Is there a plan to rewrite the Delphi IDE using FireMonkey ?

I guess this should be a logical move to target multiple platforms and prove that Embarcadero is eating its own dog food. Although I think I've read somewhere that Delphi is using some Microsoft technology for the form designer but I might be wrong there.
Is FireMonkey suitable for that kind of application or is the VCL still the way to go for "professional" business oriented applications ? What are your thoughts ?
When XE2 is released I hope there will be a clear indication as to what kind of applications FireMonkey is suitable for or not.
0
John
8/13/2011 8:40:58 AM
embarcadero.delphi.non-tech 5933 articles. 1 followers. Follow

139 Replies
1163 Views

Similar Articles

[PageSpeed] 37

<John Riche> wrote in message news:387744@forums.embarcadero.com...

> I think I've read somewhere that Delphi is using some Microsoft
> technology for the form designer but I might be wrong there.

There are several areas of the IDE that use Microsoft's .NET framework and 
thus are not portable.

-- 
Remy Lebeau (TeamB)
0
Remy
8/13/2011 9:27:29 AM
Remy Lebeau (TeamB) wrote:

> There are several areas of the IDE that use Microsoft's .NET framework 
> and thus are not portable.

What, Delphi's IDE?  I thought all the .Net stuff was gone, now.  
(Don't know, just thought I'd read it here.)

-- 
SteveT
0
Steve
8/13/2011 1:34:08 PM
> What, Delphi's IDE?  I thought all the .Net stuff was gone, now.  
> (Don't know, just thought I'd read it here.)

Sadly not... AFAIK the code refactoring is made in .NET
0
Eric
8/13/2011 2:30:22 PM
On 13.08.2011 11:27, Remy Lebeau (TeamB) wrote:
> <John Riche>  wrote in message news:387744@forums.embarcadero.com...
>
>> I think I've read somewhere that Delphi is using some Microsoft
>> technology for the form designer but I might be wrong there.
>
> There are several areas of the IDE that use Microsoft's .NET framework and
> thus are not portable.
>

.... and J# as well ;-)
0
Ralf
8/13/2011 3:01:16 PM
John Riche wrote:

To answer the question in your subject, I'd very strongly doubt it.


-- 
Nick Hodges -- Product Development Manager
Gateway Ticketing Systems
http://www.gatewayticketing.com
0
Nick
8/13/2011 3:06:49 PM
Steve Thackery wrote:

> What, Delphi's IDE?  I thought all the .Net stuff was gone, now.  
> (Don't know, just thought I'd read it here.)

No, the IDE does, has -- and probably always will -- leverage the
libraries distributed with Windows.

-- 
Nick Hodges -- Product Development Manager
Gateway Ticketing Systems
http://www.gatewayticketing.com
0
Nick
8/13/2011 3:07:33 PM
John Riche wrote:

> Is there a plan to rewrite the Delphi IDE using FireMonkey ?

I hardly doubt that there are plans for the next years to do that.
There is no indication about that at all in the Roadmap

"RAD Studio, Delphi and C++Builder Roadmap"
http://edn.embarcadero.com/article/39934

Right now porting the IDE to FireMonkey would be IMHO a big waste of
time and is not what I think what the Delphi users want next (Linux,
64-bit C++). There are much better and less expensive ways to prove
FireMonkey with real life apps by working with their technology
partners and customers.

For Windows I don't see benefits, maybe all third party stuff needs to
be rewritten too even for Windows and right now they even don't port
the IDE to 64-bit, which should be much easier. That would prove their
64-bit solution and would for sure have benefits. I guess a 64-bit
debugger within the IDE would be faster than a "remote" debugger.

For OS X a FireMonkey IDE would be the only option to run the IDE
natively, but Delphi (for OS X) rather targets soon Windows users that
want to support OS X too than OS X users want to start with Delphi.
-- 
Uwe Schuster
http://www.bitcommander.de/blog
0
Uwe
8/13/2011 4:35:29 PM
Uwe Schuster wrote:

> Right now porting the IDE to FireMonkey would be IMHO a big waste of
> time and is not what I think what the Delphi users want next (Linux,
> 64-bit C++).

An excellent point -- I doubt that the market demand for a FireMonkey
based IDE would outstrip the demand for any number of other things.

-- 
Nick Hodges -- Product Development Manager
Gateway Ticketing Systems
http://www.gatewayticketing.com
0
Nick
8/13/2011 4:58:38 PM
"Steve Thackery" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote in message 
news:387774@forums.embarcadero.com...

> What, Delphi's IDE?

Yes.

> I thought all the .Net stuff was gone, now.

You cannot develop .NET projects, but portions of the IDE use .NET 
internally.

-- 
Remy Lebeau (TeamB)
0
Remy
8/14/2011 6:41:11 AM
Eric Fleming Bonilha wrote:

> > What, Delphi's IDE?  I thought all the .Net stuff was gone, now.  
> > (Don't know, just thought I'd read it here.)
> 
> Sadly not... AFAIK the code refactoring is made in .NET

Why "sadly"?

-- 
Rudy Velthuis

"A good sermon should be like a woman's skirt: short enough to 
 arouse interest but long enough to cover the essentials." 
 -- Ronald Knox.
0
Rudy
8/14/2011 3:10:07 PM
> {quote:title=Rudy Velthuis (TeamB) wrote:}{quote}
> Eric Fleming Bonilha wrote:
> 
> > > What, Delphi's IDE?  I thought all the .Net stuff was gone, now.  
> > > (Don't know, just thought I'd read it here.)
> > 
> > Sadly not... AFAIK the code refactoring is made in .NET
> 
> Why "sadly"?


Because the installer is now 3GB instead of 50MB as in Delphi 7?

Yes. 

And every time I set up a new VM, which is always Windows XP (smallest memory  footprint) I have to install .NET manually. Which takes longer than installing Windows itself.
0
Captain
8/14/2011 3:38:22 PM
Captain America wrote:

> > {quote:title=Rudy Velthuis (TeamB) wrote:}{quote}
> > Eric Fleming Bonilha wrote:
> > 
> > > > What, Delphi's IDE?  I thought all the .Net stuff was gone,
> > > > now.  (Don't know, just thought I'd read it here.)
> > > 
> > > Sadly not... AFAIK the code refactoring is made in .NET
> > 
> > Why "sadly"?
> 
> 
> Because the installer is now 3GB instead of 50MB as in Delphi 7?

Delphi XE offers a lot more than Delphi 7. And I assume that most will
already have .NET installed. You only download .NET if you don't have
it yet, so .NET should not play a big role in the install size.

-- 
Rudy Velthuis

"Once you eliminate the impossible, whatever remains, no matter 
 how improbable, must be the truth."
 -- Sherlock Holmes (by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, 1859-1930)
0
Rudy
8/14/2011 3:58:43 PM
> {quote:title=Captain America wrote:}{quote}
> Because the installer is now 3GB instead of 50MB as in Delphi 7?

The size of the Delphi 7 Enterprise install disk is 649MB.  The Delphi XE .iso is about 1.84GB (Delphi Prism and RadPHP not included).

--
Regards
Bruce McGee
Glooscap Software
0
Bruce
8/14/2011 4:14:50 PM
>> 
>> Because the installer is now 3GB instead of 50MB as in Delphi 7?
>
>Delphi XE offers a lot more than Delphi 7. 

He is using XE and is just comparing. I assume he's creating a VM and
installs XE and app sources to test specific application
configurations. I can imaging he would be happy to leave out all of the
..net requirements.

>And I assume that most will already have .NET installed. You only
download .NET
if you don't have it yet, so .NET should not play a big role in the
install size.

I believe XP doesnt unless its installed with the latest service packs.
If its really 3 Gb (no idea if its that huge) i can imagine the
complaint, but i gues its the complete update packs that makes it this
big.


In general, seeying the general direction Embarcadero is taking (or
going to take) to multiplatform (and assuming the ide needs to be
running on windows, linux, apple etc etc) a rewrite without the .net
would be a possibility

(and yes, it would also be a waste of time in some area's)
0
sorry
8/14/2011 4:19:04 PM
Marius . wrote:

> >> 
> >> Because the installer is now 3GB instead of 50MB as in Delphi 7?
> > 
> > Delphi XE offers a lot more than Delphi 7. 
> 
> He is using XE and is just comparing. I assume he's creating a VM and
> installs XE and app sources to test specific application
> configurations. I can imaging he would be happy to leave out all of
> the .net requirements.

Even in a VM, .NET should be installed already. My XP Professional, my
Vista and Win7 came with .NET and they can't even be removed.

So the difference in size is certainly not due to .NET. It is due to
extended functionality.
-- 
Rudy Velthuis

"A man who is afraid will do anything."
 -- Jawaharlal Nehru
0
Rudy
8/14/2011 4:33:03 PM
> {quote:title=Rudy Velthuis (TeamB) wrote:}{quote}
> Marius . wrote:
> 
> > >> 
> > >> Because the installer is now 3GB instead of 50MB as in Delphi 7?
> > > 
> > > Delphi XE offers a lot more than Delphi 7. 
> > 
> > He is using XE and is just comparing. I assume he's creating a VM and
> > installs XE and app sources to test specific application
> > configurations. I can imaging he would be happy to leave out all of
> > the .net requirements.
> 
> Even in a VM, .NET should be installed already. My XP Professional, my
> Vista and Win7 came with .NET and they can't even be removed.

I am a MSDN subscriber and the latest Win XP PROF EN ISO I download does not come with ANY .NET environment!
0
Captain
8/14/2011 5:02:16 PM
> {quote:title=Rudy Velthuis (TeamB) wrote:}{quote}
> Captain America wrote:
> 
> > > {quote:title=Rudy Velthuis (TeamB) wrote:}{quote}
> > > Eric Fleming Bonilha wrote:
> > > 
> > > > > What, Delphi's IDE?  I thought all the .Net stuff was gone,
> > > > > now.  (Don't know, just thought I'd read it here.)
> > > > 
> > > > Sadly not... AFAIK the code refactoring is made in .NET
> > > 
> > > Why "sadly"?
> > 
> > 
> > Because the installer is now 3GB instead of 50MB as in Delphi 7?
> 
> Delphi XE offers a lot more than Delphi 7. And I assume that most will
> already have .NET installed. You only download .NET if you don't have
> it yet, so .NET should not play a big role in the install size.

Yeah, and how many users use those .NET  based functions practically?

Ask a question about code metrics (written in J#) and you'll see how many responses you'll get. Many don't even know they are available. I would be very happy if the installer asked me: do you want to install all this .NET crap in Delphi IDE?

My prediction is that way over 50% would say "no" and they'd enjoy a 5 minute install process. Delphi 7 installs in less than a minute! For XE often one hour is not enough!
0
Captain
8/14/2011 5:08:12 PM
>
> I am a MSDN subscriber and the latest Win XP PROF EN ISO I download does not come with ANY .NET environment!

This is correct. XP is fortunately .net free.
0
Ralf
8/14/2011 5:17:18 PM
Captain America wrote:

> > Even in a VM, .NET should be installed already. My XP Professional,
> > my Vista and Win7 came with .NET and they can't even be removed.
> 
> I am a MSDN subscriber and the latest Win XP PROF EN ISO I download
> does not come with ANY .NET environment!

I am not, and my XP Prof (German) DID come with .NET as a optional
install. In Vista and Win7, it is not optional, and can't be removed
either.

-- 
Rudy Velthuis

"The use of anthropomorphic terminology when dealing with 
 computing systems is a symptom of professional immaturity."
 -- Edsger Dijkstra
0
Rudy
8/14/2011 5:24:41 PM
Ralf Stocker wrote:

> > 
> > I am a MSDN subscriber and the latest Win XP PROF EN ISO I download
> > does not come with ANY .NET environment!
> 
> This is correct. XP is fortunately .net free.

Why "fortunately"? If it has .NET, what would that change?

-- 
Rudy Velthuis

"Sometimes a scream is better than a thesis."
 -- Ralph Waldo Emerson (1803-1882)
0
Rudy
8/14/2011 5:25:16 PM
Captain America wrote:

> > Delphi XE offers a lot more than Delphi 7. And I assume that most
> > will already have .NET installed. You only download .NET if you
> > don't have it yet, so .NET should not play a big role in the
> > install size.
> 
> Yeah, and how many users use those .NET  based functions practically?

