual Studio.

Are you with Microsoft?

You sound suspiciously like someone armed with a fistful of spoiler information, and a whole lot of spite.

At least the Borland guys have the decency to declare who they are.

"Does serious programmers use Borland?"

That makes me laugh, what a stupid statement. Makes me wonder how some of you really classify a serious programmer?

I use both compilers. BDS 2006 is far more versatile and is used by us for enterprises develpement of large scale projects (Yes, other than hello world my "serious" programmers).

Go for it Borland.. ignore the poor ignorant ones that knows only one environement!

Nate, I encourage you to dare program with VCL and then come again and tell us about the benefits of .NET and VC++ frameworks -if you find any...

2 Nate.

Well, let's restate question in other way - is there any IDE other then VS and BDS? I do not track them specifically, and may be you can find something usable, but most companies is out of this business already.

If it's so simple to create good IDE where is the products?

(Chrome is interesting thing, but it's not IDE and is far away from stable product.)

Yes, MIDAS is expenive, but it doesn't make it worse. It's superior to the castrated functionality of ADO.NET. In your words, I'm throwing out (a lot), when i see table presentation as array of rows, where i need to do a lot of work to simply reconcile updates. MIDAS has this and a lot more for years. Master-Datails, multiple checkpoints, optimistic locking and so on. I do not need to deal with moronic CommandBuilder.

You are asking compare VS03 vs. BDS. Ok!
For axample. If you even try to program against ADO.NET interfaces soon you find it's almost impossible, because different providers have different or absent methods. Is this good design? Is this good implementation? Is it forgivable for a company who does development for decades? On the other hand Borland spend time and prowided nice own provider model which is way cleaner.

I don't know about you, but for me it's more valuable then IDE startup time.

Do you want another sample? Ok! Create Button and attach event handler to this button. Now Cut and Paste it back in VS. Where is your event handler? It's gone! Delphi keep it properly. For me it's "small-BIG" difference in convinience!

An i can continue on and on. Delphi IDE is just plan better and more productive. Well i'm not going to talk about C++, because i'm not that proficient with it, but guess Builder IDE is on par with Delphi now.

MS started early - got product early. There is no wonder. Now it will use financial preasure as usual. It's so easy to kill smaler competitor. But even in this situation, they decided to leave Borland alive, because they need it! They use it's people, ideas and resources.

Initial question was about reasons.
I cannot take responsibility advice to use Borland tools right now. But there is still a lot of reasons to do this. One need decide.

FWIW, here are some more shrinkwrap software written in Delphi: Retail Pro (www.retailpro.com), a very popular POS application with thousands of users world wide, the last version was written in Delphi 5 and the current one is in Delphi 7 with active development still moving forward; HomeSite, DreamWeaver's built-in HTML editor (www.adobe.com/products/homesite); and even Microsoft's Age of Empires II was written in Delphi!  For more visit http://delphi.wikia.com/wiki/Good_Quality_Applications_Built_With_Delphi.

"The original question was specifically about developing for a Win32 environment, not as you claim about BDS vs VS.  For my money, Delphi 7 using the VCL is still a hands down more productive development environment for Win32 apps than either the BDS or any version of Visual Studio."

"Are you with Microsoft?"

I wish.

"You sound suspiciously like someone armed with a fistful of spoiler information, and a whole lot of spite."

Sorry, no spoiler information here.  Only first-hand experience with Borland and Microsoft products.

"At least the Borland guys have the decency to declare who they are"

And that's supposed to mean?

I post regularly in their newsgroups as well as here.  How am I not declaring who I am.

Would you like a personal copy of my autobiography?

- Nate.

I use C++Builder too VC++2003 (only Win32 no NET). About that, which IDE I use I determine upon of what, which I need to program. I can honestly acclaim, that both IDE have their good too bad features. Actually not only BDS, but too VS has problems:

http://blogs.msdn.com/somasegar/archive/2006/09/26/772250.aspx

who'd that was he said ;-)

Whole this discussion me recall neverending and nowhere destined discussions interim user of Linux and Windows :-(