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

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

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

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

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.

> 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

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

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

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

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