Those that use Delphi, apparently. I don't understand this fear for
..NET. It is just another framework.
-- 
Rudy Velthuis

"Believe those who are seeking the truth. Doubt those who find 
 it." -- André Gide
0
Rudy
8/14/2011 5:26:52 PM
On 14.08.2011 19:26, Rudy Velthuis (TeamB) wrote:
> Captain America wrote:
>
>>> Delphi XE offers a lot more than Delphi 7. And I assume that most
>>> will already have .NET installed. You only download .NET if you
>>> don't have it yet, so .NET should not play a big role in the
>>> install size.
>>
>> Yeah, and how many users use those .NET  based functions practically?
>
> Those that use Delphi, apparently. I don't understand this fear for
> .NET. It is just another framework.

I don't want to see these technologies (J#, .net, Java, ...) on my 
computer. Performance has prio 1.
0
Ralf
8/14/2011 5:32:38 PM
On 2011-08-14 18:32:38 +0100, Ralf Stocker said:

> I don't want to see these technologies (J#, .net, Java, ...) on my
> computer. Performance has prio 1.

And, like Rudy said, this fear of .NET is totally incomprehensible. e 
have created a massive application that is extremely performant; you 
can't tell it isn't what some would regard as "native".

Joanna

-- 
Joanna Carter [TeamB]
0
Joanna
8/14/2011 5:48:15 PM
> {quote:title=Rudy Velthuis (TeamB) wrote:}{quote}
> Captain America wrote:
> 
> > > Delphi XE offers a lot more than Delphi 7. And I assume that most
> > > will already have .NET installed. You only download .NET if you
> > > don't have it yet, so .NET should not play a big role in the
> > > install size.
> > 
> > Yeah, and how many users use those .NET  based functions practically?
> 
> Those that use Delphi, apparently. I don't understand this fear for
> .NET. It is just another framework.

Another con: once you have it on your system, when windows update kicks in it also wants to update .NET. And these are hundreds of megabytes which translate directly into lost minutes of waiting.

If I am on VPN and that process starts I can forget about my smooth remote work.
0
Captain
8/14/2011 5:55:56 PM
> {quote:title=Joanna Carter (TeamB) wrote:}{quote}
> On 2011-08-14 18:32:38 +0100, Ralf Stocker said:
> 
> > I don't want to see these technologies (J#, .net, Java, ...) on my
> > computer. Performance has prio 1.
> 
> And, like Rudy said, this fear of .NET is totally incomprehensible. e 
> have created a massive application that is extremely performant; you 
> can't tell it isn't what some would regard as "native".


I can always tell when the .NET libs are being loaded in... but maybe I've worked with Delphi apps too long!
0
Captain
8/14/2011 5:58:35 PM
Ralf Stocker wrote:

> > Those that use Delphi, apparently. I don't understand this fear for
> > .NET. It is just another framework.
> 
> I don't want to see these technologies (J#, .net, Java, ...) on my 
> computer. Performance has prio 1.

How do they influence performance? 

ISTM that there are many misconceptions in the heads of people about
..NET.

-- 
Rudy Velthuis

"Small minds run in the same gutter."
 -- Alfred E. Neuman
0
Rudy
8/14/2011 6:02:26 PM
> {quote:title=Bruce McGee wrote:}{quote}
> > {quote:title=Captain America wrote:}{quote}
> > Because the installer is now 3GB instead of 50MB as in Delphi 7?
> 
> The size of the Delphi 7 Enterprise install disk is 649MB.  The Delphi XE .iso is about 1.84GB (Delphi Prism and RadPHP not included).


When you strip if of all those extras (manuals, Acrobat readers, icon designers, etc) it's less than 100MB. Sorry, I don't have it handy now. But typically you just need setup.exe plus one Installshield file (data...). You can't do that with XE.
0
Captain
8/14/2011 6:02:52 PM
Captain America wrote:

> I can always tell when the .NET libs are being loaded in... but maybe
> I've worked with Delphi apps too long!

But how does the presence of .NET on your HD influence performance? You
may notice it if you USE it, but otherwise?

And of course you can tell when the .NET libs are loaded in: Delphi
shows it in the startup screen. You should also notice that it takes
almost as long, if not longer, to load all the native DLLs, which the
startup screen also shows.

-- 
Rudy Velthuis

"In order to avoid being called a flirt, she always yielded 
 easily." -- Charles, Count Talleyrand
0
Rudy
8/14/2011 6:06:08 PM
Captain America wrote:

> > {quote:title=Rudy Velthuis (TeamB) wrote:}{quote}
> > Captain America wrote:
> > 
> > > > Delphi XE offers a lot more than Delphi 7. And I assume that
> > > > most will already have .NET installed. You only download .NET
> > > > if you don't have it yet, so .NET should not play a big role in
> > > > the install size.
> > > 
> > > Yeah, and how many users use those .NET  based functions
> > > practically?
> > 
> > Those that use Delphi, apparently. I don't understand this fear for
> > .NET. It is just another framework.
> 
> Another con: once you have it on your system, when windows update
> kicks in it also wants to update .NET. And these are hundreds of
> megabytes which translate directly into lost minutes of waiting.

LOL! Is that honestly your argument? That it takes some time to
download?

-- 
Rudy Velthuis

Cohn's Law: The more time you spend in reporting on what you are 
doing, the less time you have to do anything.  Stability is 
achieved when you spend all your time reporting on the nothing 
you are doing.
0
Rudy
8/14/2011 6:07:57 PM
> {quote:title=Joanna Carter (TeamB) wrote:}{quote}
> On 2011-08-14 18:32:38 +0100, Ralf Stocker said:
> 
> > I don't want to see these technologies (J#, .net, Java, ...) on my
> > computer. Performance has prio 1.
> 
> And, like Rudy said, this fear of .NET is totally incomprehensible. e 
> have created a massive application that is extremely performant; you 
> can't tell it isn't what some would regard as "native".

As a .NET person you are biased towards .NET. And I am biased too. But I want a choice: this is my OS, and I decide what to put on it. Some people don't want that choice and in 5 years they will be happily downloading Delphi XE7 10 GB ISO disc (humming "HDDs are so cheap nowadays...").
0
Captain
8/14/2011 6:07:59 PM
On 14.08.2011 21:07, Captain America wrote:
> ... But I want a choice: this is my OS, and I decide what to put on it. ...

Microsoft would disagree.
0
Alexandru
8/14/2011 6:15:24 PM
>
> Why "fortunately"? If it has .NET, what would that change?
>
Fastest disc access
0
Gilbert
8/14/2011 6:15:40 PM
Captain America wrote:

> > And, like Rudy said, this fear of .NET is totally incomprehensible.
> > e have created a massive application that is extremely performant;
> > you can't tell it isn't what some would regard as "native".
> 
> As a .NET person you are biased towards .NET. And I am biased too.
> But I want a choice: this is my OS, and I decide what to put on it.

Then don't get Vista or Win7, since then you will have .NET and you
won't be able to remove it. You'll have to stay with your old version
of XP (updates do install .NET too).

-- 
Rudy Velthuis

"Democracy is four wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for
 lunch."
 -- Ambrose Bierce
0
Rudy
8/14/2011 6:21:19 PM
Gilbert Padilla wrote:

> > 
> > Why "fortunately"? If it has .NET, what would that change?
> > 
> Fastest disc access

How?

-- 
Rudy Velthuis

"Some cause happiness wherever they go; others, whenever 
 they go." -- Oscar Wilde
0
Rudy
8/14/2011 6:21:20 PM
> 
> An excellent point -- I doubt that the market demand for a FireMonkey
> based IDE would outstrip the demand for any number of other things.

I agree, but I think it would make great IDEs for things like Databases.
I for one am going to look at creating a firemonkey version of my PostgreSQL admin
program, I am just hoping some third party vendor comes out with a syntax editor for
it and I will be all set.

--
Tony Caduto
AM Software Design
http://www.amsoftwaredesign.com
0
Tony
8/14/2011 6:36:26 PM
> {quote:title=Rudy Velthuis (TeamB) wrote:}{quote}

> Then don't get Vista or Win7, since then you will have .NET and you
> won't be able to remove it. You'll have to stay with your old version
> of XP (updates do install .NET too).

And I don't. Full freedom: Linux host + several Win XP VM's.
0
Captain
8/14/2011 7:34:24 PM
> {quote:title=Rudy Velthuis (TeamB) wrote:}{quote}
> Captain America wrote:
> 
> > > {quote:title=Rudy Velthuis (TeamB) wrote:}{quote}
> > > Captain America wrote:
> > > 
> > > > > Delphi XE offers a lot more than Delphi 7. And I assume that
> > > > > most will already have .NET installed. You only download .NET
> > > > > if you don't have it yet, so .NET should not play a big role in
> > > > > the install size.
> > > > 
> > > > Yeah, and how many users use those .NET  based functions
> > > > practically?
> > > 
> > > Those that use Delphi, apparently. I don't understand this fear for
> > > .NET. It is just another framework.
> > 
> > Another con: once you have it on your system, when windows update
> > kicks in it also wants to update .NET. And these are hundreds of
> > megabytes which translate directly into lost minutes of waiting.
> 
> LOL! Is that honestly your argument? That it takes some time to
> download?

download, install, reboot. I run several VM's, do the math. 

I am much happier without .NET on them. My choice.
0
Captain
8/14/2011 7:36:31 PM
Captain America wrote:

> > {quote:title=Rudy Velthuis (TeamB) wrote:}{quote}
> 
> > Then don't get Vista or Win7, since then you will have .NET and you
> > won't be able to remove it. You'll have to stay with your old
> > version of XP (updates do install .NET too).
> 
> And I don't. Full freedom: Linux host + several Win XP VM's.

That is so cool. Or is it?

-- 
Rudy Velthuis

"In all affairs, it's a healthy thing now and then to hang a
 question mark on the things you have long taken for granted."
 -- Bertrand Russell
0
Rudy
8/14/2011 7:41:24 PM
Captain America wrote:

> > {quote:title=Rudy Velthuis (TeamB) wrote:}{quote}
> > Captain America wrote:
> > 
> > > > {quote:title=Rudy Velthuis (TeamB) wrote:}{quote}
> > > > Captain America wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > > > Delphi XE offers a lot more than Delphi 7. And I assume that
> > > > > > most will already have .NET installed. You only download
> > > > > > .NET if you don't have it yet, so .NET should not play a
> > > > > > big role in the install size.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Yeah, and how many users use those .NET  based functions
> > > > > practically?
> > > > 
> > > > Those that use Delphi, apparently. I don't understand this fear
> > > > for .NET. It is just another framework.
> > > 
> > > Another con: once you have it on your system, when windows update
> > > kicks in it also wants to update .NET. And these are hundreds of
> > > megabytes which translate directly into lost minutes of waiting.
> > 
> > LOL! Is that honestly your argument? That it takes some time to
> > download?
> 
> download, install, reboot. I run several VM's, do the math. 

That you run several VMs is your problem, not a general one. FWIW, I
also run several VMs (XP, Vista, Win7) on a iMac. I am writing this on
the Win7 one. Downloading .NET and rebooting didn't happen yet. I guess
I was lucky. FWIW, I have Delphi XE an each of these VMs.

> I am much happier without .NET on them. My choice.

Sure. I assume you are also happy with some old-timer version of
Delphi, then. Your choice indeed.

-- 
Rudy Velthuis

"We only acknowledge small faults in order to make it appear
 that we are free from great ones." -- La Rochefoucauld
0
Rudy
8/14/2011 7:48:50 PM
> {quote:title=Captain America wrote:}{quote}
> > {quote:title=Bruce McGee wrote:}{quote}
> > > {quote:title=Captain America wrote:}{quote}
> > > Because the installer is now 3GB instead of 50MB as in Delphi 7?
> > 
> > The size of the Delphi 7 Enterprise install disk is 649MB.  The Delphi XE .iso is about 1.84GB (Delphi Prism and RadPHP not included).
> 
> 
> When you strip if of all those extras (manuals, Acrobat readers, icon designers, etc) it's less than 100MB. Sorry, I don't have it handy now. But typically you just need setup.exe plus one Installshield file (data...). You can't do that with XE.

I do.  

The Delphi 7 install folder is 464 MB.  I'm not sure how many of these you can get rid of and still have a valid install.

