Waiting for Mr. Arnold Aug 17, 2005 10:40
There are still many of the Delphi faithful that cling to the belief that Borland is committed to the future of Delphi. I admire their devotion in spite of what Borland executives have actually said recently.
Their justification seems to be rooted in being accustomed to Borland's management undervaluing, underpromoting and underfunding Delphi over the years. "Nothing has changed" in the eyes of the devout. "Trolls have been saying Delphi is going to die for years and Delphi has always survived" they maintain with blind faith in Borland.
Well, I believe that things have changed. I also believe that products do "die" or become irrelevant (which is pretty much the same as being dead). Delphi was a revolutionary product at one time. It has outlasted many of its competitors: VB (Win32), PowerBuilder, Gupta, etc. But it's on its last legs now.
The primary reason I believe things have changed is not because Delphi for dotNET was a hack, the poor quality of Delphi 2005, the commoditization of the IDE market or even the increasing quality/power of its direct competition. The reason is because of Borland itself. Just like the old times of Inprise, Borland has lost its way: they are no longer focused on the Developer. I base this on what Borland is saying themselves, not anything else.
Whenever I mention these kinds of things on non-tech, there seems to be a bunch of responses challenging my analysis or interpretation. That's fine and some of these posts present coherent arguments. I admire the devotion of the Delphi loyal even if Borland is intent on milking every last dollar out of Delphi.
What is very telling in many of these challenges is what aspects they actually challenge. Typically its an ancillary part of the main point (e.g. Mr. Coates motivations, or Delphi for .NET's Mono support).
But ultimately the doubt over Delphi's future remains. They cannot challenge what Borland's executive team themselves have said (although they find some creative ways to interpret what they say). I know there are some Delphi fans that doubt like I do, they have said as much in their blogs and in non-tech posts. This doubt is not good for Delphi; I sympathize with John Kaster and the Delphi R&D team.
I'm blogging here to say that the challenges to what I post in non-tech are misplaced. I understand why I am confronted, I am not painting a very rosy picture of Delphi's future. In general, people don't like to hear bad things. But it's not about what I say, it's about what Borland says. There is a very simple remedy that Borland can provide if they are willing to do so.
Borland has the opportunity to publish an Open Letter to the Delphi community explaining exactly how Delphi fits into their long-term ALM strategy. Expressing in non-ambiguous terms how they are as committed as ever to Delphi and the Delphi developer.
I believe a tactical RoadMap (that was ready back in June) is not sufficient to address the strategic questions being asked. That's not to say I wouldn't welcome a RoadMap, I would.
The longer Borland waits to do so and the more press Borland's executive team generates regarding their ALM transformation, the larger the doubt becomes within the Delphi community. Their silence on this issue is deafening.
So the ball is in Borland's court. Are you willing to remove the doubt Mr. Arnold? Can you honestly remove that doubt or have your plans for Delphi already been disclosed? We're waiting.
Write a comment
- Required fields are marked with *.