Comments on: Why we didn’t convert to .Net. And perhaps we never will… http://windwings.wordpress.com/2009/11/09/why-we-didnt-convert-to-net-and-perhaps-we-never-will/ ...On the Wings of the Software Wind Wed, 08 Sep 2010 12:09:56 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.com/ By: Wings of Wind http://windwings.wordpress.com/2009/11/09/why-we-didnt-convert-to-net-and-perhaps-we-never-will/comment-page-1/#comment-1981 Wings of Wind Sun, 07 Feb 2010 07:21:09 +0000 http://wings-of-wind.com/?p=519#comment-1981 <em>"I have never seen one customer, engineer, etc… complain about it’s speed."</em> FYI, There were once enough complaints about ATI's Control Panel (writen in .NET). Nowadays the same phenomenon is seen with Nero (rewritten in .NET). Also, for your other affirmations can you back them up with some hard data? “I have never seen one customer, engineer, etc… complain about it’s speed.”
FYI, There were once enough complaints about ATI’s Control Panel (writen in .NET). Nowadays the same phenomenon is seen with Nero (rewritten in .NET).

Also, for your other affirmations can you back them up with some hard data?

]]> By: bbqchickenrobot http://windwings.wordpress.com/2009/11/09/why-we-didnt-convert-to-net-and-perhaps-we-never-will/comment-page-1/#comment-1977 bbqchickenrobot Sat, 06 Feb 2010 03:09:42 +0000 http://wings-of-wind.com/?p=519#comment-1977 @Lars: .NET is *NOT* only for windows. It runs on *nix flavors and some set top boxes via mono. Delphi is ok, but do business end users really care about small executables that are faster via bench mark stats? No. They don't. .NET is fast enough to handle the largest web sites, the largest business applications, etc. I have never seen one customer, engineer, etc... complain about it's speed. Delphi is dead. Maybe .NET is so huge because it's just that good. I think it's funny when people make all kinds of excuses for something rather than giving it the credit it deserves. Also, the productivity boost you get from using the VS.NET tools is HUGE. Another advantage to developers with clients with massive expectations to get their vision to market as quickly as possible. What about things like linq? Delphi (to my knowledge) does not have anything like this (lambdas). What about the fact that multiple languages can target the .NET CLR? In turn this means that no matter what language you are comfortable with, you are can write code for the target platforms without having to learn any new language tied to the platform. Java sucked and .NET would not have been here if Sun had not sued M$ over thier extensions to Java. Thank God they did. Otherwise we'd all be running on that horrible thing they call a JVM. Great for the *nix world though... well, until mono came out. @Lars: .NET is *NOT* only for windows. It runs on *nix flavors and some set top boxes via mono. Delphi is ok, but do business end users really care about small executables that are faster via bench mark stats? No. They don’t. .NET is fast enough to handle the largest web sites, the largest business applications, etc. I have never seen one customer, engineer, etc… complain about it’s speed.

Delphi is dead. Maybe .NET is so huge because it’s just that good. I think it’s funny when people make all kinds of excuses for something rather than giving it the credit it deserves. Also, the productivity boost you get from using the VS.NET tools is HUGE. Another advantage to developers with clients with massive expectations to get their vision to market as quickly as possible.

What about things like linq? Delphi (to my knowledge) does not have anything like this (lambdas). What about the fact that multiple languages can target the .NET CLR? In turn this means that no matter what language you are comfortable with, you are can write code for the target platforms without having to learn any new language tied to the platform.

Java sucked and .NET would not have been here if Sun had not sued M$ over thier extensions to Java. Thank God they did. Otherwise we’d all be running on that horrible thing they call a JVM. Great for the *nix world though… well, until mono came out.

]]> By: Daniel http://windwings.wordpress.com/2009/11/09/why-we-didnt-convert-to-net-and-perhaps-we-never-will/comment-page-1/#comment-1816 Daniel Wed, 09 Dec 2009 15:09:00 +0000 http://wings-of-wind.com/?p=519#comment-1816 very, very good post about delphi vs .net, the truth is that web apps, web services and every thing related to them are what the market requires, let's face it, the market is moving to the web 2.0 and delphi is weak in this point; i think this is what Embarcadero tries to managed with delphi prism, but on the other hand desktop's apps are way easier to develop with delphi. very, very good post about delphi vs .net, the truth is that web apps, web services and every thing related to them are what the market requires, let’s face it, the market is moving to the web 2.0 and delphi is weak in this point; i think this is what Embarcadero tries to managed with delphi prism, but on the other hand desktop’s apps are way easier to develop with delphi.