Rad Studio XE's install folder is 1.07 GB.  I know you can remove several language and SKU specific files and still have a valid install.

And, of course, you can reduce the installed size of either version by unchecking certain options.

You might be able to argue the .Net isn't the best platform to use for certain features, but I don't think the size argument alone carries much weight.

--
Regards
Bruce McGee
Glooscap Software
0
Bruce
8/14/2011 8:02:10 PM
On 14.08.2011 18:33, Rudy Velthuis (TeamB) wrote:
> Marius . wrote:
>
>>>>
>>>> Because the installer is now 3GB instead of 50MB as in Delphi 7?
>>>
>>> Delphi XE offers a lot more than Delphi 7.
>>
>> He is using XE and is just comparing. I assume he's creating a VM and
>> installs XE and app sources to test specific application
>> configurations. I can imaging he would be happy to leave out all of
>> the .net requirements.
>
> Even in a VM, .NET should be installed already. My XP Professional, my
> Vista and Win7 came with .NET and they can't even be removed.
>
> So the difference in size is certainly not due to .NET. It is due to
> extended functionality.

The first version of XP came without, so the first thing I had to do was 
install .NET. But, it was a matter of a few seconds of download from 
Microsoft. nothing on the CD.

So I don't understand what's the problem :-)
0
Alf
8/14/2011 8:08:37 PM
> {quote:title=Captain America wrote:}{quote}
> Yeah, and how many users use those .NET  based functions practically?

Good question.  Some features are a little obscure and not everyone knows they even exist (marketing opportunity?).  Others are more common, but it isn't obvious that they also use functionality written in .Net.

- Audits and metrics.
- Diagrams (including generating sequence diagrams)
- Documentation generation
- Data Explorer (including query builder)
- Error Insight (long maligned but much improved)
- Unit test integration
- Refactoring
- Code Formatter
- MSBuild integration

I'm pretty sure there are more, but these are the ones I found.

> Ask a question about code metrics (written in J#) and you'll see how many responses you'll get. Many don't even know they are available. I would be very happy if the installer asked me: do you want to install all this .NET crap in Delphi IDE?

Originally written in Java and ported to J# (path of least resistance?) after Borland purchased TogetherSoft.

> My prediction is that way over 50% would say "no" and they'd enjoy a 5 minute install process. Delphi 7 installs in less than a minute! For XE often one hour is not enough!

Maybe.  If they don't need or are willing to give up the features that rely on it.

--
Regards
Bruce McGee
Glooscap Software
0
Bruce
8/14/2011 8:25:52 PM
Ralf Stocker wrote:

> 
> I don't want to see these technologies (J#, .net, Java, ...) on my 
> computer. Performance has prio 1.

Everyone's different -- that's your priority.

As for me, I'm fine with all of it, even Java's JVM.  

I just find it humorous that people are so militant about it -- if you
don't like .Net, great. But don't act like it's the Sharks and the Jets.

-- 
Nick Hodges -- Product Development Manager
Gateway Ticketing Systems
http://www.gatewayticketing.com
0
Nick
8/14/2011 9:27:38 PM
Captain America wrote:

> I am much happier without .NET on them. My choice.

Indeed -- why anyone cares either way is beyond me. 

As I said to Rolf -- the funny part is that people get so upset about
it.

-- 
Nick Hodges -- Product Development Manager
Gateway Ticketing Systems
http://www.gatewayticketing.com
0
Nick
8/14/2011 9:29:35 PM
>And of course you can tell when the .NET libs are loaded in: Delphi
>shows it in the startup screen. You should also notice that it takes
>almost as long, if not longer, to load all the native DLLs, which the
>startup screen also shows.

Each time i want to use refactoring and start to click on the
refactoring menu i have to wait for about 15 to 20 seconds (that only
happends the first time obviously). I'm not sure if its parsing my
project or is loading the libraries though. I do know that delay is
really annoying if you use delphi day in day out and have to restart it
every 3 hours.

Greetings,
Marius
0
sorry
8/14/2011 9:56:26 PM
Rudy Velthuis (TeamB) wrote:

>Ralf Stocker wrote:
>
>> > Those that use Delphi, apparently. I don't understand this fear
>>for  > .NET. It is just another framework.
>> 
>> I don't want to see these technologies (J#, .net, Java, ...) on my 
>> computer. Performance has prio 1.
>
>How do they influence performance? 
>
>ISTM that there are many misconceptions in the heads of people about
>.NET.

They do degrade the system. Just think on all the crapload of
optimizers like mscore* and java quick starters etc etc. These also
consume additional memory.
0
sorry
8/14/2011 9:59:33 PM
Marius . wrote:

> > And of course you can tell when the .NET libs are loaded in: Delphi
> > shows it in the startup screen. You should also notice that it takes
> > almost as long, if not longer, to load all the native DLLs, which
> > the startup screen also shows.
> 
> Each time i want to use refactoring and start to click on the
> refactoring menu i have to wait for about 15 to 20 seconds (that only
> happends the first time obviously). I'm not sure if its parsing my
> project or is loading the libraries though. I do know that delay is
> really annoying if you use delphi day in day out and have to restart
> it every 3 hours.

Hmmm... I don't restart it ever 3 hours and I never noticed a delay.
Not sure how that relates to .NET?

-- 
Rudy Velthuis

"A camel is a horse designed by a committee" -- Unknown
0
Rudy
8/14/2011 10:07:18 PM
Marius . wrote:

> Rudy Velthuis (TeamB) wrote:
> 
> > Ralf Stocker wrote:
> > 
> >> > Those that use Delphi, apparently. I don't understand this fear
> >>for  > .NET. It is just another framework.
> >> 
> >> I don't want to see these technologies (J#, .net, Java, ...) on my 
> >> computer. Performance has prio 1.
> > 
> > How do they influence performance? 
> > 
> > ISTM that there are many misconceptions in the heads of people about
> > .NET.
> 
> They do degrade the system. 

Installing them certainly doesn't degrade the system. Using them might,
but I guess I have been lucky.
-- 
Rudy Velthuis

"The purpose of software engineering is to control complexity,
 not to create it." -- Dr. Pamela Zave
0
Rudy
8/14/2011 10:09:38 PM
Rudy Velthuis (TeamB) wrote:

>Marius . wrote:
>
>> > And of course you can tell when the .NET libs are loaded in:
>>Delphi  > shows it in the startup screen. You should also notice
>>that it takes  > almost as long, if not longer, to load all the
>>native DLLs, which  > the startup screen also shows.
>> 
>> Each time i want to use refactoring and start to click on the
>> refactoring menu i have to wait for about 15 to 20 seconds (that
>>only  happends the first time obviously). I'm not sure if its
>>parsing my  project or is loading the libraries though. I do know
>>that delay is  really annoying if you use delphi day in day out and
>>have to restart  it every 3 hours.
>
>Hmmm... I don't restart it ever 3 hours and I never noticed a delay.
>Not sure how that relates to .NET?

Because refactoring is build on top of .net. Thats also my only problem
wiyth .net, its slow to start and degrades any system to a certain
degree.
0
sorry
8/14/2011 10:27:17 PM
Marius . wrote:

> Rudy Velthuis (TeamB) wrote:
> 
> > Marius . wrote:
> > 
> >> > And of course you can tell when the .NET libs are loaded in:
> >>Delphi  > shows it in the startup screen. You should also notice
> >>that it takes  > almost as long, if not longer, to load all the
> >>native DLLs, which  > the startup screen also shows.
> >> 
> >> Each time i want to use refactoring and start to click on the
> >> refactoring menu i have to wait for about 15 to 20 seconds (that
> > > only  happends the first time obviously). I'm not sure if its
> > > parsing my  project or is loading the libraries though. I do know
> > > that delay is  really annoying if you use delphi day in day out
> > > and have to restart  it every 3 hours.
> > 
> > Hmmm... I don't restart it ever 3 hours and I never noticed a delay.
> > Not sure how that relates to .NET?
> 
> Because refactoring is build on top of .net.

And you think it would be different if it weren't? As you say, the
delay is probably due to parsing the project.
-- 
Rudy Velthuis

"Success usually comes to those who are too busy to be looking 
 for it" -- Henry David Thoreau (1817-1862)
0
Rudy
8/14/2011 10:55:53 PM
Gilbert Padilla wrote:

> Fastest disc access

What?  Listen, if you seriously think .Net slows down your programs you 
probably ought to be in a different career.

-- 
SteveT
0
Steve
8/14/2011 11:45:38 PM
Marius . wrote:

> ......and degrades any system to a certain
> degree.

What!!??  "Degrades any system"?  You've absolutely no idea what you 
are talking about.

Did you know that .Net is just a bunch of DLLs?  If you don't call 
them, they sit there on the disc doing nothing.

Marius: you need to find another career.  Irrational prejudice, 
ignorance and illogical thinking have absolutely no place in software 
engineering.

-- 
SteveT
0
Steve
8/14/2011 11:49:31 PM
Captain America wrote:

> I 
> want a choice: this is my OS, and I decide what to put on it.

Wrong.  It's not your OS.  You've licensed it from Microsoft, and THEY 
decide what goes in it.  If you don't like that then you need Linux.

Look: .Net is a bunch of DLLs that do nothing at all apart from sitting 
on your capacious disk until a program calls them.  That's exactly like 
every other DLL on your hard disk.

-- 
SteveT
0
Steve
8/14/2011 11:53:30 PM
Captain America wrote:

> I am much happier without .NET on them. My choice.

But it's an irrational choice that smacks of prejudice.  If you develop 
software for a living, that worries me.

-- 
SteveT
0
Steve
8/14/2011 11:55:09 PM
Steve Thackery wrote:

> What?  Listen, if you seriously think .Net slows down your programs
> you probably ought to be in a different career.

;-)

-- 
Nick Hodges -- Product Development Manager
Gateway Ticketing Systems
http://www.gatewayticketing.com
0
Nick
8/14/2011 11:58:48 PM
>> I just find it humorous that people are so militant about it -- if you
>> don't like .Net, great. But don't act like it's the Sharks and the Jets.


I think part of the militancy stems from the fact that the path CodeGear (or 
what ever it was back then)  chose to support DotNet did serious harm to the 
product. Anyone who lived through Delphi 8, 2005 and to a lesser extent 2006 
debacle understands this.

That and the hype surrounding DotNet at the time, that it would become the 
only OS API. That whole era, where CodeGear lost focus on native 
development, has left a bad taste in the mouths of many developers.

Thankfully, since D2007 the situation is much improved, and for the first 
time I am eagerly awaiting the release of Delphi XE2.

I also, don't know that I have ever seen a DotNet desktop application that 
had the same or better performance than that of native desktop applications. 
That's just my experience. I accept the argument that DotNet made 
development easier, especially compared to C++ and the MFC.

Dan
0
Daniel
8/15/2011 1:32:39 AM
>> Look: .Net is a bunch of DLLs that do nothing at all apart from sitting
>> on your capacious disk until a program calls them. That's exactly like
>> every other DLL on your hard disk.


Steve,
    I believe that you have missed the point, every DotNet app, that has not 
been NGEN'ed for the specific hardware on which it is run, will have a 
performance penalty the first time any feature is used, relative to 
precompiled native code. Sometimes, it's a substantial penalty, though 
today's faster processors has alleviated the penalty to some extent. One of 
the first DotNet programs I wrote was interfacing to some NI hardware, the 
first call into the driver literarily to 1 minute and 35 seconds to return, 
subsequent call were quite fast. I'm sure the JITer is much faster today, 
but back then it gave a really bad first impression.

Dan
0
Daniel
8/15/2011 1:45:37 AM
"Daniel Sox" <thesoxfamily@verizon.net> wrote in message 
news:388148@forums.embarcadero.com...
>
> That and the hype surrounding DotNet at the time, that it would become the
> only OS API. That whole era, where CodeGear lost focus on native
> development, has left a bad taste in the mouths of many developers.

The hype around .Net was no worse than it was around Java when it came out - 
and with equally stupid claims: that all other languages would become 
obsolete and, as above, even (the absurd claim) the OS would be written in 
it.

However, behind the hype, in both cases, was some solid and worthwhile ideas 
that did prove themselves and have a legitimate place in the industry. And 
in the case of Java, Borland managed to produce the #1 Java IDE for a number 
of years before Eclipse took away its market.

> I also, don't know that I have ever seen a DotNet desktop application that
> had the same or better performance than that of native desktop 
> applications.

