![]() | ![]() Products ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Home » Technical Support » DBISAM Technical Support » Support Forums » DBISAM General » View Thread |
Messages 61 to 70 of 70 total |
![]() |
Mon, May 7 2007 3:45 AM | Permanent Link |
Charalabos Michael | Hello Dave,
> I think most professionals and especially developers who are selling > developer tools wouldn't even question the need to "move on", and would > find the insistence for continuing builds to be unreasonable. But > hobbyists or part timers might not understand. In fact, that insistence > most probably indicates that someone is a hobbyist on a limited budget. I understand that. > I have never asked for zero cost continuing builds from any vendor. > Besides being long and drawn out this thread has caused me to think > about the issues involved. I can appreciate why a vendor discontinues > builds. I can appreciate that that there may not be any other reasonable > alternative. The problem that i was faced too (with my application) is that if you starting to deal with a old complex code (as DBISAM) to make an change, improvement or anything, you eventually you'll follow to make more bugs than actually doing any good. Believe you don't want your customers to call you for more bugs of your application. -- Charalabos Michael - [Creation Power] - http://www.creationpower.gr |
Mon, May 7 2007 4:23 AM | Permanent Link |
Roy Lambert NLH Associates ![]() | Dave
I'm a hobbyist on a limited budget. I have dragged a few components (including some I wrote) kicking and screaming from D4 to D6 and now D2006. Some components are just to complex for me to think about doing that and I pay for DBISAM (and now ElevateDB) and WPTools. I also pay for Delphi upgrades but not every one anymore (I went 1,2,3,4,6,2006) but I won't be buying D2007 just to get the OLH sorted and a few Vista enablements. If the budget ever gets to tight I'll just freeze the environment (my computer not the world) and it won't matter much. Its pro developers who HAVE to keep up to date with the latest eye candy and lack of performance that seems to be ongoing in the Windows world, and if they can't pay for the upgrades they'll be out of business. Roy Lambert |
Mon, May 7 2007 12:41 PM | Permanent Link |
Tim Young [Elevate Software] Elevate Software, Inc. ![]() | John,
<< How hard would it be for you to compile a D2007 version of 3.30, and only bundle with a new version? >> I've already outlined the reasons why a 3.x build is very difficult to do at this point. << I bet your legacy users would be willing to purchase D2007 4.x if a 3.30 version was bundled in. >> You're not reading what is being said or you are simply ignoring it. Existing non-source users can buy an upgrade to 4.x with source code *now* and compile 3.x with D2007 with minimal efforts. If Delphi 2007 support for 3.x is so important to you, then you can spend a couple of dollars on the upgrade and a couple of hours doing the work. A couple of hours estimate is being very generous, also. It should only take a few minutes in most cases. << OTOH, you may lose a user altogether by not supplying what is seemingly so simple just because you don't want to. >> Well, if you intend to misrepresent what I say or how we do business, then you can expect to not receive any further replies from me. I've already stated very plainly our reasons for not doing a 3.x build for any versions of Delphi after 3.x was frozen. The fact that you choose to ignore what I say is your issue, not mine. -- Tim Young Elevate Software www.elevatesoft.com |
Mon, May 7 2007 12:53 PM | Permanent Link |
Tim Young [Elevate Software] Elevate Software, Inc. ![]() | Bill,
This is a general response, so please don't think that any of this is specifically directed towards you. << So now you might ask, "Well if it took so little time, then why can't Tim do it?" A fair question but one that he has already answered. He is no longer able to support version 3 while maintaining and supporting version 4 at the same time he develops EDB. >> That's partly the issue. The bigger issue is that I have to make all sorts of changes to the build system to accomodate a new version of Delphi. I then have to go through all of the documentation for 3.x and make sure that it will build properly using the new version of our documentation build code. I then have to do the same for the actual installation builds themselves. All of this has changed dramatically since 3.x was last built. Just looking at the 3.x builds and documentation vs. DBISAM 4/EDB 1 builds and documentation is all the evidence you need to see this. Finally, once this is all done, what I'm left with is an official build on our web site of 3.30 for Delphi 2006/2007, which completely defeats the purpose of freezing the 3.x code base in the first place. I would then implicitly be obligated to support the 3.x as a current build that is no longer frozen. What John (and some others) don't seem to understand is that I don't build the products using the IDE compiler and then just manually FTP them up to a web site somewhere. I couldn't do that if I tried since that's not the way we're set up. Everything is automated, therefore to do a build requires that everything be set up properly so that the automated builds will work properly. It's an all or nothing proposition. -- Tim Young Elevate Software www.elevatesoft.com |
Mon, May 7 2007 1:17 PM | Permanent Link |
Bill Mullen | Yep, I read that in your original response but forgot about it when I
replied to John. >Bill, > >This is a general response, so please don't think that any of this is >specifically directed towards you. > ><< So now you might ask, "Well if it took so little time, then why can't Tim >do it?" A fair question but one that he has already answered. He is no >longer able to support version 3 while maintaining and supporting version 4 >at the same time he develops EDB. >> > >That's partly the issue. The bigger issue is that I have to make all sorts >of changes to the build system to accomodate a new version of Delphi. I >then have to go through all of the documentation for 3.x and make sure that >it will build properly using the new version of our documentation build >code. I then have to do the same for the actual installation builds >themselves. All of this has changed dramatically since 3.x was last built. >Just looking at the 3.x builds and documentation vs. DBISAM 4/EDB 1 builds >and documentation is all the evidence you need to see this. Finally, once >this is all done, what I'm left with is an official build on our web site of >3.30 for Delphi 2006/2007, which completely defeats the purpose of freezing >the 3.x code base in the first place. I would then implicitly be obligated >to support the 3.x as a current build that is no longer frozen. > >What John (and some others) don't seem to understand is that I don't build >the products using the IDE compiler and then just manually FTP them up to a >web site somewhere. I couldn't do that if I tried since that's not the way >we're set up. Everything is automated, therefore to do a build requires >that everything be set up properly so that the automated builds will work >properly. It's an all or nothing proposition. |
Mon, May 7 2007 1:22 PM | Permanent Link |
"JohnE" | > You're not reading what is being said or you are simply ignoring it.