]]> By: Daniel http://windwings.wordpress.com/2009/11/09/why-we-didnt-convert-to-net-and-perhaps-we-never-will/comment-page-1/#comment-1767 Daniel Tue, 17 Nov 2009 04:37:59 +0000 http://wings-of-wind.com/?p=519#comment-1767 Actually, while the future may be the Internet, client web apps are increasingly "fat" but by a different nature. 1) When was the last time you visited a web site not running one of the following, oh by the way, requiring you to download something before using it: Flash, Acrobat, .Net (all versions), Shockwave, active X controls, COM Controls, you get the point. 2) Updates. Sigh all the updates, degrading system performace, reaking havoc on IT maintenance schedules and ensuring future programs, oh more updates. Sure, the data is remote and not local - so it is with Delphi. I have yet to write an application, since 1990 anyway, where data was not on the local machine. Meanwhile, oh, wait, I have to download something else to get this applicaiton to run on my machine. No, the Internet is a tool. .Net is a tool. Delphi is a, wait for it, a tool. The former requiring without regard to users desires, a download of what, a fat buch of DLLs, COMS, and what not. Delphi, on the other hand, may or may not require such bloatware, depending on the needs of the application and development tools used by the Programmer. I choose .Net when and if it is a better choice for the given situation. More often than not, I do not choose it. Actually, while the future may be the Internet, client web apps are increasingly “fat” but by a different nature.
1) When was the last time you visited a web site not running one of the following, oh by the way, requiring you to download something before using it: Flash, Acrobat, .Net (all versions), Shockwave, active X controls, COM Controls, you get the point.
2) Updates. Sigh all the updates, degrading system performace, reaking havoc on IT maintenance schedules and ensuring future programs, oh more updates.

Sure, the data is remote and not local – so it is with Delphi. I have yet to write an application, since 1990 anyway, where data was not on the local machine.

Meanwhile, oh, wait, I have to download something else to get this applicaiton to run on my machine.

No, the Internet is a tool. .Net is a tool. Delphi is a, wait for it, a tool. The former requiring without regard to users desires, a download of what, a fat buch of DLLs, COMS, and what not. Delphi, on the other hand, may or may not require such bloatware, depending on the needs of the application and development tools used by the Programmer.

I choose .Net when and if it is a better choice for the given situation. More often than not, I do not choose it.

]]> By: Daniel http://windwings.wordpress.com/2009/11/09/why-we-didnt-convert-to-net-and-perhaps-we-never-will/comment-page-1/#comment-1766 Daniel Tue, 17 Nov 2009 04:28:55 +0000 http://wings-of-wind.com/?p=519#comment-1766 And um, MS doesn't use other vendor's code? Oh, no, that's right - they just buy the company and make it part of MS. Ahhh... And um, MS doesn’t use other vendor’s code? Oh, no, that’s right – they just buy the company and make it part of MS. Ahhh…

]]> By: LDS http://windwings.wordpress.com/2009/11/09/why-we-didnt-convert-to-net-and-perhaps-we-never-will/comment-page-1/#comment-1755 LDS Fri, 13 Nov 2009 11:20:28 +0000 http://wings-of-wind.com/?p=519#comment-1755 The problem is "web apps" are becoming fatter and fatter, just native apps using client side WebOSes - browser, flash, silverlight, air, whatever. To run some applications you may have to install four browser and seven plugins. After a while native apps start to become appealing again. At least the usually have a common interface, and not a different paradigm, UI and widgets each. The problem is “web apps” are becoming fatter and fatter, just native apps using client side WebOSes – browser, flash, silverlight, air, whatever. To run some applications you may have to install four browser and seven plugins. After a while native apps start to become appealing again. At least the usually have a common interface, and not a different paradigm, UI and widgets each.

]]> By: fritz http://windwings.wordpress.com/2009/11/09/why-we-didnt-convert-to-net-and-perhaps-we-never-will/comment-page-1/#comment-1754 fritz Thu, 12 Nov 2009 16:34:16 +0000 http://wings-of-wind.com/?p=519#comment-1754 Why is Nebeans still so slow then? I mean it would be a fantastic IDE if it wasn't so slow. I blame it on Java. Why is Nebeans still so slow then? I mean it would be a fantastic IDE if it wasn’t so slow. I blame it on Java.