That is at least mostly due to the use of unaccelerated GDI+ being used for 
the UI. However, again with both .Net and Java, they have proved themselves 
more useful on the server side where there are no UI issues.

Either way it was perfectly correct for CodeGear to go after the .Net market 
and certainly correct to leverage .Net wherever it happens to be useful. If 
any are against .Net, to any degree, because of the way VCL.Net worked out, 
that is the same as blaming the messenger for the bad news he brought - it 
is just as irrational.

But I really doubt that is the reason; I think the bigger reason is just a 
general continuing hate for MS, and thus a hate for anything if it is 
produced by them. Even though every Delphi developer depends on Windows, 
there are a surprising number that seem to resent that fact - for reasons I 
cannot grok at all.


-- 
Wayne Niddery (TeamB)
HEALTH TIP: If you can't afford a doctor, go to an airport - you'll get a 
free x-ray and a breast exam and; if you mention Al Qaeda you'll get a free 
colonoscopy.
0
Wayne
8/15/2011 2:43:56 AM
> {quote:title=Captain America wrote:}{quote}
> > {quote:title=Rudy Velthuis (TeamB) wrote:}{quote}
> > Then don't get Vista or Win7, since then you will have .NET and you
> > won't be able to remove it. You'll have to stay with your old version
> > of XP (updates do install .NET too).
> 
> And I don't. Full freedom: Linux host + several Win XP VM's.

So why do you want to install all that new-fangled, bloated crap?  Real men can develop just fine with DOS 3.3 and Assembler.
--
Rick Carter
Cincinnati, OH
0
Rick
8/15/2011 3:16:59 AM
> {quote:title=Rudy Velthuis (TeamB) wrote:}{quote}
> Captain America wrote:
> 
> > > Even in a VM, .NET should be installed already. My XP Professional,
> > > my Vista and Win7 came with .NET and they can't even be removed.
> > 
> > I am a MSDN subscriber and the latest Win XP PROF EN ISO I download
> > does not come with ANY .NET environment!
> 
> I am not, and my XP Prof (German) DID come with .NET as a optional
> install. In Vista and Win7, it is not optional, and can't be removed
> either.
> 
> -- 
> Rudy Velthuis
> 
> "The use of anthropomorphic terminology when dealing with 
>  computing systems is a symptom of professional immaturity."
>  -- Edsger Dijkstra

XP came out in 2001 and .Net in 2002, so how can XP come with .Net?  Not even sp2 of xp comes with ,Net
0
Phillip
8/15/2011 4:25:03 AM
> {quote:title=Rudy Velthuis (TeamB) wrote:}{quote}
> Captain America wrote:
> 
> > > And, like Rudy said, this fear of .NET is totally incomprehensible.
> > > e have created a massive application that is extremely performant;
> > > you can't tell it isn't what some would regard as "native".
> > 
> > As a .NET person you are biased towards .NET. And I am biased too.
> > But I want a choice: this is my OS, and I decide what to put on it.
> 
> Then don't get Vista or Win7, since then you will have .NET and you
> won't be able to remove it. You'll have to stay with your old version
> of XP (updates do install .NET too).
> 
> -- 
> Rudy Velthuis
> 

No, get Win8, where it will all be HTML 5 and Javascript.  :)
> "Democracy is four wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for
>  lunch."
>  -- Ambrose Bierce
0
Phillip
8/15/2011 4:28:21 AM
> {quote:title=Wayne Niddery wrote:}{quote}
> But I really doubt that is the reason; I think the bigger reason is just a 
> general continuing hate for MS, and thus a hate for anything if it is 
> produced by them. Even though every Delphi developer depends on Windows, 
> there are a surprising number that seem to resent that fact - for reasons I 
> cannot grok at all.

Give that man a kewpie doll!

That's exactly what it is.  And I am sometimes for a brief time swayed emotionally by those same arguments.  Especially when some Linux zealot chides me for not leaving Windows and doing everything in Linux.

And, the answer, of course, is, that my work place, as well as my other colleagues that I want to share files with and write programs for, are all firmly entrenched in Windows.  It would make about as much sense for me to shun .NET as it would for me to completely forget about programming in Windows using Delphi.  And as long as I'm writing Windows programs, I'm a customer of Microsoft, like it or not.
--
Rick Carter
Cincinnati, OH
0
Rick
8/15/2011 6:38:51 AM
> {quote:title=Steve Thackery wrote:}{quote}
> Captain America wrote:
> 
> > I am much happier without .NET on them. My choice.
> 
> But it's an irrational choice that smacks of prejudice.  If you develop 
> software for a living, that worries me.

why? why? why?

I don't care what my customers have on their desktops. But in my kingdom... I am the king!
0
Captain
8/15/2011 6:47:38 AM
>
>And you think it would be different if it weren't? As you say, the
>delay is probably due to parsing the project.

I dont know, i don't have the measuring tools to prove my point a 100%
unfortunately. The project is just 350k lines big so i should no see
the delay i guess. The delay is actually the most irritating when your
in code mode..
0
please
8/15/2011 7:29:33 AM
>What!!??  "Degrades any system"?  You've absolutely no idea what you 
>are talking about.
>
>Did you know that .Net is just a bunch of DLLs?  If you don't call 
>them, they sit there on the disc doing nothing.
>
Sure i do, its just a huge set of dll's with manager, optimizer etc
etc. Using just 1 dll of it (witch is already loaded by most OS) will
trigger a cascade of dll's loaded and that takes time. If the .net
optimizer is off it first needs to compile some of the internal code.

>Marius: you need to find another career.  Irrational prejudice, 
>ignorance and illogical thinking have absolutely no place in software 
>engineering.

Doublecheck, yes this is the nontech area ;)

Having to wait every day a couple of times on the slow performance of
refactoring stengthens my idea it can can be improved A LOT in that
corner. Or do you admit that waiting almost half a minuteis normal in
that corner?

With the upcoming multiplatform i still hope Embarcadero sees a way to
rewrite its ide since at this time its not portable to linuc/mac
(unless mono is a solution).
0
please
8/15/2011 7:35:17 AM
Rudy Velthuis (TeamB) wrote:

>> They do degrade the system. 
>
>Installing them certainly doesn't degrade the system. Using them
>might, but I guess I have been lucky.

Well, in the end it doesnt matter much because i have to live with it
anywhay, i guess not much works in windows 7 without it. Microsoft
finding a better way to boost the .net language speed would be
wunderfull ;)
0
please
8/15/2011 7:35:17 AM
Captain America wrote:

> And every time I set up a new VM, which is always Windows XP
> (smallest memory  footprint) I have to install .NET manually. Which
> takes longer than installing Windows itself.

That seems stupid. Why don't you just clone a VM where .NET is already
installed?
0
Anders
8/15/2011 7:45:36 AM
Ralf Stocker wrote:

> I don't want to see these technologies (J#, .net, Java, ...) on my 
> computer. Performance has prio 1.

Well, if they are just sitting unused on your hard disk, they will
hardly affect performance, will they? But they will be there when you
need them. Win-win situation in my eyes...
0
Anders
8/15/2011 7:50:02 AM
> Rudy Velthuis (TeamB) wrote:
> Why "sadly"?
> 
> -- 
> Rudy Velthuis
> 

As far as I am concerned , I can't say that that it has anything to do
with disk space, or speed,  or having .Net installed, as it is going to
be on most systems anyway. And getting rid of any dependency on .Net is
certainly not my highest priority, but I would still prefer it to not
be there.

Why? Simply because of the implicit suggestion that Delphi was not good
enough for the job.

I know the arguments about using the best tool for the job, and for
almost any other application I would agree, but when we are discussing
a direct competitor to Visual Studio and .Net development, then other
factors must come in to the equation.

Is Embarcadero really saying 'Well, this bit actually could not be done
with Delphi."? If that was the situation, then the response should have
been 'Why the heck not?' and to implement the required features in the
Delphi complier, not to go to your competitor and use their product.

Show me features of Visual Studio that have been implemented with
Delphi, and I will retract my argument. Otherwise, depencence on a
directly competing development platform suggests an admission
of inferiority.

HMcG
0
Hector
8/15/2011 11:13:37 AM
On 15/08/2011 5:23 AM, Steve Thackery wrote:
> Captain America wrote:
>
>> I
>> want a choice: this is my OS, and I decide what to put on it.
>
> Wrong.  It's not your OS.  You've licensed it from Microsoft, and THEY
> decide what goes in it.  If you don't like that then you need Linux.
>
I think if he does not like it then he should use nLite to strip out all 
the things that he does not like from WinXP.

You are right MS decides as to what to give in their OS but then the 
user also has choice as to what to keep from what is provided. ;)

Thanks to nLite and many such utilities.

Check this out: http://www.nliteos.com/nlite.html
0
Yogi
8/15/2011 12:38:24 PM
On 15-Aug-11 3:35 AM, Marius . wrote:
>
> Having to wait every day a couple of times on the slow performance of
> refactoring stengthens my idea it can can be improved A LOT in that
> corner. Or do you admit that waiting almost half a minuteis normal in
> that corner?
>
Pardon me, I just can't resist:

Refactoring might be slow, but at least its unreliable.

(In my environment, the various refactoring functions only work OK about 
50% of the time - its the most frustrating part of the IDE).

J.
0
John
8/15/2011 1:01:26 PM
> {quote:title=Phillip Woon wrote:}{quote}
> XP came out in 2001 and .Net in 2002, so how can XP come with .Net?  Not even sp2 of xp comes with ,Net

SP2 (on DVD) came with .Net as an optional installation. SP2 when downloaded installed the .Net framework.
0
Ken
8/15/2011 1:02:41 PM
> {quote:title=Steve Thackery wrote:}{quote}
> Captain America wrote:
> 
> > I 
> > want a choice: this is my OS, and I decide what to put on it.
> 
> Wrong.  It's not your OS.  You've licensed it from Microsoft, and THEY 
> decide what goes in it.  If you don't like that then you need Linux.


Nope, it is *my* OS. I can go my Windows folder and put/remove whatever I want there. And Microsoft can not breathe a word.
0
Captain
8/15/2011 1:03:12 PM
> {quote:title=Rudy Velthuis (TeamB) wrote:}{quote}
> > > Even in a VM, .NET should be installed already. My XP Professional,
> > > my Vista and Win7 came with .NET and they can't even be removed.
> > 
> > I am a MSDN subscriber and the latest Win XP PROF EN ISO I download
> > does not come with ANY .NET environment!
> 
> I am not, and my XP Prof (German) DID come with .NET as a optional
> install

An optional 1.x version, yes, that is I recall too. 

But unless you are still running Turbo Explorer, .NET 1.x will not help you with .NET requirements of recent Delphis
0
Marco
8/15/2011 1:03:16 PM
> {quote:title=Daniel Sox wrote:}{quote}

> Steve,
>     I believe that you have missed the point, every DotNet app, that has not 
> been NGEN'ed for the specific hardware on which it is run, will have a 
> performance penalty the first time any feature is used, relative to 
> precompiled native code. Sometimes, it's a substantial penalty, though 
> today's faster processors has alleviated the penalty to some extent. One of 
> the first DotNet programs I wrote was interfacing to some NI hardware, the 
> first call into the driver literarily to 1 minute and 35 seconds to return, 
> subsequent call were quite fast. I'm sure the JITer is much faster today, 
> but back then it gave a really bad first impression.

Note that native apps are faster as well!
0
Captain
8/15/2011 1:04:19 PM
> {quote:title=Hector McGillivray wrote:}{quote}
> Why? Simply because of the implicit suggestion that Delphi was not good
> enough for the job.

This is nonsense. Choosing to use something already implemented and making the job easier is smart business, not an admission of poor quality or capabilities.

Your argument is like saying a building contractor is not good enough because they don't cut their own trees and mill their own lumber. They don't do that because it doesn't make sense; there are other companies that do that, and sell the ready to use products.

Car manufacturers don't make all of their own parts for the same reason. They buy from parts manufacturers (for instance, Delphi or AC Delco) because it's more efficient and cost effective.

Using .Net because they could leverage things that already existed had  nothing to do with whether or not Delphi itself could be used. It had to do with getting a product to market that worked, had decent features to improve productivity for programmers, and stayed competitive.