> Existing non-source users can buy an upgrade to 4.x with source code *now* > and compile 3.x with D2007 with minimal efforts. If Delphi 2007 support > for 3.x is so important to you, then you can spend a couple of dollars on > the upgrade and a couple of hours doing the work. A couple of hours > estimate is being very generous, also. It should only take a few minutes > in most cases. I understand that the source can be obtained. I was merely stating a point that by not providing the 3.x build that you probably will lose some users. I didn't mention source, iirc. > Well, if you intend to misrepresent what I say or how we do business, then > you can expect to not receive any further replies from me. I don't recell mispresenting anything. My posts have mentioned a compiled build, not source code. I now understand that you have a complicated build process the prohibits a quick and easy fix - understood. John |
Mon, May 7 2007 2:23 PM | Permanent Link |
Tim Young [Elevate Software] Elevate Software, Inc. ![]() | John,
<< I understand that the source can be obtained. I was merely stating a point that by not providing the 3.x build that you probably will lose some users. I didn't mention source, iirc. >> Yes, but my point is that buying the source and making the changes yourself is a heck of a lot easier than switching to a completely different database engine. Therefore, I would expect that customers with an eye for the least amount of work possible would simply take those two minor steps to ensure that they can use 3.x with D2007. << I don't recell mispresenting anything. My posts have mentioned a compiled build, not source code. >> You said this: "just because you don't want to" which is misrepresenting what I have stated. What I want or don't want has absolutely zero impact upon our business decisions. If we did business based upon what I want or don't want, I'd still be selling version 1 for $3000 per license. Our customers say otherwise. I *want* to be able to support every past version in every new compiler coming out or Delphi, but I can't. Therefore I have to make the best decision that I can, given the circumstances. The best decision is defined as that which will provide the most benefit to the *majority* of our customers, and thus provide the most benefit to us. I *want* to make everyone happy, and some would say that I try too hard in some cases to do just that, but I must sometimes put aside what I want in favor of what is practical. If I lose a couple of customers due to the 3.x <--> Delphi 2007 customers (which I don't know is even true), then it would be worth it as opposed to losing one of the hundreds of new EDB customers that we have recently acquired because I'm not spending time on moving EDB forward. << I now understand that you have a complicated build process the prohibits a quick and easy fix - understood. >> Thank you. -- Tim Young Elevate Software www.elevatesoft.com |
Mon, May 7 2007 7:01 PM | Permanent Link |
Dave M | Roy Lambert wrote:
> > I'm a hobbyist on a limited budget. And you weren't making *demands* either, so not really in the group to which I trying to refer. >I won't be buying D2007 just to get the OLH sorted and a few Vista enablements. I don't buy every version. The only reason I have 2007 is because of SA. It's a bit of a shame, but the biggest benefit of 2007 for me is the *much* faster imbedded designer. 2006 was intolerable when there were many controls on the form, (although there were some tricks to speed it up some) so I used it floating. The reason it's a shame is because the speed fix is really a bug fix when it comes right down to it. Dave M |
Tue, May 8 2007 2:57 AM | Permanent Link |
Roy Lambert NLH Associates ![]() | Dave
>> I'm a hobbyist on a limited budget. > >And you weren't making *demands* either, so not really in the group to >which I trying to refer. I make polite requests ![]() Roy Lambert |
Tue, May 8 2007 8:47 AM | Permanent Link |
wim sterns | Wow, what a discussion. I really liked it when Microsoft was mentioned. Yeah, they are doing great supporting older stuff. What a joke! Remember VB6 ??? Or apps written in acces95 and the used on acces XP At least dbisam 3.30 is still usable with the latest software (vista, delphi 2007) The price you have to pay is next to nothing ... Buy and compile the source, you even get V4 for free ... Keep up the good work Tim. We all make sure that the *one* customer you eventually lose will be replaced ... Wim |
« Previous Page | Page 7 of 7 | |
Jump to Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 |
This web page was last updated on Wednesday, August 14, 2024 at 07:31 PM | Privacy Policy![]() © 2024 Elevate Software, Inc. All Rights Reserved Questions or comments ? ![]() |