]]> By: fritz http://windwings.wordpress.com/2009/11/09/why-we-didnt-convert-to-net-and-perhaps-we-never-will/comment-page-1/#comment-1753 fritz Thu, 12 Nov 2009 16:26:38 +0000 http://wings-of-wind.com/?p=519#comment-1753 Actually it's a combination of the compiler, a super slow linker and libtools that cause the slowdown. We're linking everthing statically to ease deployment, and that doesn't exactly speed up things either. It's really slowing us down, despite having superfast Core7 machines... Actually it’s a combination of the compiler, a super slow linker and libtools that cause the slowdown. We’re linking everthing statically to ease deployment, and that doesn’t exactly speed up things either. It’s really slowing us down, despite having superfast Core7 machines…

]]> By: Ken Knopfli http://windwings.wordpress.com/2009/11/09/why-we-didnt-convert-to-net-and-perhaps-we-never-will/comment-page-1/#comment-1751 Ken Knopfli Thu, 12 Nov 2009 09:54:08 +0000 http://wings-of-wind.com/?p=519#comment-1751 A link to his homepage is not very helpful. I dug around for 10min without finding the analysis you refer to. A link to his homepage is not very helpful. I dug around for 10min without finding the analysis you refer to.

]]> By: LDS http://windwings.wordpress.com/2009/11/09/why-we-didnt-convert-to-net-and-perhaps-we-never-will/comment-page-1/#comment-1748 LDS Wed, 11 Nov 2009 21:20:52 +0000 http://wings-of-wind.com/?p=519#comment-1748 * cross-platform: that's IMHO the most risky effort. Because it could save Delphi, or doom it. Delphi could become a "jack-of-all-trades-and-master-of-none", and I hope that won't be the "distinctive feature". Meanwhile, this effort is slowing down Windows improvements. It will also need a larger team - or see how Kylix first and .NET later stalled development for seven years. But nobody was ever able to deliver a very good native xplat solution including Windows yet, let's see. * productivity: every tool aims to be productive - productivity is both the IDE and the libraries available - if it is easier to code but one has to write more code himself... and again, here .NET, Java and C/C++ have a big advantage. Again, this require a larger team, especially if they had more platforms. And BorCodeDero should stop releasing half-baked libraries - Datasnap is a good example of this. Take longer, but deliver better - it's not nice when the libraries do enough well the 80%, but coding the remaining 20% becomes a nightmare... * performance: I am awaiting eagerly the new compiler... that's a side that has been too long overlooked. Also libraries too were not much optimized, and here most improvements came outside the company. There's a drawback, this area does not pay much in marketing sheets, unless the perfomance is really spectacular. * no runtime: hope the xplat approach won't require some "runtime"... * visual programming: I believe this approach shouldn't be brought too far. The risk is it can easily become inflexible. Sometimes IMHO is better to write some lines of code more, and retain flexibility, than having a nice visual tool that forces you to work one way only. * cross-platform: that’s IMHO the most risky effort. Because it could save Delphi, or doom it. Delphi could become a “jack-of-all-trades-and-master-of-none”, and I hope that won’t be the “distinctive feature”. Meanwhile, this effort is slowing down Windows improvements. It will also need a larger team – or see how Kylix first and .NET later stalled development for seven years. But nobody was ever able to deliver a very good native xplat solution including Windows yet, let’s see.
* productivity: every tool aims to be productive – productivity is both the IDE and the libraries available – if it is easier to code but one has to write more code himself… and again, here .NET, Java and C/C++ have a big advantage. Again, this require a larger team, especially if they had more platforms. And BorCodeDero should stop releasing half-baked libraries – Datasnap is a good example of this. Take longer, but deliver better – it’s not nice when the libraries do enough well the 80%, but coding the remaining 20% becomes a nightmare…
* performance: I am awaiting eagerly the new compiler… that’s a side that has been too long overlooked. Also libraries too were not much optimized, and here most improvements came outside the company. There’s a drawback, this area does not pay much in marketing sheets, unless the perfomance is really spectacular.
* no runtime: hope the xplat approach won’t require some “runtime”…
* visual programming: I believe this approach shouldn’t be brought too far. The risk is it can easily become inflexible. Sometimes IMHO is better to write some lines of code more, and retain flexibility, than having a nice visual tool that forces you to work one way only.