Your argument makes about as much sense as if you'd said Delphi was saying it  was inferior because Borland chose to use the Windows API to create windows, buttons, and so forth instead of writing their own libraries to accomplish the same thing. I know of a couple of companies that did that, and they no longer exist today because they couldn't keep up with the functionality as the OS changed.

And .Net is part of the operating system, just like the Windows API. 

> I know the arguments about using the best tool for the job, and for
> almost any other application I would agree, but when we are discussing
> a direct competitor to Visual Studio and .Net development, then other
> factors must come in to the equation.

But that's not what we're discussing at all. Delphi is not a .Net language, and VS barely produces native applications any more. They're not directly competing; they're targeting different developers for the most part.

> Is Embarcadero really saying 'Well, this bit actually could not be done
> with Delphi."? 

No. They're saying "we're smart enough  to use something that already exists that does what we need, so we can use our resources where they can add more functionality and value to our products and keep us in business longer".

> Show me features of Visual Studio that have been implemented with
> Delphi, and I will retract my argument. Otherwise, depencence on a
> directly competing development platform suggests an admission
> of inferiority.

Again, they're not directly competing. And MS has mega$$$$ to invest in developing things to support it's own OS (since they also make money from selling it and Office, as well as other things). MS deciding to write their own stuff in it's entirety sometimes makes sense; but sometimes even they choose to buy other people's work instead of reinventing the wheel. It's simply good business. 


> 
> HMcG
0
Ken
8/15/2011 1:35:03 PM
Captain America wrote:

> And every time I set up a new VM, which is always Windows XP
> (smallest memory  footprint) I have to install .NET manually. Which
> takes longer than installing Windows itself.

So, make an XP VM with .NET on it, and use that as the baseline when
setting up new VMs. Problem solved.

You're welcome.
0
Tom
8/15/2011 2:03:55 PM
Captain America wrote:

> I would be very happy if the installer asked me: do 
> you want to install all this .NET crap in Delphi IDE?

I doubt that. You strike me as someone who actively looks for reasons
to be unhappy.
0
Tom
8/15/2011 2:09:24 PM
On 15.08.2011 09:29, Marius . wrote:
>>
>> And you think it would be different if it weren't? As you say, the
>> delay is probably due to parsing the project.
>
> I dont know, i don't have the measuring tools to prove my point a 100%
> unfortunately. The project is just 350k lines big so i should no see
> the delay i guess. The delay is actually the most irritating when your
> in code mode..

Try to monitor with sysInternals ProcMon and you may perhaps observe lot 
of paging occuring. It take lot of time to load the different source 
files and parsing them.

Maybe your main problem, like me, is tooooooo little available RAM.
0
Alf
8/15/2011 2:56:46 PM
"Hector McGillivray" wrote in message news:388233@forums.embarcadero.com...
>
> Why? Simply because of the implicit suggestion that Delphi was not good
> enough for the job.
>
> I know the arguments about using the best tool for the job, and for
> almost any other application I would agree, but when we are discussing
> a direct competitor to Visual Studio and .Net development, then other
> factors must come in to the equation.

This is the exact same argument as saying "If .Net is so good why doesn't MS 
rewrite Office completely in .Net?" And the answer is also exactly the same: 
because there is no valid reason to go to the expense of writing from 
scratch when you already have a working model, just for the sake of changing 
its language.

Borland bought TogetherSoft which is where the modelling and refactoring 
engines came from - all written in Java. If they had spent resources to 
rewrite all that in Delphi then *something else* in Delphi would have had to 
give, possibly delaying even further 64 bit or not getting other features 
yet that we already enjoy. Instead they did what any rational company should 
do - they did only what was necessary to make it work in the Delphi IDE 
which in this case was a relatively simple port of source code from Java to 
J#.

From that point, adding new features to extend the existing refactoring or 
modelling very naturally *should* be done within the existing code base, 
still no excuse to rewrite the entire thing.

Of course when the first version of Delphi came out, I remember a lot of 
complaints demanding to know why this new product was done using Pascal 
instead of C++ (oblivious to the fact that Delphi was in fact the next 
version of the Pascal product line) - and when the first version of 
C++Builder was released, the dismay many customers expressed that C++Builder 
had to use a VCL written in Pascal and suggesting the VCL should have been 
or should be *rewritten* in C++.

Same stupid argument!

-- 
Wayne Niddery (TeamB)
HEALTH TIP: If you can't afford a doctor, go to an airport - you'll get a 
free x-ray and a breast exam and; if you mention Al Qaeda you'll get a free 
colonoscopy.
0
Wayne
8/15/2011 4:19:15 PM
Captain America wrote:

> As a .NET person you are biased towards .NET. And I am biased too.
> But I want a choice: this is my OS, and I decide what to put on it.

Well, the solution is obvious. If you choose not to use a version of
Windows that has .NET with it, then you must perforce use a version of
Delphi which does not require .NET.

That Delphi XE requires .NET, and therefore is not usable by you, is
/not/ a problem with XE. You are merely being faced with the
inescapable consequences of your own choices.

Technology changes constantly. Nothing requires you to keep pace if you
don't choose to. But make no mistake, the world doesn't give a damn if
you don't choose to keep up, and your complaints amount to nothing more
than sour grapes.
0
Tom
8/15/2011 4:25:32 PM
Steve Thackery wrote:

> But it's an irrational choice that smacks of prejudice.  If you
> develop software for a living, that worries me.

I have that exact same worry about most of our politicians.
0
Tom
8/15/2011 4:35:00 PM
Is there a plan to rewrite the IDE using ALGOL?  APL?  Lisp? Forth?

Seems like about as productive.
0
Paul
8/15/2011 5:58:15 PM
The typical Delphi customer (those who purchase the IDE) often do so because of a preference for a non-.NET environment. Right or wrong in their notions about performance, there is something to be said for having a leaner environment. I think that some Team B members might want to go to a marketing class because their doing nothing to increase sales or cause anyone to want to tell others about the community here.
0
Jason
8/15/2011 7:30:18 PM
"Jason Goff" wrote in message news:388394@forums.embarcadero.com...
> The typical Delphi customer (those who purchase the IDE) often do so 
> because of a preference for a non-.NET environment.

I thinik the majority of customers that do or might choose Delphi are 
looking at far more than simply that it produces native non-.Net apps. It is 
the whole package and what it has to offer that matters, and for many 
customers that includes the fact that they can develop *both* native and 
..Net apps (the latter now via Prism). I predict Delphi sales will accelerate 
further *specifically* due to the next version's ability to target Mac and 
iOS platforms.

> Right or wrong in their notions about performance, there is something to 
> be said for having a leaner environment.

Certainly there is, but not in isolation - i.e. at the cost of something 
else important. It depends on what your goals and preferences are. There are 
always trade-offs.

>I think that some Team B members might want to go to a marketing class 
>because their doing nothing to increase sales or cause anyone to want to 
>tell others about the community here.

Our primary job here is neither sales nor marketing and we are not employees 
of EMBT, we are volunteers and we are customers just like you. Granted 
having TeamB as a whole has some degree of marketing value towards other 
programmers, just as MS MVPs do, but we speak here as ourselves with our 
individual opinions which often are not in agreement with each other let 
alone with other participants here.



-- 
Wayne Niddery (TeamB)
HEALTH TIP: If you can't afford a doctor, go to an airport - you'll get a 
free x-ray and a breast exam and; if you mention Al Qaeda you'll get a free 
colonoscopy.
0
Wayne
8/15/2011 8:24:39 PM
> {quote:title=Wayne Niddery wrote:}{quote}
 
> Our primary job here is neither sales nor marketing and we are not employees 
> of EMBT, we are volunteers and we are customers just like you. Granted 
> having TeamB as a whole has some degree of marketing value towards other 
> programmers, just as MS MVPs do, but we speak here as ourselves with our 
> individual opinions which often are not in agreement with each other let 
> alone with other participants here.

I appreciate the response Wayne. Some of my customers buy my software for reasons I
did not intend. I don't berate them for it. I'm not suggesting TeamB foster false ideas, but
could use a little more tact to those clinging to Delphi's idiosyncrasies and side (to them) benefits.
As to whether or not you're employed by EMBT is meaningless in this day and age. You
are the voice here and what you say enters our consciousness. Future sales are being 
made and lost right here in these forums.
0
Jason
8/15/2011 8:45:02 PM
Phillip Woon wrote:

> XP came out in 2001 and .Net in 2002, so how can XP come with .Net?
> Not even sp2 of xp comes with ,Net

Mine did. It was on the DVD. It was an optional install, but it was on
the DVD.

-- 
Rudy Velthuis

O'Toole's Commentary On Murphy's Law: Murphy was an optimist.
0
Rudy
8/15/2011 9:04:40 PM
On 2011-08-15 21:45:02 +0100, Jason Goff said:

>> {quote:title=Wayne Niddery wrote:}{quote}
> 
>> Our primary job here is neither sales nor marketing and we are not employees
>> of EMBT, we are volunteers and we are customers just like you. Granted
>> having TeamB as a whole has some degree of marketing value towards other
>> programmers, just as MS MVPs do, but we speak here as ourselves with our
>> individual opinions which often are not in agreement with each other let
>> alone with other participants here.
> 
> I appreciate the response Wayne. Some of my customers buy my software 
> for reasons I
> did not intend. I don't berate them for it. I'm not suggesting TeamB 
> foster false ideas, but
> could use a little more tact to those clinging to Delphi's 
> idiosyncrasies and side (to them) benefits.
> As to whether or not you're employed by EMBT is meaningless in this day 
> and age. You
> are the voice here and what you say enters our consciousness. Future 
> sales are being
> made and lost right here in these forums.

Furthermore, you are forgetting that TeamB are not there purely for the 
benefit of Delphi developers; some of us were chosen to support 
Embarcadero's other products and who may have never used Delphi.

My specialism is, primarily, OO design and .NET development, including 
Delphi Prism but I have previous experience in Delphi.

Joanna

-- 
Joanna Carter [TeamB]
0
Joanna
8/15/2011 9:05:33 PM
Marco van de Voort wrote:

> > I am not, and my XP Prof (German) DID come with .NET as a optional
> > install
> 
> An optional 1.x version, yes, that is I recall too. 
> 
> But unless you are still running Turbo Explorer, .NET 1.x will not
> help you with .NET requirements of recent Delphis

No, indeed. I merely mentioned that even my XP already came with .NET
and that it is not even optional in Vista or Win7. What do those Delphi
users who want to be .NET free (even .NET 1.x free, I assume) do? Use
Delphi 7 on an unupdated XP, and keep on using that, or what?

OK, if they do, that is their choice. Not a very rational choice, IMO.

-- 
Rudy Velthuis

"Insanity in individuals is something rare; but in groups,
 parties, nations, and epochs it is the rule."
 -- Nietzsche
0
Rudy
8/15/2011 9:08:30 PM
Steve Thackery wrote:

> Gilbert Padilla wrote:
> 
> > Fastest disc access
> 
> What?  Listen, if you seriously think .Net slows down your programs
> you probably ought to be in a different career.

<vbg>

-- 
Rudy Velthuis

"All rights left. All lefts reserved. All reserves removed. 
 All removes right."
0
Rudy
8/15/2011 9:08:52 PM
Marius . wrote:

> > 
> > And you think it would be different if it weren't? As you say, the
> > delay is probably due to parsing the project.
> 
> I dont know, i don't have the measuring tools to prove my point a 100%
> unfortunately. The project is just 350k lines big so i should no see
> the delay i guess. 

350k lines is not very much, but, depending on its structure, it could
explain the delay. I don't have such delays, and if .NET starting up
were the culprit, I should have them too.
-- 
Rudy Velthuis

"He is one of those people who would be enormously improved by 
 death." -- H. H. Munro (Saki) (1870-1916)
0
Rudy
8/15/2011 9:11:17 PM
Paul Doland wrote:

> Is there a plan to rewrite the IDE using ALGOL?  APL?  Lisp? Forth?
> 
> Seems like about as productive.

