News 

More familiarly known as 'David I', he revels in the job title of 'Chief Evangelist', but rather more prosaically is Borland's VP of Developer Relations. He was speaking at DCON (Delphi Developers conference) 2003 in what is Borland's 20th anniversary.

Let's begin with the current Delphi state of play. What is out there that people can use?

David I: Well, last August we shipped Delphi 7 in various different flavours including Professional, Enterprise and Architect editions. We have also shipped the Delphi Preview for .Net as part of Delphi 7.

First it was a compiler and just a .Net runtime interface for the Delphi language. Since that time we've 'shipped' three updates for the Delphi Preview - up on the Web for existing customers to download - and then brought out successive fixes, and then the VCL interfaces over the top of the .Net framework, and then updates to the .Net framework itself... Also a few tools to help developers to use Delphi 7, but targeting .Net environments as well.

And on the horizon is 'Octane'?

David I: Yes. We posted an open letter and did a Q & A on our developer site regarding Octane, which is the project name for the next version of Delphi that will support both Windows and .Net. And Delphi developers will have the choice, as always - to use the VCL technology and knowledge they already have, or do development just with the .Net framework itself.

We've made it very easy to use a similar style of programming and - in many places - the same code, using the .Net framework or the VCL. And we still have support for Windows and Linux component libraries for CLX cross-platform development. So, by the end of this year I think we will have Windows, .Net and Linux support with the Delphi language.

And what is in Octane?

David I: It involves a new generation of the IDE. A way of driving the capabilities that customers tell us they need for .Net.

There's the Delphi command-line compiler for IL (intermediate languages) 'Diesel', the VCL for .Net is moving forward, the Galileo IDE is now built [in C#Builder]... You can now see all the pieces building up for what the Delphi guys want and need for a significant, new-generation step - adding .Net capabilities to those developers who still need straight Win32 access to native applications.

Octane fits into our whole ALM (application lifecycle management) strategy and the integration of the pieces beyond just the developer parts. All coming together into the development environment.

So, when Octane comes out later this year, yes there is Windows and .Net support, but we are also setting foundations in the environment and in our compiler architecture for how we get to other devices and chips in the future. There is other work that people won't see because it's under the covers but it will lead us, naturally, to the .Net Compact Framework, for example.

And when will Octane appear?

David I: The target is 'end of the year'. We are not going to hit August on a twelve-month cycle.

But amid all the talk of the .Net support already planned within C#Builder, you reassured the Delphi developers that Delphi would retain its own character.

David I: Yes, of course. Delphi will always retain its strong identity.

But you are also maintaining the principle that experienced programmers can drop down into the code and have complete control over their work

David I: Sure. Maybe in another 100 years we will have a perfect environment where you can design and model and figure out how to capture all of everything and from which you can derive a perfect running application without anything else... but there will always be specialised code that needs to be written. Whether it's to implement a certain method or capture a piece of hardware, some programmer is going to have to be involved.

It's reassuring for programmers to know they do have complete control...

David I: It's all about choice. Buy the pieces, use the pieces that you want. Do it all in code or do parts of it in models and parts of it in other things.

We don't proscribe a specific language for a specific use. You can build things in all the products we deliver and you build across development environments, across platforms, across operating systems, and across devices as well... Ultimately if you are a developer where your world is working with code, you can do that, through the Professional Edition and have at it. Eventually, you may want to do modelling and requirements...

And this is a Borland principle not a Delphi principle?

David I: Yes it applies to C++Builder, C#Builder, JBuilder and so on. There are enough companies that are trying to force people to get locked in and force them to use a specific language, a specific process, a specific back-end server, a specific platform or operating system.

Our customers - and I think most developers - want flexibility and freedom. And support for open standards. They want to be able to integrate with lots of disparate systems. And that is the luxury - the benefit, or the beauty - that we have at Borland. We are not an operating systems company, or a platform company. We are giving customers flexibility and choice. You can have what fits your needs as an individual developer.