]]> By: geek http://windwings.wordpress.com/2009/11/09/why-we-didnt-convert-to-net-and-perhaps-we-never-will/comment-page-1/#comment-1747 geek Wed, 11 Nov 2009 16:43:47 +0000 http://wings-of-wind.com/?p=519#comment-1747 FYI http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/java/library/j-jtp09275.html FYI
http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/java/library/j-jtp09275.html

]]> By: Charles Vinal http://windwings.wordpress.com/2009/11/09/why-we-didnt-convert-to-net-and-perhaps-we-never-will/comment-page-1/#comment-1745 Charles Vinal Wed, 11 Nov 2009 15:58:43 +0000 http://wings-of-wind.com/?p=519#comment-1745 Great post. We use delphi for creating desktop (reasonably thin clients ~ 3mb) and application servers (including web servers) and it just rocks (especially when combined with Rem Objects, DevEx and UniDac). Note that we also use Visual Studio/C# for creating/maintaining a CMS - so we are familiar with .net's capabilities and do use it (to me the only good thing about .net is asp.net - I wish they could decouple it from .net). I used to think .net had a real place on servers (never on the desktop mind you), but having gone through so many .net updates and getting wierd error messages because someone built their latest update using .net software for service pack x and the server has service pack w or whatever and there isn't an easy way to even know what service pack you have (go to windows/microsoft.net and look at which folders are there and or right click on mscore - are you kidding me?). It is VB dlls all over again - in fact I think it is even worse. Add to this the performance issues (go ahead and run server applications (e.g., a website) that all use different versions of .net which is not uncommon - then you have .net 1.1, 2.0, 3.0, 3.5, etc all running at once). I've been a borland customer for 19 years and I think embarcadero has done a great job since purchasing Delphi (thank goodness!). Go Embarcadero (I liked CodeGear better as a name though). Great post. We use delphi for creating desktop (reasonably thin clients ~ 3mb) and application servers (including web servers) and it just rocks (especially when combined with Rem Objects, DevEx and UniDac). Note that we also use Visual Studio/C# for creating/maintaining a CMS – so we are familiar with .net’s capabilities and do use it (to me the only good thing about .net is asp.net – I wish they could decouple it from .net). I used to think .net had a real place on servers (never on the desktop mind you), but having gone through so many .net updates and getting wierd error messages because someone built their latest update using .net software for service pack x and the server has service pack w or whatever and there isn’t an easy way to even know what service pack you have (go to windows/microsoft.net and look at which folders are there and or right click on mscore – are you kidding me?). It is VB dlls all over again – in fact I think it is even worse. Add to this the performance issues (go ahead and run server applications (e.g., a website) that all use different versions of .net which is not uncommon – then you have .net 1.1, 2.0, 3.0, 3.5, etc all running at once).

I’ve been a borland customer for 19 years and I think embarcadero has done a great job since purchasing Delphi (thank goodness!).

Go Embarcadero (I liked CodeGear better as a name though).

]]> By: Wings of Wind http://windwings.wordpress.com/2009/11/09/why-we-didnt-convert-to-net-and-perhaps-we-never-will/comment-page-1/#comment-1744 Wings of Wind Wed, 11 Nov 2009 14:55:14 +0000 http://wings-of-wind.com/?p=519#comment-1744 :-) ...not responding (not needed, imho) because we agree that Delphi needs to have distinctive features from .NET. <em>"and how do you do it?"</em> - cross-platform - productivity - high-performance executables - no runtime - visual, intuitive, programming (yes, some of them can be found on .Net) :-)
…not responding (not needed, imho) because we agree that Delphi needs to have distinctive features from .NET.

“and how do you do it?”
- cross-platform
- productivity
- high-performance executables
- no runtime
- visual, intuitive, programming

(yes, some of them can be found on .Net)

]]> By: Yogi Yang http://windwings.wordpress.com/2009/11/09/why-we-didnt-convert-to-net-and-perhaps-we-never-will/comment-page-1/#comment-1743 Yogi Yang Wed, 11 Nov 2009 14:18:35 +0000 http://wings-of-wind.com/?p=519#comment-1743 We have never faced such a problem with g++ compiler. That is astonishing. Only first time build seems to take ages but not after that. We have never faced such a problem with g++ compiler. That is astonishing.