The IDE does not host Lisp, Forth, APL or Algol, but it does host
Delphi and C++Builder, so I can understand people thinking all was done
in those two languages. I don't understand those who think that the
fact that some of the stuff is done with the help of .NET is somehow a
problem.
-- 
Rudy Velthuis

"The most amazing achievement of the computer software industry
 is its continuing cancellation of the steady and staggering
 gains made by the computer hardware industry." -- Henry Petroski
0
Rudy
8/15/2011 9:14:17 PM
Rick Carter wrote:

> > {quote:title=Captain America wrote:}{quote}
> > > {quote:title=Rudy Velthuis (TeamB) wrote:}{quote}
> > > Then don't get Vista or Win7, since then you will have .NET and
> > > you won't be able to remove it. You'll have to stay with your old
> > > version of XP (updates do install .NET too).
> > 
> > And I don't. Full freedom: Linux host + several Win XP VM's.
> 
> So why do you want to install all that new-fangled, bloated crap?
> Real men can develop just fine with DOS 3.3 and Assembler.

Real men at least use the command line, even if it is in Linux. <g>

-- 
Rudy Velthuis

"Lying is done with words and also with silence."
 -- Adrienne Rich
0
Rudy
8/15/2011 9:15:24 PM
Steve Thackery wrote:

> Marius . wrote:
> 
> > ......and degrades any system to a certain
> > degree.
> 
> What!!??  "Degrades any system"?  You've absolutely no idea what you 
> are talking about.
> 
> Did you know that .Net is just a bunch of DLLs?  If you don't call 
> them, they sit there on the disc doing nothing.

Exactly. They might make my weekly defrag sessions longer, though. <g>


-- 
Rudy Velthuis

"Just as a picture is drawn by an artist, surroundings are
 created by the activities of the mind."
 -- Buddha
0
Rudy
8/15/2011 9:16:38 PM
Marius . wrote:

> Using just 1 dll of it (witch is already loaded by most OS)

Oh?

-- 
Rudy Velthuis

"The difference between 'involvement' and 'commitment' is like an 
 eggs-and-ham breakfast: the chicken was 'involved' - the pig was 
 'committed'." -- unknown
0
Rudy
8/15/2011 9:17:39 PM
John Furlong wrote:

> On 15-Aug-11 3:35 AM, Marius . wrote:
> > 
> > Having to wait every day a couple of times on the slow performance
> > of refactoring stengthens my idea it can can be improved A LOT in
> > that corner. Or do you admit that waiting almost half a minuteis
> > normal in that corner?
> > 
> Pardon me, I just can't resist:
> 
> Refactoring might be slow, but at least its unreliable.

Refactoring never produced the wrong results, for me. It does sometimes
refuse to refactor something due to an error I can't see, but that's it.

-- 
Rudy Velthuis

Goebel's Law Of Intellectual Obscurity: WHAT FUN IS IT TO BE AN 
EXPERT IF YOU MAKE YOURSELF EASY TO UNDERSTAND?
0
Rudy
8/15/2011 9:19:06 PM
Marius . wrote:

> Rudy Velthuis (TeamB) wrote:
> 
> >> They do degrade the system. 
> > 
> > Installing them certainly doesn't degrade the system. Using them
> > might, but I guess I have been lucky.
> 
> Well, in the end it doesnt matter much because i have to live with it
> anywhay, i guess not much works in windows 7 without it. Microsoft
> finding a better way to boost the .net language speed would be
> wunderfull ;)

What is wrong with the speed of .NET code? I don't see it. 

Which part of the OS uses .NET?
-- 
Rudy Velthuis

"The wit makes fun of other persons; the satirist makes fun of 
 the world; the humorist makes fun of himself." 
 -- James Thurber (1894-1961), 
    in Edward R. Murrow television interview
0
Rudy
8/15/2011 9:20:42 PM
Steve Thackery wrote:

> Captain America wrote:
> 
> > I 
> > want a choice: this is my OS, and I decide what to put on it.
> 
> Wrong.  It's not your OS.  You've licensed it from Microsoft, and
> THEY decide what goes in it. 

I won't start that argument again, but that is what they claim and what
most people accept. It is not true. My, all legal, copies of Windows
are mine, not MS's anymore.


-- 
Rudy Velthuis

"The most amazing achievement of the computer software industry
 is its continuing cancellation of the steady and staggering
 gains made by the computer hardware industry." -- Henry Petroski
0
Rudy
8/15/2011 9:24:25 PM
Captain America wrote:

> > {quote:title=Steve Thackery wrote:}{quote}
> > Captain America wrote:
> > 
> > > I 
> > > want a choice: this is my OS, and I decide what to put on it.
> > 
> > Wrong.  It's not your OS.  You've licensed it from Microsoft, and
> > THEY decide what goes in it.  If you don't like that then you need
> > Linux.
> 
> 
> Nope, it is my OS. I can go my Windows folder and put/remove whatever
> I want there. And Microsoft can not breathe a word.

While I agree it is yours, MS will invalidate your copy of Windows as
soon as you try to do an update and something substantial is missing.

-- 
Rudy Velthuis

"Good teaching is one-fourth preparation and three-fourths 
 theater." -- Gail Godwin
0
Rudy
8/15/2011 9:26:41 PM
Hector McGillivray wrote:

> > Rudy Velthuis (TeamB) wrote:
> > Why "sadly"?
> > 
> > -- 
> > Rudy Velthuis
> > 
> 
> As far as I am concerned , I can't say that that it has anything to do
> with disk space, or speed,  or having .Net installed, as it is going
> to be on most systems anyway. And getting rid of any dependency on
> .Net is certainly not my highest priority, but I would still prefer
> it to not be there.
> 
> Why? Simply because of the implicit suggestion that Delphi was not
> good enough for the job.

Oh, the NIH syndrome again?

Why should they completely re-write code they already acquired from
others which was in Java and now re-compiled as J#? Why should they
write their own build system when MSBuild works fine? Etc.

It is a sign of common sense that they don't try to rewrite things that
work fine, but happen to run on .NET, and instead allocate their
precious resources otherwise, i.e. on things that are far more
important.

Does it matter to me that the sound system in my car, installed there
by the manufacturer, was not designed and built by BMW but by Bose
instead? Should BMW design their own? Do I care that the battery is
Bosch?

-- 
Rudy Velthuis

"I failed to make the chess team because of my height." 
 -- Woody Allen
0
Rudy
8/15/2011 9:32:14 PM
Anders Isaksson wrote:

> Captain America wrote:
> 
> > And every time I set up a new VM, which is always Windows XP
> > (smallest memory  footprint) I have to install .NET manually. Which
> > takes longer than installing Windows itself.
> 
> That seems stupid. Why don't you just clone a VM where .NET is already
> installed?

Indeed, indeed. That is what I did.

-- 
Rudy Velthuis

"How wrong it is for a woman to expect the man to build the world 
 she wants, rather than to create it herself."
 -- Anais Nin (1903-1977)
0
Rudy
8/15/2011 9:32:57 PM
Wayne Niddery wrote:

> but we speak
> here as ourselves with our individual opinions which often are not in
> agreement with each other let alone with other participants here.

Sorry, but I disagree here... 

Oh.

-- 
Rudy Velthuis

"Mr. Madison, what you've just said is one of the most insanely 
 idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, 
 incoherent response were you even close to anything that could 
 be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now 
 dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and 
 may God have mercy on your soul." -- from movie Billy Madison
0
Rudy
8/15/2011 10:22:19 PM
> {quote:title=Wayne Niddery wrote:}{quote}

> This is the exact same argument as saying "If .Net is so good why doesn't MS 
> rewrite Office completely in .Net?"

Do you know they tried it with Windows? Some guy was blogging about it and eventually they threatened to sue him. Performance was horrible and they switched back to the native path.

Google is your friend. Oh, and this is not a story I heard from someone. I read it on the said blog.
0
Captain
8/16/2011 5:08:25 AM
> {quote:title=Anders Isaksson wrote:}{quote}
> Captain America wrote:
> 
> > And every time I set up a new VM, which is always Windows XP
> > (smallest memory  footprint) I have to install .NET manually. Which
> > takes longer than installing Windows itself.
> 
> That seems stupid. Why don't you just clone a VM where .NET is already
> installed?

Ever heard of Windows activation? You didn't? *That's* pretty stupid!

To solve that great mystery please read carefully now: some MSDN-based windows copies are NOT activation-free. Sleep well.
0
Captain
8/16/2011 5:21:23 AM
> {quote:title=Tom Corey wrote:}{quote}
> Captain America wrote:
> 
> > And every time I set up a new VM, which is always Windows XP
> > (smallest memory  footprint) I have to install .NET manually. Which
> > takes longer than installing Windows itself.
> 
> So, make an XP VM with .NET on it, and use that as the baseline when
> setting up new VMs. Problem solved.
> 
> You're welcome.

Thank you but no thank you. You are obviously NOT a MSDN subscriber.
0
Captain
8/16/2011 5:22:16 AM
> {quote:title=Rudy Velthuis (TeamB) wrote:}{quote}
> Anders Isaksson wrote:
> 
> > Captain America wrote:
> > 
> > > And every time I set up a new VM, which is always Windows XP
> > > (smallest memory  footprint) I have to install .NET manually. Which
> > > takes longer than installing Windows itself.
> > 
> > That seems stupid. Why don't you just clone a VM where .NET is already
> > installed?
> 
> Indeed, indeed. That is what I did.

And how is your spare Windows license doing?
0
Captain
8/16/2011 5:25:12 AM
> Do you know they tried it with Windows? Some guy was blogging about it and 
> eventually they threatened to sue him. Performance was horrible and they 
> switched back to the native path.
>
> Google is your friend. Oh, and this is not a story I heard from someone. I 
> read it on the said blog.

Ah! It's on the Internet. It must be true then.
0
Martin
8/16/2011 6:14:50 AM
> {quote:title=Martin Kammann wrote:}{quote}
> > Do you know they tried it with Windows? Some guy was blogging about it and 
> > eventually they threatened to sue him. Performance was horrible and they 
> > switched back to the native path.
> >
> > Google is your friend. Oh, and this is not a story I heard from someone. I 
> > read it on the said blog.
> 
> Ah! It's on the Internet. It must be true then.

Those with minimal brain power know how to filter out the junk. Do you?
0
Captain
8/16/2011 8:58:54 AM
Captain America wrote:

> Ever heard of Windows activation? You didn't? That's pretty stupid!
> 
> To solve that great mystery please read carefully now: some
> MSDN-based windows copies are NOT activation-free. Sleep well.

Are you saying that activating a valid license takes longer than
installing .NET runtime? Wake up.
0
Anders
8/16/2011 9:02:29 AM
Captain America wrote:

> Those with minimal brain power know how to filter out the junk. 

Thanks for admitting that you have minimal brain power.

-- 
Andy Syms
Technosoft Systems Ltd

"I find that the harder I work, the more luck I seem to have."
 -- Thomas Jefferson (1743-1826)
0
Andy
8/16/2011 9:53:46 AM
> {quote:title=Rudy Velthuis (TeamB) wrote:}{quote}
> Wayne Niddery wrote:
> 
> > but we speak
> > here as ourselves with our individual opinions which often are not in
> > agreement with each other let alone with other participants here.
> 
> Sorry, but I disagree here... 
> 

LOL

Dalija Prasnikar
0
Dalija
8/16/2011 10:10:13 AM
Rudy Velthuis (TeamB) wrote:

> Phillip Woon wrote:
> 
> > XP came out in 2001 and .Net in 2002, so how can XP come with .Net?
> > Not even sp2 of xp comes with ,Net
> 
> Mine did. It was on the DVD. It was an optional install, but it was on
> the DVD.

But is it the right version? I suspect it were some earlier version of
the .net, not the one required by Delphi.


ain
0
Ain
8/16/2011 10:10:41 AM
Rudy Velthuis (TeamB) wrote:

>Marius . wrote:
>
>> > 
>> > And you think it would be different if it weren't? As you say,
>>the  > delay is probably due to parsing the project.
>> 
>> I dont know, i don't have the measuring tools to prove my point a
>>100%  unfortunately. The project is just 350k lines big so i should
>>no see  the delay i guess. 
>
>350k lines is not very much, but, depending on its structure, it could
>explain the delay. I don't have such delays, and if .NET starting up
>were the culprit, I should have them too.

We got a large amount of thirdparty code, though delphi is only
pointing to the dcu's, dcp's end bpl's. Think i will try the procmon
Alf mentioned if i have some more free time
0
please
8/16/2011 10:35:17 AM
Yogi Yang wrote:


> I think if he does not like it then he should use nLite to strip out
> all the things that he does not like from WinXP.
> 
> You are right MS decides as to what to give in their OS but then the 
> user also has choice as to what to keep from what is provided. ;)
> 
> Thanks to nLite and many such utilities.
> 
> Check this out: http://www.nliteos.com/nlite.html



Er...