It's a tough line to walk - not proscribing the use of tools through tie-ins. You have to be competitive?<

ADVERTISEMENT

David I: We are a company that has been around for 20 years, and we are competing very well with companies that are a hundreds of times larger than us. We are successful with Reader Awards and Choices, and such like. We continue to innovate and people know that Borland is an innovator. It's down to the foundations: share everything, integrate with everything,

The spirit of developers that don't feel constrained by some proscribed operating system 'religion' or philosophy. That allows developers at Borland to be as free as our customers want to be. It's unique position in the industry.

We talked earlier about consolidation in the industry, but even with consolidation there are always a few companies or individuals that think differently - to coin Apple's phrase.

We don't try to think differently for differently's sake, we try to think about how we can help solve customer problems. Whether it's making COM programming simpler, as we did with Delphi 3, or making Web programming simpler, or .Net programming or cross-platform development simpler. All these are what drive us to solve real problems, not just add syntactic sugar or add components for components' sake, and things of that kind.

You have mentioned the .Net Compact Framework. How do you measure the success of .Net?

David I: When we talk to our customers worldwide, a vast majority say they will have Java J2EE, and Windows .Net somewhere in their infrastructure, whether it's in different departments or divisions, but these two going to be there. And are customers are asking us for solutions to both, and to integrate across both. For example our Janeva software - that's all about integrating across those two platforms for enterprise computing.

But how big is it going to be?

David I: Anything that Microsoft is involved in is big! We have been successful at Borland by supporting Microsoft since Dos 1. Windows is already huge and .Net is going to be really big.

We are already covered for C#, which we think is going to be significant - people are exploring the language. Being early on a platform, or being early on a language, is a good thing for the adoption curve. Our customers are on the same curve.

How is the relationship with Microsoft. On the one hand you are co-operating, but on another hand you are competing?

David I: If you think about it, Microsoft sometimes competes with itself. They have products, for example for the Macintosh, which competes with Windows. There are different parts of Microsoft, it is a large company.

The way we put it is like this, we have a 'good strategic alliances' with the Microsoft Windows division, we don't really to do anything with the Games division, Office is a sort of huge component library for us - we populate palettes full of components by pulling in the COM interfaces and making Delphi interfaces, automatically. We have great cooperation at all levels, the operating system, .Net framework, and so on. And, also, we have a 'healthy dose of competition' with their developer tools division!

Speaking of Apple prompts a mischievous question: some conspiracy theorists believe the presence of Apple (in which Microsoft has invested in the past) is necessary for Microsoft to prove there is competition in the market place. Does Microsoft need Borland to exist, too?

David I: Gee. I don't think about it. Such a conspiracy theory wouldn't be worth the ink of print.

I believe in focussing on what we are trying to do, to solve real problems to give customers real business benefits by delivering functionality that can help them be productive and successful. Conspiracy theories don't help developers, don't help customers - I don't want to go down that path.

But to turn it into a more serious question, are you happy that the market place is sufficiently level that the rewards for responding to customer needs will lead to Borland's prosperity. The market is sufficiently benign, as it were?

David I: I believe that if we do a good job in providing products and services that solve real business problems for customers, and that we do it with high quality, with good partnerships, then Borland will be around for a long, long time. Because those kind of things, over time, are celebrated. Just as we are celebrating 20 years.

I can't foresee a future where Borland is not part of the world of development. People may have tried in the past to get rid of Borland or tried to make Borland irrelevant. But ultimately the real value, the real truth, is that excellence does endure. When you consider the range of things we have brought to the development world, Borland has done good things and continues to do good things.

But hey, I suppose if someone wanted to keep us around 'for fun' or for 'healthy competition', fine, give us a couple of billion dollars and we'll sit around and wear Borland polo shirts and put the money in the bank, but we'll still innovate, no matter what somebody did. We'll still drive, because of the people inside the company. And our customers are very demanding. Very demanding. With other competitors of ours they might just say 'well, we get whatever they give us, because that's the way they work'. In our case, they are very demanding - we hear from them all the time, and we wouldn't have it any other way. That's the difference. There's just a difference. The difference between Borland and other companies. And that's to be celebrated.

A final note for those who may be feeling nostalgic for the days of 1983 and Turbo Pascal. If you like your software to be seasoned and mature, check out the Museum section of Borland's Developer Network, where you can download version 1.0 of Turbo Pascal.