Only first time build seems to take ages but not after that.

]]> By: Yogi Yang http://windwings.wordpress.com/2009/11/09/why-we-didnt-convert-to-net-and-perhaps-we-never-will/comment-page-1/#comment-1742 Yogi Yang Wed, 11 Nov 2009 14:16:57 +0000 http://wings-of-wind.com/?p=519#comment-1742 @Cameron, Now with advent of QT I have to say that there are not reasons for a long time C++ developer to switch to Delphi or any other language as QT supports both easy GUI building as well as easy DB! @Cameron,

Now with advent of QT I have to say that there are not reasons for a long time C++ developer to switch to Delphi or any other language as QT supports both easy GUI building as well as easy DB!

]]> By: Yogi Yang http://windwings.wordpress.com/2009/11/09/why-we-didnt-convert-to-net-and-perhaps-we-never-will/comment-page-1/#comment-1741 Yogi Yang Wed, 11 Nov 2009 14:06:38 +0000 http://wings-of-wind.com/?p=519#comment-1741 You need to check out with Daniel Appleman the owner of www.desaware.com. He has got very detailed speed chart comparint .NET with other true compiled exes You need to check out with Daniel Appleman the owner of http://www.desaware.com.

He has got very detailed speed chart comparint .NET with other true compiled exes

]]> By: James Arrington http://windwings.wordpress.com/2009/11/09/why-we-didnt-convert-to-net-and-perhaps-we-never-will/comment-page-1/#comment-1740 James Arrington Wed, 11 Nov 2009 13:52:37 +0000 http://wings-of-wind.com/?p=519#comment-1740 Well, I understand you decision to a point. I hope you don't have to go looking for a job, because you will be up the creek without a paddle. Well, I understand you decision to a point. I hope you don’t have to go looking for a job, because you will be up the creek without a paddle.

]]> By: Franz See http://windwings.wordpress.com/2009/11/09/why-we-didnt-convert-to-net-and-perhaps-we-never-will/comment-page-1/#comment-1739 Franz See Wed, 11 Nov 2009 13:33:30 +0000 http://wings-of-wind.com/?p=519#comment-1739 Maybe you're just too much of an early adopter? :-) ...too early that when you tried things out, it was still full of quirks :-) Java right now is a monster and had tons of performance improvement with 1.5, and now with 1.6 (and in the near future, with 1.7). Maybe you’re just too much of an early adopter? :-) …too early that when you tried things out, it was still full of quirks :-)

Java right now is a monster and had tons of performance improvement with 1.5, and now with 1.6 (and in the near future, with 1.7).

]]> By: Cameron http://windwings.wordpress.com/2009/11/09/why-we-didnt-convert-to-net-and-perhaps-we-never-will/comment-page-1/#comment-1738 Cameron Wed, 11 Nov 2009 12:51:05 +0000 http://wings-of-wind.com/?p=519#comment-1738 The future is web apps. Call me unconvinced. Fat client, thin architecture is still in my mind the dominant design in my world of big apps a preferred architecture. I have been hearing for a decade that web apps are the future and just around the corner with .Net then and Silverlight now. IMO, the browser is cumbersome, another layer and multi-platform (IE, Chrome, Firefox, etc) that is a PIA to support. I will believe web apps are the true future when the majority of game companies and enterprise applications abandon fat client architecture. As it is now having friends at large development shops such as HP and working in enterprise applications myself, all I hear from the .Net crowd is how garbage collection is killing them, .Net doesn't scale well and how limited they feel with their controls and this is almost ten years later. Web apps are good for the small to mid stuff, but when you start running a few TB through them you can really see the cracks in the foundation and unfortunately like all wipe-your-butt technologies there is no where to go when the pavement ends. I guess that is why the vast majority of MS products are still C++. As for Delphi not having good developers anymore. I have to completely disagree. For years now Delphi has some of the best programmers out there. We still have one of the best sourced libraries of any GUI based development system. Ask a Delphi question and you usually get a high level answer. Search for a Delphi solution and you will usually find one quickly. Search for a .Net one and you get a bunch of yahoos that came from VB that don't really understand OOP or functions beyond basics more often than not. Searching for .net is a PIA as well since punching ".net" or "dotnet" into Google usually ends badly. I do love .Nets data architecture though. It is what Delphi should have done years ago. Oh and Java sucks. I am reminded of this every time I power up Eclipse to play with Android development. How that language ever moved forward has always been a surprise to me. I think I would rather use Smalltalk which is just slightly less annoying. The future is web apps. Call me unconvinced. Fat client, thin architecture is still in my mind the dominant design in my world of big apps a preferred architecture. I have been hearing for a decade that web apps are the future and just around the corner with .Net then and Silverlight now. IMO, the browser is cumbersome, another layer and multi-platform (IE, Chrome, Firefox, etc) that is a PIA to support. I will believe web apps are the true future when the majority of game companies and enterprise applications abandon fat client architecture. As it is now having friends at large development shops such as HP and working in enterprise applications myself, all I hear from the .Net crowd is how garbage collection is killing them, .Net doesn’t scale well and how limited they feel with their controls and this is almost ten years later. Web apps are good for the small to mid stuff, but when you start running a few TB through them you can really see the cracks in the foundation and unfortunately like all wipe-your-butt technologies there is no where to go when the pavement ends. I guess that is why the vast majority of MS products are still C++.

