Lucian,

<< That's the problem. I don't have the time. It's a lost feature for me. I
spent a great deal of time writing code based on that, I have a bunch of
apps using it. Dunno when I'll have spare time to reinvent the sliced bread.
>>

Perhaps one of these days when I get some spare time I'll see if I can
create something that will bridge that gap.

--
Tim Young
Elevate Software
www.elevatesoft.com

John,

<< Not necessarily: >>

I understand that you can code workarounds.   We had to code a ton into the
ElevateDB Manager just to get things like the main menu, etc. to work
correctly under Windows XP.  However, the point is that this shouldn't be,
and isn't, necessary for an application developer that has updated tools for
the most current operating systems.  As much as one can like Delphi 7 for
its stability, it also lacks a lot of features that should work "out of the
box" in terms of UI design.

--
Tim Young
Elevate Software
www.elevatesoft.com

John,

Let me just add to this by saying that the development of the ElevateDB
Manager added about 4 months to the development time of EDB in general,
mainly due to the shortcomings of Delphi 7 in terms of the UI.  That is time
that could have been spent working on adding replication, messaging, or one
of several hundred other features that would be of great interest to our
customers.  It is in everyone's best interest that the newer CodeGear
development environments have top-notch support for the latest operating
system interfaces.

--
Tim Young
Elevate Software
www.elevatesoft.com

All,

> I understand that you can code workarounds.   We had to code a ton into the
> ElevateDB Manager just to get things like the main menu, etc. to work
> correctly under Windows XP.  However, the point is that this shouldn't be,
> and isn't, necessary for an application developer that has updated tools for
> the most current operating systems.  As much as one can like Delphi 7 for
> its stability, it also lacks a lot of features that should work "out of the
> box" in terms of UI design.


Depends on the market you are aiming at. One of our clients (one of the
largest financial corporations in the world) has sketched in Vista as a
possible upgrade/deployment in the 2010 timeframe ...the rest have
announced no plans at all. When I was in London in October another
customer (also a global, "top twenty" bank) was rolling out a desktop OS
upgrade ...the first appearance of *XP* in the entire division!!

These organisations are neither broke nor lazy - they simply don't want
to have to explain in court why they put multi-billion dollar operations
at risk by implementing unnecessary operating system upgrades with no
credible justification. That means another good reason for retaining D7
is that it targets the operating systems that your customers actually
use. I have no idea if D2007 is WinNT4 SP6 compatible and given all the
other problems that have arisen since the .NET infestation of Delphi I
am not especially motivated to find out.

Eryk

Eryk,

> These organisations are neither broke nor lazy - they simply don't want to
> have to explain in court why they put multi-billion dollar operations at
> risk by implementing unnecessary operating system upgrades with no
> credible justification. That means another good reason for retaining D7 is
> that it targets the operating systems that your customers actually use.

Yes, you are right, but... we are talking about DBISAM / ElevateDB here.
Come on, those organisations do *not* use these database. Not to offend Tim
(and you as a former employee) cause I very much like his databases, but I
guess the developers that uses DBISAM / ElevateDB have customers that move
ahead faster - I suspect most of them use XP by now and you do not need D7
for that, cause D2007 is perfectly capable of producing software for XP.

When a developer is "trapped" in using D7 or even D5 it is, in my opinion,
mostly related of *not* having the source code of 3rd party components. Now,
does Tim really need to support an IDE as old as D5 just because those
developers got trapped by their own stupidity. I am not going to get
applause for this statement, but this is how I look upon it. And every hour
Tim needs to spend on supporting IDE's this old, means an hour lost that
could have been spend on further improving his databases.

As stated, Tim based his decisions on the number of downloads, so I guess
the users of the older IDE's are outnumbered by the users of more up-to-date
IDE's. Can't be sure, but I trust Tim in carefully deciding which IDE to
phase out. So, in the end those with newer IDE's pay the price of supporting
older IDE's. Maybe you disagree, but this is my opinion nonetheless.

Now, as D7 may still be used quite heavily (for whatever reason) I guess
phasing out D7 might be put on hold for the time being, but I cannot say
that about D5. It is everyone's own decision to stick with a particularly
IDE but that does not mean Tim has to support it, unless it is economically
viable. Period. If one uses D5, fine, but the consequences of that choice
relies solely on the person who made that choice and no one else.

And as far as D2007 is concerned, it works really well for me. No
complaints, apart from the Help which needs improving.

In the end only Tim can decide which course he takes, and whatever he
decides I will still use and keep on using ElevateDB. I've been using DBISAM
since version 2, so I guess I'm a loyal user of Elevate Software.

Please note that I am Dutch, so expressing myself in English is always a bit
difficult. I did not mean to offend anyone, I am just trying to explain how
I look upon this situation. As being more an account than a developer I
probably have a different kind of view upon the matter.

Fons

> much as one can like Delphi 7 for its stability, it also lacks a lot
> of features that should work "out of the box" in terms of UI design.

It's going to be some time until Vista itself will work fine just "out
of the box" Hopefully, when that happens, D2007 will be fine too.