"nLite supports Windows 2000, XP x86/x64 and 2003 x86/x64 in all
languages.
It needs .NET Framework 2.0 in order to run... Check if you have it
already, maybe on some of your CDs before downloading if your
connection is slow."



Kind regards,
D.
0
Don
8/16/2011 12:08:27 PM
On 15-Aug-11 5:19 PM, Rudy Velthuis (TeamB) wrote:
> John Furlong wrote:
>
>> On 15-Aug-11 3:35 AM, Marius . wrote:
>>>
>>> Having to wait every day a couple of times on the slow performance
>>> of refactoring stengthens my idea it can can be improved A LOT in
>>> that corner. Or do you admit that waiting almost half a minuteis
>>> normal in that corner?
>>>
>> Pardon me, I just can't resist:
>>
>> Refactoring might be slow, but at least its unreliable.
>
> Refactoring never produced the wrong results, for me. It does sometimes
> refuse to refactor something due to an error I can't see, but that's it.
>
You are right Rudy, its mostly about not working (as opposes to getting 
the wrong result).  For me, common culprits are Find References, Find 
Unit, Declare Variable, and Declare field.  Its just an annoyance, but 
sometimes I have to restart the IDE to prod them into working again.

J.
0
John
8/16/2011 12:42:19 PM
No.
0
Farshad
8/16/2011 12:57:45 PM
Captain America wrote:

>> So, make an XP VM with .NET on it, and use that as the baseline when
>> setting up new VMs. Problem solved.
>> You're welcome.
 
> Thank you but no thank you. You are obviously NOT a MSDN subscriber.


That may be obvious, but it's also wrong.
And having a single baseline XP VP works very well. I've been doing it
for years.
0
Tom
8/16/2011 2:42:17 PM
> {quote:title=Tom Corey wrote:}{quote}
> And having a single baseline XP VP works very well. I've been doing it
> for years.

Huh?  When did we switch to talking about Vice Presidents?
--
Rick Carter
Cincinnati, OH
0
Rick
8/16/2011 5:22:01 PM
Rick Carter wrote:

> > {quote:title=Tom Corey wrote:}{quote}
> > And having a single baseline XP VP works very well. I've been doing
> > it for years.
> 
> Huh?  When did we switch to talking about Vice Presidents?

I'm suffering a slow death by acronym.
0
Tom
8/16/2011 6:45:25 PM
Yeah, ok, you got me. I was having a bit of a rant - bad day.

I really do appreciate the arguments for using the existing code from Together. It's just that the initial implementation of refactoring and modeling back in 2005 / 2006 was not that good, and that has probably coloured my opinion on the whole .Net dependency matter.

HMcG
0
Hector
8/16/2011 6:53:31 PM
Tom Corey wrote:

> I'm suffering a slow death by acronym.

MT.  SBI.

-- 
Cheers,
Van

"Half of what I say is meaningless..." - John Lennon
"Your job is to figure out which half." - Van Swofford
0
Van
8/16/2011 7:12:33 PM
Am 15.08.2011 01:45, schrieb Steve Thackery:
> Gilbert Padilla wrote:
> 
>> Fastest disc access
> 
> What?  Listen, if you seriously think .Net slows down your programs you 
> probably ought to be in a different career.
> 

Hm? The less you install on the system partition C. the smaller it can
be the more of it fits into the inner areas of the platters the faster
it is maybe? But I doubt it will be measurable...

At least it will speed up defragmentation: what's not there doesn't need
to get defragmented ;-)

Greetings

Markus
0
Markus
8/16/2011 8:24:03 PM
I've been using C# since 2.0.  I've built desktop and asp.net mvc apps in it.  It's bloody fantastic and by far the most productive environment I use.  All of this FUD about the garbage collector.  I don't think i've ever really had much of an issue aside from RAII issues that they fixed by adding the "using" keyword.


> {quote:title=Rudy Velthuis (TeamB) wrote:}{quote}
> Captain America wrote:
> 
> > > Delphi XE offers a lot more than Delphi 7. And I assume that most
> > > will already have .NET installed. You only download .NET if you
> > > don't have it yet, so .NET should not play a big role in the
> > > install size.
> > 
> > Yeah, and how many users use those .NET  based functions practically?
> 
> Those that use Delphi, apparently. I don't understand this fear for
> .NET. It is just another framework.
> -- 
> Rudy Velthuis
> 
> "Believe those who are seeking the truth. Doubt those who find 
>  it." -- André Gide
0
Mike
8/18/2011 1:30:19 AM
Ain Valtin wrote:

> Rudy Velthuis (TeamB) wrote:
> 
> > Phillip Woon wrote:
> > 
> > > XP came out in 2001 and .Net in 2002, so how can XP come with
> > > .Net?  Not even sp2 of xp comes with ,Net
> > 
> > Mine did. It was on the DVD. It was an optional install, but it was
> > on the DVD.
> 
> But is it the right version? I suspect it were some earlier version of
> the .net, not the one required by Delphi.

It was the one required by the Delphi I had then.

-- 
Rudy Velthuis

"Patriotism is the virtue of the vicious."
 -- Oscar Wilde
0
Rudy
8/19/2011 5:17:55 PM
Captain America wrote:

> > > That seems stupid. Why don't you just clone a VM where .NET is
> > > already installed?
> > 
> > Indeed, indeed. That is what I did.
> 
> And how is your spare Windows license doing?

It is waiting to be used. <g> 

-- 
Rudy Velthuis

"An effective way to deal with predators is to taste terrible."
0
Rudy
8/19/2011 5:17:55 PM
Mike Margerum wrote:

> I've been using C# since 2.0.  I've built desktop and asp.net mvc
> apps in it.  It's bloody fantastic and by far the most productive
> environment I use. 

Burn the heretic!!!!
0
Tom
8/19/2011 6:39:36 PM
> {quote:title=Eric Fleming Bonilha wrote:}{quote}
> > What, Delphi's IDE?  I thought all the .Net stuff was gone, now.  
> > (Don't know, just thought I'd read it here.)
> 
> Sadly not... AFAIK the code refactoring is made in .NET

I wonder... 

Is .NET refactoring maintained out of house by a third party?
Is .NET refactoring used in other non RAD Studio products?
How large is the code base for refactoring?
Apart from the obvious effort part - is there any specific reason to keep refactoring .NET?
Why not rewrite the refactoring to native?

I am not biased towards .NET - but if Delphi is going into crossplatform GUI code - why not have a cross-platform IDE?
There is no better proof of concept than the dogfood way.

--
http://delphi.fosdal.com - Delphi Programming
http://plus.lars.fosdal.com - Google+
0
Lars
8/23/2011 7:31:14 AM
On 2011-08-14 15:38:22 +0000, Captain America said:

>> 
>> {quote:title=Rudy Velthuis (TeamB) wrote:}{quote}
>> Eric Fleming Bonilha wrote:
>> 
>>>> What, Delphi's IDE?  I thought all the .Net stuff was gone, now.
>>>> (Don't know, just thought I'd read it here.)
>>> 
>>> Sadly not... AFAIK the code refactoring is made in .NET
>> 
>> Why "sadly"?
> 
> 
> Because the installer is now 3GB instead of 50MB as in Delphi 7?

since the .NET framework installer is nowhere near 3GB (or even .5GB), 
i doubt that .NET is your problem, here.
0
marc
8/23/2011 12:40:50 PM
On 2011-08-23 03:31:14, Lars Fosdal wrote:

> I am not biased towards .NET - but if Delphi is going into
> crossplatform GUI code - why not have a cross-platform IDE?  There is
> no better proof of concept than the dogfood way.

Maybe they'll eventually do that, but I'd rather cross-compile and
remote debug now than compile & debug native in another year or two.
0
Anthony
8/23/2011 12:45:30 PM
On 2011-08-14 21:56:26 +0000, Marius . said:

>> 
>> And of course you can tell when the .NET libs are loaded in: Delphi
>> shows it in the startup screen. You should also notice that it takes
>> almost as long, if not longer, to load all the native DLLs, which the
>> startup screen also shows.
> 
> Each time i want to use refactoring and start to click on the
> refactoring menu i have to wait for about 15 to 20 seconds

news flash: .NET is loaded into Delphi right on startup; i know, 
because lots of our newer IDE integration for our Delphi prodicts is 
written in Prism (and incidentally loads uop just fina and fast). If 
invoking Refactoruing takes 20 seconds, that;'s not .NET's fault, it's 
the refactoring engine;'s fault (regardles sof what it is written in).

seriously, people.
0
marc
8/23/2011 12:45:57 PM
Tom,

> Captain America wrote:
> 
>> As a .NET person you are biased towards .NET. And I am biased too.
>> But I want a choice: this is my OS, and I decide what to put on it.
> 
> Well, the solution is obvious. If you choose not to use a version of
> Windows that has .NET with it, then you must perforce use a version of
> Delphi which does not require .NET.
> 
> That Delphi XE requires .NET, and therefore is not usable by you, is
> /not/ a problem with XE. You are merely being faced with the
> inescapable consequences of your own choices.
> 
> Technology changes constantly. Nothing requires you to keep pace if you
> don't choose to. But make no mistake, the world doesn't give a damn if
> you don't choose to keep up, and your complaints amount to nothing more
> than sour grapes.

best post i have read in this newsgroup in ages. well said!
0
marc
8/23/2011 12:52:18 PM
> {quote:title=Anthony Frazier wrote:}{quote}
> On 2011-08-23 03:31:14, Lars Fosdal wrote:
> 
> > I am not biased towards .NET - but if Delphi is going into
> > crossplatform GUI code - why not have a cross-platform IDE?  There is
> > no better proof of concept than the dogfood way.
> 
> Maybe they'll eventually do that, but I'd rather cross-compile and
> remote debug now than compile & debug native in another year or two.

I fully agree :)

--
http://delphi.fosdal.com - Delphi Programming
http://plus.lars.fosdal.com - Google+
0
Lars
8/23/2011 1:54:39 PM
<Lars Fosdal> wrote in message news:390959@forums.embarcadero.com...
Regarding "rewriting" the IDE in firemonkey...

> There is no better proof of concept than the dogfood way.
>

At the least, they should have a QC engineer trying to do it.

I've not doubt, with an engineer capable of such, that it would be much more 
than an academic exercise and if leveraged properly A)find problems with the 
underlying firemonkey libraries and tools, and B)maybe give them a potential 
product for other platforms.

The possible exception to (A), would be that there really aren't any 
problems to find. :)
0
david
8/23/2011 5:21:24 PM
>> Each time i want to use refactoring and start to click on the
>> refactoring menu i have to wait for about 15 to 20 seconds
>
>news flash: .NET is loaded into Delphi right on startup; i know, 
>because lots of our newer IDE integration for our Delphi prodicts is 
>written in Prism (and incidentally loads uop just fina and fast). If 
>invoking Refactoruing takes 20 seconds, that;'s not .NET's fault,
>it's the refactoring engine;'s fault (regardles sof what it is
>written in).
>
>seriously, people.

Thanks Marc,

Time they tackled that delay..
0
sorry
8/23/2011 5:46:25 PM
marc hoffman wrote:

> best post i have read in this newsgroup in ages. well said!


Thanks. My wife would probably suggest that it's not a good idea to
encourage me :-)
0
Tom
8/23/2011 9:47:45 PM
> {quote:title=Remy Lebeau (TeamB) wrote:}{quote}
> > I thought all the .Net stuff was gone, now.
> 
> You cannot develop .NET projects, but portions of the IDE use .NET 
> internally.

Good ol' Non-tech. Missed it and didn't know :) 

I'm going back to Delphi (as hobbyist mainly, and small projects) after many years. Just stayed at the legendary Delphi 7 because it does the job. Even in Win7 64bit (blame it on Borland, they did a great product :))  I tried many of the versions after Delphi 7 but I never felt the real need to upgrade; in fact I was going to buy XE because I wanted proper Win7 support (nothing fancy, hopefully some enhancend controls, code folding) and the local Embarcadero dealer let me know they would give me a XE2 ins
tead with many nice changes (too bad I was *one* day late for the XE2 tour ..).