As for Delphi not having good developers anymore. I have to completely disagree. For years now Delphi has some of the best programmers out there. We still have one of the best sourced libraries of any GUI based development system. Ask a Delphi question and you usually get a high level answer. Search for a Delphi solution and you will usually find one quickly. Search for a .Net one and you get a bunch of yahoos that came from VB that don’t really understand OOP or functions beyond basics more often than not. Searching for .net is a PIA as well since punching “.net” or “dotnet” into Google usually ends badly.

I do love .Nets data architecture though. It is what Delphi should have done years ago. Oh and Java sucks. I am reminded of this every time I power up Eclipse to play with Android development. How that language ever moved forward has always been a surprise to me. I think I would rather use Smalltalk which is just slightly less annoying.

]]> By: Siegfried http://windwings.wordpress.com/2009/11/09/why-we-didnt-convert-to-net-and-perhaps-we-never-will/comment-page-1/#comment-1737 Siegfried Wed, 11 Nov 2009 11:26:28 +0000 http://wings-of-wind.com/?p=519#comment-1737 My first attempt in creating GUI's for W indows was Delphi 5. It was very easy to create a good looking GUI, no need to use an installer (like Visual Basic 6) for deployment and many books where available. I was very happy with this IDE and created many products for different customers. During the years, I followed the productline, so i worked with Delphi 6 .. up to .. 2005 . The last one was the point where i said "it's enough with that crap". Meanwhile i changed to Java, as a Borland-Fanboy i used JBuilder 9, which was a very good IDE. Sadly, Borland changed the platform to Eclipse with the release of JBuilder 2005. This was the end of the second great productline. Borland had not listen to their community, build products which no one wanted and lost the market. Changing the company name does not solved the problem. The good years are over, Delphi (and Borland) is slowly dying. The market is dominated by .NET and Java. The most of my customers want to migrate away from old stuff (Delphi, C/C++, VB) to .NET or Java. They said that this is the future. To earn my money i cannot recommend them to use Delphi for their apps, the future are Web-Apps - not Desktop-Apps, and for this you need platforms like .NET or Java, but not Delphi. My first attempt in creating GUI’s for W indows was Delphi 5. It was very easy to create a good looking GUI, no need to use an installer (like Visual Basic 6) for deployment and many books where available. I was very happy with this IDE and created many products for different customers. During the years, I followed the productline, so i worked with Delphi 6 .. up to .. 2005 . The last one was the point where i said “it’s enough with that crap”. Meanwhile i changed to Java, as a Borland-Fanboy i used JBuilder 9, which was a very good IDE. Sadly, Borland changed the platform to Eclipse with the release of JBuilder 2005. This was the end of the second great productline.

Borland had not listen to their community, build products which no one wanted and lost the market. Changing the company name does not solved the problem. The good years are over, Delphi (and Borland) is slowly dying. The market is dominated by .NET and Java. The most of my customers want to migrate away from old stuff (Delphi, C/C++, VB) to .NET or Java. They said that this is the future. To earn my money i cannot recommend them to use Delphi for their apps, the future are Web-Apps – not Desktop-Apps, and for this you need platforms like .NET or Java, but not Delphi.

]]>