Lucian

> Perhaps one of these days when I get some spare time I'll see if I
> can create something that will bridge that gap.

Would be nice, really! With all these Christmas bonuses I'm looking at
buying some new stuff


regards,
Lucian

Fons,

> Yes, you are right, but... we are talking about DBISAM / ElevateDB here.
> Come on, those organisations do *not* use these database.

Oh yes they do. All customers of mine use DBISAM because that is what
our product is based around. This is not a case of fully embedding the
DB engine either - they KNOW they are using DBISAM and most of them also
interface to it directly via ODBC for some purposes (same for those who
integrate our data feed into high end asset management packages like
Aperture and AssetPoint).

> Tim (and you as a former employee) cause I very much like his databases,
> but I guess the developers that uses DBISAM / ElevateDB have customers
> that move ahead faster - I suspect most of them use XP by now and you do
> not need D7 for that, cause D2007 is perfectly capable of producing
> software for XP.

That is perfectly possible (and in my opinion "likely"), however that
doesn't change the fact that other scenarios exist and they are not all
inconsequential "edge cases".

> components. Now, does Tim really need to support an IDE as old as D5
> just because those developers got trapped by their own stupidity. I am

I don't disagree with that. Killing D5 and C++ V5 would be a valid and
responsible step at this stage (IMO). This is exactly what DevEx have
just done so there is a pretty strong precedent in the market.

> which IDE to phase out. So, in the end those with newer IDE's pay the
> price of supporting older IDE's. Maybe you disagree, but this is my
> opinion nonetheless.

I disagree with the timing. Everything between D7 and D2007 was a fiasco
and the latest release is only part way to restoring market confidence.
After a rock solid Tiburon release with compelling Win32 features there
should be an opportunity to kill off D7 support - but not before (again,
IMO). Remember I don't actually use ElevateDB - I use DBISAM so to me
the whole issue is slightly moot. I am just considering what I estimate
to be acceptable to the user base in general.

> Now, as D7 may still be used quite heavily (for whatever reason) I guess
> phasing out D7 might be put on hold for the time being, but I cannot say
> that about D5.

As above, I agree with you. The appropriate discontinuation point for D7
support will be (if I had to guess) around Q3 2009 (subject to CG
delivering what they claim to be able to deliver).

> Please note that I am Dutch, so expressing myself in English is always a
> bit difficult. I did not mean to offend anyone, I am just trying to
> explain how I look upon this situation. As being more an account than a
> developer I probably have a different kind of view upon the matter.

I didn't see anything inflammatory in anything you wrote

Eryk

Hi Tim,

>
> We had to code a ton into the ElevateDB Manager just to get things like the main menu, etc.
> to work correctly under Windows XP.
>

Maybe I'm missing something, but can't you move the code for ElevateDB Manager to Delphi 2007?

Some people may disagree, but it shouldn't matter which version of Delphi you use to
develop database management utilities.
Sure, some people wont be able to compile the source, but they can read the source files
and see how the functions work.,

Cheers Stu

Eryk,

> Oh yes they do. All customers of mine use DBISAM because that is what our
> product is based around. This is not a case of fully embedding the DB
> engine either - they KNOW they are using DBISAM and most of them also
> interface to it directly via ODBC for some purposes (same for those who
> integrate our data feed into high end asset management packages like
> Aperture and AssetPoint).

Really? Well, I am pleasantly surprised   Good to hear that a
multi-million dollar company uses DBISAM, probably they use other databases
as well, but still, this is really nice to hear.

> That is perfectly possible (and in my opinion "likely"), however that
> doesn't change the fact that other scenarios exist and they are not all
> inconsequential "edge cases".

Glad you agree that it's likely, but I don't quite follow on the "edge
cases" part.

> I don't disagree with that. Killing D5 and C++ V5 would be a valid and
> responsible step at this stage (IMO). This is exactly what DevEx have just
> done so there is a pretty strong precedent in the market.

Well, we are on a roll here, you agree again  

> I disagree with the timing. Everything between D7 and D2007 was a fiasco
> and the latest release is only part way to restoring market confidence.
> After a rock solid Tiburon release with compelling Win32 features there
> should be an opportunity to kill off D7 support - but not before (again,
> IMO). Remember I don't actually use ElevateDB - I use DBISAM so to me the
> whole issue is slightly moot. I am just considering what I estimate to be
> acceptable to the user base in general.

Ok, fair enough, D8 (.Net only) through D2005 pretty much sucked. D2006 for
me was okay, but for most it was not. With this in mind, maybe phasing D7
out is to soon. If D2005 and D2006 were actually any good, you agree it
would have been a whole other story... And yes, the issue is more for
ElevateDB than it is for DBISAM.

> As above, I agree with you. The appropriate discontinuation point for D7
> support will be (if I had to guess) around Q3 2009 (subject to CG
> delivering what they claim to be able to deliver).

You agree again. Damn, I was hoping for a big discussion     As for the
time period, the end of 2009 is more than generous and cannot be reason for
anyone to complain about. All things must come to an end.

> I didn't see anything inflammatory in anything you wrote

That's a relief. Seriously, thank you for your comments.

Fons