On Sep 22, 10:52 pm, Matt <m...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> > Hash: SHA1
>
> > Two Views of Enterprise Open Source
>
> > ,----[ Quote ]
> > | Whatever his success with words, he was less fortunate in business. Microsoft
> > | essentially won the battle for the hearts and minds of the developer
> > | community, and Borland became something of a lost soul, wandering the fringes
> > | of computing, trying to find something to do in the shadow of Big Bill and an
> > | even bigger Microsoft.
> > |
> > | One of the people at Microsoft tasked with destroying Borland was Todd
> > | Nielsen, who was general manager for Microsoft's developer relations and
> > | platform marketing.
> > `----
>
> >http://www.computerworlduk.com/toolbox/open-source/blogs/index.cfm?bl...
>
> I don't know if I can be very broken up about the demise of Borland. I
> think they really played the same game as MS in regard to programming
> languages. There was a similar attack on standards through non-standard
> language features and extensions, the desired effect being to lock
> developers in to their compilers. The guy who built Turbo Pascal for
> Borland is now at MS, being the designer of C#. Borland was very good
> about pricing though, at least in the mid 80's, selling Turbo for $50
> while MS compilers cost hundreds.
I bought Microsoft C for DOS some time in the '80's. First time I
used it I hit a bug.
|
|