Thing is, back when I got my hands on the first .NETified IDE I felt it less "responsive" than Delphi 7's. I felt the initial resistance to .NET as a programmer; we were taught that "no dependency" on DLLs was better. I felt the same with the first programs I downloaded that were "written  in .NET". They were slow and had to get that .NET thing! Today I have a brand new i5 machine and response is great in the XE trial, .NET is there in Win7.. Maybe some us are still keeping the bad initial feeling when .N
ET would slow down your hardware; I don't have a problem anymore with .NET.

I'd also love to see a more "native" IDE, specially with Firemonkey, but that's not essential; I think for now Embarcadero should focus on adding great stuff like cross platform abilities, the IDE seems to be working fine as it is; anyway I'll let you know after a couple of months of working with my new XE2 ;)

Edited by: carlos saenz on Aug 27, 2011 10:35 PM
0
carlos
8/28/2011 5:35:26 AM
> {quote:title=Tom Corey wrote:}{quote}
> Well, the solution is obvious. If you choose not to use a version of
> Windows that has .NET with it, then you must perforce use a version of
> Delphi which does not require .NET.
> 
> That Delphi XE requires .NET, and therefore is not usable by you, is
> /not/ a problem with XE. You are merely being faced with the
> inescapable consequences of your own choices.
> 
> Technology changes constantly. Nothing requires you to keep pace if you
> don't choose to. But make no mistake, the world doesn't give a damn if
> you don't choose to keep up, and your complaints amount to nothing more
> than sour grapes.

<FLIPPANT>
Look, I wrote this in machine code - binary machine code actually, because that new-fangled assembler isn't going anywhere near my code...
</FLIPPANT>

'Tis ridiculous not to move with the times in this game! As for .Net, I agree with Rudy (shock!) that it is a bunch of DLLs that sit there doing nothing until called forth to perform. There's nothing wrong with that!
--
Mark Jacobs
www.dkcomputing.co.uk
0
Mark
8/30/2011 4:29:39 PM
> {quote:title=Mark Jacobs wrote:}{quote}
> 'Tis ridiculous not to move with the times in this game! As for .Net, I agree with Rudy (shock!) that it is a bunch of DLLs that sit there doing nothing until called forth to perform. There's nothing wrong with that!

Mark, watch out, or you're going to ruin your reputation at this forum.  You're starting to sound ... reasonable.  ;)
--
Rick Carter
Cincinnati, OH
0
Rick
8/30/2011 7:57:58 PM
Rick Carter wrote:

> Mark, watch out, or you're going to ruin your reputation at this
> forum.  You're starting to sound ... reasonable.  ;)

If he keeps it up we can always post links to his website.  ;-)

-- 
Andy Syms
Technosoft Systems Ltd

"It is forbidden to kill; therefore all murderers are punished
 unless they kill in large numbers and to the sound of
 trumpets."
 -- Voltaire
0
Andy
8/31/2011 8:16:10 AM
Reply:

Similar Artilces:

Is it posible to configure Delphi XE3 IDE to use Delphi 7 compiler/debuger
Hi! Like many other developer out there I have several project which has been developed with older version of Delphi (Delphi 7). Since theese projects rely on some components which are not compatible with newer versions of Delphi (no newer versions available) I'm forced to do any maintnance on theese projects using Delphi 7. Another solution would be to find replacment components which would provide me with same capabilities and work with latest versions of Delphi. But this would probbably require compleete rewritings of my projects (lots and lots of work). So currently I'm using...

Using Delphi 7 and Delphi 2010
I had a project in Delphi 7. I worked on it in Delphi 2010. When I try to open the .dpr again in Delphi 7, the IDE toolbar widens across both monitors, and Delphi 7 locks up. It appears that Delphi 2010 modifies the .dpr in a way that makes Delphi 7 unable to open it again. All my forms & units appear to open fine in D7 after D2010, except for the warnings on the ExplicitHeight and ExplicitWidth properties being missing... I can easily recreate the .dpr, but is this expected behavior? Thanks. Tom Field wrote: > I had a project in Delphi 7. > > I worked o...

delphi Win32 using delphi .NET dll
Hi, I'm trying to use a delphi.NET dll in delphi.WIN32. I am currently using CodeGear Delphi 2007 with version2(base version) of .NET I can get the dll to import into the WIN32 application the only problem is when i include things such as: "using Classes,DateUtils, SysUtils" in the .NET dll the win32 application will instantly hang when any of the dll functions are called. Any help would be great thanks. Also I have tried this example and it also crashes for me? http://cc.embarcadero.com/Item/22688 -Braden I also found this.. "The problem is that, wehn you instal...

To use or not to use Delphi
Sadly, it seems to me that there is a sort of race between the two threads, for and against using Delphi in new projects, with more or less the same users posting in both threads. Arguments are fiercely debated in both camps. Borland had their own vision. As a community, now that Delphi has changed ownership I believe we should try to be more consistent, more clear, and more articulate in what we expect from Embercadero in terms of Delphi. We can contribute to keeping Delphi alive and moving in the right direction. "Laurent Cocea" schrieb: > Sadly, it seems to me that there ...

How to use a delphi XE3 obj file in delphi 2007?
Hi, I'm migrating an application from delphi 2007 to delphi XE3 and I would like to do it in several steps. To do this I need to use a part of my new code (XE3) in the current delphi 2007 application. So I want to use the .obj file from my XE3 file. I know I have to use the {$L 'Filename'} and I know that I have to declare the functions that I want to use in external in my D2007 project. I wanted to make an easy and simple example to see how it works with only 1 function 'hello world' compiled in obj with XE3 but I can't find the way to use it in D2007. In D200...

can i use delphi 2007 bpls in delphi 2009
can i use delphi 2007 bpls in delphi 2009 ? "Gaetan SIRY" skrev i meddelelsen news:8703@forums.codegear.com... > can i use delphi 2007 bpls in delphi 2009 ? No. -- Finn Tolderlund The compatiblity between D2006 and D2007 was unique. Normaly they can't be compatible because new version enhance/change the API. And D2009 defines String = Unicode where older version has String = Ansistring so D200x/Dx-BPL are 200% incompatible with D2009. ...

Delphi 2006 vs Delphi 2009 IDE stability
Hello, all. I have medium sized project which includes about 20Mb of source code (just size of *.pas files). I use Delphi 2006. There are third party component suites JVCL, DevExpress Bars, Pegasus Imaging. All updates applied. The main problem is IDE stability. About four..five times a day IDE become unstable after intensive usage of code insight functions (most often I press Ctrl+Space key). The best outcome is that I have to save everything and restart the IDE. The worst outcome is when IDE stalls or falls into endless loop of error messages and any unsaved work is lost. OS...

Delphi and Delphi for .Net
It seems that Delphi for .Net is slower than Delphi Win32 native applicaiton. I would like to know is it true all .Net application is slower than Win32 native applicaiton or it is Delphi for .Net only. Your information is great appreciated, Inung On 2011-06-21 18:20:17 +0100, Inung Huang said: > It seems that Delphi for .Net is slower than Delphi Win32 native applicaiton. > I would like to know is it true all .Net application is slower than > Win32 native applicaiton or it is Delphi for .Net only. If you are only running the code in the application once then, yes, yo...

MOVED: Use Delphi XE TLB importer in Delphi 2007?
....to the ActiveX group: https://forums.embarcadero.com/thread.jspa?threadID=47170 -- Craig Stuntz · Vertex Systems Corp. · Columbus, OH Delphi/InterBase Weblog : http://blogs.teamb.com/craigstuntz/ ...

Debugging in Delphi XE2 using another Delphi BDS process as host
Hi I've been using delphi a long time And I always had the possibility of debbuging Packages using another Delphi process as host. This is very useful to test the design-time side of packages. Now with XE 2 I can whether running with options - Debugger - Host Application or Attach to process Any ideas? Thanks Plp Pedro wrote: > Now with XE 2 I can whether running with options - Debugger - Host > Application or Attach to process What exactly are you having trouble with? Error messages, unexpected behavior, etc. -- Remy Lebeau (TeamB) Hi Remy ...

I wrote an application and used cracked delphi 7, after i bought delphi 7
I wrote an application and used cracked delphi 7, I sold it, after i bought delphi 7 and recompiled application, is now my application legal or? > {quote:title=Ivan Ivanov wrote:}{quote} > I wrote an application and used cracked delphi 7, I sold it, after i bought delphi 7 and recompiled application, is now my application legal or? "I embezzled some money from my employer, returned the funds, and then got it back as a bonus. Can I still be arrested?" Uhhh .... didn't you just confess to a crime? > {quote:title=Ivan Ivanov wrote:}{quote} > I wrote an appli...

Trying to call a .DLL from Delphi XE (used to work with Delphi 6 :-) )
Hi everyone, I have a problem where perhaps some one could help point me in the right direction. In Delphi 6 I used a stand alone package to train a neural netowrk,. The trained neural network was stored as a .DEF file. The standalone software provided a .DLL and Delphi code to call the network and get the prediced values from your sw. (The .DLL was created in 2002 and apparently is 32 bit.) I have'nt used it for years but am now coming back to it.... I now use Delphi XE on Windows 7 (32 bit) The old .exe's I had compiled from that time work fine. However in Delphi XE ...

Re: Where is data form wizard in Delphi 2009? [pubic.delphi.ide]
This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand this format, some or all of this message may not be legible. --JivePart=_21560.zeB8CwDOH5aMJzMl Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Utf-8" Sample picture showing drag and drop from persistent fields edit window. (Any TField in any TDataset should work, TSomeKindofTable, or TSomeKindofQuery. Warren --JivePart=_21560.zeB8CwDOH5aMJzMl Content-Type: image/jpeg; name="drag_and_drop_from_persistent_fields_editor.jpg" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Disposition: attachment; ...

Can I use a DataWindow OCX in Delphi IDE?
I've tried to use a DataWIndow OCX, but got a message i have no design-time license. Can I set up a license? Is it legal practice to use this OCX in different IDE then Power++? How can I obtain license number ? Thank You. Max. No, it is not legal to use the Datawindow OCX in any tool other than Powerbuilder, Power++ and PowerJ. It shouldn't even be possible. They've got it locked down. -- Jim Egan [TeamPS] Dealer Solutions, LLC Houston, TX ...

Web resources about - Is there a plan to rewrite the Delphi IDE using FireMonkey ? - embarcadero.delphi.non-tech

Firemonkeys - GamesIndustry International
The world's leading games industry website. Get insight from todays industry leaders with news, interviews and analysis of global gaming trends. ...

Firemonkey’s Real Racing 3 To Launch At The End Of February
In September, Apple demoed Firemonkey’s Real Racing 3 at the iPhone 5 event . Three months later and the game has yet to show up in the App Store. ...

EA Games and Firemonkey Bringing Real Racing 3 to Android, Fasten your Seat Belts
Start up your engines race fans, EA Games is teaming up with Firemonkey to bring Real Racing 3 to mobile devices. If you’re a fan of more realistic ...

EA's Firemint and IronMonkey Studios Merge to Become FireMonkeys
... game development studios into one mega-studio in Australia. Firemint and IronMonkeys will be merged into a single studio now known as Firemonkeys ...

News: Firemonkeys announces Real Racing 3
Firemonkeys, a new gaming subsidiary of Electronic Arts born from the merger of FireMint and IronMonkey, has announced the coming release of ...

firemonkeys - iMore
EA has pushed out another impressive update to its equally impressive iOS racer, Real Racing 3, that for the first time brings cars from Ferrari ...

Firemonkeys on Real Racing 3 going free-to-play
... got a hands-on preview of Real Racing 3. We also spoke with Ptolemy Oberin, one of the game’s programmers and project lead at developer Firemonkeys, ...

Real Racing 3 coming in 2012 from Firemonkeys
The first game from recently merged developer Firemonkeys is Real Racing 3 , the developer revealed moments ago during EA's Summer Showcase event ...

Firemonkeys Previews Real Racing 3 for iPhone and iPad
Firemonkeys, the new combined studio from EA combining the IronMonkey and Firemint gaming studios, has announced the development of Real Racing ...

EA Mobile Moves: IronMonkey & Firemint Merge Into “Firemonkeys,” Now Have 50M Players Between
... that it is merging two top mobile game studios, IronMonkey and Firemint , which will fittingly combine to create a new company, called Firemonkeys. ...

Resources last updated: 12/10/2015 3:23:48 PM