4 ms·

They had no control over other vendors' programming tools. Borland Delphi used a more difficult language, but generated compiled, autocontained faster binaries,

by narag 4y ago

They had no control over other vendors' programming tools. Borland Delphi used a more difficult language, but generated compiled, autocontained faster binaries, had a better out of the box library, similar third party components market (same language for programs and libraries, unlike VB that often used C++ controls) and was starting to develop a version for Linux. Microsoft had been poaching most of Borland's talent: https://techmonitor.ai/technology/microsoft_and_borland_bury_the_hatchet_sotto_voce https://techmonitor.ai/technology/microsoft_and_borland_bury... That included Hejlsberg. Take a look at the tools he created and worked on: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anders_Hejlsberg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anders_Hejlsberg Later something interesting happened. Microsoft settled just another suit, this time for office applications. I don't remember if it was a spreadsheet or a desktop database and I've been unable to find it in the news, but I clearly remember that Borland received $30M in cash and priviledged access to Microsoft's dev documentation. Then Borland abandoned Kylix, its Delphi version for Linux and released Delphi 8, that wasn't a native tool, but only worked on .NET. Next versions of Delphi included both .NET and native compilers and .NET creeped into Delphi IDE making it much slower. FUD was spreaded that Microsoft will eventually close all native developement and you will only will be able to use .NET to program for Windows. Delphi versions for .NET were never as good as VS, always lagging in features, and finally they were abandoned. But the distraction lasted long enough to kill the company. It's not the same to target a binary API and a virtual machine. The first must be stable, backwards compatible and follow specifications.

bazoom42 4y ago
So .net was a deliberate ruse to trick Borland into delivering a sub-par product? It’s weird because a very common complaint towards .net was that it didn’t allow you to build self-contained stand-alone applications the way VB6 and Delphi allowed. So possibly Borland could have attracted a lot of disgruntled VB6 developer who migt have found Delphi more familiar than VB.net. > FUD was spreaded that Microsoft will eventually close all native developement and you will only will be able to use .NET to program for Windows. Given the the dominace of Windows was because of the available software (and Microsofts dedication to backwards combatibility was legendary) I dont see why anybody would belive that.
- narag 4y ago
  Sorry for the delay, very busy lately. In case you're still there and interested in the answers: So .net was a deliberate ruse to trick Borland into delivering a sub-par product? Not exactly, they wanted to create a walled garden, more similar to an app store. Drivers and some specialized programs that require high performance would still need to be native. But most everything else they wanted inside .NET ecosystem. That would eliminate any competitive advantage that Delphi had. Given the the dominace of Windows was because of the available software (and Microsofts dedication to backwards combatibility was legendary) I dont see why anybody would belive that. And yet in the Borland forums at the time there was a very vocal faction, including many of the official evangelists, that bought it. Borland was caught in a trap that Joel Spolsky described perfectly: https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2002/01/06/fire-and-motion/ https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2002/01/06/fire-and-motion/ Microsoft offered access to docs. The bait. Also the price structure of Borland had gone horribly bad. The insisted in selling to the enterprise market because, they said, there's no money in reasonably priced dev tools. But that was just not true. JetBrains filled that gap. I believe Delphi still exists but it costs ten grands or something like that. Edit: another couple of factors why the wanted everything in .net were security (native is uncontrolable) and possibility of instantly disassembly the applications of any potential competitor. Yes, I know it sounds paranoid, but...
  - bazoom42 4y ago
    > they wanted to create a walled garden, more similar to an app store Clearly this didnt happen - you can still run native executables on Windows, here 25 years later. Indeed this is why Windows was and remains popular - the amount of software you can run on it, including decades old native binaries. .net was a reaction against Java which was considered an existential threat to Microsoft because it promised platform-indepentent software. (Turned out it was the web and javascript MS should have been worried about, but they realized that to late.) Delphi was never a threat to Microsoft. Microsoft was just happy when people developed windows native software. Selling windows was strategically much more important than selling dev tools, so they probably wanted delphi to be succesful. Java and the web is what killed Borland.

by narag 4y ago

bazoom42 4y ago

So .net was a deliberate ruse to trick Borland into delivering a sub-par product? It’s weird because a very common complaint towards .net was that it didn’t allow you to build self-contained stand-alone applications the way VB6 and Delphi allowed. So possibly Borland could have attracted a lot of disgruntled VB6 developer who migt have found Delphi more familiar than VB.net. > FUD was spreaded that Microsoft will eventually close all native developement and you will only will be able to use .NET to program for Windows. Given the the dominace of Windows was because of the available software (and Microsofts dedication to backwards combatibility was legendary) I dont see why anybody would belive that.

narag 4y ago
Sorry for the delay, very busy lately. In case you're still there and interested in the answers: So .net was a deliberate ruse to trick Borland into delivering a sub-par product? Not exactly, they wanted to create a walled garden, more similar to an app store. Drivers and some specialized programs that require high performance would still need to be native. But most everything else they wanted inside .NET ecosystem. That would eliminate any competitive advantage that Delphi had. Given the the dominace of Windows was because of the available software (and Microsofts dedication to backwards combatibility was legendary) I dont see why anybody would belive that. And yet in the Borland forums at the time there was a very vocal faction, including many of the official evangelists, that bought it. Borland was caught in a trap that Joel Spolsky described perfectly: https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2002/01/06/fire-and-motion/ https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2002/01/06/fire-and-motion/ Microsoft offered access to docs. The bait. Also the price structure of Borland had gone horribly bad. The insisted in selling to the enterprise market because, they said, there's no money in reasonably priced dev tools. But that was just not true. JetBrains filled that gap. I believe Delphi still exists but it costs ten grands or something like that. Edit: another couple of factors why the wanted everything in .net were security (native is uncontrolable) and possibility of instantly disassembly the applications of any potential competitor. Yes, I know it sounds paranoid, but...
- bazoom42 4y ago
  > they wanted to create a walled garden, more similar to an app store Clearly this didnt happen - you can still run native executables on Windows, here 25 years later. Indeed this is why Windows was and remains popular - the amount of software you can run on it, including decades old native binaries. .net was a reaction against Java which was considered an existential threat to Microsoft because it promised platform-indepentent software. (Turned out it was the web and javascript MS should have been worried about, but they realized that to late.) Delphi was never a threat to Microsoft. Microsoft was just happy when people developed windows native software. Selling windows was strategically much more important than selling dev tools, so they probably wanted delphi to be succesful. Java and the web is what killed Borland.